Pete has been busy in prison ....

Joey Smith
Infidel Enslaver
Posts: 895
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:57 pm

Re: Pete has been busy in prison ....

Post by Joey Smith »

I've not paid income tax since 2007
Which is no great shakes since you're not making anything anyway. It's like that guy over there who says basically, "I've quit working and live a minimalist lifestyle but they are not collecting any taxes!"

Uh, yeah, buddy that's a really good strategy. :roll:
- - - - - - - - - - -
"The real George Washington was shot dead fairly early in the Revolution." ~ David Merrill, 9-17-2004 --- "This is where I belong" ~ Heidi Guedel, 7-1-2006 (referring to suijuris.net)
- - - - - - - - - - -
Famspear
Knight Templar of the Sacred Tax
Posts: 7668
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 12:59 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Pete has been busy in prison ....

Post by Famspear »

"Harvester" wrote:
I've not paid income tax since 2007 and have no friv pen, no levies, no liens, no garnishments. Not a peep from the DoJ/IRS.
Which puts Harvester in the category of the vast majority of other crooks who cheat on their federal income taxes. The fact that they haven't been caught yet proves nothing that they would like to see proved.
Pete is correct, the income tax is an excise on federal privilege.
No, Pete is incorrect. The federal income tax is not an excise on "federal privilege." Every court that has been presented with this argument has rejected it. And neither Pete nor Harvester has ever offered a statute or court decision that backs up what they say about "federal privilege." There is no record of anyone ever having even raised the stupid "federal privilege" argument in a court of law in the about first 67 years of the modern federal income tax.

No one raised the argument from 1913 to 1919.

No one raised the argument from 1920 to 1929.

No one raised the argument from 1930 to 1939.

No one raised the argument from 1940 to 1949.

No one raised the argument from 1950 to 1959.

No one raised the argument from 1960 to 1969.

No one raised the argument from 1970 to 1979.

The earliest reported decision of anyone having ever come up with this stupid theory in a court of law that I have found so far is in 1980 -- the case of United States v. Buras (argument that the taxpayer can be subject to the federal income tax only if he benefits from a "privilege extended by a government agency" was rejected), 633 F.2d 1356 (9th Cir. 1980).

Then other wackos began copying the argument -- losing every single time. Hendrickson is just another in a line of loser copycats.
He was selectively prosecuted for daring to show us the truth, that we could walk off the federal plantation at any time. Like I did.
He was prosecuted for filing false tax returns. He was tried, found guilty by the jury, sentenced, and sent to prison. That's where he is now. And if he was "selectively" prosecuted in the sense used by Harvester, that's OK -- both legally and morally. The term "selective prosecution" does have a technical legal meaning. However, the kind of "selective" prosecution that Harvester is talking about does not qualify as an illegal selective prosecution. The courts have ruled that it is OK for the government to "selectively prosecute" tax protesters in the way that Harvester is describing. And there is nothing in the U.S. Constitution or any statute that prohibits this kind of "selective prosecution."
The govt never proved their case, never presented a valid assessment for the years in question, never proved Pete even owed the tax.
Yes, the government proved its case. The fact that Harvester disagrees with the result means nothing. And whether the government presented a valid assessment or not, the government was not legally required to do that in order to prove its case. Showing a valid assessment is not required to prove the willful filing of a false federal income tax return.
Instead they relied on deception and the conditioned response of a jury of taxpayer slaves.
Baloney. Typical tax protester rhetoric -- offered with nothing to back it up.
It's no surprise they said "not so fast pal," found him guilty of escaping the same farm they're slaves on too. The jury didn't realize they're victims of the cabal too, free to go at any time!
Baloney. Typical tax protester rhetoric -- again, offered with nothing to back it up.

Peter E. ("Blowhard") Hendrickson is an just another con artist loser -- just like Harvester, aka Nationwide aka johnthetaxist aka Libre aka John Travis Harvester.

EDIT: Oh, and the reader will be happy to know that people who have claimed to be users of Hendrickson's scam, or who Hendrickson has listed as users on his web site, are also in federal prison, including Roger Charles Menner, Eugene George Warner, and Michael O'Daniel. "Selective" prosecution, indeed....
8)
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet
Famspear
Knight Templar of the Sacred Tax
Posts: 7668
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 12:59 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Pete has been busy in prison ....

