by Martin Armstrong, Armstrong Economics:
The US prosecutors are conspiring with the British to ensure that Julian Assange never goes to trial and what is taking place is the collapse of civility and Justice which has become sheer vengeance and political prosecution. The British will not allow independent doctors to visit Assange meanwhile they have been keeping him like Jeffrey Epstein in solitary confinement. This is where they keep people who are really political enemies of the states who will never be given a fair trial.
I warned that Jeffrey Epstein would be killed because there was no way these people would ever allow him to stand trial. You will never understand this type of person claiming to be a prosecutor until you stare at them in the eyes. They are lifeless. They see everyone as someone who must be stopped or killed because they have a zero measure of humanity and no conscience. To them, everyone is guilty of something so even if they are wrong, the person deserves it.
Justice has become a mere fiction like a bedtime story they tell children. There is no such thing as equal justice nor is anyone ever innocent until proven guilty. We really desperately need the mainstream press to stop supporting this type of ruthless prosecutorial action. Until we see real investigative journalists step up and editors who will allow the truth to be printed, then even they are condemning their own families and posterity to ruthless tyranny.
The governmental powers that be could care less about what is written on the internet. Only when the story appears in a printed mainstream newspaper will the government pay attention. Even then, it will take more than just one paper. When the Gretchen Morgenson of the New York Times put me on the front page asking what was going on, the prosecutor stood up in court and said the New York Times didn’t understand and the Judge said of course. The government called the New York Times and complained, so they refused to publish any letters to the editor. The New York Times bowed to the government, not Gretchen.
When I confronted Judge Richard Owen who was changing the very words spoken in court, the legal profession went nuts. They all said you cannot accuse a federal judge or committing a crime. Yet they all admitted that the federal judges in New York alter the transcripts. Even the court of Appeals told them they should stop (US v Ziccetello).
Andrew Ross Sorkin, of the New York Times, was covering Frank Quatrone’s case of First Boston before the same judge. He was also the author of Too Big to Fail. Sorkin came to visit me on this topic of judges changing transcripts and said that Judge Richard Owen was changing the transcripts in Quatrone’s case. I told him I had even written to the SEC and asked why to bother with trials. Just alter the transcript and say I have confessed to even killing JFK and the courts will pass judgment. He told me that Judge Owen was changing the transcripts and he was keeping notes of what was taking place in court which turned out confirmed the judge was changing the very words and actions in the court.
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals in their decision wrote that Sorkin misrepresented what took place in court in the New York Times because that was not what the transcript showed. “However, the very article that Quattrone employs to establish improprieties has at least one material mischaracterization of the court’s trial management. The article claims that Brodsky testified upon cross-examination “No” when asked “Did you think he [Quattrone] had done anything wrong?” See Andrew Ross Sorkin, A Shift in Testimony in Ex-Banker’s Trial, N.Y. Times, Apr. 23, 2004, at C3. This characterization was completely accurate. See J.A. 291 (Tr. 1371). What was inaccurate, however, was the next sentence of the article: “The judge ․ immediately struck the answer from the record ․” Sorkin, supra, at C3. The record clearly reflects that upon objection, the trial judge allowed Brodsky to testify “No” but instructed the witness to move on without providing further commentary. J.A. 291 (Tr. 1370-71).”
They threw me into the very same cell with terrorists and told my family I was not there. The prosecutors then went after my lawyers demanding they return all money that had been paid and to turn over tapes that exposed how the “club” was paying political bribes and were indeed attempting to manipulate the world markets with the aid of government for profit, which is why no bankers are ever prosecuted. That would expose the corruption veins running through the entire legal and political system. The bankers have consistently blown up the entire world economy many times, but NEVER were banks ever held responsible. When I asked a New York Lawyer why no bankers are ever prosecuted, he laughed and replied: “You don’t shit where you eat!”