INCOME TAX LAWS UNCONSTITUTIONAL -THEY VIOLATE PROHIBITION AGAINST BILLS
OF ATTAINDER.
This is an opinion letter written to the Justice Times -1987
Italics are mine – Frank Trejo
Dear Editor:
I read your paper all the time and when I am finished with it, I leave it in a place where other people can find it and read it which in turn, they might subscribe. I have a piece of information that could probably help some people that are fined or penalized by the IRS and that I have not seen mentioned in your paper.
It concerns Bills of Attainder.
The U.S. Constitution at Art. 1, Sec. 9 and 10 prohibits Bills of Attainder from being issued by the federal government and by the States. A Bill of Attainder is any form of punishment or penalty imposed on a citizen without a judicial proceeding. (U.S. v. Brown 328 US 303)
Bill of Attainder: Legislative acts, no matter what their form, that apply either to named, individuals or to easily ascertainable members of a group in such a way as to inflict punishment on them without a judicial trial. (U.S. Brown 381 US 437, 448-49, 85 S. Ct. 1707, 1715.)
An act is a Bill of Attainder when the punishment is death and a Bill of pains and penalties when the punishment is less severe; both kinds of punishment fall within the scope of the constitutional prohibition. U.S. Constitution Art. 1, Sec. 9, Clause 3 (as to Congress); Art. 1, Sec. 10 (as to State Legislators) Black’s Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, page 150.
The legislators have never written any Bills of Attainder and therefore have never given the revenue department the authority to fine or penalize any citizen without a judicial trial. All fines issued by the revenue agency employees are illegal and are Bills of pains and penalties in violation of the law. I hope that this will help some of your readers…end of opinion letter
This letter was written by a A. R. M. from Phoenix, Arizona
Many opinion letters written by concerned citizens are initialed such as this one – how far fear of government has overtaken many. I don’t blame them. Many end up being audited and harassed, intimidated and sometimes destroyed.
Isn’t this information mind-boggling? All our lives we’ve been convinced by government and media that we are the smartest people on earth. When in reality most don’t know a God-damn thing about our monetary system and the laws we’re suppose to be living under. Mainly – ignorance of the U.S. Constitution and the fact that we do have criminals that have usurped our U.S. Constitution.
There was a movement during the depression of the 20’s and 30’s against withholding taxes on wages but soon petered out. I believe in the early 60’s, or so, some courageous citizens renewed the fight. Soon others began to study the laws governing taxation only to discover the fraud and deception and started raising hell. Newspapers such as the Justice Times started writing about the discovered “new” information and bad experiences “tax rebels” were being confronted with. Many were destroyed and sent to prison. The system began to demean and attack the rebels as being “anarchist” anti-government, “right-wing wackos” “the religious right” all this and more…supported by the main stream media, academia, and government itself. The public was convinced tax rebels were the scum of the earth. But truth began to permeate throughout the land. There have been many victories by rebels in the courtroom against the IRS but never reported by the media.
Out of all this came the revelation that the Federal Reserve was a private organization that corrupted the three branches of government. The criminals in government gave them the unconstitutional authority to administer and control our monetary system – except for the spending – of course. It also discovered that the purpose of the IRS was to collect interest for the bankers and to operate outside your Constitution by destroying those armed with the truth, to protect the scam of the bankers Many were in disbelief upon discovering that our country’s monetary system was being administered under the Second, Fourth, and Fifth planks of the communist manifesto. Previous articles read the fact that bankers invented communism to control and to make lots of money.
The writings of Claire Kelley, which I use quite a bit, is a treasure of information that lives forever. Many other contributors in the “Freedom Movement” discovered that the 16th Amendment was never ratified; that this amendment is really an excise tax and is not suppose to be a direct tax on your sweat. The Supreme Court has said so. Scroll to the beginning of this link and you’ll read many articles by Claire explaining in detail.
There is much spending by Congress not allowed by the Constitution. Banker’s agenda has always been to get criminals in Congress (in any country) to become a socialist/welfare state because it costs a lot to operate. It grows with borrowed money. The FDR administration started centralizing all our institutions under federal control. And the hero of many – FDR – was the one that promoted the socialist/welfare state. He was the one that made the depression worse. He and the bankers manipulated our country into war and the bankers didn’t have to laugh “all the way to the bank” they were there already. Its always been about money – OURS!
Some have calculated that ALL our liabilities are around $100 TRILLION. The bankers don’t care if it reaches Zillions. All they want is the interest. Now, we’re being told that within the next 6 years we will pay $6 trillion in interest alone. We are in for a rude awakening and the criminals in the three branches of government don’t have the answer other than printing more fiat paper called money. I bought a can of coffee and the price had risen two dollars. 79 cents for a lemon? Almost a dollar for an onion? Have you noticed the increase in garage sales? 99 cent stores becoming more popular? People are struggling and politicians are running around in limousines eating steaks on your dime…I fear for my country and people – we have been betrayed.
“I AM SORRY I HAVE ONLY ONE BAT TO SWING FOR MY COUNTRY.”
By BARRY CRONIN (in the Justice Times – 1984)
Italics are mine – Frank Trejo. Yesterday’s News Today
An angry federal judge recently castigated U.S. Labor Department officials for an “abuse of power,” saying they applied undue pressure on their key witness in a $10 million lawsuit, involving the Teamsters’ central states health and welfare fund.
U.S. District Judge Hubert L. Will said the officials engaged in “unconscionable” action when they agreed to drop further legal action against the witness only if he testified in a way favorable to the government’s case, rather than just telling the truth.
“I have never seen a document like this before…, which says, “We have a deal with you, if you testify in a particular way,” said an irritated Will, referring to a letter of agreement between the government and the witness, Daniel Shannon.
“If this isn’t an abuse of power, I don’t know what is. If I hadn’t had some prior experience with the way you people operate, I would look at this document and say it’s unbelievable. But as it is, I’m only surprised.”…end of article
There are many unconstitutional instances that take place in the courtroom every day. I could have used stories of jury tampering, grand jury collusion with prosecutors, IRS intimidating witnesses, corruption by judges…etc., but this makes the point short and sweet. I will post an article about the impeachment process. Its origin, the way it works now, but it’s not complete. The article recommends a way of impeaching ALL OFFCIALS of government and not just politicians and judges. There have been only a half dozen or so federal judges impeached. It is very difficult to do. There are many bureaucrats that deserve to be impeached but when have you read of such a thing?
Being that the three branches of government operate outside your Constitution and operate under their own rules we should fight back. I’d like to see a change to take the Senate out of the impeachment process. Let it stand where the House impeaches AND conducts the trial and deny the Senate to participate as to whether a president stays or goes after impeachment. Also, another change I’d like to see is to take the presidential power to pardon away from the White House – it breeds corruption. We are living in the most corrupted political time in our country. We must consider alternative ways of combating the criminals in government. We must fight fire with fire. The next message will give you food for thought.
“I AM SORRY I HAVE ONLY ONE BAT TO SWING FOR MY COUNTRY.”
By Norman H. Crowhurst – In the Justice Times – 1984
Italics are mine – Frank Trejo – Yesterday’s News Today.
That our oversized government bureaucracy has abused a great many citizens is not news: the number so abused must run into the millions. (think Waco Texas as one example) What can citizens so abused do about it? Except for a few who go berserk, and the tool we are about to describe, two more rational options appear: he can write to his Congressman, or he can sue the offending bureaucrat(s).
USELESS REMEDIES
If he writes to his Congressman, his complaint is referred to the bureaucratic agency to which the offending bureaucrats belong. They allegedly conduct an investigation. Actually they hold a small counsel of war on how best to answer that particular complaint. Whatever, it will be explained away as an unfortunate happening. The Congressman sends his constituent a copy of their reply, with regrets: end of complaint.
The victim who decides to sue finds it even more tenuous. First he must get permission to sue. Recently the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals granted such permission to a California man. He still has to sue, with no guarantee of winning. Hundreds of thousands never get that permission. Is that the remedy the Constitution provided against such government excesses?
OVERLOOKED TOOL
A much overlooked tool is very plainly set forth in Art. 11, Sec. 4: “The President, Vice-President and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from Office on the impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, bribery, or other high Crimes,
and Misdemeanors.”
Most are aware that the President, Vice-President, or Chief Justice can be impeached. They have not noticed the words “all civil officers.” Any government employee, acting in alleged pursuance of his alleged duty, is a civil officer. Officers of the United States are required to take an oath to uphold the Constitution, but we’ve been overlooking the remedy available if they don’t perform. (The oath of office has become meaningless. It is just for show. There are many violations by bureaucrats in government that don’t adhere to Constitutional laws any longer. So let’s put to rest the “oath of office.”
Those with a practical turn of mind will ask how that could ever be done. Art. 1, Sec. 2, Paragraph 5 and Sec. 3, Paragraphs 6 and 7 spell out how impeachment is to be conducted. The House of Representatives is to act as the prosecutor, while the Senate acts as the Court. Can you imagine thousands of offending bureaucrats being paraded through the process? It sounds impossible doesn’t it? (This business of having the Senate judge the culprit and Presidents being able to pardon felons has become too corrupted by the White House. Ford should never have pardoned Nixon and the criminals in the Senate should have thrown Clinton out. Meanwhile, thousands rot in jail illegally, because they don’t have connections like those with means. But we are a democracy – aren’t we?
CORRECTIVE TOOL
Look at another provision such victims may need to use, already in effect: Pardon: Art. 11, Sec. 2, Paragraph 1 says, “The President…shall have power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.” Let’s explain that.
If an agency charges you with some violation and you are not convicted, that goes into the record as an offense against the United States, because the agency allegedly acted in behalf of the United States. Thousands have been unlawfully convicted, using falsified or perjured testimony against them.
The record shows that they have committed offenses against the United States, even though in reality they are innocent. So they are eligible for pardon. Provision already exists for this: the Office of Pardon, answerable to the President. The applicant fills in a form, adds any relevant details, gets affidavits of character from friends, submits the whole packet to the Office of Pardon, who must submit it to the President, who alone may act on it. That mechanism is already in place. But we don’t have such a mechanism for impeachment – yet. Such a mechanism would be equally valid. But first take a closer look at how impeachment came into being, for the founding fathers to include it in the Constitution. It has a long history, so we’ll jump into the record with which the founding fathers were familiar.
ORIGINS
England had been ruled by a sequence of monarchs who alternated between catholic and protestant. To effect those changes, three processes were widely used: impeachment, attainder, and pardon. To remove someone from government office, he was impeached. He might also be attainted, which means he lost all his property and rights as an individual. Come a favorable monarch, the same individual could be pardoned. (If memory serves me well upon reading history, one reason, of several, why the church started celibacy was to prevent those in the clergy that had property to leave it to heirs. The church wanted it. How was it implemented? A pope decided he couldn’t serve God and be married at the same time and mandated celibacy. What does this have to do with the subject matter? I don’t know – I just finished a six-pack.)
Attainder had bad features. If not enacted in the attainted’s absence, he was allowed no defense. Individuals judged guilty of treason were not always attainted or, if they were, that decision was separate from, and made after they were found guilty of treason. Further study of the way attainder was used will show why the founding fathers prohibited it absolutely (Art. 1, Sec. 9, paragraph 3 and Sec. 10, paragraph 1)
Impeachment was an appropriate remedy for someone who abused his government office to commit some felony or crime. He was not taken to an ordinary court of law, as a private citizen would be. That is why the founding fathers included impeachment as a provision of the Constitution. Why haven’t we used it? (Because government controls education in our country and keeps us ignorant of such important things)
If a person was properly impeached – i.e., not for some political “indiscretion” – he could not be pardoned. If, rather that merely adhering to a different political or religious philosophy, a person had abused his privileges as a government officer, he was to be removed from office and could not be restored to office.
All this was intended to stop what had been going on in Britain: the alternation of “ins” and “outs” in politics, using such pseudo-legal processes, at the same time stopping real abuses of government power. Now how can we apply today what the founding fathers provided?
IMPLEMENTING IT
Two things are needed: first, the proper place to report such wrongdoing is to your Congressman. But make it clear it is a complaint, for which impeachment is the appropriate remedy. Second, at the same time, point out how prevalent such offenses are, urging him to support the creation of an Office of Impeachment to handled such a volume of complaints.
An Office of Impeachment would be unlike any of the bureaucracy that is causing the problem, because the office would be answerable only to Congress. Existing agencies are autonomous: do what they like, answerable to nobody. They make rules designed to keep their abuses “out of public sight.” They promote legislation to further their objectives, while appearing to “cure” ills they themselves caused. That is why every new piece of legislation makes worse what it promised to put right.
With such an Office of Impeachment in place, bureaucrats will start losing their jobs by impeachment: other will see the “handwriting on the wall” and quit. Those who remain will be careful to fulfill their oath upholding the Constitution, instead of doing what every bureaucrat does today” guarding his “rear-end” to make sure the abuses he himself perpetrates can be “covered.” Taking this relatively simple step, already provided in the Constitution, can turn this country around in short order, eliminating all the ills about which we keep learning…end of article.
Most articles I reprint are quite a few years back. Laws may have changed but I do notice that many ideas such as the above never materialize. I have offered several but nothing ever happens for lack of wide distribution. This is why I wish third parties would unite. They are organized and capable of spreading ideas a lot better.
Getting the Congress to create an Office of Impeachment would take it as a threat to their power. Complaints by the thousands would cost millions and yet another bureaucracy to contend with. It is a good idea but not doable. The same thing may be said of mine.
Nevertheless, allow me to reiterate. Third parties are established in every State. Uniting all of them under one umbrella is possible. That would give some political strength in State elections. As it stands now, third parties are allowing democrats to win elections by taking votes away from the republicans in the race. I can’t stand either but I’d much rather have a GOP than radicals that have gotten control of the Democratic Party. This is my reason for leaving that party.
Third Parties must consider a new direction. Either unite with other organizations or join the GOP to change it from the ground up. In due time you could implement your ideas in the GOP of which I think would be welcomed. We’re sick and tired of people like McCain, Snow, Collins, Lott, and many other GOP “moderates.” We are in a cultural war and losing it. We must fight fire with fire and I don’t see anybody out there with matches.
With control of the State’s GOP party we would dictate to any GOP politician from our State in Congress to do what we say. No more running around with a tin cup hustling lobbyists. We don’t need to repeal anything, or a new amendment, we control the votes and they jump when we demand. What happened to common sense?
Anyone out there with a match? A cigarette lighte? Even rubbing two sticks together will do…I’m going after another six-pack.
“I AM SORRY I HAVE ONLY ONE BAT TO SWING FOR MY COUNTRY.”
By Daniel Hansen – 1994
(This article appeared in a newspaper – The Independent American – of the Independent American Party)
Italics are mine – Frank Trejo – Yesterday’s News Today
Hey Baby, the World Serious and the Stupor Bowl…these games don’t amount to peanuts in the Big Game of Life.
While giddy American’s minds are occupied with the sports paper or TV trivia, the big boys have established a new league, the NEW WORLD ORDER. They’re not talking about paltry million dollar contracts, they’re talking about billions and trillions. Cost of admission is high, very high and we’re talking high-stake rollers…you can bet your life on it. In fact, whether you are aware of the game or not, your life, your mortgage, your paycheck are already on the “come line” along with what’s left of our debt-ridden national economy and our nation’s independence and sovereignty.
The rules of the game are simple…keep Joe Six-pack in a stupor and rape America. America is being disarmed and dismantled militarily, morally, and monetarily. Lets look at the score.
Disarming America Militarily
“Read my lips” President Bush brought the term “New World Order” to the awareness of the American people by his repeatedly stated goal in the Middle East of establishing a “new world order… a United Nations that can use its peacekeeping role to fulfill the promise and role envisioned by its founders.”
“We shall have World Government whether or not we like it. World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent.” (J.P. Warburg – banker – 1950)
Bush, true to his vision, began dismantling the American Military including closing down military bases such as Fort Dix, New Jersey to which he invited New World Order troops for training. President Clinton continues the same policy. Diminished American military forces are scattered around the world under PDD (Presidential Decision Directive) “to place U.S. forces under international control of a foreign commander.” What’s left of our “politically-correct” military is further demoralized and misdirected with the forced infusion and promotion of homosexuality.
Riots associated with Rodney King in L,A, and Las Vegas saw police and firemen, intimidated by sensitivity-training, federal financing, controls and regulations and “politically-correct policies, refuse to confront rioters as they ran amuck, looting, burning and killing. (Some of you may remember a scene that took place in the L.A. area when burning and looting were ongoing. Rioters literally took over parts of the city and the police would do absolutely nothing. I remember a camera shot of an American-Korean citizen on top of his roof, protecting his business with an AK-47. All around his building were other structures on fire but not his. THIS IS WHAT YOUR SECOND AMENDMENT IS ALL ABOUT! Don’t allow bureaucrats, be it city, county, state or federal to chip away at that Amendment.)
While local police are being politically disarmed, federal agencies such as B.A.T.F., and the IRS are being converted into military units such as assembled at Waco, Texas. It is interesting to contrast the media treatment of Rodney King, an acknowledged criminal who was kicked around by police, like with the men, women and children torched at Waco. Media attention has never ceased in its advocacy to protect the violation of King’s civil righst. (It was reported, although I didn’t see it, that the media didn’t show the beginning of the confrontation showing King fighting the police. They only showed the beating to bring him down. Unfortunately, the police over did it. But that was enough for sensationalism by the electronic and print media to foment rioting for ratings.
On the other hand, the nearly 100 innocent victims at Waco were tried and convicted by the news media, torched by the Gestapo-like B.A.T.F., (which in turn was defended by Attorney General, Janet Reno) and forgotten by the media. Survivors of Waco continue to be persecuted. (Under a Constitutional Republic Reno would have been charged with murder. I’m sickened by the fact that crimes committed by the criminals in Congress, and the White House, are rarely brought to justice. They protect themselves. These bastards are responsible for the economic crash that is costing us trillions and no elected official is going to pay. Democracy in action – the worst form of government according to Aristotle.
In the mean-time JFK and Abraham Lincoln were both assassinated. Why and how is opened to speculation, but one overlooked and disregarded fact is that both Presidents issued millions of Constitutional debt free money into circulation. (Wilkes Booth worked in the banking industry – conspiracy? And evidence points to the CIA in the murder of JFK).
Pictured below is a $5.00 U.S. Note (not a federal reserve note) issued by JFK. He was intent upon issuing billions but was cut short by assassination. One of LBJ’s first official act upon assuming the Presidency was to cancel the issuance of U.S. Notes. (I didn’t copy the note – it can be found in earlier articles on this website.)
President Abraham Lincoln issued $449,338,902 debt-free U.S. Notes into circulation. He clearly understood the importance of debt-free government financing and the imperative need to spend money into circulation rather than to borrow it.
Said Lincoln, “The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of the consumers. The privilege of creating and issuing of money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but is the Government’s greatest creative opportunity.
“By the adoption of these principles, the long-felt want for a uniform medium will be satisfied. The taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. The financing of all public enterprises, the maintenance of stable government and ordered progress, and the conduct of the Treasury will become matters of practical administration. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity.” (This infuriated the bankers and Abe’s life was sealed. JFK made the same mistake.)
The only way money gets into circulation in the United States is through the creation of debt. The Treasury issues bonds of credit to the private Federal Reserve Bank which then prints the federal reserve notes and lends these debt certificates back to the United States Government at usury interest to be circulated as “money.”
If the debt was ever paid off in full, there would be no money in circulation. With debt money, the only way to increase the money supply needed for an expanding economy is to amass ever larger and larger debts. Eventually, the debt bubble must burst.
(For many years voices such as the Independent American Party have been warning citizens of the coming crash but people are too busy participating in the “Big Game of Life.” Perhaps this time around we’ll witness the downfall of our country. How in the hell are we going to pay almost 70 trillion in unfunded liabilities? The yearly interest to pay is predicted to go over a trillion for the first time ever. And now it’s being reported by some it’ll cost us around 6 trillion in interest the next 3 years. “Brother, can you spare a dim?”
The incoming administration will spend close to a trillion and you know what? It won’t make a bit of difference to stop a looming crash, sooner or not too much later, that will transform our country to third-world status – just as the bankers have planned. And the criminals in Congress? They have protected themselves. They won’t suffer at all, thanks to the American peoples’ apathy. Maybe if we referred to politicians as “athletes” people would pay more attention and understand the ” dirty style” of playing outside the game’s rule book – the U.S. Constitution)
Warned President Thomas Jefferson, “If the American people ever allow the banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation, and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will wake up home-less on the continent their fathers occupied. The issuing power of money should be taken from the banks and restored to Congress and the people to whom it belongs. I sincerely believe the banking institutions having the issuing power of money are more dangerous to liberty than standing armies.”….end of article
For decades, those concerned have done just about everything to “awaken” people to the dangers we face. Be it the IRS, judicial activism, a criminal Congress and White House, undeclared wars for corporations that do business on both sides, wide open borders to reduce the WASP to a minority status, foreign aid to subsidize communism the world over, spending out of control by all levels of government, subversion of the separation of powers…and on and on. So what hasn’t been tried? Something I have been advocating for a few years.
Unite all think-a-like organizations under one umbrella to form a stronger third party. There are many good ideas promoted by third parties (some taken by the two criminal parties as their own) that a platform could be designed to appeal to millions disenchanted by the criminals in Congress. There are many organizations not necessarily political third parties that think “Americanism” (Constitutional Republic) The second option would be to stop everything and join the GOP by the hundred of thousands to change it for the better. The GOP is ripe for change. There are too many radicals in the Democratic Party. It would be a piece a cake to take over the precincts.
Think about it, leaders of third parties – there isn’t much time left – set egos aside and give it a shot, you could be the answer. I think conservative talk radio could be recruited to introduce the idea to the public. Of the two I think taking over the GOP would be the easiest. They have the machine, money, organization, but are weak.
Democrats come from many radical organizations who are masters at manipulation and deceit. Sen. Trent Lott , one-time Republican Senate Majority Leader was a cheer leader in high school. You don’t cheer-lead against thugs. I blame the GOP for allowing the left to win control. If the GOP hadn’t strayed away from conservative principles they would still be in charge. And the result? We have the most radical administration in our history. Just as the bankers have always wanted. God grant us the will to save our Constitution..
Any descendants of the Founding Fathers around?
“Many ideas grow better when transplanted into another mind than in the one where they sprang up.” (Oliver Wendell Holmes)…and,
“Upon the plains of hesitation, bleach the bones of countless millions, who upon the threshold of success sat down to wait and waiting to die.” (anonymous)
“I AM SORRY I HAVE ONLY ONE BAT TO SWING FOR MY COUNTRY.”
From the Justice Times – 1984
Italics are mine – Frank Trejo
Once upon a time there was a little red hen who scratched about the barnyard until she uncovered some grains of wheat. She called her neighbors and said, “If we plant this wheat, we shall have bread to eat. Who will help me plant it?”
“Not I,” said the cow.
“Not I,” said the duck.
“Not I,” said the pig.
“Not I,” said the goose.
“Then I will,” said the little red hen. And she did. The wheat grew tall and ripened into golden grain. “Who will help me reap my wheat?” asked the little red hen.
“Not I,” said the duck.
“Out of my classification,” said the pig.
“I’d lose my seniority,” said the cow.
“I’d lose my unemployment compensation,” said the goose.
“Then I will,” said the little red hen, and she did. At last it came time to bake the bread. “Who will help me bake the bread?” asked the little red hen.
“That would be overtime for me,” said the cow.
“I’d lose my welfare benefits,” said the duck.
“I’m a dropout and never learned how,” said the pig.
“If I’m to be the only helper, that’s discrimination,” said the goose.
“Then I will,” said the little red hen. She baked five loaves and held them up for her neighbors to see. They wanted some and, in fact, demanded a share. But the little red hen said, “No, I can eat the five loaves.”
“Excess profits!” cried the cow.
“Capitalist leech!” screamed the duck.
“I demand equal rights!” yelled the goose.
And the pig just grunted. And they painted “unfair” picket signs and marched round and round the little red hen, shouting obscenities.
When the government agent came (Obama), he said to the little red hen, “You must not be greedy.” “But I earned the bread,” said the little red hen. “Exactly,” said the agent. “This is the wonderful free enterprise system. Anyone in the barnyard can earn as much as he wants. But under our modern government regulations, the productive workers must divide their product with the idle.”
And they lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked, “I am grateful. I am grateful.”
But her neighbors wondered why she never again baked any more bread.
“There are only two places where socialism works – one is a beehive and the other is an anthill.” (Ian Stewart – Richardson)
By Stephen McCarthy – Justice Times – 1984
Italics mine – Frank Trejo – Yesterday’s News Today
Irwin Schiff wants Hamden to become a tax haven, a place where “outlaw” Internal Revenue Service agents would be prevented from “illegally” seizing private property. Hamden, he says, would be a model for the country. (In an earlier article Claire Kelley wrote about jurisdiction. The federal government has no legal authority enforcing its laws on property not ceded to it.)
The nationally-reputed tax rebel, a Hamden resident, says this would be accomplished if the Hamden police arrested IRS agents who ventured to seize private property in lieu of unpaid federal income taxes without a court order. Schiff’s three-year campaign to open grand jury hearings on the alleged illegality of federal income taxes took a new twist when the Internal Revenue Service notified him that some of his certain property, such as cars, may be seized to meet unpaid income tax debts.
“Bank accounts, receivables, commissions, or other kinds of income you have are also subject to levy,” stated a past due final notice Schiff received from the IRS seeking $8,350 in unpaid federal income taxes. “Property or rights to property, such as automobiles, may also be seized and sold to satisfy your tax liability,” the notice concluded.
Schiff, author of How Anyone Can Stop Paying Income Taxes claims that no U.S. citizen is required to file an income tax return and pay income taxes. The income tax system, established in 1942 by the late FDR, is completely voluntary according to the IRS Code, Schiff says.
The terms “liability,” “failure to file,” or “failure to pay,” which are common to other provisions of the Code, are pointedly absent in the Code’s index covering income tax. Schiff maintains there is no mention of these terms within the body of the Code sections concerning income tax. Further, he says, the word “shall” used without qualification in the Code’s income tax language actually means “may,” thus denoting the voluntary nature of the income tax laws. Other tax provisions, such as those pertaining to tobacco, liquor and wagering taxes, contain the terms “shall be required to” as a mandate of payment, Schiff said. “I never said (income tax) is unconstitutional. I say it’s voluntary, so how can it be unconstitutional. I say it’s enforced unconstitutionally,” Schiff said. IRS agents are outlaws. They operate outside both federal law and state law.”
Citing the Code, Schiff declares that seizure of private property by IRS agents acting without a court order to satisfy unpaid income taxes is illegal. Internal Revenue Code Section 7401, entitled “Authorization,” state that: “No civil action for the collection or recovery of taxes or of any fine, penalty, or forfeiture, shall be commenced unless the Secretary authorizes or sanctions the proceedings and the Attorney General or his delegate directs that the action be commenced.”
This, Schiff contends, means that IRS agents must be empowered by the U.S. Secretary of Treasury or U.S. Attorney General to make even preliminary moves toward recovering unpaid taxes. No federal official, he claims, has attempted to refute his findings. (They don’t care about constitutional law they have their “own” laws)
Schiff estimates that IRS agents have seized about $200,000 of his assets, over $10,000 of which was extracted by federal agents from his account with the American National Bank of Hamden. Some $140,000, he said, was taken from Simon & Schuster, the publishing company. “I’ll get back all that money with interest and penalties,” Schiff says, when he sues the government on grounds that the money was “extorted” by IRS agents. He has also filed suit against Simon & Schuster. “The government tried to break me financially, but they couldn’t do it,” Schiff said.
“This makes Watergate look like Sunday school if any federal agent comes in here to take any property without a court order he’s got to be arrested and locked up in jail.”
“If the IRS agents knew that if they came into Hamden to seize property they’d be arrested and locked up, we could make it stick, and people could keep their money and be productive and productive people would come here. Hamden will be a tax haven in the United States where the police enforce the law.”
We have a right to expect from our (local) property taxes that the police department will prevent illegal seizure of our property by outlaws,” he says.
Schiff approached Robert Nolan commander of administration services for the Hamden Police Department in attempts to get a commitment that police would arrest IRS agents attempting to seize property without a court order.
“I told Nolan that if he arrests an IRS agent, the people will build a statute in his honor.”
Nolan said that Schiff “is a citizen of Hamden and he will be treated and protected as any citizen would.” He said that IRS agents are not immune to arrest by local police. “If they violate the law? They certainly would be, just like everyone else.” Nolan said.
Nolan said he doubted that the IRS could legally seize property with a “notice of levy” as Schiff said they did in his case. “I would assume that the bankers would be very aware of what the procedures were,” Nolan said. “I can’t see them releasing money to anyone without proper documentation.”
He said that the proper “paper work” for confiscating property would include a signed court order, “something very similar to a search and seizure warrant…recognized by a state judge or magistrate of some kind.” If this paperwork was insufficient, Nolan said, police officers would ask the agents to leave the premises. And would assume that the IRS, if dealing with Irwin Schiff would do it completely flawlessly,” Nolan said, in light of the tax rebels nationwide notoriety.
“Everybody’s afraid of the IRS,” Schiff asserts. “The bank turns over money because they don’t want to be audited. Everyone wants to stay on the good side of the IRS.” A few years ago legislation was passed ordering ALL banks to come under the rule of the Federal Reserve System. This bullshit about being afraid to be audited is a farce. The truth is that the IRS is the KGB in our country and is the bagman for the international bankers. They must keep fear in people, ongoing, to protect their scam. And to think that all public servants that administer the three branches of government (545 total) know this. So much for the “oath of office.” We have criminals running our government.
Schiff has for three years sought to testify before a grand jury that the federal income tax laws do not mandate the filing or payment of income taxes and that the IRS is illegally seizing private property. He said he has written to several federal and state officials in attempts to open grand jury hearings, including Assistant U.S Attorney Michael Hartmere, federal district court Judge Ellen Burns, FBI Special Agent in charge Alonzo Lacey, and Assistant State’s Attorney Arnold Markle.
“Now it’s obvious that I’ve got the evidence because they won’t allow me a hearing,” he says. Schiff says that he met IRS officials in their New Haven offices and offered to pay $45,000 in back taxes if they could cite his “tax liability” under the Internal Revenue Code. “The interview started when I took out the two tax records I brought along.”
Schiff wrote in a chronology of events about the meeting with IRS officials. “However, they refused to allow me to tape the proceedings and stated that if I attempted to tape, the interview would be terminated. I was, therefore, not permitted to have a complete and accurate account of this meeting.”
Schiff says he did not pay the back taxes because IRS officials were unable to cite the “liability” clause in the Internal Revenue Code.
All this was taking place in the 80s. Recently an article appeared in the newspaper reporting that Schiff had been in and out of prison numerous times but at present was incarcerated. His fate was sealed from the beginning because he was the number one tax rebel in the country in the attempt to educate people to the illegal tax system. The criminals had to set an example and destroyed him.
When people read about tax rebels they show nothing but contempt towards them. Part of the strategy by the criminals is the indoctrination, by propaganda, to brainwash people that everyone has to pay “their fair share.” This is a lie. Supreme Court decisions prove this. What rebels are doing is trying to get government to obey the law and they’re ridiculed. And to think it was tax rebels that got rid of the King in early America. We owe everything, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to courageous early Americans. We allow 545 people, responsible for the destruction of our country, to operate illegally outside your Constitution – go figure.
“I AM SORRY I HAVE ONLY ONE BAT TO SWING FOR MY COUNTRY.”
By Otis L. Sanford – Justice Times – 1984
(Ed. Note: Assistant U.S. Attorney Devon Cosnell is the same prosecutor that lost the Bill Davis case in the February issue of the Justice Times)
Italics are mine – Frank Trejo – Yesterday’s News Today
Jerry Lee Lewis (rock n roll star) was an ignorant and negligent “good ole boy” who did not pay his income taxes, but prosecutors failed to prove that the singer intentionally his assets from the Internal Revenue Service, jurors said.
Jurors questioned after Lewis was acquitted on one count of income tax evasion said the fact that he bought cars in the name of others, showered the women in his life with expensive jewelry and furs and kept large sums of cash in his home is no proof that he concealed his assets from the government.
Foreman Alma Henderson, manager of Southern Cafeteria, said the prosecution “had good evidence but just didn’t have enough proof” showing that Lewis hid his assets.
“My personal feeling is he’s guilty as hell, but we couldn’t go by that. We had to go by the evidence.” Jurors interviewed were unanimous in their sentiments that Lewis negligently failed to pay his taxes. But by the wording of the indictment, no guilt could be found.
“Sure he didn’t pay his taxes. He admitted that, but the main issue was did he hide his assets,” said one juror, who asked not to be identified by name. (how deep-rooted the fear of the IRS is) The juror and others on the panel said Lewis’ practice of buying cars in the name of others began long before his tax problems.
“Did you question Elvis Presley about having cars in other people’s name? One circumstance is just like another,” the juror said. Referring to two IRS Seizures at Lewis’ Nesbit, Miss., home in 1979, the juror said, “Everything they seized was right there at his doorstep. He wasn’t hiding it.
“I really think he was a good ole boy who let everybody else take care of his business and he couldn’t manage it himself. I felt sorry for him, not on this income tax case, but as a whole. He needs help.” She added, “If he had gone to prison, he still would have to pay his income taxes.”
Another juror, Renee Watts, who hugged Lewis after the verdict was returned, said later the prosecution did not prove that Lewis bought the cars, jewelry and furs in the names of others to conceal it from government.
“It was negligence on his part. We all agreed to that. But willfully and intentionally buying cars and hiding money in his home, the prosecution just didn’t prove that he did all that to hide his assets from the government.”
Mrs. Watts, a secretary at City Finance Co., said that during the deliberations several jurors “still thought the charge was just evading payment. That was proven,” she said, but concealing his assets was not.
Juror Lawrence Cartwright, assistant manager of Interstate Blood and Plasma Center, said the panel took about four voted before finding Lewis not guilty. It just was not proven by the government.
Said juror Annette Shannon, a clerk for Pitney Bowes, “We all knew that Jerry Lee didn’t pay his taxes. He was just ignorant. He should have taken care of it.”
Other jurors were a mix of local citizens
The October 18, 1984, 10:30 verdict brought a rousing applause from Lewis’ supporters in the courtroom. “I love it. There were some good folks on that jury,” said J.W. Whitten, Lewis’ road manager.
The handshakes and hugs that followed the acquittal, however, were mixed with sighs of relief. Chief defense attorney Bill Clifton, appearing more shocked than happy, said the jury “looked at the total man and knew he was a simple man with just a talent for playing the piano and nothing else.” Lewis’ daughter, Phoebe Lewis, said, “We won because the truth was on our side. I can’t say that I said that all along, though. I sweated a little.”
Even Lewis himself said he was “a little concerned” about the outcome before the verdict was announced, but added, “I knew I wasn’t guilty. I depended on God number one, and my wife and all my friends stood by me all the way.
Lewis said he had been tried by a fair jury and added, “These people knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that I wouldn’t steal from the federal government.” But his comments were less than kind toward U.S. District Judge Robert M. McRae Jr. and prosecuting attorney Devon Gosnell.
“I think he’s got some problems,” Lewis said of Judge McRae. “I think the man is bitterly against me. He said a lot of things about me that hurt my feelings. He even said some things before the trial, but he’s not God. I always wanted to meet God when I go to heaven.”
Lewis referred to Miss Gosnell as a “demon-possessed lady” and said, “She told me lies than Carter’s got liver pills.” (Doesn’t sound like an ignorant person to me)
The lesson to be reminded of is the power of the jurors to nullify any law they deem a bad law. The verdict, I think, was based on their emotions about him being ignorant and not so much about “jury nullification.” The judges’ behavior was typical of tyrants on the bench that care less about your Constitution. And the prosecutor? I hope she was reduced to being an ambulance chaser. Tell people that THEY are the Kings and Queens in our country when they wear the juror’s hat.
By E. Eddie LeBaron – 1984
A man lived by the side of the road and sold hot dogs. He was hard of hearing so he had no radio. He had trouble with his eyes so he read no newspapers. But he sold good hot dogs.
He put up a sign on the highway telling how good they were. He stood by the side of the road and cried “Buy a hot dog, Mister.” And people bought. He increased his meat and bun orders. He bought a bigger stove to take care of his trade. He got his son to help him.
But then something happened. His son said, “Father haven’t you heard the news? There’s a big recession on. The unemployment situation is terrible. The energy situation is worse.”
Whereupon the father thought, “Well my son has been to college. He reads the papers and listens to the radio, and he ought to know.”
So the father cut down his meat and bun orders. Took down his advertising signs, and no longer bothered to stand on the highway to sell hot dogs. And his hot dog sales fell almost overnight.
“You’re right, son,” the father said to the boy. “We are certainly in the middle of a great recession.”
So, what’s the moral of the story? I don’t know I just got here. I’m gonna go get a beer.
“I REGRET I HAVE ONLY ONE HOT DOG TO SWING FOR MY COUNTRY.”
<
By Claire Kelley – 1984 – Justice Times Newspaper
Italics are mine – Frank Trejo – Yesterday’s News Today
“ The courts and the judicial system of this country were not established by our forefathers as the private preserve of the legal profession.” Chief Justice Warren Burger, U.S. News & World report – May 28, 1984.
The U.S. Supreme Court is more open to non-lawyers (lay Counsel), than any other court in this land. The State Courts are vehemently opposed to non-lawyers and have stringent statutes to back up and punish as criminal, the practicing of law ‘without a license’.
Rosemary Furman, an ex-legal secretary in Jacksonville, Florida, was helping low-income people to file their own legal documents and was found guilty of contempt when she disobeyed a court order to stop. Her conviction (There is no jury trial for civil contempt, only for criminal contempt) was upheld by the Florida Supreme Court and that case is presently pending, before the U.S. Supreme Court.
It will be an interesting decision, when it comes down and very possibly may be a big a step in breaking the monopoly which the ‘entrenched bench-bar’ has on our courts. It is this writer’s opinion that state laws prohibiting the practice of law without a license are unconstitutional. Whether or not the Furman case raises this issue, is not known at this point. However, it is one decision that this writer is eagerly awaiting.
But there is no state jurisdiction over federal law or on federal property (federal courtrooms) and more than one U.S. District Court Judge has allowed a layman to assist or even defend a friend. The Supreme Court touched upon this matter in the Faretta case, but only as a footnote. However, it does reveal their awareness of the legality of an unlicensed person acting in behalf of a friend.
“The first lawyers were personal friends of the litigant, brought into court by him so that he might ‘take counsel with them’ before pleading. 1 Pollock & Maitland, History of English Law 211 (1909). Similarly, the first ‘attorneys’ were personal agents often lacking any professional training, who were appointed by those litigants, who had secured royal permission to carry on their affairs through a representative, rather than personally.” Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975) fn. 16.
In one of the early Tax Resistance cases (1973) defendant Jim Scott petitioned the U.S. District Court in Fresno, California to have his friend assist him, as he did not want or trust any lawyers (they are officers of the Court) and he did not feel entirely competent to ‘go it alone’. He relied upon his Sixth Amendment right to ASSISTANCE of counsel. The Court, granted it. Unfortunately, he was convicted, but on appeal, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals observed that,
“Three of appellant’s supporters – Claire Kelley (love that woman) Vaughn Ellsworth and William Drexler – played a particularly active role in presenting appellant’s defense. They were permitted to sit at the counsel table during the trial. Appellant (Scott) consulted with them frequently during the taking of testimony. They participated in hearings on various motions. They argued Appellant’s constitutional points and discussed jury instructions with the trial court. They conferred with appellant outside the courtroom, planning strategy, assembling cases and documents and marshalling arguments for later use in court. In short, THEY PERFORMED FUNCTIONS TYPICALLY RESERVED TO MEMBERS OF THE BAR.” U.S. v. Scott, (1975) 521 F. 2d 1188.
At the end of this trial, Ellsworth, Drexler and Kelley were arrested and indicted with four felonies. A fifth one was later added. They were ‘trumped up’ charges and the government was hard-put to find a judge to hear the case, it had such an obvious smell. After some un-productive conferences with different lawyers, it was decided that this writer would handle the case and with the court’s permission, she filed and pled various motions and by the Grace of God, after twenty-one months, all charges were dismissed, except as to Mr. Drexler, who made the court angry by not appearing for the dismissal and so he went to trial and was successful in obtaining a hung jury. He was not re-tried. It was also interesting to note that the Foreman of the grand jury that brought in the original indictment was an IRS Supervisor. Just think how many citizens have been treated like this and made to pay and spend time in prison. The courage of Kelley to take on the case – a demonstration of guts – to take on Goliath and strike it down with the sword of knowledge discovered from truth within the covers of your Constitution.
Section 35 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 makes a clear distinction between the word ‘counsel’ and ‘lawyer’. It says that,
“…the parties may plead and manage their own causes personally, OR by the assistance of such counsel OR ATTORNEYS AT LAW.” This Judiciary Act was later codified by Congress as 28 USC 1654. However, in writing this enabling legislation, the meaning was subtly changed and it reads:
“In all courts of the United States the parties may plead and conduct their own cases personally OR BY COUNSEL as, by the rules of such courts, respectively, are permitted to manage and conduct causes therein.” 28 USC 1654
This is a considerable change from the original Act, which the statute purports to implement. Enabling legislation may not add to or subtract from the original Act being implemented.
