Government fraud to the max!greenspun.com : LUSENET : TB2K spinoff uncensored : One Thread
The issue of the fraudulent ratification of the 16th amendment has never been decided by a court of law. The courts have instead tossed the issue into the lap of Congress as a political question, even though fraud is a clear issue for judicial review, not a political question. A brief report printed by the Congressional Research Service in 1985 states up front that, The report does not attempt to rebut specific factual allegations?.
It then goes on to make the astonishing assertion that the actions of a government official must be presumed to be correct and cannot be judged or overturned by the courts! (John Ripy, Ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment. CRS, 1985.)
An attorney speaking for Senator Orin Hatch in 1984 offered to pay former tax investigator William Benson a fortune not to publish his research proving that the 16th amendment did not even come close to being legally ratified by the required number of states in 1913. Philander Knox, Secretary of State from 1909 to 1913 during the Taft administration, proclaimed the 16th amendment to be ratified just a few days before he left office in 1913 to make way for the Wilson administration, even though he knew it had not been legally ratified. Philander Knox had for many years been the primary attorney for the richest men in America, including Carnegie, Rockefeller, Morgan and the Vanderbilts. He had created for them the largest cartel in the world, then was appointed, at their request, as Attorney General in the McKinley/Roosevelt administrations, where he refused to enforce the Sherman anti-trust laws against the cartel he had just created.
The income tax amendment was pushed through Congress in 1909 by Sen. Nelson Aldrich, father-in-law of John D. Rockefeller, Jr. and grandfather and namesake of Nelson A. Rockefeller, and would not have been ratified if Knox had not fraudulently proclaimed it so. Example: Kentucky's legislature rejected the amendment, but Knox counted Kentucky as having approved it. Example: Oklahoma's legislature changed the amendment's wording so that it meant just the opposite of what was submitted to the states by Congress, but Knox counted Oklahoma as approving the amendment. Example: Minnesota did not submit any results or copy of their vote to Knox, yet he counted Minnesota as approving the amendment. Legal scholars have agreed that if any state violated provisions of its own state constitution in the ratification process, its approval would be null and void. At least 20 states were guilty of serious violations of their constitutions. For example, Tennessee's constitution provided that the state legislature could not act upon any proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution submitted by Congress until after the next state legislative elections. Yet the Tennessee legislature acted on the proposed 16th amendment the same month it was received and before any elections.
Judges have been extraordinarily unwilling to allow defendants in failure to file cases to present evidence or testimony of expert researchers regarding the constitutionality of the 16th amendment.
Re: Proposition #2
Juries have been acquitting defendants in failure-to-file income tax return cases due to lack of demonstrable evidence that there is any law or regulation that requires it.
An increasing number of employers have stopped withholding taxes from their workers, and stopped filing W-2s and 1099s for the same reason. Unless one is a foreigner working in the U.S., or a U.S. citizen earning money abroad, one is not liable for the federal income tax. The OMB Number on Form 1040 is cross-referenced in the Code of Federal Regulations to the section covering taxes by resident aliens, which, therefore, doesn't apply to most Americans.
Responding to an inquiry by a constituent who was a tax consultant, Sen. Daniel Inouye told him that based on research performed by the Congressional Research Service, no provision of the Internal Revenue Code requires an individual to pay income taxes. He then went on to warn that Section 7201 sets forth numerous penalties for not paying income taxes owed. However - The failure-to-file law applies to alcohol-tobacco-firearms taxes, (Section 7201), not to income taxes, and convictions are based on the mis-application of the alcohol-tobacco-firearm regulations. No law requires employees to provide a Social Security Number to an employer, nor for an employer to demand one from an employee.
Re: Proposition #3
The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the filing of an income tax return (Form 1040) and the information on the 1040 is not compelled, and, therefore, the principle that no one may be forced to waive their 5th amendment rights in order to comply with a law is not applicable to federal income tax returns. The [5th Amendment] privilege protects against compelled testimonial communications?.
U.S. v Conklin (1994), WL 504211 (10th Cir. Colo.)
No one has been able to collect the $50,000 reward offered by William Conklin (http://www.anti-irs.com) to anyone who can 1) show how to file a federal income tax return without waiving one's 5th amendment rights, and 2) identify what statute in the Internal Revenue Code makes a typical worker liable to pay an income tax.
-- rubber ducky (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 23, 2000
[setting watch] Hmm, I must be running a little slow this week. This tax-trash post doesn't usually show up until 11:00.
-- CD (email@example.com), October 23, 2000.