Wrong.Jamie0331 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 06, 2018 1:53 pm Question 12 discussion; Due process is the right to be heard, by testimony or otherwise, and to
have the “right of controverting, by proof, every material fact which bears on the question of right
in the matter involved,” and if presumption is the evidence basis of alleged facts, then “this is not
due process.” (Black's Law Dictionary, Supra, Page b).
The Tax Court and Appeals Court showed extreme bias against Petitioner, and this court affirmed
that “justice must satisfy the appearance of justice.” (Levine, Supra, Page n). Petitioner filed for
recusal of judges twice on this issue, and once, it was apparently granted, (see Tax Court docket
showing transfer) but this changed nothing showing any attempt at “justice” in this instant case.
The courts have ruled that only if it appears “beyond doubt” that the plaintiff can “prove no set of
facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief,” can the courts dismiss the case or
ignore the evidence. (Conley, Supra, Page e). Petitioner has a plethora of evidence herein and
presented to all the lower courts, but believes “fraud on the court” has occurred because proper
procedures and compliance to law were not complied with. (Bulloch, Supra, Page d). Furthermore, this court stated that not being able to be heard in the courts on the matter in
controversy, and Petitioner having to refuse to comply with some alleged duty in order to be
heard “runs afoul of due process.” (Schulz, Supra, Page q).
Because the lower courts, for many decades, have consistently ignored, denied and refused to
review the entire evidence record, they have thereby denied due process to the people.
(Kazubowski, Supra, Page m). Only through NOT complying with alleged “laws” was this able
to be brought to this point before the Tax Court, Appeals Court, and now before this Supreme
Court, where the Respondent claims “answers” would be provided, but haven’t been thus far, but
where “fundamental fairness and substantial justice” should occur. (Vaughn, Supra, Page v).
No required answers from Respondent forced this poor utilization of judicial economy. This
court has stated that the courts are free to disagree with the administrative enforcement actions if
a substantial question is raised. (United States v. Morton Salt Co., Supra, Page u). Clearly
substantial questions have been raised in the 9 courts to date, yet no supported answers have been
forthcoming.
“Fundamental fairness and substantial justice” was denied Petitioner by every named lower court
despite being a constitutional right guaranteed Petitioner by the 14th Amendment which prohibits
the federal and state governments, respectively, from depriving “any” (See question 15, Page 28)
person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. Respondent is attempting to
deprive Petitioner of property, even presently, despite this case still in the courts, via several
NOTICE OF LEVY statements being received by Petitioner since this case was initiated. One set s in conflict with alleged “deficiency” notices now before this court. Respondent doesn’t know
what is going on with its own procedures and figures, and should be frozen from ANY action
against Petitioner. Additional proof documentation can be provided to the court.
Again, you're simply copying and pasting frivolous arguments.
Again, thanks for playing!
