Tuesday, October 04, 2005

Irwin Schiff Trial Coverage by Freedom Law School (Segment 3 of 3)


posted by David Jahn @ 10/04/2005 11:22:00 PM  

33 Old Comments:

Sec. 6330. Notice and opportunity for hearing before levy

-STATUTE-
(a) Requirement of notice before levy
(1) In general
No levy may be made on any property or right to property of any person unless the Secretary has notified such person in writing of their right to a hearing under this section before such levy is made. Such notice shall be required only once for the taxable period to which the unpaid tax specified in paragraph (3)(A) relates.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 12:15 AM  

Online IRM

1.1.1.1 (02-26-1999)
IRS Mission and Basic Organization

1. The IRS Mission: Provide America’s taxpayers top quality service by helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and by applying the tax law with integrity and fairness to all.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 12:19 AM  

For all those continuing to waste time arguing with Dale Eastman:
Don't bother, because he's a complete idiot. Either he doesn't
understand the English language, or he is completely unable to
understand elementary logic, but in any case he is absolutely unable
to understand tax law and it is a complete waste of time to continue
to argue with him.

Dale, I was writing something very similiar when I happened to find the above. Wow, how amazing that two people came to the same conclusion. I won't identify the author of the quote, just to see if you remember. But he said it much better than I ever could have.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 4:46 AM  

Never think Irwin isn't a sharp guy. Read the article "Fish Gotta Swim" on the lew rockwell site wherein it discusses that nation states simply exist within their boundaries and empires that extend beyond their boarders, like the U.S. has, eventially go broke. This article provides historical support of Irwin's concepts written many years ago, and why he even questioned the alleged "income tax."

There are serious issues facing this "empire" and those that argue in favor of their emperor, who has pilfered their true standard of living, will certainly get what they deserve, immediately after their emperor takes down the "dissidents" if we the people allow it to happen.

Respectfully submitted, CJ

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 8:05 AM  

Irwin's still hoping someone will want to make this a movie for lots of money. Irwin this is very real my friend and you are not doing you or the people that have stood behind/beside you any favors. Why would anyone say that? You are not in court to sell books. You are not in court to find friends. You dont know court precedures, yet you turned down good legal rep. You think the jury heard something as they laugh at you not with you. One thing you will be able to say, I dont have anyone too blame but myself.
Just remember they thought that OJ would go to prison.
They thought Blake would go to prison.
They thought MJ would go to prison.
Irwin my friend...the JURY sent them all home. The jury dont know squat about your cause.
I predict you will be the first grandpaw sent too the slammer.
The jury aint buying your vodvill show....
You said yourself, how could anybody not get it, well keep showing them your court rm knowledge and They/jury will show you the cell.....better hire yourself a lawyer and stop sending all your followers down the river.
What you say is right but your not saying it at the right time or place. Just ones own oppinion and everyone has one, just like $ss holes. but you cant buy coffee with either one

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 8:07 AM  

Now, if you will, go to the news with views site and click on "guest opinion." disclaimer - I am not a right wing religious fanatic - I am a Libertarian as is Irwin but I do read many things with an open mind and can learn and understand from many perspectives - now that that's out of the way...

Read about the conversion of your property in America toward the communist state. Read the facts and visit the evidence.

Then ask yourself these questions:

Is your labor your property first?
Are the fruits of your labor your property first? If your answer is no and the above is the property of the government/empire then the article is a must read for you. If your answer, to the above questions are yes, then we know there is much work to do save America, freedom, and individual liberty.

respectfully submitted, CJ

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 8:14 AM  

Lynne Meredith, Dick Simkanin, Steve Swan, Nick Jesson, Al Thompson, and Larken Rose were all convicted within the last year.

Joe Banister was acquitted.

But wait! Joe Banister's attorney says that Joe was paying his own taxes all along.

There is a lesson in there . . .

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 8:59 AM  

COMPLAIN TO THE JUDGE!

Are you too disgusted with the way Irwin is being treated by the judge and prosecutors at his trial? Then let the judge know what you think of these proceedings. You can write him directly using the address below. Let’s inundate him with mail, and let him know how we feel. WRITE A SHORT LETTER TODAY! DO IT RIGHT NOW!

Hon. Kent J. Dawson,
United States District Court Judge,
U.S. District Court of Nevada,
333 South Las Vegas Boulevard,
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 9:04 AM  

But wait! Joe Banister's attorney says that Joe was paying his own taxes all along.


Is there any truth to this?

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 9:23 AM  

Write to the JUdge....
Come on, with that kind of thinkin is whats wrong here.
The JUdge aint sending Irwin to Jail...We can beat the JUdge on appeal....The JURY is sending Irwin to PRISON...we cant tamper with the jury....what is presented to them is all they have to go on. Irwin needs too keep his attention on the jury and the witness presented and only by objection...objection...objection
the court rules are very simple if you dont first object, then you cant bring it up for objection later or for consideration for that matter on appeal....
Irwin can not win in this court even if he had Opra, do his book
He/Irwin has to get out of this court...try being late for court...try wearing pj's you need national attention to this court...step out of the box if you want to win....This court needs to be exposed to the world just like the truth about the IRS needs to be spread far and wide....put the spot light on the court...the judge cant stand the attention from the...out side the box

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 9:44 AM  

Win on appeal?

Who in their right mind tries to win a case on appeal in the middle of the trial?

Why would anyone think that Irwin could get a fair appeal, when he didn't get a fair trial?

Plus, Irwin would probably have to sit is jail for a year or two waiting for his appeal.

It doesn't matter to you, you won't have to sit in jail for a year or two.

Letters to the judge?

Sure, why not? Would you want to get letters from thousands of people telling you that you are unfair, corrupt, biased, a disgrace to the judicial system, etc, etc?

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 10:03 AM  

Anonymous said...

But wait! Joe Banister's attorney says that Joe was paying his own taxes all along.


Is there any truth to this?

10/05/2005 10:23 AM

I have no problem with it.

Some of us that know the truth need to stay on the outside. It's hard to do the lecture circuit informing the Citizen's of the nation about all the political prisoners if you are locked up with them.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 10:34 AM  

Yes nekogami, thanks for creating a link to that article...don't forget the one on the Lew Rockwell .com site titled, "Fish Gotta Swim" maybe you can create a link there as well for I don't know how and admittedly haven't tried to.

Just a couple of the well written articles that support, in part, Irwin's reasoning and YES, though he isn't perfect always, he does have reason and reasoning. I make that statement for those who would rather call names or deny rather than allowing themselves the joys of human life. Some of those joys being reading, learning and comprehending. Sincerely, CJ

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 10:48 AM  

Iam just saying what the def lawyers are saying...Irwin cant win...for what ever reason (judge)
If you cant present your case...good chance your loosing...hello anybody home? If the def lawyers have said we can win on appeal...you think we ought to maybe not take a knife to a gun fight? In jail...2 yrs...on appeal come on , only if they thought he booked a flight.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 11:02 AM  

(from Reuters) today 5th, Oct.
U.S. POVERTY WORST IN INDUSTRIALISED WORLD

"Every August, we Americans tell ourselves a lie," said David Brady, a Duke University professor who studies poverty.

"The poverty rate was designed to undercount because the government wanted to show progress in the war on poverty.

(stop right there...hahaha...you mean to tell me the government cooked the books on poverty too?)

"Taking everything into account, the real rate is around 18 percent, or 48 million people. Poverty in the United States is more widespread, by far, than in any other industrialized country."

Remember folks, Irwin has addressed the above and other economic issues. All those in favor of a continued decline, wherein income taxes pay only to the outrageous debt service to the debt based money system and nothing to the people while corporate welfare run amuck, keep your head burried in the sand till the day comes that you are kicked in the butt and maybe, by that time, no one of honor will remain to help you. Sincerely, CJ

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 11:15 AM  

I just have one concern for this case..and that concern is jury rigging against Irvin

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 12:35 PM  

I just want to say a big thank you to the U.S. Congress for discriminating against U.S. Citizens and Residents. P.S-By the way, make sure all those dirty little secret loopholes in the tax code don't get recognized by the American public!

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 12:55 PM  

Here's one for you...
On lien and other forms there is a box, to be filled in by your agent that askes, "Type of Tax Owed." Your agent types in his appropriate answer, which is most always, "1040"

Have you ever read the code section 1040?

Is your agent telling you that you owe a tax (on behalf of a dead person) because you are a trustee or exeutor of an estate and are to satisfy pecuniary bequests?

OR

Is your agent telling you that the form 1040 creates the tax (as though a form is a law) that you owe?

NOW

Why doesn't it ever say you owe a specific tax based on a specific law or section that applies to YOU?
CJ

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 1:03 PM  

I have been watching without posting for about 2 and a hlaf weeks now.

After witnesses both sides of this I've come to the conclusion that your both RIGHT. This tax code seems to have numerous contradictions, misleading sections and is frankly a huge piece of incomprehesable nonsense.
I certainly am not a lawyer and I haven't read nearly as much as most of the posters, nor can I cite any laws/sections that make you 100% unquestionably compelled to pay, on the other hand I certainly can't find a law that makes you 100% not required to pay.

The main reason I have an interest in this case isn't taxes it is the reason this blog was started, to see if people can get fair trials on controvesal topics. My conclusion on this is from everything I have heard and read is obviously NO. A judge is suppose to be the mediator in the courtroom making sure the defendant gets a fair trial and all his rights are respected. This man seems to think it is his job to prosecute. The fact that he would tell a defendant to learn to read lips instead of letting him read the transcript is unconienable. That sattement there should be reason enough to throw this case out and remove this judge from the bench. Irwin may be a pain in the butt, but his rights still need to be respected.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 1:21 PM  

No disrespect, Name Withheld above, but how often are there laws written that state you are 100% not required to do something? Your statement saying that you cannot cite any law making most individuals not required to pay says more than the statement that there is no law saying you don't.

Your commentary on the trial speaks volumes. CJ

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 1:53 PM  

So simple! Where is the law that makes one liable for any income tax? So far no one can find it. To go to court and spend jillions of dollars and weeks of time and disrupt lives of innocent people for not being able to find the law that makes one liable for an income tax is insanity!!!!

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 1:59 PM  

originaly Posted by Angela Stark

Witty logic from Jim Mattatall

At the CDPH

Jim: what law requires me to pay the income tax?

IRS: We are not here to discuss the law.

Jim: Well then, we're here for NO legal purpose!

IRS: No. We are here for a legal purpose.

Jim: Well, then we will discuss law.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 2:09 PM  

"The main reason I have an interest in this case isn't taxes it is the reason this blog was started, to see if people can get fair trials on controvesal topics. My conclusion on this is from everything I have heard and read is obviously NO. A judge is suppose to be the mediator in the courtroom making sure the defendant gets a fair trial and all his rights are respected. This man seems to think it is his job to prosecute. The fact that he would tell a defendant to learn to read lips instead of letting him read the transcript is unconienable. That sattement there should be reason enough to throw this case out and remove this judge from the bench. Irwin may be a pain in the butt, but his rights still need to be respected."

___________________________________
OR read jury instructions to aid the Plaintiffs case in the middle of a trial?!

Welcome to the reality of the U.S. Courts: They create law rather than preventing injustice.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 3:12 PM  

Have you ever searched Title 26 for the work "liable?"

(I find this site easy to use:
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/index.html)

What you find is Very Interesting!! Too many hits to list here (hint: look them up yourself), but here is a representative sampling:

These three sections are referred to in IRS info inserts:

Sec. 6001. Notice or regulations requiring records, statements, and special returns
Every person liable for any tax imposed by this title, or for the collection thereof, shall keep such records [etc.]

Sec. 6011. General requirement of return, statement or list (a) General rule - When required by regulations prescribed by the Secretary, any person made [read: who is] liable for any tax imposed by this title, or with respect to the collection thereof, shall make a return or statement.

Sec. 6012. Persons required to make returns of income.
(a) General Rule - Returns with respect to income taxes under subtitle A shall be made by the following: [etc.]

Does one not first have to be "liable" in order to be "required?"

Use of the word "liable" in other sections:

Sec. 6303. Notice and demand for tax
(a) General rule - Where it is not otherwise provided by this title, the Secretary shall, as soon as practicable, and within 60 days, after the making of an assessment of a tax pursuant to section 6203, give notice to each person liable for the unpaid tax, [etc.]

Sec. 6321. Lien for taxes
If any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the same after demand, [etc.]

Sec. 6331. Levy and distraint
(a) Authority of the Secretary
If any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the same within 10 days after notice and demand, [etc.]

Sec. 7203. Willful failure to file return, supply information, or pay tax
Any person required [note: if they are first liable] under this title to pay any estimated tax or tax, [etc.]

Sec. 7602. Examination of books and witnesses
(a) Authority to Summon, etc.
(2) To summon the person liable for tax or required to perform the act, [etc.]

Now, who are some persons "liable" in Title 26 to pay the tax?

Sec. 4401. Imposition of tax
(c) Persons liable for tax
Each person who is engaged in the business of accepting wagers shall be liable for and shall pay the tax under this subchapter on all wagers placed with him. Each person who conducts any wagering pool or lottery shall be liable for and shall pay the tax under this subchapter on all wagers placed in such pool or lottery. [etc.]

Sec. 5005. Persons liable for tax
(a) General - The distiller or importer of distilled spirits shall be liable for the taxes imposed thereon by section 5001(a)(1)
(b)(1) Liability of persons interested in distilling - Every proprietor or possessor of, and every person in any manner interested in the use of, any still, distilling apparatus, or distillery, shall be jointly and severally liable for the taxes imposed by law on the distilled spirits produced therefrom.

Sec 5043. Collection of taxes on wines
(a) Persons liable for payment
(1) Bonded wine cellars
(2) Foreign wine
(3) Other wines

Sec. 5418. Beer imported in bulk
The proprietor of a brewery to which such beer is transferred shall become liable for the tax on the beer withdrawn [etc.]

Sec. 5703. Liability for tax and method of payment
(a) Liability for tax
(1) Original liability - The manufacturer or importer of tobacco products and cigarette papers and tubes shall be liable for the taxes imposed thereon by section 5701 [etc,]

Sec. 5751. Purchase, receipt, possession, or sale of tobacco products and cigarette papers and tubes, after removal
(b) Liability to tax
Any person who possesses tobacco products or cigarette papers or tubes in violation of subsection (a)(1) or (a)(2) shall be liable for a tax equal to the tax on such articles.

As an American citizen, it does not appear that I am a "person liable" for any Title 26 taxes.

How about you?

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 3:48 PM  

Tax Attorney Confirms Article on W-4
* Larry Becraft, Jr.

Presently, I have an appeal in a criminal tax case pending before the Eleventh Circuit which raises the issue as to who is liable for the federal income tax.

The government filed its brief in this case and I was utterly amazed at the government's answer to my argument.

Due to the admission so made, I now realize that my argument is monumentally significant and I feel compelled to tell other attorneys involved in similar litigation.

Last year, I tried a case in Orlando, Florida wherein **** was charged with tax evasion. **** was a student and follower of a man named George Arlen, who, like Irwin Schiff, advocated the who's liable argument built around 26 USC sections 6001, 6011, and 6012.

**** had engaged in a constant stream of letters to both the IRS and his employers which squarely raised the issue that he didn't believe he was liable for the tax because he found no section of the Code that made him expressly liable.

This position formed the factual foundation for our defense that he didn't act willfully. It also afforded me the excellent opportunity to raise the same legal argument via requested instructions and motions for judgment of acquittal.

The essence of my argument was that the income tax, pursuant to Subchapter N of the Code, imposed the tax only on aliens and foreign corporations who had sources of income outside the U.S., and also within U.S. possessions. The only persons expressly made liable for the income tax are section 1461 withholding agents for aliens and foreign corporations.

This was the legal argument created by my requested instructions and my Rule 29 Motion.

My brief in Ward's case to the Eleventh Circuit had several major parts which constitute my ultimate conclusion that state citizens were not taxed on their sources of income within the states.

First, I treated the question of the jurisdiction of the United States and showed that its jurisdiction was only in Washington, D.C., the federal enclaves within the states and the territories and insular possessions of the United States.

Next, I discussed all the federal income tax statutes from the 1913 act forward and showed that, statutorily, the tax was one imposed only in its jurisdiction.

I then treated all prior regulations promulgated for all the prior income tax acts and showed that the regulations clearly stated that the tax was jurisdictional.

My argument was thus ended with the conclusion that state citizens are outside the jurisdiction of the United States and were not thus taxed. As my brief says:

For U.S. citizens, the sources subjected to taxation are treated in Section 911 and 931. In Section 911, a U.S. citizen living and working abroad, and thus having sources without the U.S., is subjected to taxation. In Section 931, the sources subjected to taxation are those sources earned within a possession of the United States. For U.S. citizens, who were born in the U.S., who are domiciled in the U.S., and who have sources of income within the U.S., there is no income tax imposed.

Since Ward did not fall within the statutory classes of individuals subject either to the tax or filing requirement under section 6012, the District Court committed error in denying his motions for acquittal.

I then presented the subchapter N argument and concluded that the only persons liable for the tax pursuant to 26 USC sections 6001, 6011, and 6012, were section 1461 withholding agents.

I had expected that the government would respond with a lengthy, detailed argument showing that state citizens were taxed via some complicated manner that directly or indirectly so imposed the tax.

///////
But, when I received the government's brief, I found one page thereof that addressed my issue;.. After calling my argument frivolous, the U.S. attorney then stated as follows:

"The government is unable, therefore, to offer case authority for the universally accepted proposition that a citizen of the United States, working and residing in the United States, subject to federal law, earning wages, and responsible for filing an income tax return, is liable for taxation."
///////

Although these are the words of Bruce Hinshelwood, I feel confident that most other prosecutors would have been compelled to make the same admission. There, indeed, is no case, or statute, that expressly holds a state citizen liable for the income tax.

It is my hope that you and other attorneys will study this issue... From my viewpoint, we certainly need to raise this issue in other circuits.

P.S. Why is it that the only court which has been given jurisdiction of Title 26 crimes is the U.S. District Court in Guam? See 48 USC 1421.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 4:04 PM  

I certainly am not a lawyer and I haven't read nearly as much as most of the posters, nor can I cite any laws/sections that make you 100% unquestionably compelled to pay, on the other hand I certainly can't find a law that makes you 100% not required to pay.

The law is NOT required to say what it doesn't apply to. The law is only required to say what is does apply to.

EXAMPLE:
Bug law, RED 1.
Any Volkswagon beetle of any year, that is any color red, shall be taxed at the rate of $10 per year.

COMPARE:
Every car shall be taxed at a rate of $10 per year.
This tax shall not apply to:
green volkswagon beetles;
blue volkswagon beetles;
yellow volkswagon beetles;
brown volkswagon beetles;
orange volkswagon beetles;
purple volkswagon beetles;
black volkswagon beetles;
white volkswagon beetles;

green ford mustangs;
blue ford mustangs;
yellow ford mustangs;
brown ford mustangs;
orange ford mustangs;
purple ford mustangs;
black ford mustangs;
white ford mustangs;
red ford mustangs;

green chevy corvettes;
blue chevy corvettes;
yellow chevy corvettes;
brown chevy corvettes;
orange chevy corvettes;
purple chevy corvettes;
black chevy corvettes;
white chevy corvettes;
red chevy corvettes;

And so on, ad infinitum

In the interpretation of statutes levying taxes it is the established rule not to extend their provisions, by implication, beyond the clear import of the language used, or to enlarge their operations so as to embrace matters not specifically pointed out. In case of doubt they are construed most strongly against the government, and in favor of the citizen. United States v. Wigglesworth, 2 Story, 369, Fed. Cas. No. 16,690; American Net & Twine Co. v. Worthington, 141 U.S. 468, 474 , 12 S. Sup. Ct. 55; Benziger v. United States, 192 U.S. 38, 55 , 24 S. Sup. Ct. 189.
GOULD v. GOULD , 245 U.S. 151 (1917)

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 4:28 PM  

P.S. Why is it that the only court which has been given jurisdiction of Title 26 crimes is the U.S. District Court in Guam? See 48 USC 1421.

Huh?

Sec. 1421. Territory included under name Guam

-STATUTE-
The territory ceded to the United States in accordance with the provisions of the Treaty of Peace between the United States and Spain, signed at Paris, December 10, 1898, and proclaimed April 11, 1899, and known as the island of Guam in the Marianas Islands, shall continue to be known as Guam.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 5:06 PM  

Yes nekogami, thanks for creating a link to that article...don't forget the one on the Lew Rockwell .com site titled, "Fish Gotta Swim" maybe you can create a link there as well for I don't know how and admittedly haven't tried to.

Tutorial for making links in blog posts.

Blog Admin
This seems to be a common problem. Go ahead and post that link on the main page so the bloggers have something to refer to.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 5:12 PM  

blog admin
Please delete previous post.
Bad link.

Dale Eastman said...

Yes nekogami, thanks for creating a link to that article...don't forget the one on the Lew Rockwell .com site titled, "Fish Gotta Swim" maybe you can create a link there as well for I don't know how and admittedly haven't tried to.

Tutorial for making links in blog posts.

Blog Admin
This seems to be a common problem. Go ahead and post that link on the main page so the bloggers have something to refer to.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 5:14 PM  

"Bush Switching Priority from Social Security to Taxes"

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/05/2005 5:28 PM  

The jury has the right to decide the law. Precedent has been set. We can use as an example the "Fugitive Slave Act" (FSA). Juries said it was immoral to send run away slaves back to the south. Remember, judges said the FSA law was the law of the land. Many juries ruled against the law. The same can be said of the alleged tax code. Juries can rule on the law. Anyway, all Anti-Republic people use the Uniform Commercial Code, the Federal Register, and the State Registers' to violate the Constitution. Our rule of law is no more. God save us!!!!

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/06/2005 12:03 AM  

To each poster that said there doesn't need a law to say you aren't required to file.
Yes of course I know that. I have just seen enough things that make it is seem as though there is a law. Although I have also seen as many if not more that make it seem there is no law.
Irregaurdless, that is not what concerns me here (although I would be truely appriciative if the income tax was stuck down). I just want a trial were defendants are respected and thought of as innocent until the time when (or if) the defendant is found guilty.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/06/2005 8:56 AM  

I just want a trial were defendants are respected and thought of as innocent until the time when (or if) the defendant is found guilty.

The same people that are telling you the trial is being conducted fairly are the same people telling you the law doesn't need a liability statute.

'Nuff Said?

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/06/2005 11:35 AM