If you are well, mate, then for pity's sake please code!

I just give my opinion and get back to work

I'm afraid I can't contain myself any longer. I've been biting my tongue long enough.

TPTB_need_war, is developing Ion more important than these battles?

Maybe certain individuals on here know which buttons to press in order to distract you from your purpose.

Do the symptoms of your illness prevent you from coding but allow you to write thousands of words a day on this forum?

I can't believe I'm the only one here who thinks this? Maybe one reason they don't is that they believe they will end up with a tongue lashing from you.

Shoot me down if you want. I really don't have the hours to spare to get bogged down in the kind of squabbling Ive just read over the last few pages; I'm too busy at work.

I've been reading your often fascinating ideas and plans for nearly two years, but I've pretty much lost patience now.

I really do hope you get to beat your illness, but too often it seems you spend your good days in arguments on here.

Hoping you take this in the friendly but firmly encouraging manner it is intended.

It was reported as such in the press.

I don't have the transcripts from the case

but it would not surprise me at all if there were hearings or motions on the delays.

Anyway, I'm more inclined to give any weight at all to an independent source as opposed to his blog that you keep foolishily quoting as the authoritative source that it quite literally cannot ever be given its one-sided nature and the inherent self-interested bias of its author.

Sorry, I don't believe it. If that were true he could go to count and get a finding of factual innocence. He wouldn't have to argue his innocence on a blog.

What I believe is that some aspects of the case were probably found to be more attributable to the actions of others.

But as I said it was a very complex case with so many pieces and in reality there are so many complex laws and conflicting requirements, especially when it comes to vague fraud charges that it is almost impossible to be completely and provably innocent. So when he claims to be "completely vindicated" that just tells me that he is full of shit and trying to rehabilitate his image (or possibly self-image) with such puffery.

But in this case, had he gone forward with trial and then fully prevailed at trial, the civil contempt would also have ended because the order was to turn over assets associated with the alleged fraud.

There is also a bit of verbal slight of hand in the statement of his that you posted (not unusual it seems). You do not have a right to a trial for civil contempt (though can appeal the order, which he did, twice, and lost twice), but being held in contempt does not prevent being tried in another case, which is what he was facing. If he wasn't going to turn over the assets he needed to prevail on the fraud (and other) charges to render the civil contempt charges moot.

I'm sorry but Armstrong is apparently full of shit on a lot of this stuff. You shouldn't blindly reading and quoting his blog and do your own independent research. It seems not infrequently to disagree with his spin on it.

Nope the court did that.

The facts of the trial delay are contested. The government claims he requested the delays and they were willing to go to trial.

I find credible the supposition that he was and is a cantankerous and stubborn guy who wanted to fight every for single inch of process

but who knows

Of course, as long as Barrett keeps it civil contempt, then those being imprisoned are not entitled to a trial by jury. This is a serious violation of human rights and someone can die in prison at the hands of an unscrupulous lawyer and a crazy power mad judge.

Chadwick and ex wife

H. Beatty Chadwick is a former lawyer in the Philadelphia area, who spent nearly 14 years behind bars without being charged on civil contempt in a divorce case by his ex-wife. He was finally released after a judge admitted there was no remaining coercive effect.

CIVIL Contempt should be abolished as an abuse of human rights. Judges can be bribed or just be insane and you have no recourse whatsoever. That is pure tyranny.

The only reason why I was released is because my case was accepted by the Supreme Court and the only way to stop them from ruling on my arguments was to release me and tell the Supreme Court it was no longer a viable case since I was released. Chadwick’s lawyer called me, as he was denied a hearing by the Supreme Court. In my case, there was no order specifying what was to actually be produced – ambiguous.

Civil contempt means you have absolutely no rights whatsoever.  You are supposed to have a clearly defined order that says you do this and you will be released. I never had an order, for if they gave me such an order and I complied, they would have had to release me. Additionally, they were demanding my source code privately and not publicly in court, so there could be no official order. The solution was clear: don’t give me an order. That allowed them to demand the source code out of court and off the record as Tancred Schiavoni did in an email to another lawyer stating:

“In part, we are doing this because Armstrong Sr. has refused to turn over the uncompiled source code for the model that is being licensed.”

Yet I was never directed publicly in court to do so, nor was I ever given any order stating what it was I was supposed to do to end the contempt. This was an outright violation of my human rights; a violation of my family’s and employee’s civil rights. Yet I believe they will go unpunished for what I believe is clear criminal activity because the Justice Department never prosecutes their own – What’s the point of being corrupt if you have to follow the law?

During my recent European tour, people continually asked, “Why are you still alive?” True, there was an attempt on my life and I spent 3 days in a coma, but I survived, no doubt to their dismay. I doubt many people would buy a claim I committed suicide after the Supreme Court compelled them to end the contempt by agreeing to hear the case. So in my case, they will have to fake an accident or cause me to be in the wrong place at the right time.

Yet at the very beginning of my case, someone placed a bullet in my mailbox as a warning before the contempt began. That was even discussed in court and the bullet was turned over as evidence. In my case, I had tapes documenting every market manipulation of the “club” which included who they were. They were seized from my lawyers under threat of imprisoning them and then the receiver demanding those tapes was given a job inside Goldman Sachs as a board member yet continued to work as the court receiver from the board of Goldman Sachs never resigning from the court.

here I was with tapes documenting market manipulations by the banks. The court receiver, Alan Cohen, was appointed to run Princeton Economics. Goldman Sachs then hired Cohen after threatening to imprison all the lawyers if the deid not hand over all tapes. Goldman made Cohen a member of the Board of Directors. However, Cohen NEVER resigned from the court and continued running Princeton Economics from the board at Goldman. Come on! You cannot make up this type of outright corruption/conflict of interest; it is to the point where they simply do not care.

The New York banks have been my adversary, to say the least. Alan Cohen, the court receiver put in charge of running Princeton Economics, was simultaneously on the board of directors of Goldman Sachs. When the SEC said the contempt should end, Cohen lied to the court to keep the contempt going, without even receiving a complaint or charges since the original charges were dropped.

In my own case, Alan Cohen seizes all evidence about market manipulations by the banks and then I believe was rewarded by Goldman Sachs and hired as a board member. Yet he did not  resign from the court and continued to be the receiver in court while running Princeton Economics from the boardroom of Goldman Sachs. You cannot make up this stuff.

So yes, Alan Cohen of Goldman Sachs was intimately involved to prevent my release and advocated holding me until I died even though there was no crime, no description of a crime, no trial, not entitlement to lawyers, or anything that was supposed to be American. Under Due Process of Law you are supposed to be advised what you are being accused of and you then enter your plea guilty or not guilty. I was NEVER advised of any such crime and this is what Alan Cohen of Goldman Sachs stood before the New York court loaded with the “free” press who NEVER would report a single word or bothered to question anything Goldman Sachs every does.

Americans are entitled to a “PUBLIC TRIAL” where everything is supposed to be open to the public for review. That does not do much when the press is pro-government and they close the courtroom illegally and throw the Press out as Judge Richard Owen did on April 24th, 2000. That event caused the Associated Press to report that it was a “closed” hearing and to question whether I would ever receive a “fair trial” in New York City.

What Alan Cohen did that from confiscating all evidence to protect the New York Investment Bankers, arguing I be imprisoned forever even though there was no longer any crime even described, to advocating throwing out the press on April 24th, 2000, one can only wonder just what is going on in New York City.

Because they could not even describe a crime I might have done, Alan Cohen dispensed with the problem of even charging someone and providing notice to defend. His solution, just imprison me until I died knowing the NY Press will NEVER go against the NY boys. So much for liberty and justice for all and the land of the free except when you expose the New York Bankers and their destruction of the free markets and world economy. It is always about shutting people up to protect their illegal activities.

Alan Cohen even admitted HSBC pleaded guilty criminally, nobody went to jail, and they just gave back money they tried to pocket by blaming me. The bankers got away with precisely that in M.F. Global. The losses with illegal trading at the banks was covered by depositors at M.F. Global. That is precisely against the law.

The most insane corruption in New York is the acknowledged alteration to the transcripts that the judges in New York Federal Court claim the power to change the very words you speak in court. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals acknowledged the practice as being “unique” to New York, but on page 97 of their decision in UNITED STATES v. ZICHETTELLO, they claimed they lacked the power to order judges to obey the law.

Back in 1999, I stood up in court and objected Alan Cohen’s demands for my lawyers to turn over tapes of conversations I recorded to protect me as a journalist when I was writing about the various bank manipulations. I told Judge Richard Owen that those tapes revealed criminal activity by the major banks in market manipulations across the board, ..., and had nothing to do with my case.

Judge Owen told my lawyers to turn over all the tapes or they would be thrown in prison and held in contempt. That action under the law was totally illegal for it was an OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE that would land anyone else in prison for 5 years. Instead, Goldman Sachs hired Alan Cohen, awarding him a position on the board while remaining court officer still running Princeton Economics. Cohen never resigned, despite the obvious conflict of interest. I NEVER received any support from anyone in the press for what I was defending. They understood that since the media is on their side they can get away with anything.

Now four of the banks: JPMorgan Chase, Barclays, Citigroup, and RBS have agreed to plead guilty to U.S. criminal charges with fines reaching $5.7 billion. The U.S. Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, said that “almost every day” these firms were manipulating currency rates since 2007 to clip clients on transactions all the time.

All the evidence I had gathered that included documentation and phone recordings with brokers who also were monitoring these manipulations were seized by the now Chief of Global Compliance at Goldman Sachs and Tancred Schiavoni. The court put Cohen in charge of Princeton Economics. All that evidence vanished or I would be putting on the Web those audio tapes for the world to hear. Below is a transcript of the court proceeding where I objected about the seizure of this evidence I knew would miraculously vanish.

What I can say is I had personal conversations with Bill and he knew about the Buffett silver manipulation back in 1993 and how the CFTC walked into to PhiBro demanding they reveal their client. PhiBro refused and the CFTC told them to exit the trade. For him to have known that meant he had some real sources.

I confess, I am not aware of what they have said about manipulations since. I, and many others in the industry, kept track of all the manipulations for they covered everything from Rhodium to US Government Bond auctions just like the LIBOR scandal. I have explained that manipulations were common in the commodity industry during the 1970s. I saw those skills migrate to Wall Street only AFTER the big commodity house PhiBro put in a bid for Salomon Brothers. Then Goldman Sachs bought J. Aaron in the mid 1980s. From there the game expanded and by 1991, Salomon got caught manipulating the Federal Government Bond auctions. Talk about guts. This scandal was then documented in the 1993 book Nightmare on Wall Street.

I was one of the largest traders. So I kept track of what was going on just to make sure I did not get caught up it the nonsense. They tried persistently to get to to join the manipulation crowd. I could trade so (1) I didn’t need that, and (2) how do you know when you are the patsy? I saw Salomon use analysts to say the bonds were rising and they were selling using other brokers on the floor. They take no prisoners.

There was the  Robert Maxwell (1923–1991) scandal that he had stolen hundreds of millions of pounds from his own companies’ pension funds to save the companies from bankruptcy. However, behind the scenes there may have been trading losses with the club. Eventually, the pension funds were replenished with monies from investment banks Shearson Lehman and Goldman Sachs, as well as the British government. Maxwell was presumed to have fallen overboard from his luxury yacht off the Canary Islands, and his body was subsequently found floating in the Atlantic Ocean. He was buried on the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem with great official participation. The official ruling was death by accidental drowning.

On the second Silver Manipulation PhiBro brokers walked across the floor and showed me the Buffett orders to buy desperately trying to get me to join. They did not like it when I published “they’re back” giving the price target of $7 which was met on schedule. The silver bugs hated my guts then as well because they wanted so much to believe it was real. They have these people wound around their finger knowing that if they just make the metals rise, these people will always buy the high believing this time it is different an the price will truly soar. They need these believers so they can sell the high as always and then the fake analysts say the decline is not real, its just a manipulation to force it down (assuming the rise was real of course), so just keep buying. It works EVERY time!. When I say they are at it again, I get the hate mail because these people cannot wait to hand the bankers their money every time.

For the whole Long-Term Capital Management collapse and Russia, they tried to get me involved. I was invited to the IMF dinner just to impress me that they had the IMF in the palm of their hand just like they have the US government today. I refused to get involved, yet they knew I knew everything. When Russia collapsed in 1998, they blamed me saying I had more influence than all the politicians they could buy. They do not believe in real markets – only rigging the game. That is why they do not consider risk when you bribe everything you do not even consider what if you are wrong. That is why they ALWAYS need bailouts.

The strange thing is when my case began I believed it was really about the fact I refused to play ball with the New York boys since the contracts were clear – we bought the portfolios outright and were NOT managing their money. An idiot could just read the contracts and the accounts were ours – not client’s with a limited power of attorney. I had documented EVERY manipulation with hard evidence and taped EVERY phone call as insurance. So when they started the case and removed press that knew the truth, I understood the game was afoot. I believe they were illegally tapping my lawyers for somehow they found out I had split up that evidence and gave it to two law firms for safekeeping. They went after my lawyers threatening to throw them in jail unless they turnover that evidence. The lawyer pressing for it that day was Martin Glen who I believe was rewarded with a Judgeship and coincidentally is the presiding judge over M.F. Global who protected once again the NY banks. The receiver Alan Cohen I believe was rewarded by giving him a board position in Goldman Sachs. I guess another coincidence. The SEC head of enforcement was Andrew Geist. who selected the law firm O’Melveny & Myers to get all this evidence and then resigned from the SEC and became a partner in that very law firm – coincidence once again of course. The CFTC prosecutor Dennis O’Kkeefe was disbarred for misconduct in the other case at that time charging Sumitomo for manipulating copper not mentioning at all the NY boys or how Sumitomo was trying to defend its positions rather than “manipulate” absorbing the short sales of the NY boys so I believe they had the CFTC taken Sumitomo out of the game making them a fortune..

I don't know the truth

Just on the basis of that small section we can already ask about other periods

I'm not endorsing it.

There's nothing wrong with quoting fraud though (not making a statement either way about the above quote though). How else do you bring it to light?

I'm still of the opinion that nearly every criminal in prison can claim his or her rights were violated (and most if not all of them are likely correct one way or another). Should we let them all out? Erase or ignore or deny their convictions?

There is no objective basis to treat Armstrong's claim one way and every other criminal making essentially the same claim another way. Being a smart economist isn't enough.

According to court records, he has a criminal conviction.

Does that make you feel better?

If someone asks if he has any criminal convictions and he says no, he is lying. If that's the basis of some economic advantage, he'd likely be guilty of fraud.

You plead guilty to something in court, and it isn't overturned (even if, on its merits, it could be overturned), you have a conviction. Which he does, and which the original post on this topic correctly stated.

Let it go. You are not personally responsible for his status as a convicted criminal. Why do you even make such a big deal about it? Why not the thousands or even millions of other people whose rights are violated, and probably many is worse ways than his?

See above.

There was no shit trolling, just being accurate about his criminal record. That set you off, for reasons unknown.

I really didn't know about his trying to weasel out of his criminal record by claiming "My rights has been violated!" like every two bit criminal in the slammer (and most of them are probably right, but also largely guilty in fact), but it makes me lose a bit of respect for him. He's still a smart economist though, no taking that away.

Who appointed you advocate for Armstrong's constitutional rights anyway? He's not the first one to get a raw deal from the system, and won't be the last. If you take personal responsibility for every injustice in the world, you're gonna tie up a lot more days.

Sorry dude, but you did that. You're responsible for your own well being, so learn some restraint, eh?

Actually no, you could just leave well enough alone when I said that he had been convicted but is not necessarily disreputable because that is a factually correct statement.

And as I said, stuff he posts on his blog does not count as a credible evidence or a valid legal argument. It's one sided, selectively reported, not subject to cross examination, unauthenticated, etc. and may even be completely made up.

He does have a tendency to make things up too.

Google for "you are supposed to plead in your own words". The only hit for that phrase on the entire internet is from his blog. He made it up.

The Supreme Court has explicitly endorsed negotiated plea agreements (contracts, which may be drafted by either party, as long as agreed by both), as well as the structured questioning of the defendant by the judge that the agreement is being entered into voluntarily, there is actual guilt, etc.

The Supreme Court has explicitly endorsed negotiated plea agreements (contracts, which may be drafted by either party, as long as agreed by both), as well as the structured questioning of the defendant by the judge that the agreement is being entered into voluntarily, there is actual guilt, etc.