There is a constitutional violation here of great import. How can executive officers of the court (lawyers), sitting as legislative officers, pass laws which give them a monopoly upon the courts and the judicial system? Is this not a violation of the separation of powers principle, upon which our Republic was founded? Is this not also a gross conflict of interest? Is the title ‘lawyer’ a title of nobility, prohibited under Art. 1, Sec. 9, cl. 8 of the Federal Constitution? These are questions the judiciary is going to have to answer sooner or later, for no man can serve two masters. Matthew 6:24
Many in Congress are lawyers. That is why tort reform legislation is always defeated. The criminals in Congress, because of contributions – i.e. payoffs – allow the ‘sharks’ to sue McDonalds for its coffee being too hot or representing a burglar, by suing a citizen for shooting the burglar in the citizen’s home. Conservatives are always in the forefront for change but there are not enough in Congress.
Further, it is this writer’s opinion, that we also have Ninth Amendment violation here. To limit a criminal defendant to a ‘court-approved licensed lawyer’ rather than to permit him to ENJOY the assistance of a trusted friend would be to construe certain rights in the Constitution (assistance of counsel) to deny or disparage others, (assistance of a layman) retained by the people. The Faretta Court observed that,
“The colonists brought with them an appreciation of the virtues of self-reliance and a traditional distrust of lawyers. …The years of Revolution and Confederation saw an upsurge of anti-lawyer sentiment. A ‘sudden revival, after the war of the Revolution, of the old dislike and distrust of lawyers as a class.’ In the heat of these sentiments the Constitution was forged.” Faretta supra, 826-27
The INTENT of the legislators is still the law and the intent of our Founding Fathers is clear. Our early history tells the tale that our judicial system and courts are NOT the private preserve of the legal profession. The Sixth Amendment was passed to protect the rights of the criminal defendant, not of the entrenched-bar.
In the federal case of U.S. v. Peterson CA 7-case No. 75-2093, 1977, the Seventh Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals reversed the conviction of Gordon Petersen, a disbarred attorney, who was indicted for the “unauthorized practice of law, in the case of U.S. v. Stockheimer.
Peterson was first charged by the state of Wisconsin, with “unauthorized practice of law” but they ‘dropped the case’ (they must have realized they had no jurisdiction), in favor of a federal prosecution of Peterson, under 18 USC 13 (Federal Assimilated Crimes Act).
The Seventh Circuit reversed Peterson’s and remanded the case to the trial court with instructions to dismiss the indictment for failing to allege a crime.
“We believe the Assimilated Crimes Act is NOT APPLICABLE here. We find nothing to suggest that Congress intended by that Act to make STATE penal statutes applicable to the practice of law in federal courts.” Peterson, supra. Peterson was prosecuted even though there was a legitimate court order, allowing him to represent Stockheimer. That order read in part,
“ I have concluded that in the defense of this criminal prosecution initiated against him by the government, this defendant (Stockheimer) should not be flatly forbidden the assistance of persons not licensed to practice law.”
This was no doubt a bad faith prosecution by the federal government, to ‘accommodate’ their state ‘buddies’, while also protecting their own legal monopoly. What the courts really fear with assistance of friends is a criminal appeal, alleging ‘ineffective counsel’. An Affidavit, waiving any appeal on this ground should go a long way in calming any court’s ruffled feathers, as to lay counsel…end of article.
Let this be a lesson to all of us – DO NOT TRUST ANY COURT! It’s bad enough that we have judges who think the courtroom is theirs. Future articles will relate stories of judges committing crimes.
“I REGRET I ONLY HAVE ONE BAT TO SWING FOR MY COUNTRY.”
By Darrell Ellis – 1983
Italics are mine – Frank Trejo – Yesterday’s News Today
The United States Government currently demands that we supply it with over 500 million forms and documents annually. The personnel and money required to process and evaluate and store this data in an enormous maze of computer networks is mind boggling. But government has grown at such a rapid rate it is starting to devour our country. It has become a self-serving monster which keeps growing with each new law Congress passes. Congress generally creates new laws but it seldom abolishes old acts or outdated laws.
Few of these laws ever give more rights to the people; they usually take away our freedoms or add new restrictions to existing freedoms. Our once sensible and responsible Republic now feeds like a leech on the productivity of those who still produce. The problem is, the stronger this monster becomes, the weaker its victim, until finally, this creature we call “democracy” (America is not a democracy. It always has been a republic) will kill its host and America, as we know it, will die. (On paper we are still a Republic, which some of us still cling to, but what is practiced is a socialist/communists welfare system and your Constitution be damned.)
Your tax dollars are being used to suppress and control you. That’s right, America is no longer the home of the free, and the brave are few and far between. We are nurturing a beast which throws constitutionalists and real patriots into jail for asserting their rights, while the true criminals slither around freely wheeling and dealing, and making things even more corrupt.
These “monies” which you voluntarily donate (or face criminal sanctions) finance pro IRS propaganda, rigged tax court trials, and strong arm tactics by which the IRS confiscates citizens’ property without due process of law. You are also supporting foreign governments, covering loans made to countries who cannot make the payments to our banking cartels (your economic masters) and contributing to many other free-ride programs, at a time when our current unemployment rates are the highest since the “Great Depression” of the thirties. (I can’t think or know of any financial disaster experienced in our country not attributed to government in collusion with the international bankers. The present one is an example. Our people are suffering and who does Congress and White House bailout first? We have criminals running our government.)
Why would anyone contribute so generously to their own demise? One reason is fear, which of course stems from lack of faith in our Creator. If you choose to live in a correct way, you do not fear mortal men or government agencies you instead fear the wrath of your Creator for not standing up for Him and His principles of Truth and Justice.
Another reason is ignorance. What is fear? To me fear IS ignorance. Once you understand what you’re learning on this website your fear will disappear. Attitude towards the criminals in government will change.
As a side note, recently it was reported some bureaucrats in the State of Alaska want to make it mandatory for ALL State workers to have a flu shot. The punishment will be dismissal. The State of California is considering legislation allowing utility companies to regulate the thermostat in your home. THIS IS COMMUNISM! Remember, socialism is the step before communism and despicable thinking of this sort is conditioning your minds to make it easier for the transformation. And to think that many bureaucrats don’t understand what they are promoting…I’m gonna go get another beer…
“I REGRET I HAVE ONLY ONE BAT TO SWING FOR MY COUNTRY.”
