More Stupid Questions answered!

[Gregg]

It's been awhile, so I thought it was once again time for a new episode of
"Stupid Questions Answered"
where normal, sane people, many of them with specialized knowledge of Tax law, practice and policy, try to put to rest concerns of other people, without same, who for some reason go to a convicted felon presently in prison for tax related crimes, for enlightenment.

I'm just saying...

The producers encourage you to play at home, and feel free to contribute!

Todays first question is the thread topic over in crackhead land....

How does Pete's situation affect our situations?

Well kids, one oft quoted definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and then expecting different results. Logically, this points towards the obvious conclusion that unless you're trying to do a stint in the joint, doing the ame thing as Pete is insane.
Really. Its kind of snarky, and makes a good joke (much like Pete himself) but that is in fact a totally true statement even if taken in dead earnest. Doing what Pete did on his taxes is insane. (unless as mentioned you desire to spend some time in a Federal Prison, if that's your goal, you're totally rational in your decision)

Our next winner is this grammatically challenged poster who's just desperate for some good news. Seems almost fearful in his pleading, doesn't he?

Anyway Doreen can list some recent victories on the forum?

Well Chum, no she can't. Ain't none to post. And we can all agree that putting up a list of the people who have gotten the "Final Notice of Intent to Levy" would be both redundant and depressing.
As a special note, this topic was not responded to, not even by Skankbeat, so I guess there's not even a common law answer. On a high note, this does provide proof that there is a way to shut Skankbeat up, in an emergency.

And today's final question, an oldie but a goodie from way back in July....

How many CtC filers experience difficulty after filing?

All of them. Some sonner or later, some more or less, but eventually y'all have a difficulty. Lose the house kinds of difficulty. Wife takes the kids and leaves kind of difficulty. Go to jail, do not collect $200 kind of difficulty. A few years pay in Frivilous Penalty on a tax bill of a few thousand dollar difficulty. (and they don't forgive the penalties, so contray to what you think makes sense, you're really screwed)
A few of you might slip through the cracks of human falibility. But they're making and using a system to catch you, targeted specifically at you. They may be slow, but in the end they're pretty good at this stuff.

Difficulty.

[Number Six]

As Dan Pilla, Jr. says, "There is no such thing as a hopeless tax situation". He should know, he has tolerated his father's protesting for many years, and as a qualified tax pro, has people calling him all day long trying to get out of their self-created tax problems.

In terms of helping the paytriots, tax protestors, and sovruns, take a clue from the 12 step programs. Here are the steps:

The 12 Steps

Step 1 - We admitted we were powerless over our addiction - that our lives had become unmanageable
Step 2 - Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity
Step 3 - Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood God
Step 4 - Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves
Step 5 - Admitted to God, to ourselves and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs
Step 6 - Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character
Step 7 - Humbly asked God to remove our shortcomings
Step 8 - Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all
Step 9 - Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others
Step 10 - Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong promptly admitted it
Step 11 - Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood God, praying only for knowledge of God's will for us and the power to carry that out
Step 12 - Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to other addicts, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.

These are generic and universal "steps". Substitute "sponsor" for "God" or "higher power" if unable to grasp that there are higher powers. There are many families affected by various addictions where the results are almost predictable. Resentment and denial is at the core of many of the social problems which lead to distrust of authority and various forms of rebellion, the search for allies in one's battles and problems. The problem is, the paytriots are in a legally untenable situation, many are insane or at least unsane, and are much in need of help through actually competant CPAs, tax attorneys, etc.. Some work on a probono basis if the protestor has come out of the denial about the seriousness of the problem.

The most elementary question is "Why should I pay income taxes?" My answer would be what is your form of income and anticipated liability, it shouldn't be that hard to work out a solution? It's a little like a medical condition, there is no such thing as being a "little" pregnant, or having a benign sarcoma. The solution is having a thorough examination of the records by a confidential professional. If the situation has gone from civil to criminal in the case of well known protestors, there will be no remedy unless there is an admission of wrongdoing and competant counsel. The criminal justice apparatus on the state and federal levels is hungry for new food, and will not differentiate between a confused law challenger and a wanton defier. The cops on up to the AG are out to better their careers by high rates of conviction. The crook who snookered you into tax defiance should be doing the time, why are you going down with him? The tragedy with these people is that so many others are affected. Family members, customers, and friends are all affected by an attitude and by actions that make a bad situation worse.

[Harvester]

How many CtC filers experience difficulty after filing?

All of them. Some sonner or later, some more or less, but eventually y'all have a difficulty. Lose the house kinds of difficulty.

Incorrect Gregg. I experienced no difficulty after CtC filing. In fact I received a phat IRS refund check. And over a year later - no worries.

Time's running out Gregg. Whose side are you on? Will you stand up for the real America, or the banksters NWO?

[Arthur Rubin]

Incorrect Gregg. I experienced no difficulty after CtC filing.

Don't worry. You will.

[Gregg]

How many CtC filers experience difficulty after filing?

All of them. Some sooner or later, some more or less, but eventually y'all have a difficulty. Lose the house kinds of difficulty.

Incorrect Gregg. I experienced no difficulty after CtC filing. In fact I received a phat IRS refund check. And over a year later - no worries.

Time's running out Gregg. Whose side are you on? Will you stand up for the real America, or the banksters NWO?

Ivy League BSBA $180,000
MBA from Jesuit Institution $60,000
PhD, Land Grant College $55,000
coupla odd degrees along the way $100,000


Not being a pathetic loser internet troll howling in the wind?

Priceless

I'm Illuminati, bitch boi, I pwn you before you get out of bed every morning.

[Joey Smith]

NESARA Now!

[Imalawman]

How many CtC filers experience difficulty after filing?

All of them. Some sonner or later, some more or less, but eventually y'all have a difficulty. Lose the house kinds of difficulty.

Incorrect Gregg. I experienced no difficulty after CtC filing. In fact I received a phat IRS refund check. And over a year later - no worries.

Time's running out Gregg. Whose side are you on? Will you stand up for the real America, or the banksters NWO?

You feel confident after a year, do you? You must not deal with the IRS a lot. Just a show of hands here - Who here thinks that a year of inaction by IRS means anything at all?

[webhick]

You feel confident after a year, do you? You must not deal with the IRS a lot. Just a show of hands here - Who here thinks that a year of inaction by IRS means anything at all?

::Raises hand::

Ahem. A year of inaction means that they haven't gotten around to it yet.

[absdes96]

I knew a person who decided to "unvolunteer" in 2000. The US DOJ waited until 2006 to send him the invite to Federal Court.

I would say that if nothing happens in three years, that still does not mean very much.

[bmielke]

I knew a person who decided to "unvolunteer" in 2000. The US DOJ waited until 2006 to send him the invite to Federal Court.

I would say that if nothing happens in three years, that still does not mean very much.

I would say that even if nothing ever happens you will always need to look over the shoulder. Is this the day I will be arrested?

[Famspear]

You feel confident after a year, do you? You must not deal with the IRS a lot. Just a show of hands here - Who here thinks that a year of inaction by IRS means anything at all?

::Raises hand::

Ahem. A year of inaction means that they haven't gotten around to it yet.

Yes, Harvey is a bit "time challenged," if that's the right term. I don't think he has any realistic concept of how long it takes the IRS (or certain other government entities) to do things.

In the summer of 2009, if I recall, Harvey was arguing in so many words that because six or seven years had passed between the time Peter E. ("Blowhard") Hendrickson self-published Cracking the Code, this somehow was a signficant "clue" that Blowhard would probably not be convicted in his then-pending criminal case. I think Harvey thought that somehow Hendrickson "had something" on the IRS because it had taken the government such a "long time" to obtain an indictment -- that the government had a weak case.

Many tax protester/tax deniers like Harvester delude themselves into thinking that, through their reading of wackadooster internet web sites, they have somehow come to an understanding of the inner workings of government that has somehow eluded the real experts.

Similarly, Blowhard Hendrickson had pontificated to the effect that the millions of dollars supposedly received by his followers using the Cracking the Code scam was evidence that the IRS really "knew" that Hendrickson's method/non-method was "really the law." Of course, all the millions supposedly received by his followers in refunds since 2002 or 2003 -- even if they had been received in just one year -- would be a drop in the bucket compared to the total erroneous refunds (fraudulent and otherwise) issued by the IRS every year. I believe we've published the statistics on that here in Quatloos before.

Getting back to Harvey's specific misconception, it can easily take the IRS two or two and half years just to assert the most routine questions about previously filed tax returns. And in the case of fraud, evasion, etc., there's a reason why the Congress long ago provided a six year statute of limitations for certain criminal tax indictments (IRC sections 6531(1), 6531(2), etc.) and an unlimited statutory period for the IRS to assess the tax (IRC section 6501(c)(1) and (c)(2)).

[Judge Roy Bean]

As I have noted in the past, the amount of time that passes between any number of notable TP/TD cases actually being brought to court and the miscreant's playing the weaknesses in the system is simply an invitation to more of them.

And I have the feeling that for every actual perpetrator discovered there are hundreds still playing the system from among all economic strata.

[Gregg]

We have a new winner!

after sending my responses again, a few months ago...now I receive a Letter 3228 stating that I owe over $24,000. This goes to prove just how much they're breaking their own regulations. I sent my 1040 to them 3 times...each time they keep adding on. I've been charged $5,000, twice, as wella s them stating I owe them $14,000 for taxes on my 2007. They actually owe me $4,500.

These people need to go...what do I do next?

Well, to get them to leave you alone, try sending them $24,000. If you want another penalty, you can write them a note demanding they accept the same return you got rung up for the first two times.

[Gregg]

Our uncommonly stupid common law eggspert Skankbeat throws in this gem today...

Dealing direct with the US Secretary of Treasury could accomplish the same as dealing with TIGTA, plus you clean the grease off the pig! If the money taken is not subject to statutes, then it makes no sense trying to get it back using statutes. You think? Makes sense to me!

Well, that's because you're a moron.

[Doktor Avalanche]

I knew a person who decided to "unvolunteer" in 2000. The US DOJ waited until 2006 to send him the invite to Federal Court.

I would say that if nothing happens in three years, that still does not mean very much.

I would say that even if nothing ever happens you will always need to look over the shoulder. Is this the day I will be arrested?

Oh that's just the IRS's bag, baby.

They're waiting for dumbass to reach the "magic number" before they drop the hammer on him.

Something to think about, Harvey.

[Gregg]

I have often thought the IRS waits until the year before the Statute of Limitations runs so they can get the maximum penalty.

And sometimes I agree with that. You can't cure stupid, but beat on it hard enough and the symptoms go into remission.

[Gregg]

Oh my, it looks like JHV was stupid enough to follow my buddy Skankbeat's advice, and screw dealing with various vassals and miscelanious minions, preffering to send demands direct to the Secretary of the Treasury. All this got him was apparently a $5,000 bonus penalty....

SkankBeat wrote:
Dealing direct with the US Secretary of Treasury could accomplish the same as dealing with TIGTA, plus you clean the grease off the pig! If the money taken is not subject to statutes, then it makes no sense trying to get it back using statutes. You think? Makes sense to me!


I finally got a response to my demands from old Timmy. He allowed his minions in Ogden to send me a pile of "frivolous" letters

Skankbeat looks to me, in his reply to be surprised by this, but also relieved that he got some other sucker to try it, afterall, that could have been HIS $5,000!

Well, the buck stops with the US Secretary of Treasury. Am i incorrect here? You have a choice of whether you will consent to the Secretary's delegation of your issue to his minions. Looks like the Secretary tried to pass the buck with you. If you back down then you consent to being treated as a subject- more legal presumptions to slow you down. Surely you will not put up with this fluff from a white shoe-boy of the federal reserve cartel?

And then, JHV comes back, and to prove he can outstupid anyone, he tells us all how he's gonna show these crooks....

He and my boss are violating my rights under the color of law. I can document this. I need to have a little chat with the FBI.

You go right ahead, Sparky. If you go in person take a video camera and tape it, it'll look great on You Tube!

And I still want to see who is the first to take another Skankbeat Approved, genuine common law action and Citizens Arrest a Federal Judge! That'll be better than a "My Name is Earl" all day marathon!

[The Operative]

The only problem for the government in all of these dimwitted shenanigans is that by the time the government finally gets around to collecting the penalties and unpaid taxes, these dimwits will already be unemployed and homeless. Their cases will be put in the currently not collectible category except for those few that are living off of government benefits already.

[Gregg]

It's almost too easy to make fun of Skankbeat, but him, Lame/Libre/Harvester and one or two others are the only ones still posting at the ghost ship that Lh has become. Anyhow, in the above discussion where Skank is advising JHV about how to go to prison JHV shows real crackhead genius in his latest reply. I'm including an earlier post to give context

I finally got a response to my demands from old Timmy. He allowed his minions in Ogden to send me a pile of "frivolous" letters.

to which Skankbeat replies ...

What could have happened is that your letter to the Secretary was read by a delegate and when the delegate saw the content was about "taxes" forwarded it to the IRS. In your letter, did you specifically address "Timothy Geithner" and did you condition that you do not consent to dealing with his delegates and agents until this matter of the return of your property is resolved? And did you properly serve letter via USPS registered mail with restricted delivery? Like a grease pig, a viper can be hard to pin down.
(snip)
Unlike other high ranking officers in the federal government, the US Secretary of Treasury is naked to liability under common law because a direct link between him and individual injury can be made. Here the unlawful detainment of property that was taken by agents and delegates under the color of law. If he refuses to return property upon demand he is locked in. Something to think about.

So our first genius has a plan...

I addressed it to him, though there may have been room for improvement. I did not restrict delivery to him. Maybe I need to do it again.

Gee Sparky, maybe you need to take your big red crayon and write "Frivilous Penalty Request Enclosed" on the envelope.

If we can keep these idiots working long enough, the friv pens they run up could balance the budget!

[Quixote]

Skankbeat's latest post indicates that his concept of a common law court is even stranger than I imagined. Apparently in a Skankbeat common law action the plaintiff is also the judge.

In case the US Secretary of Treasury does not surrender taken property upon proper notice and demand, when you initiate common law action, if you are acting in sovereign capacity, you can issue court order to compel compliance with your notice and demand. See USC 28 section 1361 below. Once you establish ownership and chain of custody of your taken property, the US Secretary of Treasury will have an insurmountable burden to prove you wrong. With you in the drivers seat in a common law action, presumptive evidence is not going to sway the court.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/ ... -000-.html

Quote:
TITLE 28 > PART IV > CHAPTER 85 > § 1361
§ 1361. Action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty
The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff.