The FED Inspector General Has No Idea Where The 9 Trillion Dollars Went

[Iriemon]

Oh you can find attorney's who would agree.

I suspect most of them fall in line just like the majority of you do. Jillian DOES NOT believe this stuff.

But I talk to conspiracy theorist tax attorneys and CPA's all the time. I sell the Internal Revenue Code. I tell people at work all the time about what I'm telling you. They don't care/don't believe/don't have all the facts/don't think anything can be done about it even if it were true.

Or they just feel that if the government ends the income tax, they'll just stick us somewhere else. They are the masses. They know nothing, say nothing, do nothing.

That's fine for them Sealy. Most people don't care. But I'm not doing that. I (and Toro) am taking my time to research and I am answering your questions about whether there is a law that requires you to pay taxes by showing you the laws that explicitly require you to pay income taxes.

How can you continue to believe there is no law that requires you to pay taxes when you have it right before you eyes?

I think I found the answer

You hear this all the time. When presented with the simple request to "show me the law that unambiguously requires me to pay income tax," I was told, everyone from congressmen to tax lawyers to IRS agents is stymied, even when Schiff and others offer enormous rewards to anyone who can do so. It didn’t take me long to find what seemed to be an answer to that question.

In U.S. Code Title 26, Subtitle A, Chapter 1, Subchapter A, Part I, Section 1, it says, "There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of...," followed by subcategories that seem to include most Americans, complete with tables showing the percentage owed for each income range. (Subchapter A even comes close to that magic word liable that many in the movement insist is nowhere applied to personal income taxes -- it’s called "Determination of Tax Liability.")

Maybe this is a hint they are wrong?

But "taxable income" is the rub. Tax honesty types claim the "constitutional" definition of income, as set forth in such Supreme Court cases as Doyle v. Mitchell Brothers (1918), is corporate profits, not individuals’ wages. (Courts have knocked down this claim regularly during the last 30 years.)

What does that have to do with whether there is a law or not?

At the conference you learn that taxing violates our natural rights; and anyway, the Constitution does not permit an unapportioned direct tax like an income tax; and if you think the 16th Amendment took care of that, well, it wasn’t properly ratified; and even if it was, it didn’t give any new taxing powers to Congress; and even if it did, the statutes and codes of the IRS as written aren’t officially U.S. law; and even if they were, they don’t define liability and income such that any normal working American owes taxes

SEE, THE STATUTES & CODES AREN'T OFFICIALLY LAWS.

OK. According to the conference (whatever conference that is) where do we find the official laws passed by Congress?

 

[Toro]

SEE, THE STATUTES & CODES AREN'T OFFICIALLY LAWS.

I see someone never went to law school.

 

[Iriemon]

Oh you can find attorney's who would agree.

I suspect most of them fall in line just like the majority of you do. Jillian DOES NOT believe this stuff.

But I talk to conspiracy theorist tax attorneys and CPA's all the time. I sell the Internal Revenue Code. I tell people at work all the time about what I'm telling you. They don't care/don't believe/don't have all the facts/don't think anything can be done about it even if it were true.

Or they just feel that if the government ends the income tax, they'll just stick us somewhere else. They are the masses. They know nothing, say nothing, do nothing.

That's fine for them Sealy. Most people don't care. But I'm not doing that. I (and Toro) am taking my time to research and I am answering your questions about whether there is a law that requires you to pay taxes by showing you the laws that explicitly require you to pay income taxes.

How can you continue to believe there is no law that requires you to pay taxes when you have it right before you eyes?

Remember I said something yesterday about some conspiracy theorist warning me about spelling your name in all caps? I found somethign on it:

Larry Becraft is a lawyer who has actually won a handful of acquittals -- including one for Vernice Kuglin -- in defending people on trial for tax evasion. He gives a talk that is basically a warning to the movement to get its act straight and stop being absurd. Among the beliefs even others in the movement condemn as silly are the notions that by using a ZIP code or allowing a government document to spell your name in all capital letters, you surrender your sovereignty and make yourself a serf of the federal government, and that the income tax applies only to people who live in a federal territory or district, not to residents of the states.

So why don't you beleive that?

 

[sealybobo]

Here is the leading group on this movement:

We The People Foundation

In July 2004 almost 2000 Americans filed a landmark lawsuit against the U.S. Government seeking to have the federal Judiciary declare
-- for the first time in history -- the constitutional meaning of the First Amendment Petition clause including the Right of the People to enforce the Right of Petition if Redress is denied.
The new WTP
Right-To-Petition DVD

Watch the FREE 3-minute preview:






We The People believes the Right to Petition
is, in fact, the "capstone" Right of the Bill of Rights and that its effect is the direct exercise of Popular Sovereignty -- the First Grand Right of the Founding documents that declares government is the servant of Men.

And they are trying to sue/petition the gov.


PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES

RELATING TO THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX

Petition for Redress -- Income Tax

PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES

RELATING TO THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Petition for Redress -- Federal Reserve



They keep getting denied.

 

[sealybobo]

That's fine for them Sealy. Most people don't care. But I'm not doing that. I (and Toro) am taking my time to research and I am answering your questions about whether there is a law that requires you to pay taxes by showing you the laws that explicitly require you to pay income taxes.

How can you continue to believe there is no law that requires you to pay taxes when you have it right before you eyes?

Remember I said something yesterday about some conspiracy theorist warning me about spelling your name in all caps? I found somethign on it:

Larry Becraft is a lawyer who has actually won a handful of acquittals -- including one for Vernice Kuglin -- in defending people on trial for tax evasion. He gives a talk that is basically a warning to the movement to get its act straight and stop being absurd. Among the beliefs even others in the movement condemn as silly are the notions that by using a ZIP code or allowing a government document to spell your name in all capital letters, you surrender your sovereignty and make yourself a serf of the federal government, and that the income tax applies only to people who live in a federal territory or district, not to residents of the states.

So why don't you beleive that?

I haven't heard enough information to make me believe it or not.

I have heard enough information that I'm convinced about the IRS and Feds.

 

[sealybobo]

SEE, THE STATUTES & CODES AREN'T OFFICIALLY LAWS.

I see someone never went to law school.

Did you? Then explain the difference. Sometimes i get the feeling you guys know there is a difference yet you pretend not to, until someone comes along and explains, and then you say, "yea, I knew that"

So the internal revenue code is not the book. That's A.

B. The wording is vague and misleading and illegal and unconstitutional.

Anyways, you keep glady paying your income taxes. I'll pay too, but it won't be gladly. And I'll help these We the People guys by signing their petitions.

Paying taxes is patriotic. Paying an unconstitutional income tax that is set up so the government can spend wildly is not.

 

[sealybobo]

SEE, THE STATUTES & CODES AREN'T OFFICIALLY LAWS.

I see someone never went to law school.

the Constitution does not permit an unapportioned direct tax like an income tax

True or false smart ass.

 

[Toro]

SEE, THE STATUTES & CODES AREN'T OFFICIALLY LAWS.

I see someone never went to law school.

the Constitution does not permit an unapportioned direct tax like an income tax

True or false smart ass.

Dude, statues and codes are laws if passed.

Take it court if you are so certain. You'll be a famous hero and quite wealthy if you are correct.

 

[Toro]

Did you? Then explain the difference. Sometimes i get the feeling you guys know there is a difference yet you pretend not to, until someone comes along and explains, and then you say, "yea, I knew that"

I took several law classes. It bored the hell out of me so I didn't go to law school. Thank God. Many of my lawyer friends are miserable.

Google is your friend.

Code of law

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_(law)
Civil code - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Statutes

Statute - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

BTW, I explained fiscal and monetary policy to you. Did you learn anything?

 

[sealybobo]

Ah, but we have sealy, Terral and 9/11 inside job to straighten us all out. Thanks fellas!

When his year long project was finished at the end of 1984, Bill had visited every state capitol and knew that not a single state had actually and legally ratified the proposal to amend the Constitution. 33 states engaged in the unauthorized activity of amending the language of the amendment proposed by congress, a power the states do not possess. Since 36 states were needed for ratification, the failure of 13 to ratify would be fatal to the amendment, and this occurs within the major (first three) defects tabulated in Defects in Ratification of the 16th Amendment. Even if we were to ignore defects of spelling, capitalization, and punctuation, we would still have only 2 states which successfully ratified.

So ... why doesn't Russo or anyone else file a lawsuit in federal court pointing out that the IRS is unconstitutional, and have the Supreme Court overturn the tax code?

Laws are challenged all the time and overturned for violating the constitution. We have a lot of strict constructualists on the Supreme Court now that I'm sure would be happy to overturn an unconstitutional law.

Bottom line is that they have this so vague and muttled that I don't believe it was intended that our labor ever be taxed. But they did it anyways and they used slick talking lawyers like Toro who think they know everything.

They don't. They only know what they were told.

 

[sealybobo]

I see someone never went to law school.

the Constitution does not permit an unapportioned direct tax like an income tax

True or false smart ass.

Dude, statues and codes are laws if passed.

Take it court if you are so certain. You'll be a famous hero and quite wealthy if you are correct.

Oh contrare. The people who get found innocent in court still have to pay the IRS all the back taxes. Or so I read.

No, I am no ghandi. I'll pay my taxes until they are deemed illegal.

Or I'll just avoid paying taxes the old fashion way.

But I will sign the petitions, like Ron Paul's to audit/abolish the Fed/Income tax.

They both need to go.

I know, Iriemon thinks the Fed is doing a heck of a job, but I don't.

 

[Iriemon]

Remember I said something yesterday about some conspiracy theorist warning me about spelling your name in all caps? I found somethign on it:

Larry Becraft is a lawyer who has actually won a handful of acquittals -- including one for Vernice Kuglin -- in defending people on trial for tax evasion. He gives a talk that is basically a warning to the movement to get its act straight and stop being absurd. Among the beliefs even others in the movement condemn as silly are the notions that by using a ZIP code or allowing a government document to spell your name in all capital letters, you surrender your sovereignty and make yourself a serf of the federal government, and that the income tax applies only to people who live in a federal territory or district, not to residents of the states.

So why don't you beleive that?

I haven't heard enough information to make me believe it or not.

I have heard enough information that I'm convinced about the IRS and Feds.

So are you actually sitting there saying there is no law that requires you to pay taxes?

 

[Iriemon]

SEE, THE STATUTES & CODES AREN'T OFFICIALLY LAWS.

I see someone never went to law school.

Did you? Then explain the difference. Sometimes i get the feeling you guys know there is a difference yet you pretend not to, until someone comes along and explains, and then you say, "yea, I knew that"

Explain what difference?

So the internal revenue code is not the book. That's A.

The Internal Revenue Code is part of the United States Code -- the official laws of the United States passed by Congress.

Go to any law library, and as for where the laws of united states are. The librarian will show you a wall of maroon colored books that say United States Code in them. Look at the laws we cited and you will find them in the code, allong with the bill number and the date they were passed into law, as well as any amendments.

B. The wording is vague and misleading and illegal and unconstitutional.

What is misleading and vague about Any person who willfully attempts ... to evade ... any tax imposed by this title or the payment thereof shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be guilty of a felony ... ?

Anyways, you keep glady paying your income taxes. I'll pay too, but it won't be gladly. And I'll help these We the People guys by signing their petitions.

I never gladly pay them. But it beats going to jail which the laws clearly say can happen if you willfully evade paying taxes.

Paying taxes is patriotic. Paying an unconstitutional income tax that is set up so the government can spend wildly is not.

I'll wait until a federal court says they are unconstitutional before agreeing with you on that point.

 

[sealybobo]

So why don't you beleive that?

I haven't heard enough information to make me believe it or not.

I have heard enough information that I'm convinced about the IRS and Feds.

So are you actually sitting there saying there is no law that requires you to pay taxes?

Not one that is legal/constitutional. Not on my labor/income.

 

[Iriemon]

the Constitution does not permit an unapportioned direct tax like an income tax

True or false smart ass.

Dude, statues and codes are laws if passed.

Take it court if you are so certain. You'll be a famous hero and quite wealthy if you are correct.

Oh contrare. The people who get found innocent in court still have to pay the IRS all the back taxes. Or so I read.

That is because the law says you have to pay taxes.

No, I am no ghandi. I'll pay my taxes until they are deemed illegal.

Wise decision to ignore what Russo tells you, IMO.

But I will sign the petitions, like Ron Paul's to audit/abolish the Fed/Income tax.

That is certainly your right.

They both need to go.

I know, Iriemon thinks the Fed is doing a heck of a job, but I don't.

How is the Govt going to pay for all those social programs I think you seem to favor without an income tax? What do you propose to replace it?

 

[Iriemon]

I haven't heard enough information to make me believe it or not.

I have heard enough information that I'm convinced about the IRS and Feds.

So are you actually sitting there saying there is no law that requires you to pay taxes?

Not one that is legal/constitutional. Not on my labor/income.

I didn't ask if you thought it was constitutional, just if you were claiming there was no law requiring you to pay taxes, as Russo says.

Did you not seen post #71 setting out the law defining gross income to include "(1) Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items;"

Isn't "compensation for service" income from your labor?

 

[sealybobo]

So why don't you beleive that?

I haven't heard enough information to make me believe it or not.

I have heard enough information that I'm convinced about the IRS and Feds.

So are you actually sitting there saying there is no law that requires you to pay taxes?

the statutes and codes of the IRS as written aren’t officially U.S. law; and even if they were, they don’t define liability and income such that any normal working American owes taxes

Anyways, it doesn't matter, since you are paying your income taxes voluntarily because you are a patriot.

The fact is no provision of the Internal Revenue Code requires anyone to file or pay income taxes. This tax, unlike other internal revenue taxes, is strictly (censored voluntary). This is because a compulsory income tax would violate the Constitution's three taxing clauses, the Bill of Rights and the 16th Amendment-all of which impose restrictions on the government's power and ability to tax income in ways few Americans understand. So, in order for the income tax not to be unconstitutional it had to be written on a non*compulsory basis. However, in order to deceive Americans of this, as well as provide federal courts and the IRS with deceptive passages on which to hang illegal prosecutions and illegal seizures, the Internal Revenue Code was written to make paying income taxes appear mandatory. The government succeeded in doing this by tricking the public into believing that those enforcement provisions of the Code, that apply to other, non-voluntary taxes (such as alcohol and tobacco taxes), also apply to income taxes when in fact, they do not. However, despite such trickery, the IRS still admits that our "income tax laws"' are purely VOLUNTARY!



Indeed, every official IRS pronouncement on this issue admits to the voluntary nature of the income tax, as the following quotations and government documents prove.



"The IRS' primary task is to collect taxes under a voluntary compliance system." (emphasis added)

- Jerome Kurtz
Internal Revenue Annual Report, 1980



"Our tax system is based on individual self*-assessment and voluntary compliance." (emphasis added)

- Mortimer Caplin
Internal Revenue Audit Manual, 1975



"Each year American taxpayers voluntarily file their tax returns and make a special effort to pay the taxes they owe." (emphasis added)

-Johnnie M. Walters
Internal Revenue 1040 Booklet, 1971



"Because the American tax system is based on voluntary compliance and self-assessment, each year taxpayers make their own determination of their tax liability' and file returns reporting the correct tax. (emphasis added)

- WELCOME to the United States of America
Form 1-357, Re. 7-19-80, the United States

Department of Justice, Immigration
and Naturalization Service

Mafia Chap1

 

[sealybobo]

Did you? Then explain the difference. Sometimes i get the feeling you guys know there is a difference yet you pretend not to, until someone comes along and explains, and then you say, "yea, I knew that"

I took several law classes. It bored the hell out of me so I didn't go to law school. Thank God. Many of my lawyer friends are miserable.

Google is your friend.

Code of law

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_(law)
Civil code - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Statutes

Statute - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

BTW, I explained fiscal and monetary policy to you. Did you learn anything?

Look into it further and realize you have been hood winked. Bamboozled!

The purpose of publishing revenue rulings and revenue procedures in the Internal Revenue Bulletin is to promote correct and uniform applications of the tax laws by the Internal Revenue Service employees and to assist taxpayers in attaining maximum voluntary compliance. (emphasis added)



On July 8, 1981 the Controller General of the United States issued a report entitled Illegal Tax Protesters Threaten Tax System (GGD-81-83)3, which, on its cover, warned that illegal tax protesters threatened our tax system because they represent a threat to our nation's voluntary tax system. (emphasis added)

Mafia Chap1

 

[Iriemon]

When his year long project was finished at the end of 1984, Bill had visited every state capitol and knew that not a single state had actually and legally ratified the proposal to amend the Constitution. 33 states engaged in the unauthorized activity of amending the language of the amendment proposed by congress, a power the states do not possess. Since 36 states were needed for ratification, the failure of 13 to ratify would be fatal to the amendment, and this occurs within the major (first three) defects tabulated in Defects in Ratification of the 16th Amendment. Even if we were to ignore defects of spelling, capitalization, and punctuation, we would still have only 2 states which successfully ratified.

So ... why doesn't Russo or anyone else file a lawsuit in federal court pointing out that the IRS is unconstitutional, and have the Supreme Court overturn the tax code?

Laws are challenged all the time and overturned for violating the constitution. We have a lot of strict constructualists on the Supreme Court now that I'm sure would be happy to overturn an unconstitutional law.

Bottom line is that they have this so vague and muttled that I don't believe it was intended that our labor ever be taxed. But they did it anyways and they used slick talking lawyers like Toro who think they know everything.

They don't. They only know what they were told.

And you know what you know for some reason other than what you were told in some internet video?

 

[sealybobo]

I see someone never went to law school.

Did you? Then explain the difference. Sometimes i get the feeling you guys know there is a difference yet you pretend not to, until someone comes along and explains, and then you say, "yea, I knew that"

Go to any law library, and as for where the laws of united states are. The librarian will show you a wall of maroon colored books that say United States Code in them. Look at the laws we cited and you will find them in the code, allong with the bill number and the date they were passed into law, as well as any amendments.

Did you forget I sell these things? I have one sitting at my desk.

You're either referrring to the Federal Tax Coordinator or the Tax Reporter. The Internal Revenue Code is only one or two books, depending on which company you buy them from, and if you need to dig deeper than the Code, you grab the Federal Tax Handbook, which is like a set of 6, and then if you need to dig deeper, you would grab the two I mentioned above.

So I'm going to tell you and Toro NO, the Internal Revenue Code is not the law. It may be the short version of the law, but it isn't "THE LAW". If you need to know more, you have to dig deeper. And I suspect if you dug deep enough, you'd find out Aaron Russo and these tax protesters are right.

But what can you do about it, right? Nothing with that attitude.