Post by Famspear »

Meanwhile, back at the nuthouse (losthorizons.com), "oldhawaiiscot" writes:
Pete Hendrickson has exposed one facet of the IRS "racket", but sadly his method of fighting them has led to little...
http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... a659#28116

Oh, I don't know..... a federal prison sentence for Pete seems like his own definition of a "victory...."
10 million [in fraudulent tax refunds obtained by followers of Pete Hendrickson] may seem like a lot to one or two of us, but to the feds it is nada...
Well, it is indeed a small amount money in comparison to the total dollar amount of erroneous refunds (fraudulent or otherwise) paid out by the Internal Revenue Service each year.
They [the nice people at the IRS] have even come out with assigning a "Hendrickson" submission as being frivolous. In spite of them not having any legal bearing to assign a "frivolous" status...
Uh, no "legal bearing" except for the law itself.
The assignation of "frivolous" is very distinct..
Can't argue with that.
There are a number of other concerns that you might wish to explore in your travel down the highway in search of tax freedom.. Look up Tom Cryer, Larry Becraft(who I don't care for, but he has quite an extensive history as a tax appeal lawyer. He does have a couple of cases(Kuglin and the Tennesse [sic] boys) cases which won.)
Yet in none of these cases did the courts uphold a tax protester argument. Indeed, the court specifically rejected Cryer's tax protester arguments. A not guilty verdict in a federal criminal tax case does not constitute a victory for a tax protester argument, Einstein.
Look up the congressional record from 1943 where congress defines the Income tax....
The Congress does not define the income tax in the "Congressional Record," Einstein. You're thinking of the erroneous statement by a former legislative drafter that was printed in the Congressional Record.
Look up Otto Skinner..
I think Otto Skinner has gone on to his reward in the next life. If you look up Otto Skinner you will find that he was another clueless tax protester.
People have fighting, some successfully, the IRs's misapplications of the laws since the late 1940's.. Look up Devvy Kidd...
I doubt that Ms. Devvy Kidd would appreciate your apparent implication that she is old enough to have been fighting what you call the "misapplications" of the income tax laws since the late 1940s. (I guess she might be that old -- but I still doubt she would appreciate your intended -- or accidental -- implication about her age.)
I wish us all more power in our quest for justice, constitutional obediance [sic] of our federal government agencies, but sadly doesn't look like it's gonna happen in our lifetime. My dad worked for the Treasury department in the 50's, brought up questions to his superiors why the laws weren't being followed. Kinda of a predecessor to Joe Bannister [sic]. He was told to keep quiet and don't make wave. He was a patriot so he quit the Treasury department...
So, you got your goofy ideas from your father. No disrespect of your father is intended, but it seems that you're really indicating is that your father was no better at grasping reality than you are. Thanks for clearing that up.

By the way, who are the "Tennesse boys"?
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet
Harvester

Re: Pete has been busy in prison ....

Post by Harvester »

HA! You're comical Famspire. Pretending to be on the side of truth & justice, but actually defending the world's biggest fraud. Constantly trying to defend the indefensible. And why haven't you been able to shut me up? Perhaps I'm too kind to the Quatlosers?
Cathulhu
Order of the Quatloos, Brevet First Class
Posts: 1258
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: Pete has been busy in prison ....

Post by Cathulhu »

First you lie about your postings being blocked, then you demand to know why we haven't shut you up.

A total lack of logic in your position--well, there's a surprise.
Goodness is about what you do. Not what you pray to. T. Pratchett
Always be a moving target. L.M. Bujold
LPC
Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
Posts: 5233
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
Location: Earth

Re: Pete has been busy in prison ....

Post by LPC »

Cathulhu wrote:Looks to me like he'll go like Simkanin--stubbornly insisting he's right, from his cell, until he dies in prison.
Except that Pete's scheduled to be released in a little over a year.

However, it's now clear that he hasn't learned anything from the second kick of the mule (and won't ever), so there are really two role models for him to choose from: Larken Rose and Irwin Schiff.

Rose continues to rant like the anarchist loon that he is, but limits himself to publishing and has (I think, or I hope) refrained from doing anything that would put him back into prison.

Schiff also continued to rant, but also drifted back into the guru business and so went down for the third (and I'm afraid last) time.

Given his history (and the vehemence of his continuing rants), I suspect that Hendrickson won't be able to stop practicing what he preaches, that he's another Schiff, and that we'll be seeing his name in another indictment before too long.
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
User avatar
wserra
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Posts: 7580
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 6:39 pm

Re: Pete has been busy in prison ....

Post by wserra »

Anyone who wishes to find the electrons Harvey wasted can go here.
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume