SaintAlbans1 wrote:Again, bring proof. Or shut it.
Ioane testified, and then a jury unanimously convicted him on all counts after deliberations that lasted only a couple of hours. While Ioane does get bail pending appeal, the points on which he appeals have nothing to do with his guilt. He is defended here by someone cuts and pastes a rant, and then deletes his own post.
That's not bad for a start.
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume
I'm very glad I waited before I started parsing and destroying the original post. "Oath on a bible"??? In the Federal system??? I sort of started ignoring the rest of the post when I got to that sentence. Someone with a MAJOR adgenda who is NOT going to listen to anythng that does not agree with THEIR version of the "TRUTH"
When you are already convinced that what you know is correct, there is very little reason to listen to any other position.
Little boys who tell lies grow up to be weathermen.
Pottapaug1938 wrote:SaintAlbans1: first, welcome to Quatloos.
Second, please understand that mere assertions of government malfeasance and imputations of evil motives to the IRS, prosecutors and judges don't cut much ice here (if any) unless they are supported by appellate case law which indicates either that the assertions have been upheld as good law in previous cases, or based on holdings in similar cases they are likely to prevail in this one. Be careful not to simply lift quotations out of court opinions without saying more, because often these quotations do not involve the holding -- or the core decision of the court in question; they are merely "dicta", or explanations of the holding in the case.
I was going to start posting the docs here. But it is clear that this is a flame group dedicated to, not listening to the truth, but flaming anyone who goes against the IRS. Sorry. I've fought the IRS for years. They are worse than the mob. And I am also now done with this site. As all I am getting is lies, flames and a lot of heat for writing something in reference to a man everyone here hates simply because the reportage on him was negative. As if everything the courts and government does it right and just. When we all know it is not.
Farewell, goodfellows.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out, Cuddles. You're just another drive-by self-appointed legal expert who thinks that he can baffle us with bulldada, and then runs away bawling like a baby when we ask him to prove that there is anything to his fantasies.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
Pottapaug1938 wrote:SaintAlbans1: first, welcome to Quatloos.
Second, please understand that mere assertions of government malfeasance and imputations of evil motives to the IRS, prosecutors and judges don't cut much ice here (if any) unless they are supported by appellate case law which indicates either that the assertions have been upheld as good law in previous cases, or based on holdings in similar cases they are likely to prevail in this one. Be careful not to simply lift quotations out of court opinions without saying more, because often these quotations do not involve the holding -- or the core decision of the court in question; they are merely "dicta", or explanations of the holding in the case.
I was going to start posting the docs here. But it is clear that this is a flame group dedicated to, not listening to the truth, but flaming anyone who goes against the IRS. Sorry. I've fought the IRS for years. They are worse than the mob. And I am also now done with this site. As all I am getting is lies, flames and a lot of heat for writing something in reference to a man everyone here hates simply because the reportage on him was negative. As if everything the courts and government does it right and just. When we all know it is not.
Farewell, goodfellows.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out, Cuddles. You're just another drive-by self-appointed legal expert who thinks that he can baffle us with bulldada, and then runs away bawling like a baby when we ask him to prove that there is anything to his fantasies.
That was quick. Quitting after only eight posts. Usually the scammers have more stamina. Van Pelt would still be doing his pre-exercise warmups at this point.
"Yes Burnaby49, I do in fact believe all process servers are peace officers. I've good reason to believe so." Robert Menard in his May 28, 2015 video "Process Servers".
Geeze, take a few days to deal with RL and the troll comes out. To attempt a recap, our troll of the day posts a lengthy, factless rant about the victimization and Noble Fight led by either himself or his useful idiot. Accusations are tossed about the Ebil Gobernment, dark forces are alluded to, but the lengthy rant is singularly lacking in verifiable facts. In fact, two minutes of googling by anyone not an idiot, as our ranter obviously is, throw out plenty of verifiable facts. And court cases. And convictions. Plural.
Astonished by our unwillingness to leap up to his soapbox, he then fires off a few admittedly weak insults, and runs away.
SaintAlbans1, you also claim to be a journalist. Lemme guess--you just don't happen to be a one who has ever been paid by a legitimate newspaper or magazine. Do you even know what first NASR is?
Goodness is about what you do. Not what you pray to. T. Pratchett
Always be a moving target. L.M. Bujold
Cathulhu wrote:Astonished by our unwillingness to leap up to his soapbox, he then fires off a few admittedly weak insults, and runs away.
Not only runs away (thus garnering a nomination for the Sir Robin of The Month Award), but takes his original post with him, which can only mean that he recognized that it was so pitiful and stupid it was causing him deep embarrassment.
"I could be dead wrong on this" - Irwin Schiff
"Do you realize I may even be delusional with respect to my income tax beliefs? " - Irwin Schiff
What irritates me is that the little twit jumped ship before I got a chance to finish reading his twaddle, and I was so looking forward to it if just for the amusement value. What puzzles me is why he posted it here in the first place considering the short shrift Mikey has gotten here before, and what would possibly have made him think that sort of thing would get anything but the derision it so rightly deserved?
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
notorial dissent wrote:What irritates me is that the little twit jumped ship before I got a chance to finish reading his twaddle, and I was so looking forward to it if just for the amusement value. What puzzles me is why he posted it here in the first place considering the short shrift Mikey has gotten here before, and what would possibly have made him think that sort of thing would get anything but the derision it so rightly deserved?
I get a chuckle out of the fact that he entitled the thread "IRS: The Federal Mafia?" and posted what was obviously the most outrageous flame material, and then had the audacity to pretend that he believed that the responses by the Quatloos regulars were somehow "flame" material.
If, on the other hand, he really believed that his post was not flame, that is an example of psychological projection (in effect saying, "I'm going to flame the regulars at Quatloos, but I'm not the one doing it, they are").
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet
notorial dissent wrote:What irritates me is that the little twit jumped ship before I got a chance to finish reading his twaddle, and I was so looking forward to it if just for the amusement value. What puzzles me is why he posted it here in the first place considering the short shrift Mikey has gotten here before, and what would possibly have made him think that sort of thing would get anything but the derision it so rightly deserved?
Not a problem. Our man Burnaby caught the twit's website for you. You can read what he originally posted here, and much more. The little twit seems to like seeing himself in print. http://michaelsioane.wordpress.com/cate ... onspiracy/
"Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig." - Robert Heinlein
I have a feeling that SaintAlbans1 is sitting in his elderly Mommy's basement, going onto web sites and blogs within his comfort zone and bragging something like "I went onto the Quatloos site and gave those Quatlosers WHAT FOR! They wouldn't listen to The Truth, though, so I gave up on them."
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
You cannot argue with a mind welded shut from the inside. Logic and fact do not impressed the terminally deluded. "StAlbans1", in all of his manifestations, is someone who simply will not acknowledge that his personal view of how things ought to be is not identical to how things actually are. Thus, anyone who disputes his barely lucid rantings against the IRS, citing fact, is part of the conspiracy.
It is possible, of course, that this person is merely having us on, that he (or she; I'll assume "he" because English lacks a third-person gender neutral pronoun) knows full well that what he spouts is nonsense, and does it because it's fun. I think it more probable, though, that he actually believes his drivel. His insistence smacks of real passion. In his mind, he is, indeed, a "victim". I agree that he is - not of a conspiracy of IRS agents and their Quatloos fellow travelers, but of some cognitive cog gone haywire.
Can someone confirm if Michael Ioane was recently released pending appeal. I think I read something on his blog that states he was, but who is going to believe that. . . . .
Probably not, actually. Depending on whether the deadlines are extended, and on the Ninth Circuit's backlog, I would guess there will be a decision by early next year.
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume