See other Resistance Articles
Title: Commenting on the IRS (while it's still legal)
Source:
LWAN: Life Without a Number
URL Source: http://www.cjmciver.org/cgi-bin/lwanread.cgi?2007-08-12
Published: Aug 12, 2007
Author: Neil McIver
Post Date: 2010-02-20 12:44:05 by Deasy
Ping List: *libertarians* Subscribe to *libertarians*
Keywords: irs, bor, constitution, federal
Views: 210
Comments: 13
August, 12, 2007 The title isn't factitious. The IRS/DOJ is seeking among other things to prohibit the Save-a-Patriot Fellowship and it's members from speaking out about the IRS and I'm a member. This is being done in the form of a civil injunction which is presently being litigated. Among the terms sought by the IRS is a prohibition of dispensing any kind of information in any form that might pursuade people to break any internal revenue laws, or selling any information about the IRS that basically just makes them look bad. As of this writing the injunction is not in place. I do not have any kind of tax license and I've never advised anyone not to file tax returns. So far as I know SAPF has never given such advice either as SAPF founder and fiduciary John Kotmair has always been up front about never doing such a thing in the 13 years I've been familiar with him. I understand it is illegal to give tax advice in this country without a license. From that we can certainly infer that we unlicensed are legally unqualified to understand what the tax laws really mean and say. In which case there's no way I can ever know if what I say or do violates some portion of this apparently nebulous tax code that is legally beyond my comprehension. I am therefore both legally unqualified to understand the tax laws and yet, with the injunction sought, required to know what requirements it makes so as to not advise people to break any of those laws. I'll try my best. But whatever the tax requirements may be for everyone, the IRS has butted heads with a number of those in the so-called "tax honesty movement" which certainly should be highlighted. First, the SAPF suit is being litigated now. SAPF has lost the initial lower court case as well as the initial appeal. Not all avenues have been exhausted and I know John Kotmair of SAPF will not concede an inch, taking advantage of every legal avenue available. It's important to note that being civil case, no criminal wrongdoing is alleged. The IRS already alleged criminal activity against SAPF back in 1993 when they raided the fellowship. They lost that case and had to return everything they took from the fellowship at the point of a gun. Lots of guns, actually. Having lost that case "with prejudice", they could not file the same criminal charges again. But where they failed criminally they can try civilly. It's easier to prove your case in a civil court since the evidence doesn't need to be as strong as per court rules. Second, Ed and Elaine Brown of New Hampshire stopped filing tax returns after they concluded the law did not require them to file. They were charged with tax crimes but boycotted their own trial when they believed they were not permitted to give their honest defense. Court rules currently require the desired defense be approved by the judge before it can be presented to a jury. They were convicted and sentenced in abstencia, but Ed Brown's position is that he will not be taken quietly. The Browns have returned to their New Hampshire home to await whatever happens next. The federal response has been tempered thus far. The Browns' home is not barracaded, at least in any obvious manner, and friends just drive up his driveway and knock on the door when visiting, that in spite of media reports that his home is now a "compound". (Homes and churches are automatically converted to compounds when the feds train their sights on them, in case you didn't know). Certainly the feds have a political consideration with the Browns, as a raid that results in any deaths will be a replay of the stand off at Ruby Ridge where 2 family members of the (falsely) accused (via sting operation) were shot and killed along with one federal marshall, or more infamously, the Waco Texas tragedy in which 4 federal agents were killed and some 80 followers of David Koresh, including many children, were killed when the wooden church burned down in high winds during the final tank assault. (The sniper who killed Randy Weaver's wife at Ruby Ridge was exhonerated from state murder charges when the feds moved to have the case first transferred to federal court and then to have the charges dropped). Ruby Ridge and Waco have served as rallying cries for the modern militia movement who believe the federal government has become tyrannical, and the feds certainly know that if there are any deaths on the Brown's estate it will be a third log on the fire. There was a federal pseudo military operation undertaken against the Browns on June 7th, but it was aborted when they were discovered by a friend, Danny Riley, walking the Browns' dog during the early morning. He reported spotting an armed man in the woods near the end of the long driveway and was so oblivious to the prospect of a raid that he first assumed the camauflaged man was turkey hunting. He reported being fired upon (misses), tasered, and arrested but later released and warned not to return to the Browns or talk to the press. His video account can be seen here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3083052001159394679 A federal marshall gave a press release claiming they were there only to conduct surveillance but had to abort their operations after being discovered. No mention was made of whether shots were fired, and no explanation was made as to why mere surveillance required such secrecy. It's easy to believe the feds were there for the sole purpose of forcibly apprehending the Browns. That they aborted the operation seems evidence enough of that. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1490432427048704609 [missing] Third, Sherry Jackson, former IRS agent has been charged in April with 4 counts of willful failure to file tax returns. The award winning agent/CPA turned private tax consultant answered a challenge to find the law that made most Americans liable for the income tax and was unable to find one. She became outspoken about what she has NOT found, and, as the charges indicate, seems to have stopped filing herself. As is often the case with consciencious non-filers, greed is hardly a motive as they usually fair worse in taking such stands than those who just keep their jobs and file. Jackson reports the IRS demanded her tithing records from her church in order to ascertain how much she earned. The irony of a supposed tax evader tithing to a church seems lost on the IRS investigators. Jackson gives a brief history of her findings and experience with the IRS on these youtube links: http://youtube.com/watch?v=s1UT2Ms5E2k http://youtube.com/watch?v=F9PSYkWIuIs Hopefully she will prevail against the IRS. Fourth, Louisiana attorney Tom Cryer was acquitted last month of 2 counts of willful failure to file after he, too, concluded that there was no law requiring him to do so. Victories for non-filers in court have been rare, mostly because the IRS gets to choose who to take to court. For obvious PR purposes, the IRS seems to only choose people whom they expect to have a high percentage chance of convicting, and leave the rest. High profile names also get added attention, again for PR purposes. Tom Cryer, the Hall of Fame attorney, and honor graduate of LSU Law School apparently beat those odds. Finally, Bill Benson. A gentleman who's being sued in civil court over his research involving the ratification of the 16th Amendment of the US Constitution, the so-called "income tax" amendment. The 16th Amendment is what most tax preparers and judges today consider to be the authority for the federal government to tax incomes. Benson's book "The Law that Never Was" makes a case that the 16th was never legally ratified, contrary to the claim by Secretary of State Philander Knox just before leaving office in 1913. While the 16th did not actually confer any new tax powers as per Supreme Court decisions shortly after ratification, for those who think otherwise Benson's research is quite significant. Benson visited all capitals of all states in existance in 1913 involved with the ratification of the 16th Amendment for the legislative archives of their discussion and vote on the amendment. He concluded that there were, in fact less than the Constutionally required 3/4's of the union states that had voted in favor of the amendment. It includes the states of Texas and Louisiana who's state constitutions prohibit voting in favor of any new taxing power for the federal government. Although, again, if the 16th doesn't actually confer any new taxing power that would be okay but since modern trial judges and the IRS keep saying it did confer new power.... the irony of the whole affair runs deep. But Bill Benson claims no more than 20 of the required 36 states actually formally or legally approved of the 16th Amendment. They are in court now to try to force Benson to not make his book available and to turn over the names of all past customers who have purchased it. Recently 3 interested anonymous parties came aboard for Benson's defense. Two of whom have purchased Benson's material and one who wants to but is afraid of IRS retributions if she buys it. These parties create a legal question that must be answered by that court as to the impact of the IRS suit against those innocent 3rd parties. The IRS has their hands full with these cases, but unlike those they attack, the IRS also has an unlimited budget. Bill Benson's web site is here: http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com/new/home.asp A summary of IRS activity isn't complete without mentioning Aaron Russo's film, "America: From Freedom to Fascism". Aaron Russo is a well know name in Hollywood circles. For anyone interested in federal income tax matters, it raises very good questions. The DVD can be found on the web at this link: The full length feature can also be seen on the web here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173 Make of it what you will. Today, while I am still allowed to be, I'm just the messenger. Neil McIver For subscription changes, email lwan3@cjmciver.org with 'subscribe' or 'unsubscribe' in the subject line. Poster Comment: See also save-a-patriot.org.
Commenting on the IRS (while it's still legal)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Pinguinite, christine, All (#0)
Hat's off mister.
Thanks, Deasy! This is a blast from the past. I didn't recognize the title and it took me a little reading to wonder who wrote it. SAPF lost the injunction, appealing all the way to the USSC, who refused to hear it. There was no trial. It was a summary judgment that stuck. Sherry Jackson was convicted and sent to prison, and last year was suffering some serious physical illness in prison that was going untreated in spite of her pleas. Hopefully she's doing better and will be out before too long.
But it's a free country for some value of "free." I figured people here ought to know about your own personal fight for restoring our constitutional liberties. Your diary of a personal odyssey with "life without a number" was well written. It was a real service to the community.
Thank you very much for the compliment. It was a different life from what I have now. I'm not so idealistic now, which in a way is unfortunate. I now have about 4 years of living in Ecuador under by belt which has a way of making one more pragmatic. The running joke in "Pirates of the Caribbean" was about the Pirate's Code: "They're just guidelines anyway". That pretty much sums up Ecuadorian laws and, I think now, US laws too. In both cases they are flimsy and only apply when the enforcers want them too. I've seen that -- we all have -- all too often. It's more obvious here though, especially when driving around. People run red lights all the time. I've done it too. Cars without tags on them are a frequent site. A 3 lane road turns into a 2 lane road at an intersection without any warning or clue as to who is supposed to merge where. A limited access stretch of highway is 25 yards wide with no lanes painted on them either. And in the states, we have the courts that use so-called "case law" to bend and completely twist the meaning of the Constitution and enforcement that's selective about who gets prosecuted for what. Constitutionalists, such as I was, would treat the Constitution as a sacred "law of the land", but to the US courts, the supreme law is just a "guideline" too that they are free to change (Supposed educated lawyers call it a "living document"). They aren't supposed to do it and courts will deny ignoring the Constitution, but any challenge in court that the Constitution means what it says just gets railroaded. While corruption is rampant at the top in the states, it's more localized here which has the advantage of giving the little people a fighting chance. There are some exceptions, but in total, there is more freedom here than in the states. More libertarianism, and more responsibility. There's very little in the way of corporations that run the show behind the scenes. Thanks, Deasy, for the opportunity to ramble a bit.
Not a problem. Steel is best when tempered.
Neil, I think I may have told you this before but back when I learned (mid 80's) that the income tax was a scam I started writing letters to the editor to the little hometown paper. Not too long after I started I chanced upon one of the town's CPA's one night at the post office. And he told me that Roscoe (Egger) said he was going to "put all you tax protesters in jail." I told him that Roscoe Egger had no such power, that the only people who could do that were jurors who were ignorant of the law. And I was doing my best to get at least some of them beyond their ignorance of the law. Only takes one juror to deny the government a conviction. I am sure he thought they would charge me with the "crime" of "willful failure to file" but they haven't yet. And Roscoe has been gone from that job a long time.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Thanks, Deasy ! LWAN is me too ... hats off to you, sir. Hope you're doing well in Ecuador.
Prior to the Federal Reserve Act, no political dreamer was ever wild enough to think of breaking down the lines which separate the States, and of compounding the American People into one common mass of slaves. Yet, this is exactly what has happened under Social Security, by creating a revenue base for the collection of interest on a fictitious national debt owed to the Federal Reserve banks, in other words, slavery to the national debt under the so-called 14th Amendment.
This must be for Neil.
Yes, and you for posting it.
Prior to the Federal Reserve Act, no political dreamer was ever wild enough to think of breaking down the lines which separate the States, and of compounding the American People into one common mass of slaves. Yet, this is exactly what has happened under Social Security, by creating a revenue base for the collection of interest on a fictitious national debt owed to the Federal Reserve banks, in other words, slavery to the national debt under the so-called 14th Amendment.
I am. This place is growing on me. The mountains are beautiful and they are everywhere. The air is clean, and the food is fresh, cheap and good. Here is no doubt my best panoramic photo to date. This is not what I see out my window (wish it was) but rather an extremely good view even by Ecuador standards. It's from a small out-of-the-way 4 block village called Isinlivi which is hard to get too without so much as a hole in the wall eatery in it. It overlooks a river canyon sparsely populated with farmers. http://ecuadortreasures.ec/images/sigchos/5pan1280.jpg This is a 270 degree panoramic, as you can see both the rising sun and the shadow of a tree that's near me. That's the small 57K version. To get the full size 4 meg jpg version, take out the "1280" in the URL. I don't want to post the URL to the big one or spiders will download it, and it's a humdinger.
