60 Minutes piece on Sovereign Citizens

[Imalawman]

Great job Demo. Can't wait to read your Alleged book.

Fixed it for you.

[wserra]

Over on Son of Suijurisclub, the comments devolve to the usual. This one from "grndslm", the admin there, who has done a drive-by or two here and left each time without answering questions:

The opening paragraph of the CBS story says it all... "Many don't pay taxes, carry a driver's license or hold a Social Security card." Hmm... are you capable of showing a coherent "law" that requires all men to pay taxes? .... what about to carry a driver's license? Are all men required to hold a Social Security card?

Why can't we start with those such questions. Why wouldn't they just prove the sovereign citizens wrong by showing them the law??

When it's already been done a million times, what difference would the million-and-first make?

[Pottapaug1938]

Even if we showed these idjits a law that said "every person who operates a motor vehicle within the State of ____________, whether it be for public or private purposes, must possess a driver's license issued by a governmental authority within the United States, or any variant thereof", they'd still come up with some exuse as to why the law didn't apply to them. We're wasting our time if we even try, because the idjits have a compelling emotional need to believe that no such law exists.

[Number Six]

Good program, but I would have liked to see a "60 Minutes" team ambushing a group of sovereigns, as Mike Wallace used to do with targets who, like Dracula, are afraid of the light.

I found it telling that police groups are largely oblivious to the sovereign movement: As are most Americans, who may mislabel them "Constitutionalists" or "good, old-fashioned family-oriented people". That is the con--cover up a complete lack of accountability to others, with the pretension that you are harmless, God-fearing, honest concerned citizens, while actually behaving like the most ruthless outlaws on the planet. The program's focus on the Kanes showed the ugliness of the movement. Expect more programs on the sovereigns.

[Arthur Rubin]

Good program, but I would have liked to see a "60 Minutes" team ambushing a group of sovereigns, as Mike Wallace used to do with targets who, like Dracula, are afraid of the light.

That would be dangerous. Very dangerous.

I mean, (some of) these sovereigns have automatic weapons, and are paranoid. They might react to an "ambush" interview as a rational armed person would to an actual ambush.

[Number Six]

I guess that's why even some of the judges are living in fear with guns under their pillows.

"The Sovereign Society" was fuming over the "60 Minutes" mention of them:

"We must set the record straight.

"Some of you have seen the recent 60 Minutes segment titled Sovereign Citizens, in which the CBS news program examined a marginalized faction of disaffected Americans who live by a largely anarchist belief system and which, 60 Minutes says, the FBI considers a domestic terror threat.

"To build its case that the so-called sovereign-citizen movement is a menace to America, 60 Minutes pointed its camera at The Sovereign Society website, holding for about six seconds on a single headline: Never Pay U.S. Taxes Again Legally. As the shot closes in on the headline and Sovereign Society logo, reporter Byron Pitts asserts that the Internet is full of ân endless stream of mind-numbing seminars on how, with just the right paperwork, you too can beat the system.

"Had Mr. Pitts, his researchers or 60 Minutes legal team bothered to read beyond the headline the producers chose to emphasize, they would have instantly realized that The Sovereign Society story they played up had nothing to do with the premise of the 60 Minutes segment. Where 60 Minutes focused on a band of largely poor Americans who effectively believe the U.S. government is illegitimate, our story was about expatriation, which remains a fully legal, non-violent, non-confrontational option for Americans who wish to renounce citizenship for asset-protection reasons,a move that ultimately would result in not owing taxes to the U.S. government, legally.

"I come from the pinnacle of high-quality journalism. I spent 17 years as a reporter for The Wall Street Journal. I know the game 60 Minutes unsuccessfully tried to play. Its researchers trolled the Internet for anything tied to the word sovereign, and when they found The Sovereign Society website and the headline about legally avoiding taxes, they latched onto it as an inflammatory smoking gun.

"Only, there is no gun. And there is no smoke.

"There is but an exceedingly poor decision by 60 Minutes to libel The Sovereign Society by wrongly inferring that we the publication and you, our readers are a part of a militant, anti-government movement of domestic terrorists that has resulted in the death of police officers and threats against others within the U.S. judicial system.


"Nothing is further from the truth. And 60 Minutes careless, mistaken portrayal is as maddening as it is libelous.

"Inferring that The Sovereign Society is tied to the sovereign-citizen movement is about as accurate as inferring that 60 Minutes is a show on timepieces simply because of its title.

"Had Mr. Pitts or 60 Minutes research and legal squad properly vetted this segment, they would have quickly recognized that we the Sovereign Society staff and you, our readers are not in any conceivable way a part of the sovereign-citizen movement. The Society is a financial publication, not a mouthpiece for violence.

"60 Minutes amateurish reporting clearly misses the point of what we are truly all about namely, unique overseas investment advice and proven strategies on asset-protection, foreign real-estate purchases and ways to obtain residency and citizenship overseas. All of the ideas and strategies we report on are fully legal and compliant with U.S. tax laws.

"The news magazine is essentially guilty of what it implies of us, sensationalism. It grabbed our headline simply to grab the attention of its viewers the exact same reason we wrote the headline to grab the attention of our readers.

"60 Minutes, however, never contacted anyone at our organization to seek comment on its story or the portrayal of The Sovereign Society as a fringe group. In failing to do so, 60 Minutes violated the most basic tenet of quality journalism: Give those you seek to besmirch the right to defend their actions.

"Had Mr. Pitts or the researchers he relied on picked up the phone to ask a few simple questions, they would have learned quickly that they were standing on faulty, libelous logic.

"The Sovereign Society is not a part of the sovereign-citizen fringe. We do not advocate any form of violence against any elected official or officers of the law.

"The Society does not advise members to disavow the tax system or to seek ways to illegally avoid taxation.

"We are not pushing for the overthrow of government and we are not anarchists.

"We're peaceful, law-abiding libertarians who simply believe in maximizing individual rights through minimizing the role of the federal government on her people and the states that comprise her union. We do not believe in the elimination of government, but rather that the hand of government must be light that laws and taxation must be applied even-handedly and adherent to free-market ideals and that the federal government's role in America should largely be limited to its primary function of protecting her citizens, securing her borders, maintaining sound monetary and fiscal policies to defend her currency, and ensuring the rule of law.

"We promote 100% legal investment and asset-protection strategies tied to opportunities that exist globally. In doing so, we tell our readers that any income earned overseas is subject to U.S. taxes, and we regularly explain that any financial accounts must be reported annually to the U.S. Treasury Department. We do not promote or support tax-avoidance schemes, though we do show our subscribers how to reduce their tax obligation, protect their assets and invest globally through strategies that are fully compliant under America's current tax code and legal system.

"We take exception with 60 Minutes' portrayal of a sovereign individual as a radical who believes that he is above the law. It's clear that Mr. Bryon, his researchers and the producers, editors and lawyers at 60 Minutes are clueless to the notion...that America, herself, is the quintessential example of sovereignty.

"A sovereign individual is simply a self-reliant person, someone who exerts supreme authority within a limited sphere of influence. Those italics are key. Sovereign individuals, unlike the fringe sovereign-citizen movement, operate within the bounds of their own life and do not seek to exert control over others through physical or financial force or coercion.

"We believe that individuals have the freedom to make their own choices within an ethical framework that does not impinge on the rights of others. And, we believe, you must live with the consequences of those choices without relying on others to bail you out when your choices go bad.

"60 Minutes not only libeled The Sovereign Society, it belittled our readers and every American who shares our view that the best government is a limited government, and that the pursuit of personal liberty and free-market economics is a noble cause.

Now more than ever, stay Sovereign."


Jeff D. Opdyke
Investment Director & Senior Editor, The Sovereign Society
http://www.sovereignsociety.com/

[Prof]

I think the program used Adask because he is at least lucid, looks "normal," and speaks something like English (something other than sovereign gibberish), even if he is an anti-lawyer flake.

[wserra]

"The Sovereign Society" was fuming over the "60 Minutes" mention of them:

to libel The Sovereign Society
...
And 60 Minutes careless, mistaken portrayal is as maddening as it is libelous.
...
that they were standing on faulty, libelous logic.
...
60 Minutes not only libeled The Sovereign Society

So sue them. 'Course, it might be difficult, given that (AFAIR) the piece never mentioned the "Sovereign Society".

So what are they talking about, when they say "Never Pay U.S. Taxes Again - Legally"?

our story was about expatriation, which remains a fully legal, non-violent, non-confrontational option for Americans who wish to renounce citizenship for asset-protection reasons,a move that ultimately would result in not owing taxes to the U.S. government, legally.

Ah. Expatriation. And what does the Sovereign Society hold out as being involved in expatriating?

the first step is to find alternative citizenship. After attending a Sovereign Society meeting, I decided that my best bet was to gain citizenship in St. Kitts & Nevis by purchasing a property there for an amount over $350,000. Then, I paid another $50,000 for two additional family members to apply for citizenship

Wait a second - $400K in after-tax bucks? Unless you're Bill Gates or Warren Buffett, I would think that amount would go a long ways towards equalizing any tax differences. And then there's the exit tax (26 USC 877 and 877A) and the Reed Amendment . . . and the children and grandchildren.

Fuck 'em. Go for the bucks.

[wserra]

I think the program used Adask because he is at least lucid, looks "normal," and speaks something like English

Which is why it would have been nice if they had played the excerpt from his radio show in which he said that American women were "money-grubbing sluts".

[Prof]

IIRC, his anti-lawyer, anti-judge, anti-establishment crap came out of a bad divorce in Dallas. Is this correct? A quick glance at the internet did not answer the question.

[ArthurWankspittle]

IIRC, his anti-lawyer, anti-judge, anti-establishment crap came out of a bad divorce in Dallas. Is this correct? A quick glance at the internet did not answer the question.

Yes. But you didn't need the internets, just Quatloos: http://quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=6459

[Prof]

IIRC, his anti-lawyer, anti-judge, anti-establishment crap came out of a bad divorce in Dallas. Is this correct? A quick glance at the internet did not answer the question.

Yes. But you didn't need the internets, just Quatloos: http://quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=6459

Thanks!

[wserra]

Why I Don't Like This: Adask says it for me, in his comment from May 18, 7:59 AM, on his only blog entry so far re: 60 Minutes:

Yeah, it is funny. Yesterday I was on Alex Jones. Today, Fox News. Tomorrow, another big national radio show whose name escapes me. For the past 3 days, my blog is averaging about 8,000 hits a day (it usually averages 700). 60 Minutes attempt to discredit me has actually helped me enormously. And it’s not over.

I imagine it's not. Were it not for 60 Minutes, Adask would remain in well-deserved obscurity. But train wrecks draw viewers.

[Pottapaug1938]

Adask suffers from the same delusion as does Van Pelt. He thinks that the higher hit count translates to increased support for his delusions; when in reality most of the people who are now seeking him out are essentially just like the motorists who slow down to gawk at the smashed-up cars by the side of the road after a particularly ugly accident.

[ArthurWankspittle]

Adask suffers from the same delusion as does Van Pelt. He thinks that the higher hit count translates to increased support for his delusions; when in reality most of the people who are now seeking him out are essentially just like the motorists who slow down to gawk at the smashed-up cars by the side of the road after a particularly ugly accident.

Exactly. Take the case of Casey Serin, which is what first got me into all this. His IAFF blog got 50,000 hits at its peak. Where is he now? Broke, unemployable and possibly homeless. As some else following the saga put it, his ability was to implode with such magnitude that it could not fail to draw people to the edge of the resulting crater to see what was going on.

The real test would be to see what his following is in a year from now.

[wserra]

in reality most of the people who are now seeking him out are essentially just like the motorists who slow down to gawk at the smashed-up cars by the side of the road after a particularly ugly accident.

Like us.

While you are hopefully correct, take a look at the comments on the above blog entry. There is no way of knowing whether the favorable ones - the large majority - are mainly from dimwits who admired Adask before the piece or not.

[Demosthenes]

There's also no way of knowing how many of the favorable comments were written by Adask.

If Alfred thinks the good that comes from the story is going to outweigh the bad, he's delusional...

[ArthurWankspittle]

....If Alfred thinks the good that comes from the story is going to outweigh the bad, he's delusional...

Oh yes. You can be sure that someone at the IRS is now tasked with checking his file, if they weren't already doing it, after his comments on tax.

[Demosthenes]

I doubt they'll find much. Alfred was living in 300 square foot travel trailer in Texas and when his landlord learned out about the 60 Minutes interview, he kicked Alfred out of the trailer.

[Gregg]

I doubt they'll find much. Alfred was living in 300 square foot travel trailer in Texas and when his landlord learned out about the 60 Minutes interview, he kicked Alfred out of the trailer.

Another "Warrior Standing Tall!"