Legal Bear

[Demosthenes]

SECRETS TO USING YOUR SUBCONSCIOUS MIIND TO SOLVE IRS PROBLEMS
Starting at: $27.00
Secrets to Using Your Subconscious Mind to Solve Sticky IRS Problems

I searched the internet for the phrase “subconscious problem solving” and turned up the following quotes:

“When I have an important (or tough) problem to solve, I often afford myself the luxury of shelving it for a few days, …During this time, I don’t think about it and it does not weigh on my mind…it percolates away in my subconscious, and a solution often announces itself when I least expect it…I am often amazed by the simplicity and elegance of the solutions I arrive at using this method.”

And:

“…unconscious thought results in creative problem-solving…” “…unconscious thought is especially effective at solving complex problems,"

I’ve seen even more quotes like this as I researched what was on the net about using the subconscious to solve problems. As I researched I began to realize what has worked so well for me over the years. I fill my mind with knowledge; in particular, my subconscious. I then tell my subconscious, in essence, a phrase I remember from algebra class, “Solve for Y.” With respect to the IRS, “Y” is dealing with a cumbersome, oppressive, and dishonest bureaucracy and still prevailing. Attorney Michael Louis Mimms, author of the book The Underground Lawyer, won every case he took for seven years running. One of his secrets was to learn every case that was for them and every case that was for his client. My packages take that approach. If there is a case that works against you, you or your subconscious, needs to know about it so that it can formulate a strategy for dealing with it. This 42 minute mp3 audio explains in more detail how the process works in particular with solving IRS problems by using my research packages. You need to use your subconscious to come up with creative solutions. If you do what everybody else has done already, I predict you will not like the results. Get this MP3 audio and let your subconscious mind come up with creative solutions that will help you prevail.

[Cpt Banjo]

Fight the IRS with Monsters from the Id!

[Judge Roy Bean]

When I see stuff like his I'm often reminded of Bill Cosby's theory of marketing:

"If you nail two boards together that have never been nailed together before, some schmuck is gonna' buy it."

[The Observer]

...unconscious thought results in creative problem-solving…” “…unconscious thought is especially effective at solving complex problems,..."

The TP movement has been replete with examples of unconscious thought. I have yet to see a TP-based consistent winning strategy.

[Gregg]

sounds a lot like early stage NESARA syndrome to me.

[Demosthenes]

CDPH TERMINATOR-FRIVOLOUS PENALTY COMBO (SAVE!)
Starting at: $377.00
CDPH TERMINATOR-FRIVOLOUS PENALTY COMBO (SAVE!)

The IRS Terminator package combined with the New Frivolous Return Penalty research package.

IRS TERMINATOR CDPH PRINCIPLES COMBINED W/ THE FRIVOLOUS RETURNS PENALTIES RESEARCH-POWERFUL! As it stands right now, a Collection Due Process Hearing (CDPH) is going to be the most effective way to challenge a frivolous return penalty. So far, merely writing letters to the IRS about the frivolous return penalty has been ineffective. What has happened is the IRS only gives non-taxpayers the option of doing what they say; i.e., amend the return so it reflects that you won’t get your refund and that you owe them money…or else! The “or else” means that they steam roll ahead with the intent of collecting the $5000 penalty by way of a levy (they know your revenue sources at this point), but, before they can do that they have been sending a “Final Notice of Intent to Levy” and inviting people to a CDPH. It is in this hearing and its appeals that you can effectively use these two packages to greatest effect to make their lives miserable for a change. Anyone with a modicum of research skill, and that includes most everybody, could do this research themselves by spending enough time. When you buy these packages, think of them as a short-cut to competence.

Normally, IRS Terminator package is $277 and the Frivolous Return Penalty package is $257 for a total of $534, but:

When You Buy Them Together They Are ONLY:

$377

A savings of $157! If you want to save money on this package I’ve bundled it with other packages here in my cart at steep discounts.

[LPC]

There are certain kinds of insights that seem to work at a non-conscious level, and there are serious studies by neurologists that have attempted to identify the part of the brain that produces these kinds of revelations.

And the process seems to work in much the way that "Legal Bear" describes. If you think about something and study something for awhile, then set it aside, suddenly one morning while you're in the shower, the solution might come to you seemingly out of nowhere.

See See http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008 ... act_lehrer for an abstract of an article on the science behind the process.

But garbage in/garbage out still applies. If you fill your head with tax denier trash, your sudden insight will just be more tax denier trash.

[bmielke]

CDPH TERMINATOR-FRIVOLOUS PENALTY COMBO (SAVE!)
Starting at: $377.00
CDPH TERMINATOR-FRIVOLOUS PENALTY COMBO (SAVE!)

The IRS Terminator package combined with the New Frivolous Return Penalty research package.

IRS TERMINATOR CDPH PRINCIPLES COMBINED W/ THE FRIVOLOUS RETURNS PENALTIES RESEARCH-POWERFUL! As it stands right now, a Collection Due Process Hearing (CDPH) is going to be the most effective way to challenge a frivolous return penalty. So far, merely writing letters to the IRS about the frivolous return penalty has been ineffective. What has happened is the IRS only gives non-taxpayers the option of doing what they say; i.e., amend the return so it reflects that you won’t get your refund and that you owe them money…or else! The “or else” means that they steam roll ahead with the intent of collecting the $5000 penalty by way of a levy (they know your revenue sources at this point), but, before they can do that they have been sending a “Final Notice of Intent to Levy” and inviting people to a CDPH. It is in this hearing and its appeals that you can effectively use these two packages to greatest effect to make their lives miserable for a change. Anyone with a modicum of research skill, and that includes most everybody, could do this research themselves by spending enough time. When you buy these packages, think of them as a short-cut to competence.

Normally, IRS Terminator package is $277 and the Frivolous Return Penalty package is $257 for a total of $534, but:

When You Buy Them Together They Are ONLY:

$377

A savings of $157! If you want to save money on this package I’ve bundled it with other packages here in my cart at steep discounts.

Is this for real. I mean I don't need either now, but it's such a good deal how can I pass it up.

Or right $377 is in addition to $5K friv. pen., never mind I don't have that kind of cash to waste.

[Brandybuck]

But garbage in/garbage out still applies. If you fill your head with tax denier trash, your sudden insight will just be more tax denier trash.

OMG! I just had this insight! I don't owe any taxes because I didn't earn any income! The key word is "earn". I actually slacked off all last year, so that while I did receive a salary, I most certainly did not earn it!

[wserra]

Attorney Michael Louis Mimms, author of the book The Underground Lawyer, won every case he took for seven years running.

Two possibilities: (1) he took very, very, very few cases; or (2) he has an atypical definition of "win" (for example: "my client wasn't shot at dawn").

[grixit]

I have a sister who's a lawyer in wills, trusts and probate. For several years she maintained a "no losses in court" record by settling out of court whenever possible.

[Quixote]

The author of The Underground Lawyer is named Minns, not Mimms. His 7 year winning streak isn't mentioned in an otherwise glowing bio, apparently written by his publisher, found at http://www.aimpress.com/minnsbio.htm

[wserra]

For a lawyer who supposedly "won every case he took for seven years running", Minns hasn't been doing so well lately.

His last federal case was representation of Diane Goulder Steiniger, the wife of the Sedona doc about whom Demo posted a few days ago. Convicted on all counts. Top count: evasion.

Before that was one Michael Diesel, 05-cr-20005 (KS). Convicted on all counts. Top count: false return.

Before that was Richard Hatch, 05-cr-00098 (RI). Convicted on top three counts (evasion).

Before that was one Denny Patridge, 04-cr-20031 (ILCD). Convicted on multiple counts of evasion and money laundering.

Before that was Paul Harris, 02-cr-00541 (CO). Convicted of multiple counts of conspiracy to defraud the United States.

Before that was Pamela Moran, 02-cr-00423 (WAWD). Minns was cocounsel with a local federal defender named Jon Zulauf. Moran was acquitted of conspiracy to defraud the U.S. and related charges. Good job by someone, can't tell who.

Now, I'll be the first to agree that federal criminal defendants are frequently - perhaps usually - squarely behind the eight-ball. Still, five of Minns' last six federal criminal trials have been top-count convictions, and it's not clear that he was responsible for the one which wasn't. While that is not necessarily something of which to be ashamed, it is surely not something about which to brag.

[Quixote]

For a lawyer who supposedly "won every case he took for seven years running", Minns hasn't been doing so well lately.

Maybe his 7 year winning streak occurred while he was specializing as a plaintiff's lawyer in legal malpractice suits. We Texans think all lawyers are guilty of something.

[Lambkin]

His approach sounds like the "think system" - ie, hum the minuet in G and you will obtain a deep understanding of the law.

[wserra]

Continuing back with Minns' results for his federal criminal clients, understanding that the further back one goes, the fewer documents are available from PACER:

Wayne Anderson, 01-cr-00180 (CAED): convicted on top count (money laundering).

Pedro Rivera, 98-cr-00142 (TXND): convicted on multiple counts of evasion.

Frank J. Masiarczyk, Jr., 97-cr-00039 (WVND): convicted on all counts (conspiracy to defraud the U.S., evasion).

Jill Ann Proctor, 97-cr-00022 (OKND): convicted on all counts (false returns).

Bianca Apusen, 96-cr-00082 (TXSD): pleaded guilty to two counts of false returns.

Gary Harris, 94-cr-00353 (OHND): convicted of top count (evasion).

Joseph Delvecchio, 93-cr-14038 (FLSD): acquitted.

William Bussey, 91-cr-00064 (TXSD): pleaded guilty to false returns.

Emmett Doyle, 90-cr-00006 (TXSD): pleaded guilty to failure to file.

Roy Powell, 89-cr-00085 (AZ): convicted on all counts (failure to file).

And that's it in PACER.

I don't see seven years of wins anywhere. I see one (perhaps two), total. Still, there are perfectly competent lawyers who don't have a single acquittal in federal criminal cases. They are hard to come by. Moreover, a conviction of a lesser can be a win, especially if the sentence is less than what a defendant would have received by pleading pretrial. But Minns only does tax cases, one of the very few types of case in which the govt's burden is significantly complicated by a "willfulness" requirement. Still, Minns' record is nothing to be ashamed of - unless one brags about it.

[LPC]

I don't see seven years of wins anywhere.

The earliest reported decision I can find with Minns name in it as counsel is United States v. Udey, 748 F. 2d 1231 (8th Cir. 1984), in which he was co-counsel to the defendant on appeal, and the conviction was affirmed.

He was admitted to the bar in 1977, so he might have won every case from 1977 until 1984, which would be seven years.

I doubt it, though.

My vote for his most interesting loss is Doyle v. US, 817 F. 2d 1235 (5th Cir. 1987), in which he represented 10 plaintiffs on appeal challenging the Rule 11 sanctions that were imposed on them for a lawsuit they filed against the government pro se. In its opinion, the Circuit Court stated that "The appellants are unhappy with the way they were treated in the district court, and they complain about various aspects of the outcome. As far as we can tell, however, their appeal asks us to consider seriously only two arguments."

If the appellate court was uncertain about the issues being raised, then the lawyer for the appellant wasn't doing a very good job.

[LPC]

Roy Powell, 89-cr-00085 (AZ): convicted on all counts (failure to file).

Minns talks about the Powell case in his law review article on willfulness, because the case was on appeal when Cheek was decided and the conviction was reversed after Cheek was decided because the trial court had ruled that the defendant's beliefs about the law must be objectively reasonable in order to constitute a defense to the element of willfulness. 955 F.2d 1206 (9th Cir. 1991). But Minns never mentioned that his client was re-convicted on remand.

[David Merrill]

http://friends-n-family-research.info/F ... _Smith.wav

[Noah]

http://friends-n-family-research.info/F ... _Smith.wav

This links to where?