Are we finished yet?

the_shootist · Jan 8, 2021

What an arrogant, disrespectful and down right shitty thing to say to people trying to help those who have lost hope!

the_shootist · Jan 8, 2021

They hate us cause they ain't us!

coopersmith · Jan 8, 2021

Ive been talking to everybody I come across who is fired up, DOWN. We dont need it.

I had the shits for three years, while I did my jobs. It was nerves for sure.

Sometimes a guy does his work, then walks away, then here we are its looking me (you) in the face.

I dont like it at all. I am thinking of becoming an anti war activist.

I have hunted some guys, they lost we killed em. I wonder when my time will come. Sometimes I worry about my home folk, they will get the shit show, if war came to my house and went like shit id blow my fucking brains out.................hahahahaha

Nothing is free.

all that aside, im ready to go.

im scared shitless, it looks like its on fellers.

I am not mad or irrational, kind of analytical and observing. I thought I left that all behind, then here it is.

I find the whole thing very disturbing.

Im full of hate. I would kill everything.

it would cost me everything. I could just go on til they out me down. I would let em.

Im not that great a guy, my shit is all mashed up, its all negative.

I am hell on coyotes............

I dont care a bit or maybe I do.

I get to laughing too, im about as un-tough as they get. I dont quit though, its somebodies ass. we never quit, thats how we stayed alive man. if we come for you your fucked. Go to the end, there is l\alot of starters in life, but not too many finishers.

I hate it, its one of the few things im good at.

For wat?

the_shootist · Jan 8, 2021

coopersmith said:

Ive been talking to everybody I come across who is fired up, DOWN. We dont need it.

I had the shits for three years, while I did my jobs. It was nerves for sure.

Sometimes a guy does his work, then walks away, then here we are its looking me (you) in the face.

I dont like it at all. I am thinking of becoming an anti war activist.

I have hunted some guys, they lost we killed em. I wonder when my time will come. Sometimes I worry about my home folk, they will get the shit show, if war came to my house and went like shit id blow my fucking brains out.................hahahahaha

Nothing is free.

all that aside, im ready to go.

im scared shitless, it looks like its on fellers.

I am not mad or irrational, kind of analytical and observing. I thought I left that all behind, then here it is.

I find the whole thing very disturbing.

Im full of hate. I would kill everything.

it would cost me everything. I could just go on til they out me down. I would let em.

Im not that great a guy, my shit is all mashed up, its all negative.

I am hell on coyotes............

I dont care a bit or maybe I do.

I get to laughing too, im about as un-tough as they get. I dont quit though, its somebodies ass. we never quit, thats how we stayed alive man. if we come for you your fucked. Go to the end, there is l\alot of starters in life, but not too many finishers.

I hate it, its one of the few things im good at.

For wat?

hang in there brother. You're not alone! We're right here with you.

Aurumag · Jan 9, 2021

I hope no one is foolish enough to take your bet.

JayDubya said:

POTUS DJT already announced that he will NOT attend the inauguration.

Unca Walt · Jan 9, 2021

the_shootist said:

If you're rooting for good over evil with that much passion and desire I have nothing else to say. I'm amazed at how eager some people are to surrender in the face of adversity. I choose to keep fighting until all doubt is gone and the fight is lost. One thing I most certainly will NOT do is risk 5 oz of gold on a silly bet like this.

I figure, there's plenty of time to cry for the loss of my country if it's indeed lost, which I may do, but I really don't believe that's going to be the case. It certainly isn't lost yet! She's in a terrible crisis and the Constitutional flag of the United States of America, flying upside down on my barn as I type this, sends that message to everyone who drives by and sees it! The enemy would like nothing better than to see us give up so they can move in, slaughter those who they feel might rise up against them again, and control the remaining sheep. They think they have the upper hand...they don't. They're terrified because they know this. They simply haven't considered the phrase "appear weak when you are strong" which is why they think they're in the driver's seat. (these people are stupid) Trump's appearance vs reality is total different. They do fear him because they know he still has tremendous power these next 12 days. They fear that he'll use it. Their fears are well founded!

To those who are so eager to cash in on their despair I say, get a grip!
BTW, arrogant asshole is one of the many labels I've been tagged with over the years. I'm still breathin' so no damage done.

shootie -- I'd have you at my six any day. I've seen smart, nice guys freeze up to uselessness. You wouldn't... and haven't.

newmisty · Jan 9, 2021

the_shootist said:

If you're rooting for good over evil with that much passion and desire I have nothing else to say. I'm amazed at how eager some people are to surrender in the face of adversity. I choose to keep fighting until all doubt is gone and the fight is lost. One thing I most certainly will NOT do is risk 5 oz of gold on a silly bet like this.

I figure, there's plenty of time to cry for the loss of my country if it's indeed lost, which I may do, but I really don't believe that's going to be the case. It certainly isn't lost yet! She's in a terrible crisis and the Constitutional flag of the United States of America, flying upside down on my barn as I type this, sends that message to everyone who drives by and sees it! The enemy would like nothing better than to see us give up so they can move in, slaughter those who they feel might rise up against them again, and control the remaining sheep. They think they have the upper hand...they don't. They're terrified because they know this. They simply haven't considered the phrase "appear weak when you are strong" which is why they think they're in the driver's seat. (these people are stupid) Trump's appearance vs reality is total different. They do fear him because they know he still has tremendous power these next 12 days. They fear that he'll use it. Their fears are well founded!

To those who are so eager to cash in on their despair I say, get a grip!
BTW, arrogant asshole is one of the many labels I've been tagged with over the years. I'm still breathin' so no damage done.

My 5th Edition, Leftist Translator defines as follows,

"Arrogant Asshole" =

a) Speaks truth/uses objective facts in discussion/debate.
b ) Someone who works/worked hard/diligently to hone their skills/ knowledge/talents, etc. to become self sufficient/successful/prosperous, etc., through one's own efforts.
(pg. 27)

newmisty · Jan 9, 2021

Aurumag said:

Perhaps because that's where he, they will be rounded up and arrested.

Unca Walt · Jan 9, 2021

newmisty said:

O Dear God. Misty, you debbil !! What BIBLICAL theater that would be!!

There's the Inauguration hoopla with simply everybody who thought they'd won -- safely protected by a Regiment of the USMC...

And on signal, Uncle Sam's Misguided Children surround them all.

I think I just peed a little...

Uglytruth · Jan 9, 2021

Unca Walt said:

Your way behind Unca & WITH THE ENTIRE WORLD WATCHING!

About the bladder thing..... talk to nadler as he is gunna have a load!

newmisty · Jan 9, 2021

Unca Walt said:

O Dear God. Misty, you debbil !! What BIBLICAL theater that would be!!

There's the Inauguration hoopla with simply everybody who thought they'd won -- safely protected by a Regiment of the USMC...

And on signal, Uncle Sam's Misguided Children surround them all.

I think I just peed a little...

Dat wernt pee UnCa!

Mr Paradise · Jan 9, 2021

skychief · Jan 9, 2021

Everyone needs to calm down, take some deep breaths and gather our thoughts.

Trump asked his supporters to march PEACEFULLY before the assault on the Capitol happened:

“I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard today.”

Trump never intended for the marchers to storm the Capitol - - he intended for there to be a peaceful showing outside.

Once the protesters breached the building Trump reiterated his demand for peace and no violence. He did it in 2 tweets:

"Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!"

and again about 30 minutes later:

“I am asking for everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful. No violence!” he said. “Remember, WE are the Party of Law & Order – respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue. Thank you!”

All Trump rallies and demonstrations prior to this were peaceful and orderly. The intruders who stormed the Capitol were acting on their own.

Trump and his peaceful supporters should not be held accountable for the actions of the thugs that breached the Capitol.

mtnman · Jan 9, 2021

skychief said:

Everyone needs to calm down, take some deep breaths and gather our thoughts.

Trump asked his supporters to march PEACEFULLY before the assault on the Capitol happened:

“I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard today.”

Trump never intended for the marchers to storm the Capitol - - he intended for there to be a peaceful showing outside.

Once the protesters breached the building Trump reiterated his demand for peace and no violence. He did it in 2 tweets:

"Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!"

and again about 30 minutes later:

“I am asking for everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful. No violence!” he said. “Remember, WE are the Party of Law & Order – respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue. Thank you!”

All Trump rallies and demonstrations prior to this were peaceful and orderly. The intruders who stormed the Capitol were acting on their own.

Trump and his peaceful supporters should not be held accountable for the actions of the thugs that breached the Capitol.

Those "intruders" were wearing backpacks and carrying skateboards with fist raised in the air. Where have you seen this before??????? Sure as hell not at a Trump rally

chieftain · Jan 9, 2021

Are we finished yet...? Depends on perspective and how much one sees through the bullshit of the clown show known as US politics.

Uglytruth · Jan 9, 2021

NOPE!

People still waking up.

snoop4truth · Jan 10, 2021

Cigarlover said:

WTF was Trump thinking? As much as I want to support him, WTF was he thinking? Hold a rally with 100's of thousands of pissed off serious supporters and throw the election fraud in their faces one last time. And for what? What did he expect to happen here? Everyone was gonna go to starbucks for a latte afterwards?
This is the guy that was supposed to be playing 5 d chess? Doesn't even read the constitution right and thinks Pence could have turned away electoral votes he didn't like. This is a smart guy? I never went to college and understand the constitution better than this 500 corporation owning billionaire. Whats even worse i he got a lot of his supporters on board with the delusion. (Although I think Q had a lot to do with turning many of his supporters delusional).

To me it seems more like a perfect setup to take down the conservatives once and for all.
The dems now control everything. The schools so the kids can turn in their parents. Every branch of government and every government agency. We already know from Obamas time in office what that means for us. And of course every media outlet so they can control public opinion and ensure that every move they do is approved by every media outlet.
He has 14 days to call on us all to start th revolution and take the country back. He can keep the military at bay while we do it. Or this is over. We wont have to worry about left or right, there will be one party.
There are no other viable options at this point. It's all or nothing.

Cigarlover,

The "Governator" seems to agree with the sentiments of your first two paragraphs.

Lancers32 · Jan 10, 2021

snoop4truth said:

What a focking piece of shite this guy is.

Cigarlover · Jan 10, 2021

There are lies being throw about on both sides for sure but the bigger picture is as I stated before. The entire system has been corrupted from the ground up. Both parties or if you prefer, the uniparty, believes that they have the power to take away our rights endowed to us by our creator. Our inalienable rights are not for the left or right or whatever party is in charge. The left through their media and big tech giants seem to feel they can silence the right. Because they are private entities they seem to feel like they can do whatever they want and to a point I would agree. A website like this one here surely can make that claim. However when you get to the point where you are a worldwide outlet for news, information and are responsible for shaping public opinion, should you not be held to a higher standard to have frank and open discussions from both sides? I don't know the answer to that to be honest. It does beg the question though, Why are there no conservative sites like twitter, FB and a MSM news station?
I think the answer to that is that these companies were formed with participation from both sides. Then they decided to go left or maybe that was the plan all along. They have just recently shown their hands although there have been hints over the last 2 years. Perhaps things will change in the future.
What is the future though if we don't have secure elections? Was this election stolen? From what I have seen, it's a close call. Wisconsin was probably stolen as was Mi. PA is a close call. (I'll see if I can find my post from election night explaining how close PA really was. ) Ga, I'm not sure about but the evidence seems like it was also stolen.. AZ is to close to call IMO as is NV. My gut tells me DJT won. Biden is just a total POS and IMO, there is no way this guy got more votes and Obama and Hillary. He couldn't get enough supporters to fill a starbucks let alone a football stadium like DJT was doing every day.
I told everyone not to underestimate the power of the media but I cant believe that even the media could overcome Trumps support without fraud being involved. It is curious that no dems want to look into it but to be honest not many R's do either.

The photos of Hunter that were posted earlier are completely disgusting. The fruit doesn't fall far from the tree. Are there really that many pedophiles in this country that would vote for gropey Joe? We aren't talking about guys in her 20's who get caught up with a 16 or 17 yr old.. The bidders like em really really young. Probably 11 yrs old or younger. They are truly pedophiles.

So the questions that are unanswered seem to be. What did Trump mean when he said over and over at the DC rally that they would not let the election be stolen? I hate to say it but to me it seemed like he was inciting a takeover that day. Are people really dropping 1000 bucks or more to go see a speech talking about the same shit thats been talked about since the election? Him and Rudy and all the other cheerleading squad. Same shit, day after day after day. We get it, you have evidence. You also have Hillaries emails. You also have evidence against Lois Lerner, Fast and Furious gun running by DOJ, Weiner laptop and of course all the Epstein evidence that was sealed in his first trial in Fl and where the Gov stepped in to get him a reduced sentence or something.

more in next post

Cigarlover · Jan 10, 2021

Where is the Fisa declass? We've been waiting for what almost 2 years now? Big government players attempted the overthrow of the last election. No one in jail.
Yea I know, Trump blames Barr for not doing the declass, yada yada yada. Early last year Trump was on TV everyday holding press conferences on Corona. He couldn't get on 1 time and hold a presser on the Fisa abuse? Declass and lay it all out there for everyone to see.

In a recent interview that the Overstock CEO did, he told us that Trump was complaining about the WH legal counsel and how they have been blocking him for 4 years.. I guess it never occurred to him to get new WH counsel?
We been over most of this stuff already about his cabinet picks and how he wants to drain the swamp and then loads his cabinet with swamp creatures.
Unlike some here, I have always liked the guy. Still do. I also have friends that do stupid shit sometimes and I am critical of them and tell them to their face WTF were you thinking? I have no problem confronting people when they do stupid shit. DJT is no difference except he isn't my friend. I can like him and still criticize him for what he is doing or has done. Some of the people here think you can never question your elected officials I guess. Then I look at some people here who I also like and wonder WTF they are thinking with the blind loyalty and delusional dreams of some biblical savior coming to end all the corruption in the government and arrest all the evil players. Not only is evil firmly in charge, they are untouchable. They will die of old age before they are ever arrested for anything. I'm not happy about it.
As i have said over and over again, the way to take down some of this corruption starts with the first step. Start at the bottom. Work your way up. Trump couldn't start anywhere because he wouldn't get rid of the people at DOJ and FBI that are protecting them all. So, after 4 years, we got nothing and everything Trump has made claims about looks like CT because no arrests were ever made.

Cigarlover · Jan 10, 2021

From my post #718 in the election thread

My math seems off there but I didn't elaborate that correctly.
60-70% would be for Biden so 1.2-1.4 million for Biden and 600-800k for Trump.

So now lets look at it. Trump was up by 500k when I posted that on election night. If Biden got 1.4 million and Trump 600k then that would have put Biden ahead by 300k.
Anyone know what Bidens lead really was? If 300k or less than certainly not outside the helm of possibilities. I'mnot saying there wasn't fraud in those ballots but that has to be proven and hopefully will be. Probably not until after Biden is sworn in though.

RebelYell · Jan 10, 2021

JayDubya said:

Before anyone takes this bet - it is worth mentioning that Jay can probably get 100-1 or more at this point on Trump and could immediately lay off any takers to guarantee himself a ~$9,000 profit.

If you really must make this bet - make it with a bookie who will give you that same 100-1. You'll still lose the bet - but at least you will have got decent odds.

PS I'm not trying to suggest that this was Jay's plan or that Jay was in any way trying to be dishonorable - I don't think that at all.

Bigfoot · Jan 11, 2021

Cigarlover said:

Hey, stop thinking critically. If CNN reporters bash Trump, that must mean that Trump is really on our side, right?

Bigfoot · Jan 11, 2021

CNN: Trump's the Devil. Trump is Satan. Trump is a real dictator. He's a Hitler. Whah, whah, whah....

FOX: Trump's a victim. Poor little Trump. His advisors cheated him. He's on your team. Fauci forced him to do it. Save poor old Trump.

Cigarlover · Jan 11, 2021

For the record Don Jr mentioned in a FB video that his Dad would not be attending Bidens inauguration. I know many wee holding out hope because DJ didn't mention Biden so I thought I would let you know what the plan is. Pence will be there though for any Pence fans who would like to attend. Seats should be cheap for the event too. All 6 of Bidens real voters will be there and 3 people who attended his rallies will also be in attendance.

Levein was pretty much on the money tonight.

Cigarlover · Jan 12, 2021

Is that what you call it? Trying to help? Seriously? As you go from threat to thread degrading anyone who isn't on team Q tard? After years of failed predictions you just keep at it like tomorrow is the day that all your fantasies come true.
Newsflash for you. They haven't come true nor will they come true. After all that you guys just wont give it up. How do you reconcile things with everyone you convinced that this was all true now that it turns out to be a larp more than likely put out there by the left? Now that you've gotten everyones hopes up because you were just trying to help them :dduck:

In the coming years as you all become the brunt of the jokes,, just remember that statement. Don't complain about the jokes because hey in our mind, it sucks to be you. How could anyone have been so gullible to fall for that crap in the first place?
The big question now for all of you is how do you deal with coming back to reality? Maybe thats what you should focus on if you really want to help people because right now a lot of people are about to get very pissed off that Q was a total lie.

nickndfl · Jan 12, 2021

The real question is what does all of this have to do with the price of tea in China?

Cigarlover · Jan 12, 2021

nickndfl said:

It depends, are you paying with dollars, gold or BTC? :dduck:

snoop4truth · Jan 13, 2021

Cigarlover said:

Is that what you call it? Trying to help? Seriously? As you go from threat to thread degrading anyone who isn't on team Q tard? After years of failed predictions you just keep at it like tomorrow is the day that all your fantasies come true.
Newsflash for you. They haven't come true nor will they come true. After all that you guys just wont give it up. How do you reconcile things with everyone you convinced that this was all true now that it turns out to be a larp more than likely put out there by the left? Now that you've gotten everyones hopes up because you were just trying to help them :dduck:

In the coming years as you all become the brunt of the jokes,, just remember that statement. Don't complain about the jokes because hey in our mind, it sucks to be you. How could anyone have been so gullible to fall for that crap in the first place?
The big question now for all of you is how do you deal with coming back to reality? Maybe thats what you should focus on if you really want to help people because right now a lot of people are about to get very pissed off that Q was a total lie.

Cigarlover,

I had no idea that you were such a prolific writer.

Your work is everywhere... and lots of it.

Good Work,

Snoop

Cigarlover · Thursday at 9:04 PM

snoop4truth said:

Well, I mainly post here so if your seeing a cigarlover write in other places it probably isn't me. Ironically on the cigar forums I use a different name.

snoop4truth · Friday at 12:37 PM

Cigarlover said:

Hello Cigarlover,

When I said your work is "everywhere", I meant everywhere here on goldismoney2.com (as on several threads on several subjects simultaneously).

Is the man in the photo smoking a cigar (above) really you?

On a different subject, I have been looking into Peter Eric Hendricksonm, David Albert Champion and others like them.

You would be amazed at how many of their followers have gone to prison and paid a fortune in fines and penalties for trusting them.

I feel sorry for them.

I'll keep you posted.

Snoop

Unca Walt · Saturday at 8:17 AM

snoop4truth said:

I've always thought that wuz Alan Arkin... one of my fave actors.

Cigarlover · Saturday at 11:10 AM

I'm sort of in the photo. This is at his farm in Pinar Del Rio. His grandson runs it now since Alejandro Robaina is no longer with us. In that photo he is lighting one of his farm rolled cigars of which I am the recipient.
In the cigar world he was the absolute best. I cropped me out of the photo to use it here.

Peter Hendrickson doesn't have it correct. A lot of people got refunds and the IRS went after tham later. Peter used to delete that portion of the information from his forums. It was obvious for al to see he was a shyster. Peter also went to jail and maybe his wife as well. I forget now. The reasons they went to jail though are interesting. Not for failure to file but for failure to sign under penalty of perjury, an information return created by the IRS on his behalf. The courts ordered him to sign it and he refused station that it was not accurate and under penalty of perjury he could not sign it. I think he did 18 months for contempt of court or something.. Not sure though I don't follow him at all.

David does have it correct but its complicated. Few will read the law and lets behest, unless your an attorney there is no way you are following the maze of the tax code and reading who it pertains to and all of the special definitions that congress created along with all of the changes that have taken place over the decades.
Why isn't Dave in jail? He openly states he hasn't paid taxes in 2 decades. Recored his interviews with the IRS the they asked him to come in and to this day he is still fre.. There's one case of his from Ca I think where they misinterpreted what he has said and written and he is no longer allowed to help people be a non taxpayer. He is still allowed to sell his book though and they have never disputed whats written.

Landmark income tax cases: US vs: Lloyd Long; Vernice Kuglin; Tom Cryer; & Illinois vs. Gaylon Harrel. All cases were cases where defendant simply raised the claim that there was no law imposing the tax on the earnings of US citizens. The juries agreed.

Cigarlover · Saturday at 11:23 AM

Was this a case that Becraft defended?

NON-TAXPAYER BEATS IRS IN TENNESSEE COURT BATTLE

Another Research Foundation Member Found "Not Guilty" on All Counts in Well-Publicized Jury Trial
by Lamarr Hardy
"Hallelujah!" was Lloyd L. Long's first comment, after being acquitted, recently, of all "Willful Failure to File" tax charges lodged against him by the Internal Revenue Service for the years 1989 and 1990. How did he do that? No, it wasn't a "miracle." Long did it by bringing before the jury solid, well-documented evidence, acquired from the Research Foundation, and other sources.

Long based his defense on his personal belief that he was not a person required to file Federal income tax returns. Long's war of words was engaged through his attorneys, the nationally-prominent Lowell Becraft of Huntsville, Alabama and Russell J. Leonard of Sewanee, Tennessee, who fought with the most powerful and time-honored weapon available: THE TRUTH!

ARGUMENTS OPEN JURY EYES IN 3-DAY COURT BATTLE

To open his defense, Long testified under oath that he had personally studied the IR Code (Title 26), and truly believed the income tax to be an excise tax which applied only to specific type of individuals or "persons" specified in the IR Code.
According to Long's research, the income tax applied ONLY to non- resident aliens, and U.S. citizens living abroad in a country where a tax treaty exists with the United States (Internal Revenue Code Sections 1441-1443).

Long stated that the only other IR Code section he found that deals with the issue of who is liable for income tax on the "withholding agent." In conclusion Long said "I am not one of those people referred to in Sections 1441, 1442, and 1461, and therefore I believe the law cannot apply to me." Long, to verify his statement, picked up his copy of IR Code book, (a 2 1/4 inch thick, 5 lb. volume containing 9,416 pages of small print!) and cited one of the pages he had carefully tabbed from Section 7701(a)(16) which defines the term "withholding agent" used in Section 1461.

The jury also heard Long say that "there are many other tax liability sections that apply 'privileged occupation' to those who are involved in the sale or manufacture of alcoholic beverages, tobacco products, and the manufacture of firearms, BUT I CAN FIND NO SECTION IN SUBTITLE A THAT APPLIES TO ME."

FILING "REQUIRED BY LAW" DECLARES PROSECUTION LAWYER

In presenting the case for the Internal Revenue Service, assistant U.S. Attorney Curtis Collier, assisted by IRS special agent Michael Cheasley, declared that Mr. Long had a gross income in excess of $49,000 for each of the years 1989 and 1990, and that he had "willfully" failed to file income tax returns for those years as "required by law."
In trial, the defense admitted that Mr. Long did in fact have income in excess of $49,000 for each of the years in question, and that he did not file a return. Attorney Becraft, in defense of Long, proceeded to prove to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that Long was not "liable" for an income tax, nor was he "required by law" to file.

COURT RULINGS CITED AS PROOF

Defense testimony showed a case titled "Brushaber v Union Pacific Railroad" wherein it was the unanimous decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that the Sixteenth Amendment (to the Constitution) did not give congress any new power to tax any new subjects; it merely tried to simplify the way in which the tax was imposed. The ruling also showed that the income tax was, in fact, an excise tax on corporate privileges and privileged occupations.
The defense then brought out a case entitled "Flint v Stone Tracy Co." wherein an excise tax was defined as being a tax laid upon the manufacture, sale and consumption of commodities within the country; upon licenses to pursue certain occupations; and upon corporate privileges.

Long's attorneys also brought out a case entitled "Simins v Arehns" wherein the court ruled that the income tax was neither a property tax nor a tax upon occupations of common right, but was an excise tax.

Next the defense turned to the case of "Redfield v Fisher." In this instance, the court ruled that an individual, unlike the corporation, cannot be taxed for the mere privilege of existing, but that the individual's right to live and own property was a natural right upon which an excise cannot be imposed. Defense also pointed to several studies done by the Congressional Research Service showing the INCOME TAX is an EXCISE.

A Tennessee Supreme Court case, "Jack Cole v Commissioner," provided the fifth defense argument. Here, the court ruled that CITIZENS ARE ENTITLED BY RIGHT TO INCOME OR EARNINGS AND THAT RIGHT COULD NOT BE TAXED AS A PRIVILEGE.

Finally, Long's legal team pointed to another Tennessee Supreme Court case, "Corn v Fort," in which the court ruled that individuals have a right to combine their activities as partnerships; and that this is a natural right, independent and antecedent of government.

NO IRS CHALLENGE

What's interesting to note here is that the prosecution did not challenge or attempt to refute any of the cases cited, or the conclusions of the courts. Furthermore, on the following defense, once again the prosecution did not challenge or attempt to refute the point made by Long's attorneys, nor were they able to show a statute that made anyone liable for income tax.
This testimony, brought out by Defense was the fact that NOWHERE IN THE ENTIRE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE (some 9,722 separate Sections, as of 1992!) WAS ANYONE ACTUALLY MADE LIABLE FOR THE INCOME TAX.

DEFENSE CITES IRS'S OWN CODE BOOK

Long's attorneys showed that in the IRS's own privacy act (Notice #609), only three sections were cited, and that none of these sections made anyone liable for the income tax. They also proved that this was not an oversight, by showing that the alcohol tax was worded so clearly that no one could misinterpret who was made liable for the alcohol tax.
At this time, Defense presented one of the arguments provided by Long's Research Foundation studies. They read to the jury the Mission Statement of the Internal Revenue Service, which state that the income tax relied upon "VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE," and a quote from the head of the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Division of the IRS which, in essence, showed that the income tax is 100% voluntary, as opposed to the alcohol tax, which is 100% enforced.

LONG TESTIFIES

Under oath, Lloyd L. Long now testified that in 1988 he knew that the income tax was, in fact, an excise tax based on his personal research on the issue, and that he was not enjoying any corporate privileges nor engaged in any privileged occupation, and further that income or earnings from the exercise of common right could not be taxed as an excise or otherwise, and that nowhere in the Internal Revenue Code was he made liable for the tax; that he had always believed that the income tax was voluntary (just as the IRS own Mission Statement states!).
LONG'S EXTENSIVE PRE-TRIAL RESEARCH USED IN EVIDENCE

Lloyd L. Long came to his attorneys, and to trial "prepared to be acquitted" (as it were). What had he already done? Long had written a series of letters to the IRS explaining that he believed that he had no licenses or privileges issued to him by the Federal government. In his letters he asked the IRS for direct answers to simple questions such as: "Am I required to file federal income tax returns?" and "Am I liable for federal income taxes?" (He was building a strong evidentiary foundation for his belief that he was NOT a person "required.")
THE IRS NEVER GAVE A DIRECT ANSWER TO ANY OF LONG'S PERSONAL LETTERS OR QUESTIONS. Instead, they inferred and insinuated and extrapolated and beat around the bush, and generally avoided answering his letters. This is when Long testified "I decided to stop 'volunteering' because if the IRS can't answer my questions, I must assume that I'm correct; that there is NO section of the IRS Code that makes me liable for the income tax.

IRS WITNESS CRUMPLES UNDER CROSS-EXAMINATION

The IRS now brought in two "expert" witnesses, who -- it was learned - - were actually IRS employees who had received special training as professional witnesses.
Under cross-examination, Defense attorney Larry Becraft faced down Special Agent, Ms. Jeu. She admitted that a secret code, known only to the IRS and encoded on Mr. Long's permanent record, showed that THE IRS KNEW THAT HE WAS NOT REQUIRED TO MAIL OR FILE A 1040 INCOME TAX RETURN. Ms. Jeu, of course, made every effort to avoid the admission, to the point that she was beginning to frustrate the jury. Finally the judge ordered her to answer the question!

Under cross-examination by Mr. Becraft, the other Special Agent gave testimony that conflicted with the Privacy Act notice. (Attempts by the IRS at a cover-up of the truth must have been obvious to the jury, by this time.)

GOVERNMENT USES "GUILT BY ASSOCIATION" AS A DESPERATE PLOY

In a last ditch attempt, the Prosecution tried to insinuate "guilt by association." They claimed Mr. Long had "known and relied upon persons of questionable character." Their argument was that the writers of some of the books he had read, and some of the people he knew and relied on as the basis for his belief had been convicted of tax-related charges in the past, and were in fact "criminals."
Long responded that just because a person had been convicted of a crime by a court, this did not invalidate everything he said. To illustrate his point, Long pointed out that "the Apostle Paul was a murderer, but by the Grace of God he became the greatest of the Apostles." He added "I did not rely on anything that I did not personally check out thoroughly."

BECRAFT SUMMATION "FINISHES" IRS

In summation, Mr. Becraft reminded the jury that Galileo was imprisoned for holding a belief that conflicted with what everyone else "knew as a fact" and that Columbus, acting on a belief which conflicted with what everyone else knew as a "fact," discovered something no one else thought existed.
The jury agreed with the Defense. By finding Lloyd L. Long "Not Guilty" on all counts, they have ventured into hitherto uncharted territory in their monumental decision.

A Chattanooga TV station quoted a government spokesman as saying that this case will change the way the IRS will handle such cases in the future. The spokesman for the government indicated that the government will, "be less likely to prosecute if a jury isn't going to decide in our favor."

snoop4truth · Saturday at 7:20 PM

Cigarlover said:

Hello Cigarlover,

YOUR COMMENT: I'm sort of in the photo. This is at his farm in Pinar Del Rio. His grandson runs it now since Alejandro Robaina is no longer with us. In that photo he is lighting one of his farm rolled cigars of which I am the recipient.
In the cigar world he was the absolute best. I cropped me out of the photo to use it here.

MY RESPONSE: In my head, the guy in the photo was always you. In my head, the guy in the photo was an old friend and someone I thought I knew well. Go figure. Guys smoking cigars come off like favorite uncles. LOL!

YOUR COMMENT: Peter Hendrickson doesn't have it correct. A lot of people got refunds and the IRS went after them later. Peter used to delete that portion of the information from his forums. It was obvious for all to see he was a shyster. Peter also went to jail and maybe his wife as well. I forget now. The reasons they went to jail though are interesting. Not for failure to file but for failure to sign under penalty of perjury, an information return created by the IRS on his behalf. The courts ordered him to sign it and he refused station that it was not accurate and under penalty of perjury he could not sign it. I think he did 18 months for contempt of court or something.. Not sure though I don't follow him at all.

MY RESPONSE: Agreed. Both Peter and his wife are convicted felons. Both have gone to prison. Pete went to prison first for domestic terrorism. He and three others planted a firebomb in a package addressed to the IRS and dropped it in the United States Mail. But, the bomb exploded prematurely and injured a postal worker and a postal customer. I am currently gathering all of the Hendricksons' criminal records, all of their litigation/tax records and making a list of all of their followers who went to prison and who paid heavy fines and penalties for relying on their claims about income tax in the book "Cracking The Code". I'll post it here when it is complete.

YOUR COMMENT: David does have it correct but its complicated.

MY RESPONSE: Not according to the courts (far below) and not according to his customers (immediately below) who paid a heavy price for relying on his claims in his "book".

IN THE ARTICLE BELOW, THE IRS PLACED LIENS ON ALL THE PROPERTY OF (AND GARNISHED ALL THE WAGES OF) A POLICE OFFICER WHO FOLLOWED DAVE CHAMPION'S ADVICE IN HIS "BOOK". FOR PROOF, SCROLL DOWN TO ABOUT 40 % THROUGH THE text here.
https://www.moabsunnews.com/news/article_0397ae14-3bdd-11e7-b2dd-bf9c297219bb.html

(QUOTE BEGINS)

YEAR LONG INVESTIGATION BEGAN WITH IRS ACTIONS

Former Moab City Police Chief Mike Navarre first placed Risenhoover on leave after the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) began to GARNISH HIS WAGES for failure to file any personal income tax statements between 2005 and 2016, according to a Utah Department of Public Safety Internal Affairs report. The IRS also PLACED LIENS ON RISENHOOVER'S HOUSE, CARS AND OTHER PROPERTY that it could identify, according to the report, which was first leaked to the City Weekly in Salt Lake City.

An Internal Affairs investigator reported that Risenhoover's tax attorney said her client owed the IRS “north of $700,000,” although she later said she believes that amount was “overinflated.”

RISENHOOVER IS AMONG THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS WHO HAVE FOLLOWED THE ADVICE OF A TALK SHOW PERSONALITY AND SELF-PROCLAIMED "TAX PROTESTER" NAMED DAVE CHAMPION, who has asserted that the federal tax code violates the 16th Amendment. The officer's tax attorney acknowledged that Champion was operating a “Ponzi scheme, of sorts,” according to the investigator's report.

(END QUOTE)

YOUR COMMENT: Few will read the law and lets behest, unless your an attorney there is no way you are following the maze of the tax code and reading who it pertains to and all of the special definitions that congress created along with all of the changes that have taken place over the decades.

MY RESPONSE: Agreed. But, at the end of the day, it is what the courts say about the maze of Congressional statutes, IRS regulations which serve them and the special definitions of terms in the statutes and regulations. So, case law is always the final word on the law. It is not about what media personalities say. It is about what the courts say.

YOUR RESPONSE: Why isn't Dave in jail?

MY RESPONSE: I do not know whether Dave is in jail or not, much less why or why not. But, I will look into it.

YOUR COMMENT: He openly states he hasn't paid taxes in 2 decades. He recorded his interviews with the IRS. They asked him to come in and to this day he is still free.

MY RESPONSE: Champion failed pay income taxes for the years 1983-1990 (a period of 7 years). So, the government seized all of Champion's property. United States v. Champion, No. 2:97-cv-05842-DDP-Mc (U.S.D.C. C.D. Cal. 8/7/1997), and No. 2:97-cv-06243-DWW-CT (8/20/1997). In response to this seizure, Champion sued the government seeking a return of all of his property, but he LOST the case. David A. Champion v. United States, No. 2:97-cv-04478-DDP-RC (U.S.D.C. C.D. Cal. 1/15/1998). So, Champion filed an appeal of this LOSS , but he LOST that appeal too. No. 97-56332 (9th Cir. 12/15/1997). (The appellate docket refers to "Champion Estate Trust and Transportation Institute, a Trust," as an appellant, indicating that Champion mistakenly believed this "trust" would shield him from income tax liability. But, this is not so.). The lawyer who represented Champion on appeal, Elliott L. Aheroni, was later disbarred in 2002 for embezzling client funds. This history (above) indicates that Champion LOST all of his property to pay at least some of his back taxes for the years 1983-1990 (a period of 7 years).

Thereafter, the government issued an administrative summons for Champion to appear to give testimony and produce certain records. But, Champion failed to appear. So, the government then filed a petition to enforce the summons. In response, Champion filed a motion to dismiss the petition. But, the court DENIED CHAMPION'S MOTION and ordered him to appear before the IRS to give testimony and to produce certain records. United States v. David Champion, No. 2:08-cv-01629-PA-JWJ (U.S.D.C. C.D. Cal. 4/30/2008). In response to this LOSS, Champion filed an appeal with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 08-55883, but he LOST that appeal too. So, when Champion later failed to appear within the time allowed, the government moved to have him held in contempt. Following a hearing on the matter, the court found Champion IN CONTEMPT. In response, Champion then COMPLETELY CAPITULATED and purged himself of CONTEMPT by producing the requested documents, and allowing his computer to be searched for additional documents. Docket #38 (9/8/2008). (Champion broadcast his version OF HIS INCARCERATION during the "Dave Champion Show" of 9/13/2008.). SO, DAVE HAS BEEN IN JAIL ON AT LEAST ONE OCCASION FOR AN INCOME TAX-RELATED OFFENSE.

More recently on February 8, 2011, the government filed a civil complaint against Champion which alleged he was promoting a tax fraud scheme designed to assist his customers evade paying federal taxes by setting up sham "pure trusts" to which they would transfer their businesses and personal assets and the government sought to enjoin the same. United States v. David A. Champion, case no. 2:11-cv-01175-DDP -SS (U.S.D.C. C.D. Cal. 2/8/2011). According to the government's complaint, Champion had not filed a federal income tax return since 1995 and his total federal tax liabilities for 1985-1990 and 1996-1997 (a total period of 6 years) exceeded $800,000. Champion unsuccessfully attempted to file a counter-claim against a judge and IRS agent, BUT, THE COUNTER-CLAIM WAS DISMISSED resulting in a total LOSS. In GRANTING THE GOVERNMENT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, the court entered a permanent injunction against Champion on January 24, 2012 which prohibited him from (a) assisting individuals in becoming “nontaxpayers,” (b) assisting individuals in evading their income tax obligations through their “nontaxpayer” status, (c) instructing individuals that they can become, or are, “nontaxpayers,” (d) assisting individuals in avoiding reporting their Social Security Numbers, Taxpayer Identification Numbers, or any other identification information that might be disclosed to the IRS by a third party, (e) creating or forming trusts of any kind for individuals, and/or (f) assisting individuals in creating or forming trusts of any kind. No. 2:11-cv-01175-DDP -SS (U.S.D.C. C.D. Cal. 1/24/2012). (THIS PERMANENT INJUNCTION IS SHOWN IN ITS ENTIRETY BELOW).

YOUR COMMENT: There's one case of his from Ca I think where they misinterpreted what he has said and written and he is no longer allowed to help people be a non taxpayer.

MY RESPONSE: Not so. The government did not misinterpret what Champion said, but it is true that Champion is forbidden from peddling tax protester arguments for the rest of his life. This is the actual court order below. https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1640140209447412728&q="David+Champion"+tax&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
DAVID CHAMPION, Defendant.
No. CV 11-1175 PA (SSx).
United States District Court, C.D. California.

January 24, 2012.

JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION

PERCY ANDERSON, District Judge.

In accordance with this Court's January 24, 2012 Order granting the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by plaintiff United States of America (the "United States") against defendant David Champion ("Champion"), the Court has concluded that Champion's THEORIES concerning the Government's taxing authority ARE WRONG. Views such as those advanced by Champion HAVE BEEN REJECTED AS FRIVOLOUS BY ALL COURTS that have analyzed similar arguments. See generally United States v. Gerads, 999 F.2d 1255 (8th Cir. 1993) (rejecting concept that filing of income tax return is purely voluntary); United States v. Karlin, 785 F.2d 90, 91 (3d Cir. 1986) (rejecting concept that individuals are not "persons" as defined in the Internal Revenue Code); United States v. Studley, 783 F.2d 934, 937 (9th Cir. 1986) (rejecting concepts that wages do not constitute "income" subject to federal income taxation, and noting in dicta that "this argument has been consistently and thoroughly rejected by every branch of the government for decades"). It is therefore hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that upon receiving actual notice of this Judgment and Permanent Injunction:

1. Pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§ 7402 and 7408, Champion is permanently enjoined from acting in any advisory, consulting, or participatory capacity in any way for any individuals or entities, whether for pay or not, with respect to the individual or entity's federal tax obligations, including but not limited to (a) assisting individuals in becoming "nontaxpayers," (b) assisting individuals in evading their income tax obligations through their "nontaxpayer" status, (c) instructing individuals that they can become, or are, "nontaxpayers," (d) assisting individuals in avoiding reporting their Social Security Numbers, Taxpayer Identification Numbers, or any other identification information that might be disclosed to the IRS by a third party, (e) creating or forming trusts of any kind for individuals, and/or (f) assisting individuals in creating or forming trusts of any kind.

2. Pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§ 7402 and 7408, and except as otherwise set forth below, Champion is enjoined from acting in any advisory or participatory capacity in any way for any trusts created by or for any of his customers, himself, or any other parties in the past ten years and in which he has assisted in the creation or management in any way during that time, including acting as trustee;

3. Pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§ 7402 and 7408, Champion and his representatives, agents, servants, employees, and anyone in active concert or participation with him who received actual notice of this Judgment and Permanent Injunction, is enjoined from directly or indirectly:

(A) Organizing or SELLING tax shelters, PLANS, OR OTHER ARRANGEMENTS that advise or assist taxpayers to attempt to evade the assessment or collection of such taxpayers' correct federal tax, including but not limited to selling or providing for free to customers any services or assistance whatsoever involving (a) informing taxpayers that they are "nontaxpayers" not subject to federal income taxation, (b) assisting customers in any way in evading their tax obligations by maximizing their purported "nontaxpayer" status, or (c) the creation, establishment, or maintenance of trusts of any kind;

(B) Engaging in any other activity subject to penalty under 26 U.S.C. § 6700, i.e. organizing or SELLING A PLAN OR ARRANGEMENT and making a statement regarding the excludability of income or securing of any other tax benefit, by participating in the plan that they know or have reason to know is false or fraudulent as to any material matter, including but not limited to the following false statements: (a) that there are individuals properly referred to as "nontaxpayers" who are outside the scope of federal income taxation, (b) that individuals should maximize their "nontaxpayer" status by refusing to provide (or refusing to allow others to provide) taxpayer identification information (including Social Security Numbers or Taxpayer Identification Numbers) to the IRS, (c) that the creator of a common law or "pure" trust can transfer his personal or business assets or proceeds into the trust and continue to exercise day-to-day control over the asset or proceeds in question without incurring any federal income tax liability from that activity, (d) that a pure trust need not file a Form 1041 income tax return and therefore is not subject to federal income taxation, and/or (e) that individuals need not comply with IRS summonses;

(C) Engaging in any activity subject to penalty under 26 U.S.C. § 6701, i.e. aiding or assisting in, procuring, or advising with respect to the preparation or presentation of a federal tax return, refund claim, or other document, knowing or having a reason to believe that it will be used in connection with any material matter arising under the internal revenue laws, and knowing that if so used it would result in an understatement of another person's tax liability; and

(D) Directly or indirectly ORGANIZING, PROMOTING, MARKETING, OR SELLING ANY PLAN OR ARRANGEMENT that advises or encourages taxpayers to attempt to violate internal revenue laws or unlawfully evade the assessment or collection of their federal tax liabilities, including promoting, selling, or advocating (a) the existence of a class of "nontaxpayers, and/or (b) the use and/or creation of common law or "pure" trusts as a means of eliminating if not greatly reducing their income tax liabilities;

4. Within thirty (30) days of receiving actual notice of this Judgment and Permanent Injunction, CHAMPION SHALL, in a conspicuous location, POST on all of his websites (including but not limited to "www.nontaxpayer.org," "www.davechampionshow.com", and "www.originalintent.org") A COPY OF THIS PERMANENT INJUNCTION. Champion shall certify to this Court in writing by filing a declaration under penalty of perjury that he has done so within thirty (30) days of receiving actual notice of this Judgment and Permanent Injunction. This requirement shall also apply to any future website that contains, links to, or advertises information concerning Champion's views and services related to taxation that Champion may obtain, initiate, or begin the operation of while this Judgment and Permanent Injunction remains in effect. Champion shall not knowingly make any statements, written or verbal, or cause or encourage others to make any statements, written or verbal, that MISREPRESENT ANY OF THE TERMS OF THIS JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION, whether such statements are made on the aforementioned websites or otherwise;

5. Pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7402, Champion is hereby required, within thirty (30) days of receiving actual notice of this Judgment and Permanent Injunction, to provide the United States with a list of the names and addresses (to the extent Champion can reasonably ascertain such information) of all: (a) purchasers of Income Tax: Shattering the Myths since its publication, and (b) customers who paid Champion to provide them any tax-related services in the past five years;

6. Pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7402, Champion is hereby required, within thirty (30) days of receiving actual notice of this Judgment and Permanent Injunction, to provide a copy of this Judgment and Permanent Injunction by mail or e-mail to all employees, affiliates, associates representatives, agents, and servants, and all persons who have purchased from him any products, services, advice, or publications associated with the tax scheme described in the underlying complaint (where Champion can reasonably ascertain the mailing or e-mail addresses of such individuals). Champion shall certify to this Court in writing by filing a declaration under penalty of perjury that he has done so within thirty (30) days of receiving actual notice of this Judgment and Permanent Injunction;

7. Pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7402, Champion shall, within thirty (30) days of receiving actual notice of this Judgment and Permanent Injunction: (a) remove from all existing unsold copies of Income Tax: Shattering the Myths, and any copies of it to be published in the future, the pages advertising his services (as reflected in Schedule A appended to this Permanent Injunction), (b) mail or e-mail to all purchasers of Income Tax: Shattering the Myths since its publication (where Champion can reasonably ascertain the mailing or e-mail addresses of such purchasers) a copy of this Judgment and Permanent Injunction and a separate notification that states:

TO ALL PURCHASERS OF INCOME TAX: SHATTERING THE MYTHS:

Under no circumstances should you rely on the content of Income Tax: Shattering the Myths in determining your federal income tax liability. You should instead seek appropriate professional assistance (e.g. from an attorney, certified public accountant, or otherwise properly licensed and reputable tax return preparer).

and (c) include a copy of the above notification and a copy of the Judgment and Permanent Injunction with all copies of Income Tax: Shattering the Myths sold after the date of this Judgment and Permanent Injunction; Champion shall certify to this Court in writing by filing a declaration under penalty of perjury that he has done so within thirty (30) days of receiving actual notice of this Judgment and Permanent Injunction;

8. This Court retains jurisdiction to enforce this Judgment and Permanent Injunction, and that for the purposes of monitoring compliance with its terms, the United States may conduct discovery using the formal procedures described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 30, 31, 33, 34, 36, and 45, or as otherwise provided in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or permitted by this Court;

9. The Court warns the parties, and all of those covered by the terms of the Judgment and Permanent Injunction who receive actual notice of it, that any violation of the terms of this Judgment and Permanent Injunction may result in the imposition of sanctions against the violator, up to and including the initiation of contempt proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

SCHEDULE A
This book is about the legal and moral issues involved in the income tax.
It is not a "how to" manual on leaving the income tax system behind. Many people would do well to seek experienced guidance, especially companies that intend to stop withholding from their workers.
Should you decide that experienced guidance is the wise course for you, please feel free to contact my office at (775) 751-0811.

THE DAVE CHAMPION SHOW AND OTHER RESOURCES
For information about the Dave Champion Show — such as how to listen — go to www.davechampionshow.com
Facebook.com/DaveChampionFanPage
Twitter.com/Dave_Champion
Youtube.com/TheDaveChampionShow

(END QUOTE)

MORE ON DAVE'S TAX PROBLEMS.
https://www.facebook.com/pages/cate...ampion-is-Fraud-Money-Hungry-104058647874694/
http://tpgurus.wikidot.com/david-champion
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/federal-court-bars-nevada-man-promoting-tax-fraud-scheme

DAVE'S OTHER PROBLEMS WITH THE LAW (SEXUAL ABUSE OF A CAPTIVE WOMAN)
https://www.ktnv.com/news/former-sheriff-candidate-arrested-in-pahrump
https://www.facebook.com/nyecountysheriff/videos/dave-champion-arrest-10519/503694546819141/
https://pvtimes.com/news/former-nye-sheriffs-office-candidate-champion-arrested-65778/
https://news3lv.com/news/local/pahrump-man-arrested-charged-with-involuntary-servitude

YOUR COMMENT: He is still allowed to sell his book though

MY RESPONSE: Yes. If (and only if) he notifies the buyer, in writing, that his book is complete bullshit. That is, if (and only if) he:

(BEGIN QUOTE)

"(a) [HE MUST] REMOVE from all existing unsold copies of Income Tax: Shattering the Myths, and any copies of it to be published IN THE FUTURE, the pages advertising his services (AS REFLECTED BY SCHEDULE A APPENDED TO THIS PERMANENT INJUNCTION).

[WHAT MUST BE REMOVED FROM THE BOOK]

"SCHEDULE A
This book is about the legal and moral issues involved in the income tax.
It is not a "how to" manual on leaving the income tax system behind.
Many people would do well to seek experienced guidance, especially companies that intend to stop withholding from their workers.
Should you decide that experienced guidance is the wise course for you, please feel free to contact my office at (775) 751-0811."

(b) [HE MUST INCLUDE WITH EACH BOOK] ... a separate notification that states:

'TO ALL PURCHASERS OF INCOME TAX: SHATTERING THE MYTHS:

UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD YOU RELY ON THE CONTENT OF Income Tax: Shattering the Myths IN DETERMINING YOUR FEDERAL INCOME TAX LIABILITY. You should instead seek appropriate professional assistance (e.g. from an attorney, certified public accountant, or otherwise properly licensed and reputable tax return preparer).' and

(c) [FINALLY, HE MUST] INCLUDE [WITH EVERY BOOK] A COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION [ABOVE] AND A COPY OF THE JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION WITH ALL COPIES OF INCOME TAX: SHATTERING THE MYTHS sold after the date of this Judgment and Permanent Injunction;

(END QUOTE)

YOUR COMMENT: and they have never disputed whats written.

MY RESPONSE: Yes, they have. The court specifically stated that Champion's "THEORIES" "ARE WRONG". See the quote below.

(BEGIN QUOTE)

JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION

PERCY ANDERSON, District Judge.

In accordance with this Court's January 24, 2012 Order granting the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by plaintiff United States of America (the "United States") against defendant David Champion ("Champion"), the Court has concluded that Champion's THEORIES concerning the Government's taxing authority ARE WRONG. Views such as those advanced by Champion HAVE BEEN REJECTED AS FRIVOLOUS BY ALL COURTS that have analyzed similar arguments.

(END QUOTE)

YOUR COMMENT: Landmark income tax cases: US vs: Lloyd Long; Vernice Kuglin; Tom Cryer; & Illinois vs. Gaylon Harrel. All cases were cases where defendant simply raised the claim that there was no law imposing the tax on the earnings of US citizens. The juries agreed.

MY RESPONSE: THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE. Under the law, ONLY THE JUDGE CAN MAKE SUCH DETERMINATIONS. Under the law, JURIES ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DETERMINE QUESTIONS OF "LAW" (SUCH AS, WHETHER THERE IS A LAW IMPOSING A TAX ON THE EARNINGS OF U.S. CITIZENS). Under the law, JURIES MAY ONLY DETERMINE QUESTIONS OF "FACT" (SUCH AS WHETHER THE DEFENDANT'S CONDUCT IN FAILING TO PAY INCOME TAXES WAS "WILLFUL").

Regardless, I will pull these cases and prove to you what they REALLY say.

All My Best,

Snoop

Cigarlover · Saturday at 9:31 PM

I enjoy our conversation Snoop. I also agree with the court cases you post. They were definitely wins for the government. Of what you posted above I feel like this is the most important comment of all.

I'm not saying your wrong in that statement, however, do the courts always get it right? Every single time? How many are locked up for political reasons or on trumped up charges or mistaken identity. Happens all the time and as many as 10% of inmates could be wrongfully convicted because of any overzealous prosecutor trying to make a name for him or herself.
Who in the courts have read the entire maze of the tax code and all versions of it since it's inception? Few, if any. In their defense there are a number of pro se defendants who simply got it wrong over the years and the courts were correct in their assessment.
On a similar note, as complex as the tax codes are, add in the complexity of case law and really the entire tax code should be abolished based on the vagueness. If the average person cannot understand what the law says then the law shouldn't exist.
https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Void+for+Vagueness+Doctrine

Just for some levity. This always cracks me up. :)

We will get back to this discussion though. :).

Your reply:

My reply:
A Jury's Rights, Powers, and Duties:

But does the jury's power to veto bad laws exist under our Constitution?

It certainly does! At the time the Constitution was written, the definition of the term "jury" referred to a group of citizens empowered to judge both the law and the evidence in the case before it. Then, in the February term of 1794, the Supreme Court conducted a jury trial in the case of the State of Georgia vs. Brailsford (3 Dall 1). The instructions to the jury in the first jury trial before the Supreme Court of the United States illustrate the true power of the jury. Chief Justice John Jay said: "It is presumed, that juries are the best judges of facts; it is, on the other hand, presumed that courts are the best judges of law. But still both objects are within your power of decision." (emphasis added) "...you have a right to take it upon yourselves to judge of both, and to determine the law as well as the fact in controversy".

So you see, in an American courtroom there are in a sense twelve judges in attendance, not just one. And they are there with the power to review the "law" as well as the "facts"! Actually, the "judge" is there to conduct the proceedings in an orderly fashion and maintain the safety of all parties involved.

As recently as 1972, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia said that the jury has an " unreviewable and irreversible power... to acquit in disregard of the instructions on the law given by the trial judge.... (US vs Dougherty, 473 F 2d 1113, 1139 (1972))

Or as this same truth was stated in a earlier decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Maryland: "We recognize, as appellants urge, the undisputed power of the jury to acquit, even if its verdict is contrary to the law as given by the judge, and contrary to the evidence. This is a power that must exist as long as we adhere to the general verdict in criminal cases, for the courts cannot search the minds of the jurors to find the basis upon which they judge. If the jury feels that the law under which the defendant is accused, is unjust, or that exigent circumstances justified the actions of the accused, or for any reason which appeals to their logic of passion, the jury has the power to acquit, and the courts must abide by that decision." (US vs Moylan, 417 F 2d 1002, 1006 (1969)).

More here on the Juries duties and rights
http://foundationfortruthinlaw.org/jury-duty.html

snoop4truth · Saturday at 11:19 PM

Cigarlover said:

Hello Cigarlover,

YOUR COMMENT: Landmark income tax cases: US vs: Lloyd Long; Vernice Kuglin; Tom Cryer; & Illinois vs. Gaylon Harrel. All cases were cases where defendant simply raised the claim that there was no law imposing the tax on the earnings of US citizens. The juries agreed

MY RESPONSE: As explained in my post above, juries are not allowed to determine whether there was law imposing income taxes.

As to these alleged landmark income tax cases,

1). LLOYD LONG: You are apparently referring to a case tried in federal court in Chattanooga, Tennessee. This case involved Larry Becraft defending Lloyd Long. This case is factually and legally IDENTICAL to Tommy Cryer's case as explained on the Sovereignty thread in post # 127. (Please re-read it there. That explanation is much more complete.).

In this case, the United States had charged Long with "WILLFULLY" refusing to pay income taxes. Under the law, a person cannot be convicted of the crime of "WILLFULLY" refusing to pay income taxes if they "GENUINELY BELIEVED" that no taxes were due EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE COMPLETELY WRONG (SUCH THAT THEY ACTUALLY DID OWE THE IRS INCOME TAXES IN QUESTION).

Becraft argued that WHILE LONG WAS COMPLETELY WRONG, he "GENUINELY BELIEVED" that no taxes were due. The jury agreed that WHILE LONG ACTUALLY OWED INCOME TAXES TO THE IRS, he "GENUINELY BELIEVED" THAT NO TAXES WERE DUE. On that basis (and only on that basis) the jury acquitted Long of the crime of "WILLFULLY" refusing to pay income taxes.

BUT, as occurred in Tommy Cryer's case, LONG STILL HAD TO PAY ALL OF THE INCOME TAXES HE OWED ANYWAY. So, as occurred in Tommy Cryer's case, Long did not go to prison SOLELY BECAUSE OF A MISTAKEN BELIEF THAT NO TAXES WERE DUE. Like Tommy Cryer's case, this case likewise HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS LAW REQUIRING THE DEFENDANT TO PAY INCOME TAXES AND SUCH A QUESTION WAS NEVER PUT TO THE JURY TO DECIDE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

2). VERNICE KUGLIN There are four (4) reported cases involving "Vernice Kuglin" AKA "Vernice B. Kuglin", BUT, SHE LOST THEM ALL. Here they are.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1206390629595342571&q=+"vernice+B.+Kuglin"+&hl=en&as_sdt=40003
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13885371585378617198&q=+"vernice+B.+Kuglin"+&hl=en&as_sdt=40003
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7202239277984905972&q=+"vernice+B.+Kuglin"+&hl=en&as_sdt=40003
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10860208841527991140&q=+"vernice+B.+Kuglin"+&hl=en&as_sdt=40003

I also found one unreported case wherein Becraft defended Vervice Kuglin from similar charges using a similar defense as those in the Tommy Cryer and Lloyd Long cases. The only new twist to this case is that Becraft emphasized that Kuglin had written to the IRS several times asking for it to provide her with the law which required her to pay income taxes (something the IRS could have easily done). But, the IRS never replied. This is relevant in the case SOLELY because it created a pretext for Becraft to claim that Kuglin "GENUINELY BELIEVED" that no taxes were due (because she asked the IRS for proof that she owed taxes and never received that proof from the IRS).

BUT, as occurred in Tommy Cryer's case, KUGLIN STILL HAD TO PAY THE ALL OF INCOME TAXES SHE OWED ANYWAY. So, as occurred in Tommy Cryer's case and Lloyd Long's case, Vernice Kuglin did not go to prison SOLELY BECAUSE OF A MISTAKEN BELIEF THAT NO TAXES WERE DUE. Like Tommy Cryer's case and Lloyd Long's case, this case likewise HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS LAW REQUIRING THE DEFENDANT TO PAY INCOME TAXES AND SUCH A QUESTION WAS NEVER PUT TO THE JURY TO DECIDE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

FOR PROOF: Read the 5th paragraph here. https://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/12/...-who-questioned-liability-for-income-tax.html

(QUOTE BEGINS)

"THE ACQUITTAL [of Vernice Kuglin] DOES NOT RELIEVE MS. KUGLIN OF THE OBLIGATION TO PAY THE TAXES. Joe Murphy, the federal prosecutor in the case, indicated in court that THE GOVERNMENT INTENDED TO PURSUE COLLECTION [OF THOSE TAXES] IN A CIVIL ACTION. Mr. Murphy said yesterday that he was not allowed to comment on the case outside of court.

The lead defense lawyer, Lowell H. Becraft Jr. of Huntsville, Ala., said he built the defense around the absence of response by the I.R.S. to Ms. Kuglin's letters.

He said the letters showed that his client lacked a criminal intent to evade the tax laws and was instead operating from a SINCERE BELIEF that her conduct was proper.

(END QUOTE)

BUT, as occurred in Tommy Cryer's case and Lloyd Long's case, VERNICE KUGLIN STILL HAD TO PAY ALL OF THE INCOME TAXES SHE OWED ANYWAY. So, as occurred in Tommy Cryer's case and Lloyd Long's case, Vernice Kuglin did not go to prison SOLELY BECAUSE OF A MISTAKEN BELIEF THAT NO TAXES WERE DUE. Like Tommy Cryer's case and Lloyd Long's case, this case likewise HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS LAW REQUIRING THE DEFENDANT TO PAY INCOME TAXES AND SUCH A QUESTION WAS NEVER PUT TO THE JURY TO DECIDE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

3). ABOUT TOMMY CRYER'S CRIMINAL CASE:

THE CASE YOU WERE REFERRING TO IS United States v. Cryer, case no. 5:06-cr-50164-SMH-MLH-ALL, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, Shreveport Division. This case is not reported because it is a trial level case, not an appellate level case.

Regardless, In this case, the United States charged Tommy Cryer with the WILLFUL refusal to pay his income taxes. Under the law, if a taxpayer GENUINELY BELIEVED that no taxes were due, HE CANNOT BE CONVICTED OF THIS PARTICULAR CRIME (BECAUSE THERE WAS NO "WILLFULNESS").

While Cryer was TOTALLY WRONG, the jury found that Cryer GENUINELY BELIEVED that no taxes were due. So, Cryer was ACQUITTED of the CRIME of "WILLFULLY" refusing to pay his income tax,

BUT, CRYER WAS NEVERTHELESS FOUND CIVILLY LIABLE TO PAY ALL OF HIS INCOME TAXES ANYWAY AND HE WAS FORCED TO DO So, the end result of the case was that Cryer was forced to pay all of his income taxes anyway! And, CRYER avoided prison ONLY because of his MISTAKEN BELIEF that no taxes were due. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Tom_Cryer

Because Cryer peddled tax protester arguments, his followers mistakenly believed that Cryer won the case above on the merits of his tax protester arguments ("Wages are not income", "I am not among the persons statutorily required to pay income tax", "There is no law requiring me to pay income taxes." etc..). But, this was not so. Cryer was acquitted in his criminal case SOLELY BECAUSE HE MISTAKENLY BELIEVED SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT TRUE! Thus, Cryer DID NOT win his criminal case because he was SO SMART. Cryer won his criminal case because he was SO IGNORANT!

AND THEN, HE WAS FORCED TO PAY ALL OF HIS INCOME TAXES ANYWAY!

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Tom_Cryer.

4). Gaylon Harrell

In Harrell v. United States, 91 TNT 36-15, No. No. 90-3181 (U.S.D.C. C.D. Ill. 1/18/1991), Harrell sued the Internal Revenue Service, an agent of the IRS, and the United States to stop them from collecting taxes that had been assessed, alleging that he was a "nonresident alien" who was not subject to federal income tax, and that the two notices of levy served on his employer were invalid because the underlying assessment was never properly signed by an assessment officer for the international branch of the IRS. The court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction because the anti-injunction act prevents courts from restraining the assessment or collection of taxes and Harrell had not filed the refund claim that is a necessary prerequisite for a suit for refund of taxes paid. A COMPLETE LOSS!

Harrell then filed a "quiet title" action against the United States, seeking to prevent a levy on his wages, and again describing himself as a "nonresident alien." As the court noted, "Different case — same result," and the court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction. Harrell v. United States, No. 91-3040, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6773, 1991 WL 631008 (C.D. Ill. Apr. 11, 1991), aff'd 13 F.3d 232, 235, 94 TNT 7-20, No. 91-2077 (7th Cir. 12/30/1993) (claim that "Congress has no constitutional authority over citizens of the states of the United States" is frivolous and "frivolousness is an independent jurisdictional basis for dismissing a suit"). A COMPLETE LOSS!

Harrell then filed a suit against the Internal Revenue Service under 26 U.S.C. section 7433(a), which allows a civil action for damages against the United States if, in connection with any collection of federal tax, any officer or employee of the Internal Revenue Service "recklessly or intentionally disregards" any provision of the Internal Revenue Code, or any regulation. The court dismissed the suit because Harrell had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies as required by 26 U.S.C. section 7433(d)(1), and imposed a penalty against Harrell of $500 for filing a frivolous lawsuit. Harrell appealed that LOSS, and the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of the suit and imposed an additional $1,000 penalty against Harrell for filing a frivolous appeal. Harrell v. United States, No. 92-CV-3169 (U.S.D.C. C.D. Ill.), aff'd 4 F.3d 996 (table only), 93 TNT 195-23, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 22907, 1993 WL 339716 (7th Cir. 9/1/1993). TWO COMPLETE LOSSES PLUS $1,500 IN PENALTIES!

Meanwhile, Harrell had failed to file income tax returns for 1989 and 1990. The IRS determined deficiencies for both years, and Harrell filed a petition in the Tax Court, contending that he was a citizen of the "sovereign State of Illinois" and that the wages he had received were not taxable by the United States. The court warned Harrell his argument was frivolous and that if he persisted with the argument the court would impose damages against him under section 6673. Harrell did not heed the warning and, noting that Harrell had already lost the cases cited above, the court imposed penalties of $3,000 against Harrell and in favor of the United States. Harrell v. United States, T.C. Memo. 1994-406, aff'd without published opinion 72 F.3d 132, 77 AFTR2d Par. 96-401, No. 94-3736 (7th Cir. 1995). A COMPLETE LOSS PLUS $3,000.00 IN PENALTIES!

Harrell was one of several plaintiffs who attempted another action for damages under section 7433, contending that they were exempt from federal income tax because Illinois was not "State" as defined in the Internal Revenue Code. The District Court dismissed the complaint and imposed sanctions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 on everyone else who had signed the complaint, including Harrell. LaRue v. Collector of Internal Revenue, No. 95-3036, 76 AFTR2d Par. 95-5011, 95 TNT 123-89 (U.S.D.C. C.D. Ill. 5/8/1995) (complaint dismissed), 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8225, 1995 WL 479521 (U.S.D.C. C.D. Ill. 6/21/1995) (sanctions imposed). A COMPLETE LOSS PLUS UNSPECIFIED PENALTIES.

Harrell also did not file income tax returns for 1991, 1992, and 1993, and the IRS issued additional notices of deficiencies. Harrell petitioned the Tax Court again, this time claiming that he did not receive income but payments "traded for labor of equal value from which there can be no taxable gain." The Tax Court affirmed the deficiencies in a motion for summary judgment, noting that "there is nothing in petitioner's filings but tax protester rhetoric, unsupported assertions, and legalistic gibberish." Gaylon L. Harrell v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-64, 96 TNT 36-16, No. 7339-95 (2/20/1996). However, the Tax Court did not reach the issue of whether there should be additions to tax. After a hearing during which Harrell both repeated his argument that the monies he received were for labor of equal value and not taxable, and argued that Federal Reserve Notes are not "money" within the meaning of the Constitution, the Tax Court then affirmed that Harrell was liable for an addition to tax FOR FRAUD under section 6651(f), and the Tax Court imposed a penalty of $10,000 for frivolous arguments. Gaylon L. Harrell v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 1998-207, 98 TNT 115-13, No. 7339-95 (6/15/1998), aff'd 1999 TNT 163-9, 84 AFTR2d Par. 99-5194, No. 98-4120 (7th Cir. 8/19/1999) (rejecting arguments that taxation without apportionment under the 16th Amendment is a violation of the 10th Amendment, and that the receipt of Federal Reserve Notes is not income, and imposing additional sanctions of $2,000 for maintaining a frivolous appeal). TWO COMPLETE LOSSES AND $12,000 IN PENALTIES!

Harrell's one "victory" is that he was acquitted of failing to file ILLINOIS STATE INCOME TAX RETURNS in People of the State of Illinois v. Gaylon L. Harrell, No. 97CF89 (Cir. Ct. of St. Clair Co. Ill.). I am unable to find details of this case, but the acquittal was likely because Harrell "GENUINELY BELIEVED" that no STATE income taxes were due, such that he lacked the requisite "WILLFUL INTENT" to commit the crime of "WILLFUL REFUSAL" TO PAY STATE INCOME TAXES".

However, in 2006, he was charged again with three counts of CRIMINAL FAILURE TO FILE ILLINOIS STATE INCOME TAX RETURNS for 1996, 1997, and 1998, AND ON 12/17/2008 HE WAS CONVICTED ON ALL THREE COUNTS! People of the State of Illinois v. Gaylon L. Harrell, No. 2006CM215 (Cir. Ct. of Logan Co. Ill.). On February 5, 2009, Harrell was sentenced to two years probation, a fine of $2,500 and court costs, and payment of his taxes for 1996, 1997, and 1998, plus penalties and interest. A COMPLETE LOSS PLUS A FINE OF $2,500.00 PLUS PAYMENT FOR 3 YEARS OF STATE INCOME TAXES PLUS PENALTIES AND INTEREST!

I FAIL TO SEE ANY LANDMARK CASE AMONG THOSE CASES YOU CITED.

Note that not one single case above supports the proposition that no income taxes were due.

Instead, every case above supports the exact opposite conclusion.

Best, Regards,

Snoop

Unca Walt · Sunday at 6:51 AM

Christ onna crutch.

Remind me to never argue with you, Snoop. You take no fucking prisoners.

solarion · Sunday at 9:01 AM

He just spews forth a bunch of legalese lieyer bs. Judges are just glorified lieyers, many of which assist the government with their subversion of the spirit of the Constitution by finding technical ways to subvert it. They then all just clap one another on the back for their alleged "cleverness" while grinning at their fellow Americans.

One example...crap companies like AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, etc provided your call records to the government. The government claimed this was NOT a violation of your 4th Amendment rights because those records were NOT yours, but were instead the property of a 3rd party corporation. Asshole judges, naturally know full well this is an end around the BOR, but they say jack shit about it because they're part of a big ass club of traitors called the BAR. Lawyers suck.

The federal regime has countless loser lieyers that spend all day dreaming up technicalities such as this to circumvent your Constitutionally guaranteed protections. A truly pathetic way to make a "living" that would likely make benedict arnold blush.

Unca Walt · Sunday at 9:03 AM

Well, yeah... but that wasn't being argued at all. :don't know:

Are we finished yet?

Old (not THAT old), but dangerous, pasty white guy

Old (not THAT old), but dangerous, pasty white guy

for fuck sake..........

Old (not THAT old), but dangerous, pasty white guy

Ag mirror of truth Aurum purity of mind

Midas Member

Transcending the 5 Elements

Transcending the 5 Elements

Midas Member

Midas Member

Transcending the 5 Elements

Midas Member

enthusiastic stacker

Platinum Bling

Gold Chaser

Midas Member

Silver Miner

Gold Member

Midas Member

Midas Member

Midas Member

Name no longer reflects my changed worldview.

Platinum Bling

Platinum Bling

Midas Member

Midas Member

Midas Member

Midas Member

Silver Miner

Midas Member

Silver Miner

Midas Member

Midas Member

Midas Member

Silver Miner

Midas Member

Silver Miner

Midas Member

Midas Member

Midas Member