Court finally rules in Hendrickson appellate case

[Mr. Mephistopheles]

I doubt Pete knows about it yet.

Anyone know how long it takes to get approved to join LH?

Apparently as long as Petey wants:

Some Notes For Those Trying To Join The National CtC Forum


Has your national forum registration not been approved? It's probably just because I'm not recognizing you! If you've filled out the registration form and aren't able to log in within 24 hours, send me an email with your log-in info so I know who you are and can give your participation proper consideration! That "consideration" includes-- indeed, largely rests upon-- whether I know you to be a CtC-educated person. Participation in this forum is limited to such persons.

http://www.losthorizons.com/Forum/index.html

Let's see, if the last sentence is translated from Dumbassese, it would read, "Participation is this forum is limited to those persons who have paid the entrance fee (cost of the book) and actually the believe the nonsense in the book that I can't even keep straight."

[Dr. Caligari]

Having now read the 6th Circuit's decision, I predict that Hendrickson is going to contend that the court never addressed the issue that he did not receive "wages" as defined in the Code and never addressed his "includes" argument, and therefore this is not a finding against CtC.

[grammarian44]

Having now read the 6th Circuit's decision, I predict that Hendrickson is going to contend that the court never addressed the issue that he did not receive "wages" as defined in the Code and never addressed his "includes" argument, and therefore this is not a finding against CtC.

I would agree. I think JJ Bulten, who may return after Ron Paul withdraws from the race tonight, will say the same thing. But assuming this is their rhetorical stance, where do they take it from here? Appeal to SCOTUS, thereby buying himself more time to sell his crap? Is there anything criminal in the offing?

To me, the only surprising thing about the opinion is that it identifies Pete Hendrickson as a convicted mail bomber in almost the first line. The court sure didn't waste any time addressing Pete's character....

[Quixote]

The Lostheads have just heard the news.

See the order, they didn't even consider the facts. They just called and labeled him a "tax protestor".

[Dr. Caligari]

The LostHopes regulars respond as predicted:

PH has not lost, they are simply going to silence him like the church did all those years ago to Galileo. The Earth was not the center of the universe...

keep the faith im sure pete is all over this one.

[Joey Smith]

Having now read the 6th Circuit's decision, I predict that Hendrickson is going to contend that the court never addressed the issue that he did not receive "wages" as defined in the Code and never addressed his "includes" argument, and therefore this is not a finding against CtC.

Plus, the Court did not say "Simon sez" before it ruled, used the common law phrase "Nanna Nanna Boo Boo", or stamp in red ink on the face of opinion, "With Recourse, UCC-1".

Hmmmm, is that the distant shuffling of grand jury indictment papers that I hear not-so-distant in the future . . . . . .

[Famspear]

A loser called "douglas" at losthorizons writes:

i dint [sic] beleive [sic] this is the end of the court cases for pete.he just has to go up a level and get it throw [sic] out.

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... 667e2e3fae

--to which another loser, "Nof", writes:

So whats his next move? SCOTUS? This is like a bad chess game where the opponent keeps making the same move to force a stalemate.

(bolding added).

This is severe delusion.

And stalemate? Stalemate? Losing at both the district court and the court of appeals is a stalemate? That's like saying that one team sweeping another team in the playoffs is a "stalemate."

I think when one side wins everything, it's called a sweep. A blowout. Something like that.

[LPC]

Yes, if you find idiocy to be tasty, then it's an all-you-can-eat gibberish buffet at Lost Horizons, and here's an appetizer sampler:

this seems more like a pr stunt, no one in the u.s. can order you to change your testimony!!!

And yet judges can order you to file correct tax returns.

seemes to me like there should be 2 judges out on their asses.

It was a three judge panel, and it was unanimous, so eliminating two of the judges is still a loss for Petey.

keep the faith im sure pete is all over this one.

You means he's "all over" the first six stages and has reached acceptance?

I really think it is a PR item, people are getting tired of the "courts" telling us what we've read is not what we've read.

If what you've read is by Hendrickson, then what you've read is not what you think you've read, because it didn't say what you thought it said. You thought it was a cogent and coherent explanation of the law, but it was rambling gibberish. And you couldn't tell the difference.

That some how because we're all non-government type that we are getting something wrong.

Not "something wrong." All of it. And it's not because you're a "non-government type" but because you're stupid and delusional.

I don't think so, because if the darn "code" is that difficult to understand then it is VOID for Vagueness.

Ever consider that you might be void for vacuousness.

They tried to silence PH's book and failed because they could not open it and point to a section, paragraph or page that offered info for any kind of "tax scheme".

No one ever "tried to silence" the book.

As we all know, the gov' just makes up those claims since they courts with their financial kick backs get paid well for rubber stamping injunction orders.

And yet the government never asked any court to rubber-stamp any injunction preventing the sale of Hendrickson's book.

Since most people suspect this to be a common practice.

Hard to argue with a non-sentence.

At least with PH's book, you can reference everything written, you can see it all for yourself and make your own choice..

And then choose to believe preposterous things that just happen to be in your own self-interest.

PH has not lost, they are simply going to silence him like the church did all those years ago to Galileo.

Which would be an absolutely perfect analogy IF (a) Galileo had been predicting the movements of the Italian courts instead of the movements of planets, (b) PH was going to be silenced, and (c) Galileo had been wrong.

The Earth was not the center of the universe...

Neither is Petey.

i dint beleive this is the end of the court cases for pete.he just has to go up a level and get it throw out.

Go "up a level"? What do they think this is, a cheerleading contest? Pump it up, PH!

So whats his next move? SCOTUS? This is like a bad chess game where the opponent keeps making the same move to force a stalemate.

Or like one of those *really* bad chess games where one player keeps losing to a "fool's mate" over and over and over again.

[Famspear]

"Sapiens" at losthorizons writes:

I have to tell you, I was expecting a little more effort by the Court of Appeals in trying to justify the scam. They didn’t even try. All they did was label Pete a tax protestor and left it at that.

For some reason, I have this feeling of resignation that this is really is the straw that broke the camel’s back. No matter how I try to spin it, all the logical conclusions that I can come to is that we all will have to make use of arms.

It is an unfortunate fact parasites can only be controlled by extermination.

Godspeed to all of us.

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... a76b111153

(bolding added).

We get a court decision with which we don't agree, and we will all have to take up arms? We must "control"? Time for "extermination"? Shades of Edward Lewis Brown, the exterminator!

Gee, I thought CtC was supposed to be about the rule of law.....

[Famspear]

Richardf614 at losthorizons write:

It took them a year to come up with this?? I could have written this decision
in 10 minutes.

Yeah, well, Richard that's what happens to Peter Hendrickson when he writes mountains and mountains of frivolous nonsense, as he does. "Frivolous" pretty much means "not worthy of serious consideration." The United States Court of Appeals had lots and lots of better things to do than to spend all those months trying to figure out how to fry Peter Eric (Blowhard) Hendrickson, and believe me, I don't think the judges agonized all these months over this particular case.

Not one issue was addressed, just a blanket tax protester label. I expected at
least a breakdown of each argument and the reasons they were deemed incorrect.

Hey, Richard, are you starting to catch on??? Repeat: Frivolous means "not worthy of serious consideration."

NOTHING! This is the best they [the judges] could do? They even quoted the smoke bomb event from years ago!

Richard, it does not need to be "the best they can do". The judges probably save "the best" for cases that really matter. Not for people who appeal with frivolous nonsense arguments. Pete got hit with a $4,000 sanction for wasting the court's time, remember?

Duh. Get a clue, Richard.

[Famspear]

Truthbearer writes:

I agree with the comments here, but I also think that the Forum Administrator needs to address the matter here in this venue, at least briefly, for the benefit of all the nervous nellies among us. It is clear that the Sixth Circuit judges have been bought and paid for by the DOJ. Lord only knows what conversations have taken place behind the scenes between these lunkheads and the IRS commissioner. It's really disgusting.....

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... a76b111153

(bolding added)

[Famspear]

ericcalderon wrote:

While I would also like to hear directly from Pete on this[,] my gut read on this is as follows:

The feds got no game and they know it. Pete's blazed a trail out of the land of IRS oppression and the only hope they have now is to smear him with mud in hopes to dissuade others not to research his findings. They need something from which they can say he lost even while he ultimately has defeated them.

The time and cost associated with appealing a $4,000 fine is enormous and most would not consider it worthwhile. That may very well be the reason the reduced it from $8,000. That amount makes the fight a bit more tantalizing.

Care to know which non-IRS web sites condoning 'tax protester schemes' are really government propaganda fronts? They will be the ones to publish commentary about this ruling in the next several weeks.

And by the way, my hat is off to anybody that in the time span of 14 years re-directed their energy from counter-productive acts of low-brain stem tactics to cerebral and lawful ones in order to achieve ultimate victory.

To those of you concerned about the lawfulness of following Pete's research I suggest that this ruling provides you great comfort.

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... =4997#4997

(bolding added)

Ah, another hopelessly deluded soul! Pete's latest crushing defeat is really a marvelous victory! Pete has really got those feds where he wants 'em now!

[webhick]

douglas is a great student of CtC. He managed to contradict himself in under 10 words.

pete said this is the law. think for yourself

Do you do believe what Pete tells you to believe, or do you think for yourself?

ETA: I forgot to mention that demolane is planning on going down with the ship:

Gone to far to turn back now!

[Joey Smith]

The poster "ericcalderon" from LostHeads is definitely the Black Knight
http://youtube.com/watch?v=2eMkth8FWno

[grixit]

Pete's blazed a trail out of the land of IRS oppression and the only hope they have now is to smear him with mud

Translation: Pete walked out deep into the swamp, and the court agreed with the IRS's observation that he managed to smear himself with mud.

[Doktor Avalanche]

As predicted.

[Famspear]

The zoo is getting noiser. This from "tgrills":

Did you really expect Pete to win!

Folks I think this country is to far gone!

They are going to keep raising gas prices until they turn us into Mexico.

Bush is gonna get our country nuked when he invades Iran.

Chinese Nuclear subs are sitting and waiting.

Russia is supplying nuclear weapons to all our enemies.

178 nuclear russian suitcase bombs are missing!

I bet they are all in Bush's closet waiting for the gov. to stage the next terrorist attack so they can declare Martial Law.

It may well be time to find somewhere else to live before the United Nations starts breaking down our doors and hauling us off to detention centers, compliments of Haliburton.

Do you really think a Gov that wants us knocked down to 3rd world country status so they can control and enslave us is going to back down to the rule of law!

Washington D. C.

Youre fired!!!!!!!

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... 35b99#4999

The monkeys over there are just screeching, shaking the bars of the cages, and bouncing off the walls.

[Investor]

The monkeys over there are just screeching, shaking the bars of the cages, and bouncing off the walls.

"Now we could do it with conventional weapons that could take years and cost millions of lives. No, I think we have to go all out. I think that this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody's part." ~ Eric "Otter" Stratton

[Imalawman]

Man its about time they ruled. Simply amazing how a tax protestor can spin a court case. Doesn't this ruling fill the others with dread knowing that in the very least, they cannot win their own cases if Pete Hendrickson could not win his case? Oop's sorry, I was using logic again. My bad.

[Famspear]

Victoria at loserheads writes:

What was the conclusion of the court?

That he, and his 'followers' avoids the income tax ? HA!!!!

That's a far cry from evades which is illegal, avoids is not illegal.. it's what everyone is supposed to do; minimize or avoid altogether -- isn't this what all the wealthy and corporations do without a second thought? Everyone has the RIGHT to avoid a tax by all legal means available.

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... =5001#5001

My response: Yeah, and what Peter does not have the right to do is to make up his own rules, which is exactly what he tried to do with Cracking the Code. Peter does not get to make the final decision on what's legal and what's not, on what is legal "avoidance" versus criminal "evasion." Earth calling Victoria.....

Bringing up some prank Pete pulled many years ago is just a cheap shot and pathetic ploy to undermine his character. Who has a perfect past? Who cares???

Obviously, you care, Victoria. You seem upset. So, the court must be on to something there. The court did not undermine Pete's character. Pete did that to himself. Evidence of participation in a bombing incident is evidence of the nature of one's character.

Victoria, you and your fellow protesters have made your own choice to follow, as your tax guru, a guy with a criminal tax conviction, a guy with no legal expertise, a guy with no accounting expertise. Sorry, but what you see is what you get. Not a single court has ever upheld Pete's goofy theories and, in fact, numerous courts have specifically rejected the kinds of arguments he makes. Peter has no statutes or case law to back him up. Peter is left with nothing but his own credibility or lack thereof. Pete's credibility as a tax guru depends on such things as his qualifications (none), on his personal character (you be the judge), and on the gullibility, the dishonesty, and the psychological imbalances of his followers. The gullibility, dishonesty, and psychological makeup of his followers tend to increase his credibility -- but only in the minds of his followers. His lack of qualifications and his personal character tend to decrease his credibility in the eyes of normal people (that is, the rest of us). So sorry.

So.. what then IS the criminal law broken here? Was there one ?

Vicky, baby, this is a civil tax case. No one has accused Pete of a crime in this particular case. Are you even paying attention? But hold on, baby. I'm not making predictions, but some day you just may find yourself talking about another criminal case involving someone using Cracking the Code.

They labeled Pete a "tax protester"? SO? was the word "illegal" in front of tax protester? If one says "illegal tax protester" we can read it as ILLEGAL TAX protestor, which would be close, but not appropriate.

The truth is Pete is a "Misapplication of the Federal Income Tax Revealer" and at NO TIME does Pete say the tax is not legal and correct as properly applied.

Pete is a "Misapplication of the Federal Income Tax Revealer"? That's a mouthful, so I'm just gonna refer to Pete as a "tax protester", thank you.

Also... Pete being a HUGE Tuna fish and we range from sharks to minnows.. what would we expect the court to do?? Say "Ok the jigs up, Pete is right - we can find no legal standing for applying a federal income tax on the average Americans career in the private sector, so let's get this on the record boys."
HA!!!
Not gonna happen.
The fleas and ticks will just slowly bail as the host becomes more aware of their presence. Thanks for the FRONTLINE Pete!!!

Yeah, thanks Pete, from everyone at losthorizons?!!?? Every loss for Peter is really somehow a magnificent victory? If that's the case, Victoria, then why are you and your friends upset?

The only people who seem unable to find a legal basis "for applying a federal income tax on the average Americans career in the private sector" are you cranks at losthorizons. The IRS seems to have no problem finding a legal basis. The legal scholars of this country have no problem finding it. The DOJ has no problem finding it. And the courts have no problem finding it.

The tax man won. Pete lost. Again.

Winners talk; losers walk.