Did you forget somebody, Pinguinite? The Anti-Defamation League, perhaps? "Tax Protest Group Barred from Tax Scheme - EXTREMISM in the News - wwww.adl.org Posted: January 2, 2007 A federal court in Baltimore has permanently barred John Baptist Kotmair, Jr., of Westminster, Maryland, and his organization, "Save-a-Patriot Fellowship," from selling an alleged tax-fraud scheme. The court described Kotmair as a "seasoned tax protester," whose representations about tax laws are "clearly fraudulent." The court's December 4, 2006, order permanently bars Kotmair and his Save-A-Patriot Fellowship, one of the largest and oldest anti-government tax protest groups in the United States, from representing or assisting any person in preparing communications to the IRS or assisting any other person in preparing court filings relating to income taxes. The order requires the defendants to notify those associated with promoting the scheme and all individuals who participated in it of the injunction, and mandates that the Justice Department be provided information about the customers. Additionally, the order requires Kotmair and his organization to notify customers of the injunction, to post the injunction prominently on their Web sites for one year, and to remove from their Web sites their alleged tax fraud promotional materials. In 1984, shortly after serving two years in prison for tax evasion, Kotmair allegedly began telling his followers that U.S. citizens do not need to pay any taxes or file tax returns on income earned domestically. This common tax protest argument has come to be known as the "Section 861" argument after a section of the tax code. The court's opinion states that Kotmair, a former Baltimore police detective, and his organization knowingly made false and fraudulent statements to their customers about the tax benefits of their system. Kotmair allegedly knew or had reason to know that the statements were false because the same arguments had been rejected by other courts, including a 2004 federal court decision barring tax protester Thurston Bell, one of Kotmair's former employees, from selling the same scheme on a rival Web site. The court additionally found that Kotmair and his organization were fraudulently advising clients that they could legally opt out of the Social Security system. The court ruled that it was "abundantly clear" that the defendants were in breach of the Internal Revenue Code, and that an injunction was necessary to halt their actions." www.adl.org/learn/extremi...Cat=Extremism_in_the_News ADL's sister organization, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) speaks out about John Stark, who allegedly flew his plane into an IRS building: Radical Anti-tax Groups Growing Threat, Say Law Enforcement (Here comes the backlash) freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/re...i?ArtNum=114821&Disp=2#C2 Thank you, Pinguinite, and your fellow freedom-fighters, for paving the way for the rest of us. Thank you for posting, Deasy.
"...as long as there..remain active enemies of the Christian church, we may hope to become Master of the World...the future Jewish King will never reign in the world before Christianity is overthrown - B'nai B'rith speech http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/luther.htm / http://bible.cc/psalms/83-4.htm
I didn't know the ADL had commented on the issue, but it's not surprising. They make plenty of use of the terms "scheme" and "fraudulent". The IRS pushed their case based on a portion of the tax code that deals with fraudulent tax shelters, which SAPF never did. A technical correction is that Kotmair was convicted in 1982 of willful failure to file, not tax evasion. The latter is a felony and willful failure is not. It's already a matter of court record in the mid-90's that John Kotmair's beliefs are in good faith (or were at that time, at least). It's very unlikely they'll quite go after him with those charges again, but if they can get him on any violation of the injunction I'm sure they won't hesitate. Again, the court simply made a summary judgment in favor of the IRS without any trial at all.
Thank you for the additional information. I didn't know the ADL had commented on the issue, but it's not surprising. I think it's a lot bigger than that....more like COLLUSION; I'm working on a thread about it.
"...as long as there..remain active enemies of the Christian church, we may hope to become Master of the World...the future Jewish King will never reign in the world before Christianity is overthrown - B'nai B'rith speech http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/luther.htm / http://bible.cc/psalms/83-4.htm
#2. To: Deasy (#1)
#3. To: Pinguinite, Jethro Tull, TommyTheMadArtist, Cynicom, Eric Stratton, maxbluto, F.A. Hayek Fan, PSUSA, Esso, purpleman, JRiggs, Horse, noone222, bluegrass, tom007, ndcorup, Rotara, Dakmar, Tatarewicz, your_neighbor, groundresonance, X-15, farmfriend (#2)
#4. To: Deasy (#3)
#5. To: Pinguinite (#4)
I'm not so idealistic now, which in a way is unfortunate.
#6. To: Pinguinite (#2)
Lord Acton
#7. To: Deasy (#0)
#8. To: noone222, Pinguinite (#7)
#9. To: Deasy (#8)
This must be for Neil.
#10. To: noone222 (#7)
Hope you're doing well in Ecuador.
#11. To: Deasy, Pinguinite, Ferret Mike (#0)
The IRS/DOJ is seeking among other things to prohibit the Save-a-Patriot Fellowship and it's members from speaking out about the IRS and I'm a member.
#12. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#11)
#13. To: Pinguinite (#12)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest