Armstrong clarified more details about the government abuse he received in his recent blog COMEY & the Unconstitutional Antics of the NY Courts:

QUESTION: I remember watching a documentary about you where none other than James Comey put you in jail illegally and forced you to admit guilt to some nonsense. Similar to what happened to General Flynn in recent years. Now that the deep state is being dismantled, do you plan on filing a lawsuit against the government? Any comments at all one way or the other?

ANSWER: Actually, to my complete shock, the company, Princeton Economics International, was officially closed in 2009 yet they have kept the receivership going for 20 years. Republic National Bank and HSBC plead CRIMINALLY guilty and had to pay back all my clients because they were illegally trading in our accounts. The bankers were simply taking money illegally from our accounts using it as their capital and then put it back in the wrong account which is how I caught them. They were using our funds as their own capitalization and were parking their trades in our accounts besides using our money like MF Global. Of course, like MF Global, New York always protects that bankers and nothing is ever done which has disgraced the United States in the eyes of the entire world.

[…]

Despite internal audits that showed we were indeed conservative using only 4% of cash for margin and were profitable into 1998. Nothing Republic alleged could be supported. They simply tried to cover-up their own illegal trading in our accounts. We dealt with Deutsche Bank and even had my own brokerage house. The only problem was at Republic New York Securities – no other institution.

[…]

Audiotapes which revealed the bank’s illegal actions were either deliberately withheld from the government by the receiver to keep his fees going for 20 years, or they claimed they were destroyed in 9/11 World Trade Center event. This is one copy I found in my mother’s basement when I got out. Did the government ever listen to the tapes? Or were the tapes withheld to protect the bankers and then the Receiver was made a board member of Goldman Sachs for his assistance?

If the government never reviewed these tapes because the receiver withheld them, then will the government suddenly prosecute the receiver and his counsel? Or will the government concede they had them all along and still engaged in a fraudulent prosecution for political reasons to protect the bankers? Was Comey aware of this? Did he sanction it to protect the bankers as he protected Hillary? After all, it was the Clintons who gave a wink and a nod to the bankers trying to take over Russia by blackmailing Yeltsin after arranging a $7 billion theft of money from the IMF loans […]

[…]

All phone lines are recorded in financial situations. The receiver threatened all my lawyers to throw them in contempt unless they handed over all the tapes. There were tapes where openly the bankers were asking me to join them on a platinum manipulation admitting that they had paid bribes to Russian ministers to recall the platinum to take an inventory to create a shortage. I stood up and stated that these tapes would reveal criminal activity on the part of the bankers. They somehow were conveniently destroyed in 9/11 to protect the bankers?

[…]

These are questions I would certainly love to have answered. But it is also why they used civil contempt to keep me in prison because you are NOT entitled to a public trial where I could have called the bankers to the testify. The prosecutors protected the bankers at every step of the way.

[…]

After the bank plead guilty and had to pay everyone back to escape even a fine, the receiver stood before the court and alleged there was another fraud to which I was never charged. No complaint was ever filed and they admitted in open court there was no criminal description of the allegation. Nevertheless, they just arbitrarily kept me in prison for 5 years without any justification whatsoever in complete denial of Due Process of Law like some corrupt third world country. That is supposed to be a violation of human rights which the USA accuses China of doing. Nevertheless, New York prosecutors and judges do this routinely to protect the government and bankers while the American press joins in to also protect the prosecutors.

[…]

The judge was even changing the transcripts, which is a criminal act by itself. The court reporter is supposed to swear under oath that the transcript is a true and correct recording of the event. They will not allow you to audio record because that prevents them from changing the transcripts. None of my transcripts were ever certified because the judge kept changing them. (Rule 5007(a) “The person preparing any transcript shall promptly file a certified copy.”). Even the court reporters conspire against you to deny you Due Process of Law in New York. Believe it or not, this was even addressed in the court of appeals in another case and the court of appeals said the judges should stop it, but they lacked the power to order them to obey the law.

“The Southern District of New York follows a practice that is unusual and perhaps unique. … Because the parties receive only a printed transcript that incorporates the judge’s revisions, the parties are not informed of such revisions. … Courts do not have power to alter transcripts in camera and to conceal the alterations from the parties. Given the issues that arose in this case as a direct result of this practice, there appears to be little justification for continuing the practice in its present form. Nevertheless, whether we have the power to order a change in such a practice is unclear. We review judgments, and our review of the convictions and sentences here may not be an appropriate vehicle for the fine tuning of this practice. However, we invite the judges of the Southern District to consider revision.”

see: US v Ziccetello

I wrote to the government and said what is the point of a trial when you people can simply alter a transcript and claim I confessed to even killing JFK and the press will NEVER question anything. I had even written to the ACLU, and they did not wish to take on the corrupt system in New York that might end political persecutions. They were just scared I supposed. Forget the press ever defending the people. They have joined the conspiracy against the people which allows the government to act in this manner knowing they will never be questioned.

[…]

I did an interview with the Japanese press and told them to tell my clients to come to sue the bank in New York or they would NEVER see a dime. The bank was trying to claim their staff conspired with me to escape liability which made no sense once the government realized the accounts were mine and did not belong to the Japanese. Only then did the bank have to plead guilty. My clients did as I directed and filed suit against the bankers. I met with the lead attorney who said “you are collateral damage” and I said yes, I know. We agreed to cooperate and help each other. The government ushered in HSBC and then put a permanent gag order on me for life to prevent me from ever helping my clients against HSBC. That was just unbelievable how far the government will go to protect bankers.

[…]

Judge Lawrence McKenna was trying to protect me. The government removed him from my case behind the curtain without any hearing or allowing me to object or be advised what they were doing. That is completely illegal but they do whatever they want in New York City. They sealed all of those entries in the docket which were all ex parte so nobody can see the truth of how they were manipulating even the judges to get the result they wanted.

[…]

I refused to plead ever saying I took money or even tried to take money from my clients. They finally wrote a plea where all I had to say was I failed to tell my client over a weekend that the bank took money for its own benefit – not me. It was August 27, 1999, when H demanded an explanation and the response came from the head of the bank, George Wendler, that he was just the messenger. I went to my lawyer Monday morning to file a suit against the bank. This was the weekend they claimed I should have told my clients even before I went to my lawyers.

[…]

Legally, if you enter a plea, the judge is supposed to make sure it is true and not coerced. Here I was not allowed to speak in my own words but had to read a script (allocution) written by the government and the judge even said you are to read a script no different than a hostage held by terrorists. It was after that when I believe they orchestrated to have me killed. They could not pull the typical suicide and claim remorse as they typically do – i.e. Jeffrey Epstein. In my case, they left my cell open and another inmate facing life who then tried to kill me. I was in a coma for three days but survived to their dismay. I knew they would kill Jeffrey Epstein for that is what they do when they can’t take you to trial and prevent evidence from becoming public.

[…]

I had no restitution because the bank had to plead guilty and repay my clients – not me!

[…]

What people do not realize is that the ONLY reason they released me was that I got into the Supreme Court back in 2007. The Supreme Court ordered the government to respond only in cases they are looking to take. They released me and told the Supreme Court the case was moot because I was no longer in contempt.

[…]

After finding out that 20 years later and 10 years after the company was shut down, did I discover that the Receiver still had millions of dollars he was siphoning off fees year after year to make sure he grabbed every penny. Everything he had been ordered to return he simply refused and was paying $5,000 in storage fees per month for 20 years. I filed an appeal trying to get my stuff back and of course, the New York court always rules in favor of just the government as the Washington Post and CNN always write against Trump. What they count on is that it costs more than a quarter-million just to appeal to the Supreme Court and out of thousands of petitions, they take about 100 a year. Since I got in the first time, they viewed the odds of the same case getting into the Supreme Court twice was maybe one in billion.

Well, the Supreme Court has ruled that the government had to respond by December 2nd. The government asked for an extension once again and was granted until January 2nd. In my case, there are three main lines of cases the Supreme Court has already ruled are unconstitutional yet the New York courts simply just ignored the Supreme Court. The New York Court has outright refused to follow the Supreme Court despite the fact one decision, Grupo Mexicano holding you cannot freeze unsecured assets, came out even 6 months before my case. On top of that, there was never any statutory authority for a receiver. The SEC asked for that authority and was granted it only in 2010. The obvious question becomes, just how far will the Supreme Court go? There was NEVER any authority to have acted as they did in New York. Fair trials are a thing of the past.

It is now up to the Supreme Court to decide. I suspect the bare minimum is they will finally have to return everything they were supposed to do 20 years ago in storage lockers. If the Supreme Court goes fully ahead and orders oral argument, we may see a decision by March or June 30th, 2020.