Tuesday, September 27, 2005

Cohen, Schiff & Neun Trial Update from Angela Stark

19 Old Comments:

apparently, the "judge" promised Irwin a day in jail for each time he talked about the law. hahaha what arrogance! solid prima facia evidence that these "courts" are not courts of law, but kangaroo courts and star chambers.

I understand that the "judge" asked one of the witnesses if he had read section 1 of the IRC. if that is true, Irwin should recall that witness and ask the question again. maybe he can get the witness to read that sentence in section 1 that states that wages are income and that anyone who receives wages is "LIABLE" for payment of income taxes on those wages.

since this "trial" is going on in Las Vegas, Irwin should call and raise the "judge's" bluff. Irwin should formulate powerful questions that will permit him to get the law into the question before the squatlosers on the prosecution team have a chance to object. let the jury hear the arrogance and expose the scam that the "judge" and the squatlosers have cooked up.

By Anonymous hank, at 9/27/2005 6:14 PM  

Yeah, Irwin needs play the Judges game and get him to put his foot in his mouth in front of the Jury.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9/27/2005 6:23 PM  

Yellooooo??? Outer space calling Irwin, Cindy and the lawyers...26 usc 1 is imposing something only upon married filing jointly, or surving spouse! Don't think either of you fit that section. Tell the "ref" to scratch his little head and come up with the correct section to present for the witness to read. Bet he can't come up with it. Even if he did, it should open up the door for Irwin to bring up the law.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9/27/2005 7:31 PM  

Sorry, but the Constitution does not require the use of the word "liable". The word "imposed" works nicely, and nobody in the courts or the legal or constitutional scholars have any problem with it, the inbred pro wrasslin' crowd notwithstanding.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9/27/2005 7:53 PM  

"26 usc 1 is imposing something only upon married filing jointly, or surving spouse!"

Only if you ignore 1(c).

Section 1(c): (c) Unmarried individuals (other than surviving spouses and heads of households). There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of every individual who is not a married individual a tax determined in accordance with the following table:

By Anonymous Jack Spitz, at 9/27/2005 7:54 PM  

Dear Anonymous,

In a previous post, you claimed that:
"Sorry, but the Constitution does not require the use of the word "liable". The word "imposed" works nicely, and nobody in the courts or the legal or constitutional scholars have any problem with it, the inbred pro wrasslin' crowd notwithstanding." However, the Supreme Court has ruled that the word Liability has to be included. Would you like to see the US Supreme Course case that cites this?

By Anonymous Please get it right, at 9/27/2005 9:40 PM  

please get it right said

Would you like to see the US Supreme Course case that cites this?

I for one would like to see it very much.

By Anonymous redhoss, at 9/27/2005 9:58 PM  

Yes, I would like to See Supreme Ct. Case -- site.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9/27/2005 10:06 PM  

Show Me.

Quatloos!

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9/27/2005 10:31 PM  

After reading ALL the posts and listening to ALL the blogs I have to post my comments and say: You Quatlosers make me sick. Instead of holding your own during an intelligent debate you pick on a person making a typing mistake or not spelling a word correctly. It clearly shows that you will not even look at what the law says and doesn't say. You are just like the barber who was asked by another if he needs a haircut, what do you think the barber is going to say? If the system is ever changed to adhere more to the Constitution (possibly to a flat tax) where CPA's are no longer needed that will be a real wake up call and most will be standing in the unemployment line waiting for the Government to give them a hand out.

If more Amercans found out that the 1040 Form's OMB number refers to Form 2555 Foreign Earned Tax Credits and that they have been filing the wrong tax form because most Americans don't earn foreign tax credits they would do the same thing Vernice Kuglin did and ask the Government what is the correct form to use. How does an elderly Fed Ex pilot who was making a lot of money get aquitted from Will failure to file? Maybe it came down to the two questions that the Government never would answer. 1) Where is the code section that makes me liable? and 2)Which form is the correct form to use? Obviously, if just those two questions could have been answered then Vernice Kuglin would be in jail.

Quatloser, where is your answer to those two simple questions? Section 1 only imposes a tax on those who are liable.
Dwight E. Avis, Head of the Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Bureau of Internal Revenue testified under oath before Congress (2/3/53 – 2/13/53):
“Let me point this out now. This is where the structure differs. Your income tax is a 100% voluntary tax and your liquor tax (A.T.F.) is a 100% enforced tax. Now the situation is as different as night and day. Consequently, your same rules simply will not apply.”

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9/27/2005 11:25 PM  

anonymous 9/28/2005 12:25 AM

I think what you meant to say was that section 1's OMB number refers to Form 2555. That would be the OMB number "they" pulled out of the regulation 602.101 because "it was confusing people".

How does an elderly Fed Ex pilot who was making a lot of money get aquitted from Will failure to file?

This is how.
(access to Kuglin trial transcripts)

By Anonymous Dale Eastman, at 9/27/2005 11:39 PM  

Yes, that is exactly what I meant. Thank you for the help with clarification.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9/28/2005 12:14 AM  

Where is the case? Show me.

As far as Kuglin, just remember that basically all of her pay now goes to the IRS as part of her agreement to keep her house from being foreclosed upon, since her acquittal did not get her out of the tax liability.

Thanks, Vernice, keep on flyin' babe.

Quatloos!

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9/28/2005 12:32 AM  

Quatloser, I still don't see an answer to the 2 simple questions. Since your insults are still showing up you must choose not to want to answer another persons legitimate questions. Proving you have NO GAME.

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." -Samuel Adams

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9/28/2005 12:58 AM  

All your answers are here: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/frivolousarguments-3-14-2005.pdf although of course you will ignore them since you don't like the answers.

TPs are like little children who whine to daddy and then whine to mommy when daddy didn't give them what they wanted. They simply can't understand the answer "No".

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9/28/2005 12:48 PM  

if it's anything like my house, mommy then gives in and gives the kids what they want. Hey, maybe your on to something?!

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9/28/2005 1:44 PM  

Anonymous said...
All your answers are here: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/frivolousarguments-3-14-2005.pdf

Really? Can you then please copy and paste the part where it points out who is "liable" so we can end all this!

"If it's all there" like you say...who would argue with you?

Liability PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hold on to your sets everyone...here it comes...the end of all this debate!

Go Quatloos...lets see it!

By Anonymous An Ant, at 9/28/2005 3:33 PM  

All your answers are here: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/friv although of course you will ignore them since you don't like the answers.

That doesn't answer the questions asked.

There is no author listed.
There is no publication date.
There is no document number.
That is not a Code section of the IRC.

What section of the IRC imposed a liability for the income tax?

I've only found:

TITLE 26 - INTERNAL REVENUE CODE
Subtitle A - Income Taxes
CHAPTER 3 - WITHHOLDING OF TAX ON NONRESIDENT ALIENS AND FOREIGN
CORPORATIONS
Subchapter B - Application of Withholding Provisions

Sec. 1461. Liability for withheld tax

-STATUTE-
Every person required to deduct and withhold any tax under this chapter is hereby made liable for such tax and is hereby indemnified against the claims and demands of any person for the amount of any payments made in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.

TITLE 26 - INTERNAL REVENUE CODE
Subtitle F - Procedure and Administration
CHAPTER 79 - DEFINITIONS

Sec. 7701. Definitions

-STATUTE-
(a) When used in this title, where not otherwise distinctly expressed or manifestly incompatible with the intent thereof -

(16)Withholding agent
The term "withholding agent" means any person required to deduct and withhold any tax under the provisions of section 1441, 1442, 1443, or 1461.

By Anonymous Dale Eastman, at 9/28/2005 7:07 PM  

The lazy lurker should be asking this question right about now:

If the Quatloosers' favorite "IRS" document contains all the answers, why are judges and lawyers still refusing to answer the questions? Haven't they read the document?

The industrious lurker will already have listened to Dave Champion eviscerate that document, and thus will know that it does not contain the answers.

By Blogger Jamie, at 10/06/2005 10:18 PM