MARTIN ARMSTRONG: The federal courts are STATUTORY, not Constitutional. The president can shut down all the federal courts. Only court he cannot shut down is the Supreme Court

Thank you to Martin Armstrong's piece, "Can Neocons Declare Martial Law to Prevent Trump from Taking Power?"

Table of Contents from Armstrong's recent book, Creating World War III.

As I laid out in this report, Creating World War III, martial law was declared once in the United States during the 20th century. Because the president never challenged and endorsed it, it was in place for several years. I have also reviewed the Supreme Court decisions on this subject, and shockingly, martial law is valid if you also close down the courts.

Most people do not know the legal system very well since they are not taught the details in school, other than law school, to a minimal extent. The federal courts are STATUTORY, not Constitutional. The president can shut down all the federal courts. The ONLY court created by the Constitution that the president cannot shut down is the Supreme Court. All other courts exist at the PLEASURE of the government. 

Okay, so I wished that Martin could parse out the differences in courts here.  I will try my best after searching the internet, noooooooooooooo!!!  

Okay, So I found this,

It’s essential to understand how constitutional vs statutory law underscores the significance of these principles. While statutory laws are created by legislative bodies, they can never contravene the established constitutional mandates.  This interaction reveals the balance of power and the role of the constitution in safeguarding individual rights. 

And there's this, 

Statutory law refers to the body of law created by legislative bodies through the enactment of statutes. Unlike constitutional law, which derives its authority from constitutions, statutory law is rooted in the laws passed by legislative entities, such as Congress at the federal level or state legislatures at the state level. Understanding this process is vital for distinguishing between the realms of constitutional vs statutory law. 

Okay, so statutory refers to laws generated by legislative bodies, but they can never "contravene the established constitutional mandates."  Statutory law is rooted in the laws passed by legislative entities, such as Congress at the federal level or state legislatures at the state level.  

from Legal Insight USA,

TOM LUONGO: Everyone freaks out, rightly. "Biden's going to start WWIII!" The markets are strangely calm, almost as if they know this is bullshit.

Have we actually gotten confirmation directly from Biden that he authorized these missiles?

Because this is smelling an awful lot like a psy-op.

Here's why.

1) They want/need WWIII. So, throw out as chum that Biden authorized the use of 'long-range' missiles to attack Russia.…

— Tom Luongo (Head Sneetch) (@TFL1728) November 18, 2024

Have we actually gotten confirmation directly from Biden that he authorized these missiles.

Because this is smelling an awful lot like a psy-op. Here's why. 1) They want/need WWIII. So, throw out as chum that Biden authorized the use of 'long-range' missiles to attack Russia. 1a) Then we find out it's ATACMS, with a 200 mile range, and not Tomahawks. So, even if true, these aren't missiles that the Russians Air Defense can't deal with easily. 2) Everyone freaks out, rightly. "Biden's going to start WWIII!" X is full of people reposting Putin's words from earlier in the year about using nukes in retaliation. 3) The markets are strangely calm, almost as if they know this is bullshit. But, that's a side note. 4) Look at the narrative. Biden, as his last spiteful move, especially after he just voted for Trump and secured his family's future, then turns around and does this a week later? Makes zero sense. 5) So, this is far more likely to be another pathetic, last gasp of the IC/Britain/Davos to start WWIII before Trump comes into office. 6) If Putin doesn't take the bait the whole thing fails.... just like every other lame attempt, which killed Russians BTW, to get Putin offside. 7) But, now we're hearing calls for using the 25th amendment to get rid of Joe. NOW!? Why?! Really?! 8) You know why... to make the case to the American people that time is short and Joe is crazy!. We must install Harris to save America (AMERICA!) from the twin Hitlers of Trump and Putin. We can't have someone "of Donald Trump's temperament running the country now!" 8a) After starting a war, and invoking the 25th, declare martial law, suspending the constitution and stopping Trump from taking power. They'll have a willing Congress and Senate because Trump is openly hostile to them. There are a lot of dead bodies, literally, floating to the surface. They'll have the support of at least 25% of the country to start. 9) Remember, folks, the first rule of malignant narcissists... If I can't have it, no one can! 10) The 25th amendment requires the VP and a plurality of the cabinet to get rid of him. Joe just betrayed 'the cause'... he's finished. They now hate him. Do you think these people aren't desperate or evil enough not to do something like this? 11) Put nothing past these people. They are counting on Putin being a man of his word after they kill more Russians.

SASHA LATYPOVA: "[I]n 2020...what happened with this COVID 'live exercise,' as Mike Pompeo called it, they [the U.S. military] essentially crossed the proverbial Rubicon...They deployed the military [on U.S. soil]."

🚨"[I]n 2020...what happened with this COVID 'live exercise,' as Mike Pompeo called it, they [the U.S. military] essentially crossed the proverbial Rubicon...They deployed the military [on U.S. soil]."

Retired pharma R&D executive Sasha Latypova (@sasha_latypova) describes for… pic.twitter.com/6ngEdhfGeH

— Sense Receptor (@SenseReceptor) June 9, 2024

"[I]n 2020...what happened with this COVID 'live exercise,' as Mike Pompeo called it, they [the U.S. military] essentially crossed the proverbial Rubicon...They deployed the military [on U.S. soil]."

Retired pharma R&D executive Sasha Latypova (@sasha_latypova) describes for Johnny Vedmore (@JohnnyVedmore) on TNT Radio (@tntradiolive) how the COVID scam/attack has been orchestrated by the U.S. military. Because COVID—particularly the bioweapon injections often falsely referred to as "vaccines"—has been unleashed on Americans themselves, Latypova says this is a "crossing the Rubicon" moment for the U.S. military. "I think...while this creeping tyranny and control of the military [happened]...over decades, maybe starting in 2012, they started building up this capacity [to produce the bioweapon injections]," Latpova says, adding that she thinks that in 2020 "what happened with this COVID 'live exercise,' as Mike Pompeo called it, they essentially crossed the proverbial Rubicon." Pharma insider, Latypova, explains: "If you remember from Roman history, when Julius Caesar with his troops crossed the Rubicon [river], that was the point of no return. You were not allowed to deploy the military onto the Roman Republic. Just as you are not allowed to deploy the U.S. military onto U.S. soil. And they did. That's what they did in 2020. They deployed the military...." Latypova adds, "there's no return for this, this is treason..." Despite the fact this is treason, Latypova says the U.S. military knows it, "so they made damn sure that they're not going to be prosecuted. So this whole deployment of this fake pandemic, fear, and then injecting everyone with poison, was preplanned for years, executed by the U.S. military—I don't know if they work for themselves or they work for others—or it's a matter of servant now controlling the master, I don't know, [but] this needs to be, obviously, investigated." Pharma insider, Latypova, adds: "I have documentation, and a lot of evidence that the U.S. military deployed themselves onto American soil, and worldwide, because they control all these bases and have military presence all over the world. They drove this fake pandemic [with] fake fear, and...the purpose of this was to inject everyone with this mRNA poison and to poison and kill and disable as many people as possible."

KEVIN RYAN: The bodies of WTC victims were crushed into tiny fragments and scattered by explosive forces. About 40% of the victims have still not been identified.

The bodies of WTC victims were crushed into tiny fragments and scattered by explosive forces. About 40% of the victims have still not been identified.  https://t.co/r2dzhSiOwo

— Kevin Ryan (@KevinRyan911) November 18, 2024

DR. ERIC BERG: Unfortunately, what we're missing in science is this thing called ethics

176 drugs once backed by scientific evidence and deemed safe have now been withdrawn from the market.  https://t.co/eN1s5S3opW pic.twitter.com/VwMKPTRq7w

— “Sudden And Unexpected” (@toobaffled) November 17, 2024

176 drugs that were considered safe and effective but now are off the market because they found that they were quite dangerous Accutane. They took it off the market because they found that it creates liver damage after 27 years.

Cylert was on the market for 30 years.  That was for ADHD or ADD.

And then we have DES, diethylstilbesterol.  This was used as a very powerful estrogen that was supposed to prevent miscarriages until they found it caused miscarriages 31 years later.

And then you had Thalidomide, and I don't know how that got passed, that credit all sorts of problems with babies coming out with flippers for arms and all sorts of issues.

Hey, these things are backed by science.  So the main question is who is funding the study, which many times gives grants to universities.  And then you have industry which then also funds the universities.  And then you have a few non-profits to do research, right? 

Here and there, we allow industry to pay certain individuals who sit on boards and committees that regulate a lot of the guidelines in our Healthcare.  And, of course, not to mention the medical journals, which depend on industry for money for their advertising.

But I think the worst of the worst is that industry is allowed to cherry-pick their data and not have to publish the studies that don't align with what they want.

Unfortunately, what we're missing in science is a thing called ethics.