Interesting thread. There is a LOT of great content here. I'm beginning to suspect that might be the case about his 1987 "forecast" as well. MA knows people do not have memories that stretch back to the 1980s or 70s even, and most of those of that generation are unlikely to be avid internet users, where now he is far more easily scrutinised.

I just tried searching for any article published 1980-87 where MA was forecasting the 1987 crash. Couldn't find anything other than one about his enormous consulting fees from the early 80s. It might require trawling through article archives either paid or at a library, which isn't really worth the time/money unless someone is a private investigator and wants to take MA to court.

There appears to be no report or news article from before the 1987 crash where MA made such a prediction. All that did happen is the Brady Commission engaged MA and he "provided all the important research for the Brady Commission upon request". However, the official Brady report has no mention of either MA nor his Princeton Economics as it was known back then:
https://archive.org/details/reportofpresiden01unit/page/n13

So IF he was involved in the Brady Commission report, he can't have played a particularly big role. Perhaps more sales BS to exaggerate what he perceives as good things to cement his credibility?

This is MA's letter to Reagan from 1985:
https://d33wjekvz3zs1a.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Martin-Armstrong-to-President-Reagan-October-25-1985.pdf

And there is no mention of an impending crash, despite MA explaining in another blog post (2013):
I have told the story how after objecting to the formation of G5 in 1985 warning that they would increase volatility, create a crash within 2 years (2.15 years), and destabilize the global economy, the White House responded that no one agreed with use about volatility would rise or this would lead to a crash

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/its-global-even-the-brady-commission-revealed-that-in-1987/

However, that same Brady Commission report "concluded that the failure of stock markets and derivatives markets to operate in sync was the major factor behind the crash", which was not to do with exchange rate volatility that MA was arguing would destabilise the economy.

So once again this looks like classic MA where it is very difficult to conclude:
1. What he forecast
2. What he WAS forecasting
3. Whether what he WAS forecasting didn't happen, but the ambiguity means he can still claim he DID forecast "something".

Ditto his forecast about the 1998 ruble crisis. There appears to be no resources online from before that period that proves beyond doubt he really did forecast it.

What is most curious is almost all of these "forecasts" seem to have appeared post-2011, when MA was released from jail. Of those forecasts made since then, his strike rate has been poor or they are so ambiguous, you can't help but remain sceptical.