RE: X-IRS-Criminal-Investigator - 16th Amendment Never Ratified (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

tazzygirl -> RE: X-IRS-Criminal-Investigator - 16th Amendment Never Ratified (1/10/2010 9:52:55 PM)

They did follow the rules. The answer was in that sheet you so obvious covet and display as gospel. i cannot help that you do not like, or approve, of the answer. but there you have it.

Repeal, the abrogation or annulling of a previously existing law by the enactment of a subsequent statute which declares that the former law shall be revoked and abrogated, (which is called "express" repeal), or which contains provisions so contrary to or irreconcilable with those of the earlier law that only one of the two statutes can stand in force (called "implied" repeal).

Now, this is from the picture of the page you provided.

This is also your complaint, that the two cannot stand together, because they contradict.

The Doctrine of Implied repeal is a concept in English constitutional theory which states that where an Act of Parliament conflicts with an earlier one, the later Act takes precedence and the conflicting parts of the earlier Act are repealed (i.e. no longer law). This doctrine is expressed in the Latin phrase "leges posteriores priores contrarias abrogant".[1]


That is the legal definition.

I really dont see where the confusion is, except in your argument. Implied repeal is a term you supplied... now you are saying it isnt valid.



stef -> RE: X-IRS-Criminal-Investigator - 16th Amendment Never Ratified (1/10/2010 10:01:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Is there really anyone who doesnt have this moron on ignore altready?

Ok, now that's funny.



tazzygirl -> RE: X-IRS-Criminal-Investigator - 16th Amendment Never Ratified (1/10/2010 10:26:54 PM)

~FR

Just wanted to add this, then i am done with this topic.



The manner in which constitutional amendments are finally recorded takes two main forms. In most jurisdictions, amendments to a constitution take the form of revisions to the main body of the original text. Thus once an amendment has become law, portions of the original text may be deleted or new articles may be inserted among existing ones. The second, less common method, is for amendments to be appended to the end of the main text in the form of special articles of amendment, leaving the body of the original text intact. Although the wording of the original text is not altered, the doctrine of implied repeal applies. In other words, in the event of conflict, an article of amendment will usually take precedence over the provisions of the original text, or of an earlier amendment. Nonetheless, there may still be ambiguity as to whether an amendment is intended to supersede an existing article in the text or merely to supplement it. An article of amendment may, however, explicitly express itself as having the effect of repealing a specific existing article.[3] The use of appended articles of amendment is most famous as a feature of the United States Constitution, but it is also the method of amendment in a number of other jurisdictions, such as Venezuela.

http://www.answers.com/topic/constitutional-amendment



Real0ne -> RE: X-IRS-Criminal-Investigator - 16th Amendment Never Ratified (1/11/2010 12:24:16 AM)

Hey dont run away just yet...... 

I knew I was going to get my ass busted on that definition but I put it up there anyway....  hehe

Its getting late and I hittin it for the nite...  Not sure when I will have time to get back to this but I will try for tomorrow.

Meantime I hope people read your last post very carefully and take serious pause to exactly what it means and the implications it has upon the law of this country.




rulemylife -> RE: X-IRS-Criminal-Investigator - 16th Amendment Never Ratified (1/11/2010 7:19:55 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

well gotta read whats not being said as well....(hows that for a line!) LOL

U.S. Constitution: Seventh Amendment

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

which means it can go to a common law grand jury of 25.

Courts established by legislation are not above the peoples court.

If they were government that was created by the people would be above the creator and the slave is never above the Master.



More Orly Taitz nonsense to discredit Obama.  Birther bullshit, in other words.



rulemylife -> RE: X-IRS-Criminal-Investigator - 16th Amendment Never Ratified (1/11/2010 7:56:44 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

as to the quest to not pay taxes- IMO one can take an easier path- write offs-etc.   Note the many in congress and in the govt dont pay taxes.  So who is to say.



How about you note those for us since you are making the claim.

Who exactly in Congress is not paying any taxes?



submittous -> RE: X-IRS-Criminal-Investigator - 16th Amendment Never Ratified (1/11/2010 10:26:01 AM)

The bottom line is the constitution and laws of the nation 'as interpreted by SCOTUS ' are the law of the land.... to reason out some reason the supreme court is wrong is silly... once they rule the are 'right' by definition. There is no appeal to a supreme court decision except another ruling by the same court. Congress can't over rule a decision, all they can do is pass a law that redefines an issue and if signed by the President. But.... the supreme court still has the power to rule a signed law is unconstitutional. Only amendments can't be ruled such and even they are subject to interpretation

All this "i figured out why we don't have to pay taxes' talk is wacko.

One nice thing about bondage dot com was the boards there have a multitude of lawyers who kick the shit outta these threads with cites and reality...




InvisibleBlack -> RE: X-IRS-Criminal-Investigator - 16th Amendment Never Ratified (1/11/2010 12:11:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: submittous

There is no appeal to a supreme court decision except another ruling by the same court. Congress can't over rule a decision, all they can do is pass a law that redefines an issue and if signed by the President. But.... the supreme court still has the power to rule a signed law is unconstitutional. Only amendments can't be ruled such and even they are subject to interpretation



The Supreme Court has the fewest checks and balances to it, but in theory Congress could pass an Amendment and abolish the Supreme Court - assuming the states ratified it.

Also, in order to get his Social Security Act passed when the Supreme Court ruled it unconsitiutional, FDR threatened to use his majority in both houses to expand the size of the Court until he could appoint as many judges as necessary to ensure his viewpoint had a majority on the Court. The Supreme Court caved and reversed their decision.



Brain -> RE: X-IRS-Criminal-Investigator - 16th Amendment Never Ratified (1/11/2010 6:01:45 PM)

I have worked for a public accounting firm a law firm as well as a couple of manufacturing companies and a company that sells educational products. I haven't worked for the IRS or revenue Canada but I was only two University courses away from becoming a public accountant so I think I have a lot of relevant experience. Those courses were advanced accounting or consolidations and advanced auditing. Consolidations involved upstream and downstream transactions and removing intercompany profits. A person can imagine the course was very complicated. I forgot to mention I also have significant work experience collecting state or provincial taxes in Canada.

In any case, I just wanted to say that I have a lot of experience with accounting and tax issues. Having said all this I would like to say this gentleman sounds authentic. As much as I know there is still a lot I do not know about constitutional law or federal income taxes. It is entirely possible everything he said is true. And it is also entirely possible if one neglects to pay their income taxes if they do not follow the process exactly as he states they will end up losing their case to the government and owing a lot of money and possibly going to prison. So I don't recommend not paying your taxes unless you are certain you can do refuse to pay them and follow the protocol exactly as he states.

I think this requires someone with professional expertise, which includes education like a university degree and professional designation and it also requires relevant work experience in accounting and taxation. I think it's important to be either a tax lawyer or accountant to be able to answer this question.

Finally, I would just like to say, they say you can't fight City Hall for a reason. So despite this man's Herculean effort, if he thinks it's going to result in people going back to 1920 or whenever the original act was passed and it will result in people being refunded or reversing those income taxes payable, he is dreaming.



luckydawg -> RE: X-IRS-Criminal-Investigator - 16th Amendment Never Ratified (1/11/2010 7:21:17 PM)

See Realone, I told you that you had a live mark here.



Termyn8or -> RE: X-IRS-Criminal-Investigator - 16th Amendment Never Ratified (1/11/2010 11:43:10 PM)

FR

I got to page two of this and had to jumpthrough. You have a right to life, therefore laws against murder are persuant to the Constitution. They made specific laws for that purpose and was and is well within their power to do so.

They argue that because the amendment is in the Constitution, no law is necessary. Bunch of shit. They don't make it law, which would be a simple matter, because it is a created loophole for their buddies.

My buddy who is classified unde section 808 or something like that has a paper from the IRS that states that he is not a taxpayer. He is classified along with international arms dealers, and probably drugs too, and the Blackwater people, all that. I have personally seen it.

When he started this process he had to get away from his nine grand a month job and study. This education cost him, but will profit him in the long run.

I'll give you some really good legal advise right now. Don't fuck with those people unless you really know what you are doing.

Common law courts have been floating around like crap games for decades. For the most part, any discovery or decree by a common law court is summarily dismissed in a statutory court. It may be law, but no teeth.

I saw a glimmer of hope when they tried Kevorkian up in Michigan. They declared it a common law trial and removed the admiraly flag. I am not sure if the judge removed his robe and I am not so sure we wanted him to. But I thought this was a milestone, something that would give this whole movement some credibility, which in my eyes it did.

But the game was on so everybody switched channels and forgot, like they do every time. Point is - you can't fight this on a part time basis. Even my 808 guy, there are certain things he must never do, certain things he must never sign. While this may have cost him a coulpe twenty grand in the last DECADE, think of what his taxes would be. And they know right where he is.

And last but not least, I am not foolish enough to pick a fight with these people. If they come to me fine, if not even better.

T



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125