No Conspiracy: IRS

No Conspiracy: IRS (Full Version)

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

Message

Real0ne -> No Conspiracy: IRS (12/17/2010 3:20:22 PM)
No Conspiracy: IRS Agent Joe Banister Acquitted by JOHN TURNER At approximately 2 p.m. on the 14th floor of the Federal Court Building in Sacramento, California, Joe Banister supporters got word that the judge had received a note from the jury and quickly moved from the hallway into the courtroom. He announced that the jury had reached a unanimous decision. The verdicts were read by the clerk of the court with Judge William Shubb presiding: "Not Guilty", "Not Guilty", "Not Guilty", "Not Guilty". Carol Delaney, assistant prosecutor in the case, was not in attendance at the verdict. Very telling at that moment was the absence of the many IRS employees that had been in attendance during the trial. In victory, Joe Banister, honorable and unpretentious man that he is, walked over to the government's side and shook the hands of the two IRS CID special agents who had investigated him, as well as the government's lead attorney, Mr. Twiss. Also very telling, Sean Breslin, the special agent in charge, stood looking at Joe with a big smile and tears in his eyes.

pahunkboy -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/17/2010 3:48:03 PM)
I never heard of him.

Real0ne -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/17/2010 4:02:01 PM)
Former IRS Agent Joe Banister and Ron Paul On CNBC I can imagine a few people on this board who are having a bird right now picking egg off their faces LMAO

MrRodgers -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/17/2010 4:16:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy I never heard of him. You were not supposed to hear of him. It does seem apparent that the major media outlets do ignore these stories. You'd think when so many people are winning these tax cases now...the press would be all over it. The corporate media and their new collective profit-seeking cowardace...will be our downfall.

kinkbound -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/17/2010 8:01:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy I never heard of him. I'm surprised.

kinkbound -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/17/2010 8:33:21 PM)
This entire documentary is worthwhile. However, for a quicker look at the topic at hand, scroll to 38:45 and watch to 47:20.

Termyn8or -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/17/2010 11:56:21 PM)
"I never heard of him." Are you serious ? This guy used to take guns to people's houses to put them out for taxes, and take their shit away. Later he questioned the morality of his actions. He is a Christian, and I think he may be one of the few real ones. He switched sides and now holds courses on how to beat the IRS, and he teaches methods that really work. Today, following his lead is not for most people. I don't. But he did prove a couple of points over the years, winning cases aainst the IRS after working for them. I seriously have a hard time believing you never heard of him. No legend by any means, but you never heard of him ? T

willbeurdaddy -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/18/2010 12:03:13 AM)
Im surprised Hunk never heard of him too. He seems to latch on to the Banisters of the world...charlatans who make a name for themselves at the expense of the clients they dupe into violating tax laws.

Termyn8or -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/18/2010 12:27:33 AM)
Willy, if you don't think this guy is for real fine, but he is. He's not God's gift, and not even practicing law, but he comes up with real world defenses that work. I do not agree with the premise of all of them. Some I believe are flawed. One is convincing the jury of a lack of intent, I would never want to depend on that. But maybe it takes more balls to admit that, maybe not. I'll read what he has to write though. T

Real0ne -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/18/2010 12:43:17 AM)
fr well they get their jurisdiction and reach into the states because federal reserve notes are "private" script owned and copyrighted by the federal reserve bank. If you use their property that they are renting into the economy at a premium they have the commercial right to come across all the state borders and "directly" hit you with income tax. Same thing with the social security number... Anytime people contract directly with a foreign agency or association its the same thing as if they wrote a treaty with another country and a binding contract so you can now be sued directly with no protection from the state. they told us that when we signed up though right?

Termyn8or -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/18/2010 1:18:13 AM)
"they told us that when we signed up though right? " That, Mr. One, is what is Real. That is the crux of some of the few strategies that can work. The Banister approach did work for a pilot a few years ago, the secondary plan. Intent. She could not resist jurisdiction because she had filed a return, a 1040. But when IRS code was read to the jury, they subsequently ruled in her favor. The IRS attourneys then tried to impel the judge to make her pay the tax at least, regardless of the lack of a conviction and the judge told him "I do not work for the IRS". I used to remember the judge's name but whatever. But what I quoted has more to do with getting out for life rather than one specific case. The process with which I am fairly familiar and know to work is to accuse the IRS of fraud. They will not respond, at least back then, things may have changed. Also comes with it is a demand for repayment of every dollar the plaintiff has paid in taxes from the gitgo. Alot of people are not in a position to do this. In fact after about a decade of research it was found that if you want to do this you can't even be a registered voter. And it does not matter if you vote. It's very complicated how that ties in but it has been argued. The fact is that each person must weigh his own situation and what is to be gained. I only know about three people who would really benefit. One does and the other two are afraid to try it. They could lose though so I will not prod them into doing it, I made them aware of it and that is all. Correlate this with S. 510. "You filed a fhfg6684 and we want to know if you made any money selling those tomatoes". We want our cut. Make a paper trail. T

MeenMrMustard -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/18/2010 2:54:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy Im surprised Hunk never heard of him too. He seems to latch on to the Banisters of the world...charlatans who make a name for themselves at the expense of the clients they dupe into violating tax laws. Banister and others like him are not the charlatans, the IRS and their jackboots are. Show me the law that requires US citizens to pay federal income taxes on their labor or wages.

DomKen -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/18/2010 3:02:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MeenMrMustard quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy Im surprised Hunk never heard of him too. He seems to latch on to the Banisters of the world...charlatans who make a name for themselves at the expense of the clients they dupe into violating tax laws. Banister and others like him are not the charlatans, the IRS and their jackboots are. Show me the law that requires US citizens to pay federal income taxes on their labor or wages. U.S.C. 26 6011, 6012, 6151.

MeenMrMustard -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/18/2010 4:18:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: MeenMrMustard quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy Im surprised Hunk never heard of him too. He seems to latch on to the Banisters of the world...charlatans who make a name for themselves at the expense of the clients they dupe into violating tax laws. Banister and others like him are not the charlatans, the IRS and their jackboots are. Show me the law that requires US citizens to pay federal income taxes on their labor or wages. U.S.C. 26 6011, 6012, 6151. I'll wait until Willy comments before I address this. How about it Willy, wanna ride on Ken's back, or do you have thoughts of your own?

DomKen -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/19/2010 7:42:37 AM)
You asked a question. You got the answer. There is no response possible beyond 'thank you.'

EternalHoH -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/19/2010 1:01:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy Im surprised Hunk never heard of him too. He seems to latch on to the Banisters of the world...charlatans who make a name for themselves at the expense of the clients they dupe into violating tax laws. Maybe he doesn't like competition that is more effective?

MeenMrMustard -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/19/2010 5:08:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen You asked a question. You got the answer. There is no response possible beyond 'thank you.' First of all, I asked Willy, not you. Willy likes to piss on a thread, but then can’t back up his neanderbrow assertions. So here you are, eager to fight his battle to defend your statist views. You spew your statist views with a left slant, while Willy spews his statist views with a right slant. Your two camps duke it out endlessly within your partisan arena to no avail. You contribute primarily childish finger-pointing, trying to blame the other camp for all the problems, and other emotion-based nonsense that leads to nothing productive except to fulfill the divide and conquer agenda of those manipulating you. How interesting it is that your two camps tend to quickly join forces to defend the status-quo whenever a non-statist comes along. No, I didn’t get an answer from you. All I got was more government propaganda. No possible response other than thank you? Try this: Section 1461 is the ONLY place in Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code where the words "liable for" are used. And who’s liable? Withholding agents for nonresident aliens and foreign corporations, that’s who. Did you watch the video that kinkbound posted earlier in this thread? If not, you really should. At least take a few minutes to watch the interview with Sheldon Cohen, a former Commissioner and author of the Tax Code (a statist big-shot, and probably YOUR fucking hero). It starts at 29:30.

DomKen -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/19/2010 5:28:35 PM)
Try that again. U.S.C. 6011 and 6012 lay out quite clearly who has to file a return. From 6012: quote: Every individual having for the taxable year gross income which equals or exceeds the exemption amount Pretty clear. 6151 says you have to pay the income tax from 6151: quote: Except as otherwise provided in this subchapter, when a return of tax is required under this title or regulations, the person required to make such return shall, without assessment or notice and demand from the Secretary, pay such tax to the internal revenue officer with whom the return is filed, and shall pay such tax at the time and place fixed for filing the return Again very clear. So either you had no idea what you were talking about or you flat out made up your claim.

MeenMrMustard -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/19/2010 5:47:38 PM)
6011: When required by regulations prescribed by the Secretary and person made liable for any tax imposed by this title, or for the collection thereof, shall make a return or statement according to the forms and regulations prescribed by the Secretary. Every person required to make a return or statement shall include therein the information required by such forms or regulations . . .(f) Income, estate and gift taxes. For requirement that returns of income, estate, and gift taxes be made whether or not there is tax liability, see subparts B and C." So show me who’s required, Ken. You either don’t have a clue what the fuck you’re talking about, or you’re another government shill. By the way, did you watch the interview with your hero Cohen?

MeenMrMustard -> RE: No Conspiracy: IRS (12/19/2010 5:54:39 PM)
quote: quote: 6151: Except as otherwise provided in this subchapter, when a return of tax is required under this title or regulations, the person required to make such return shall, without assessment or notice and demand from the Secretary, pay such tax to the internal revenue officer with whom the return is filed, and shall pay such tax at the time and place fixed for filing the return When is it required? And who's the person required, Ken? And "make" a return. LOL! Okay, I'll make it, and then file it in my drawer when I'm done. These are all ambiguous words designed to deceive a gullible public. Come on Ken, is this the best you've got?

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875