Renaissance / The Tax People President Convicted!

[Demosthenes]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
TAX
THURSDAY FEBRUARY 28, 2008

KANSAS-BASED TAX SCHEME PROMOTER CONVICTED IN $78 MILLION FRAUD
WASHINGTON – Michael Craig Cooper today was convicted in Kansas City, Kan., on tax and fraud charges after a six week jury trial, the Justice Department and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) announced. Cooper was the president and founder of Renaissance - The Tax People, which was headquartered in Topeka, Kan.

According to the evidence introduced at trial, from 1997 until 2002, Cooper and others conspired to defraud the United States and Renaissance clients by marketing a program that purported to educate individuals on how to start a home based business in order to fraudulently convert personal expenses into business deductions through false and misleading representations. Cooper assisted clients in preparing and filing false tax returns on which the clients claimed tax deductions by falsely characterizing personal expenses as business expenses. In this manner, clients illegally reduced their taxable income by deducting personal expenses, including children's allowances, commuting expenses, educational expenses and vacation expenses. This scheme was also promoted under the name Advantage International Marketing (AIM).

In December 2006, Cooper was charged in a superseding indictment with one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States, 56 counts of assisting in the preparation of a false tax return, 36 counts of mail fraud, 11 counts of wire fraud and 44 counts of money laundering.
“Citizens who pay their fair share of taxes can rest assured that the Department of Justice will continue to utilize all our resources to prosecute those who choose to cheat and engage in fraud,” said John A. Marrella, Deputy Assistant Attorney General of the Justice Department Tax Division. “To those citizens who choose to engage in tax fraud, our warning is: we are going to prosecute you and do our best to put you in jail.”

Cooper faces a maximum sentence of 20 years for each of the most serious counts of conviction and a fine of up to $250,000 for each count. The government also sought forfeiture of $84 million in proceeds from the fraud, including, United States currency, land, vehicles, gold coins, bank accounts and life insurance policies. U.S. District Court Judge Carlos Murguia will be holding a hearing on the forfeiture prior to sentencing, which is set for May 19, 2008.
“Mr. Cooper exploited his customers and attempted to steal from the honest taxpayers of the United States,” said Eric F. Melgren, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Kansas. “Despite all the cunning marketing, Renaissance-The Tax People was nothing but a scam.”

Defendants Daniel Joel Gleason, Jesse Lyala Cota, Todd Eugene Strand, Thomas Steelman Sr., Frances Ruth and Elizabeth Crotts pled guily to charges related to this scheme and testified at trial. Gleason, Cota, and Strand were charged in the indictment with Cooper.

Gleason, previously the owner and operator of a tax preparation service, My Tax Man, pled guilty on Oct. 10, 2006 to conspiracy to defraud the United States and aiding and assisting in the preparation of filing of false tax return. Cota, a former IRS District Director for the Southern District of California, plead guilty on March 27, 2006, to conspiracy to defraud the United States. Strand pled guilty on March 27, 2006, to conspiracy to defraud the United States and one court of mail fraud. In his plea, Strand admitted that the conspiracy defrauded Renaissance customers of more than $75 million and caused a tax loss of more than $20 million.
“Marketing programs to take illegal tax deductions through false and misleading representations, isn’t tax planning; it’s criminal activity,” said Eileen Mayer, Chief, IRS Criminal Investigation. “IRS Criminal Investigation has made the investigation of individuals who market or who intentionally buy into abusive tax schemes a national priority. Today’s conviction speaks strongly to our successful efforts in stopping this growing area of fraud.”

The case was prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Scott C. Rask and Justice Department Tax Division trial attorney Charles A. O’Reilly and was investigated by the IRS Criminal Investigation.

[Dr. Caligari]

and is only eligible for parole after he has served half of his sentence

There is no more parole in the federal system. A sentence can be reduced by up to 15% for good behavior in prison, but he will have to serve at least 85% of his sentence.

[grixit]

Has there been any response in the tardesphere yet?

[Mr. Mephistopheles]

Topeka, huh? I wonder if drinks from the same tainted water as Fred Phelps? If you anyone here thinks the TP diatribes are wacky, read some of Phelp's nonsense. Freaky, freaky dude.

[Demosthenes]

Tax People exec gets 4 years

| EMAIL | PRINT | COMMENT | SHARE
BY STEVE FRY
Created October 16, 2009 at 10:18am
Updated October 16, 2009 at 11:49am
A former executive of the defunct Renaissance, The Tax People, was sentenced to 51 months in prison for tax fraud and ordered to pay more than $10.6 million in restitution to the Internal Revenue Service.
Todd Eugene Strand, 39, of Topeka, who pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to defraud the IRS and one count of mail fraud, was the seventh Renaissance executive or employee to be sentenced. Strand was sentenced Friday at the Robert J. Dole U.S. Courthouse in Kansas City, Kan.
In his plea, Strand, formerly of Murrieta, Calif., admitted that in November 1995, he began working as a marketing associate with Renaissance. The company, which was based in the former Fleming Mansion at S.W. 10th and Gage, offered its members services that included tax advice, tax return preparation and so-called "audit protection." Over time, Strand became a right-hand man to Renaissance founder Michael Craig Cooper and was promoted to vice president and national marketing director.
Strand will be allowed to voluntarily surrender to start his sentence, but a specific date hasn't been scheduled, said Jim Cross, spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Kansas.
Once a judge orders a defendant to be incarcerated, the U.S. Bureau of Prisons decides when and where he is to report to start his sentence, as well as what correctional facility the sentence will be served in, Cross said.
From 1995 through April 2002, the conspiracy in which Strand was a participant fraudulently generated approximately $75 million in income from Renaissance members by means of false and misleading claims made in marketing materials and during conference calls, rallies, and promotional meetings, authorities said.
Cooper, 55, founder and president of Renaissance, is to be sentenced Nov. 18. Following a jury trial, Cooper was convicted Feb. 28, 2008, of 73 federal felonies.
The convictions are one count of conspiracy to defraud the IRS, to commit wire fraud and to commit mail fraud; 17 counts of mail fraud; 11 counts of wire fraud; one count of money laundering conspiracy; 41 counts of unlawful monetary transactions of criminally derived property worth more than $10,000; and two counts of money laundering.
Jurors acquitted him of 56 counts of preparing false tax returns and 19 counts of mail fraud.

[KickahaOta]

On December 15, 2014, Michael Craig Cooper's habeas corpus petition was rejected by the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The opinion is available at http://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/13/13-3326.pdf. A quick summary of his arguments and the failures thereof:

• Trial counsel was ineffective in failing to move for dismissal based on a Speedy Trial Act violation: Wrong, because the Act probably wasn't violated, and even if it was, the dismissal would have been without prejudice (and thus would accomplish nothing, since he would be immediately re-indicted).
• Mistrial/jury taint: During deliberations, the foreperson discussed out-of-court research and said that Cooper was lying and guilty. Foreperson was removed. Trial counsel was ineffective in failing to move for mistrial. Wrong, because trial counsel had strategic reasons for doing so: the trial had gone well, a second trial would probably have a more unfavorable jury, Cooper agreed to the strategy, and all the remaining jurors said they could be impartial. Cooper claimed that counsel admitted that the reason for not moving for mistrial was that counsel's law practice couldn't afford the time for another trial; district court found this "inherently incredible", among other things. Also, district court would have denied a mistrial, making the whole thing moot.
• Trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object that the jury instruction required the jury only to find that Cooper used or caused another person to use the wires, rather than that a wire transfer had actually taken place. I'm not sure what the difference would be, and the courts didn't see it either; and there were plenty of allegations of actual wire communications.
• Government did not present evidence of wire transfers to the jury. Wrong, and not considered since it wasn't argued in the lower courts.
• Trial counsel was ineffective for failing to argue that the mail fraud statute doesn't cover cases where a person causes someone else to send or deliver mail. Wrong, because it does.
• Trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to summary testimony and exhibits. Wrong, because Cooper failed to point out anything wrong with any particular piece of evidence, and did not try to show prejudice.
• Appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise the above claims. Wrong, because the above claims are wrong.
• Trial counsel failed to adequately prepare a defense. Wrong, because counsel investigated and performed adequately, and there was no evidence that Cooper actually told his counsel about the witnesses he wanted presented, nor what any of them would helpfully say.
• Trial counsel failed to argue against a sentencing enhancement that violated Apprendi. Wrong, because Cooper completely failed to explain his argument.
• Trial counsel failed to present Cooper with two plea offers. Wrong, because counsel was credible and Cooper not credible. In the district court's words, Cooper appeared "self-serving, deliberate, measured, and calculated. [He] seemed willing to say anything to reduce his sentence." Furthermore, no prejudice, because Cooper proclaimed his innocence all the while.
• Cumulative error. Wrong, because zero plus zero does not equal prejudice.

Michael Craig Cooper remains federal prisoner #44952-179, release date April 21, 2022. Condolence cards can be sent to Bastrop Federal Correctional Institution, 1341 Highway 95 North, Bastrop, TX 76802.

[Hyrion]

In his plea, Strand admitted that the conspiracy defrauded Renaissance customers of more than $75 million and caused a tax loss of more than $20 million.

I wonder if I understand that correctly:

• For each $1 of tax they saved their clients, they billed their clients $3.75

If I understand that correctly: Their clients were obviously not paying attention to what their "tax savings" were costing them.

[KickahaOta]

In his plea, Strand admitted that the conspiracy defrauded Renaissance customers of more than $75 million and caused a tax loss of more than $20 million.

I wonder if I understand that correctly:

• For each $1 of tax they saved their clients, they billed their clients $3.75

If I understand that correctly: Their clients were obviously not paying attention to what their "tax savings" were costing them.

Two possible explanations spring to mind there:

• This wasn't just a tax avoidance scheme; it was a pyramid scheme. So you were paying for the privilege of recruiting a downline (and theoretically getting revenue from them), as well as for the tax advice.
• If I pay $1000 for tax advice that I'm told will get me $10000 of tax savings, that's a sensible investment for me (aside from the whole "cheating and fraud" thing). If the IRS then disallows my tax return and charges me interest and penalties, and I pay up, then I've still been defrauded, but the tax loss to the government is (theoretically) zero.

[wserra]

Michael C. Cooper died last week in federal prison. Jesse A. Cota was released in 2011 at age 70.

[skassel]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/10/us/m ... -dead.html

I am quoted in this article and will be more than happy to answer any questions any of you may have. As a result of my activities with TheTaxPeople, my EA licensed was suspended for four years, but it took another year to go through all of the procedures to get it back so I lost my license for a total of 5 years.

I lost my home and just about everything else during that time.

[The Observer]

Mr. Kassel, thanks for joining and responding here. I have a couple of questions:

(1) How did you come into contact with Cooper and get involved with Renaissance?

(2) The article says that you "...left too late" and received the suspension of your EA license. What actually was the tipping point where the IRS felt that disciplinary action was required for your case?

3) Did you refer your own clients to Cooper's organization? Or did you recruit people from outside your practice as customers for Cooper's scheme?

[notorial dissent]

Yes, Mr Kassel, welcome. What he said, I too am curious as to the why.

[skassel]

In September of 1999, I received email saying, "Cut your taxes by 50%. Ask me how". That led to several phone calls and eventually I went to hear Mike Cooper speak in front of several hundred people in Oakland. I didn't really understand what he was talking about because very little had to do with taxes. At that meeting, I sat down and spoke with Jesse Cota, who was formerly the IRS District Director in Laguna Niguel. Jesse had just come aboard the company which to me was extremely positive. The next day I called an EA by the name of Dan Gleason in Tennessee. He had just left the company. I knew Dan for several years and he was a highly regarded tax professional. He told me that the company philosophy was sound, but that he and Cooper didn't get along.

I came aboard the company for one and only one reason. I knew enough about multilevel marketing to know that a huge percentage of the marketers had major tax problems. That was the only aspect of the tax business that I was in. I represent delinquent taxpayers (well, non-taxpayers) exclusively. At that time I had 2 EA's and an attorney working for me and I felt that we could literally make millions from an association with the company.

At the same time, I had just taken a major story to David Cay Johnston of the NYTimes that the IRS was refusing to approve payment agreements. That led to a Page One story https://www.nytimes.com/1999/10/10/busi ... bills.html and I was on Good Morning America the next day during the first segment of the show right after the Jon Benet Ramsey story.

In addition, two years earlier I was the only tax practitioner in the country not a representing a major stakeholder organization to testify before The National Commission on Restructuring the Internal Revenue Service.

I began doing a large number of speaking events for the company primarily talking about how I would help them to resolve their tax problems. At the same time I learned that the publications and videos put out by the company (primarily by Dan Gleason) were grossly erroneous. The company told people that with their home-based business, everything was a deductible business expense. Slap a magnetic sign on your car and every mile was deductible. Put an item for sale in your dining room, another in your living room and more in your basement and your entire mortgage or rent could be written off. Yeah, it was that blatant.

Jesse and I went to Mike Cooper and told him that we needed to remake all of the information that the company put out or that there would be problems with the IRS. Unknown to me at that time was that the IRS was already investigating the company. We also told Cooper that he had to stop the company's IMAs (independent marketing associates) from making specious claims.

Over the next several months, we put together legally sound and absolutely unimpeachable tax information. Every single time I spoke, I stressed exactly what you could NOT do.

However, Cooper was telling the top marketing people to ignore me and Jesse and to continue to make the claims. Why? Because we were signing up a huge number of new clients each month and the company was making huge sums of money. Now, IF the products were sold to end users; that is people with existing home-based businesses to whom we could teach sound tax strategies, fine. The problem is that there were very few end users and virtually no one with existing businesses. Every sale was to someone for the purpose of them making TheTaxPeople their business. It had become a pyramid scheme teaching illegal tax strategies.

Jesse and I were so certain that we had put together a great program that in the summer of 2000, we exhibited our information at the IRS Nationwide Tax Forums. We literally handed out information to every IRS employee we could find. 99% had never heard of TheTaxPeople. At the same time, at the urging of Mike Cooper's top assistant, I invited David Cay Johnston to one of our large IMA gatherings in San Diego.

That led to this article where Johnston hit the company very hard https://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/13/busi ... x-law.html That same day, I was asked my the company to go on the O'Reilly Factor where I defended the company. I am 100% certain that I pissed off the IRS by doing that interview. I stated everything that we properly taught people and did so well that a former IRS Commissioner that was also on the show said that everything I said was correct. At the end of the segment, Bill O'Reilly said, "don't do it".

At that point, the investigations got much heavier. We knew that Kansas was investigating the company for MLM violations. For the record, I made a total of 2 sales with the company. One was to one of my employees who came aboard the company and the other was a sale that I did not personally make, but someone from the company gave me. That was done by putting another person's name on the sale so they would receive the commission. The commission on each sale was around $100, I believe.

A month later, the company was raided by the IRS and USPS https://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/12/busi ... Position=2. I had personally urged Cooper to stop making any sales shortly after the first article ran in September, but he refused. The only activities I had from that point on was doing live phone calls where IMAs called in to listen. I have no idea how many people were on those calls, but it could have been thousands. During those calls I continued to tell people what to properly do and what to not do. I failed miserably in those attempts.

What I also did not know and literally found out a week ago was that the videos we thought we produced were dramatically edited by Cooper to dial back any prohibitions on the marketers. Cooper had promised Jesse and I that we would have the final say so on edits. That's not how it worked out.

There was very little activity for me over the next couple of months. It became clear that Cooper was not going to take the advice of his attorneys or anyone else and in January, 2001 I quit the company in a very public manner. The next day I contacted IRS-CID in Kansas City and a couple weeks later I flew to Kansas City to meet with IRS and an assistant US Attorney named Scott Rask. I answered questions all day and flew home. I never dealt with DOJ again. I recently found out that many people I knew were summoned to testify before a grand jury. I was not and was not asked to testify at Cooper's criminal trial either.

In 2005, I received a letter from the IRS asserting a penalty for $29,633 under I.R.C. § 6700. 6700 imposes a civil penalty on any person who participates, directly or indirectly, in the sale of (1) any interest in "a partnership or other entity," (2) any "investment plan or arrangement" or (3) "any other plan or arrangement," if, in connection with such sale, he makes or furnishes, or causes another person to make or furnish, a statement concerning available tax benefits he "knows or has reason to know is false or fraudulent as to any material matter."

In order to fight the penalty, I was required to pay 15% of the $29,633 and file suit against the government in US District Court. I did so and the case was heard by Judge Samuel Conti, a Nixon appointee who was 87 at the time the case was heard. Actually, Judge Conti heard nothing. He was stone cold deaf and even with hearing aids, he had major trouble hearing anything. My attorney made one huge error. I wanted a jury trial and he made an informal request for a jury trial. However, he never put that request on the record.

When the bench trial had concluded I was extremely hopeful. I didn't believe that DOJ had proven their case. In fact, I was extremely happy that at no time did DOJ or their witnesses ever allege any wrongdoing on my part. They had not said I completed erroneous tax returns nor did they cite anything I ever said that was improper tax advice. However, I lost. The reason was even though I had not said or done anything improper, my activities caused people to come aboard the company. Therefore, I had "in connection with such sale, he makes or furnishes, or causes another person to make or furnish, a statement concerning available tax benefits he “knows or has reason to know is false or fraudulent as to any material matter.” There was no question that I knew videos and written material presented by TTP was false and fraudulent and that was my undoing. Even though I had worked to change the items and although I personally never said anything wrong, I was part of the company and I knew material was false and fraudulent.

After losing at trial, my attorney urged me to appeal to the Ninth Circuit. After doing so, I found out that I had no chance to win our primary request because my attorney never demanded a jury trial on the record.

The judgment from the Ninth Circuit stated "The system promoted by Kassel was designed to reduce customers' claimed tax liabilities by taking various deductions related to the operation of a home-based business. Although Kassel did not advocate any unlawful tax shelters, evidence regarding the nature of the tax system he promoted was properly admitted. See I.R.C. § 6700."

After I lost in the Ninth Circuit, I resigned as an EA, but a few weeks later, I received mail from the Office of Professional Responsibility proposing that I be suspended. I worked with an attorney from OPR and settled on a 4 year suspension.

The craziest part is that I never got a single client for tax resolution purposes. NOT ONE. The money I made from TTP was a stipend for all the speaking I did on their behalf. I did so much that I ignored my own tax resolution business. Financially, it was a complete disaster. I made virtually nothing over the entire time I was with TTP; spent a fortune on attorneys and then lost my license.

So, I never brought any of my clients into TTP and recruited just one person; my employee who was doing tax returns for TTP clients.

That's it for now. I'll be happy to clarify anything that was unclear or any follow up questions.

[Duke2Earl]

In my opinion, which counts for nothing, you specifically had knowledge that the company and its management were selling fraudulent tax information. You knew they were selling a fraud and yet you did not disassociate yourself from the company. The fact that you personally did not sell fraudulent tax information is not enough. The company was perpetrating a fraud on the public at the same time you were defending the company in public and you knew it. The consequences you had to endure were justified.

[skassel]

That was the position of the government and the position of the Courts. My efforts to fix the problems were not enough and the only thing I SHOULD have done was to disassociate myself from the company.

If you look at my quote in the NYT article by David Cay Johnston I acknowledged that point when I said I should have listened to my wife and never gotten involved with the company.

[wserra]

Mr. Kassel - I too thank you for braving the headwinds here. However, I go back a ways on this stuff, to Usenet and misc.taxes in particular. I remember you from there. I thought I remembered you vigorously defending TTP, which was in fact an obvious fraud in every way. Usenet archives are quite spotty - they're actually worse than that - but lets try.

Paul Berg was a regular on misc.taxes. Do you recall the following exchange with him:

Whenever a person, such as Steven Kassel ("Nation's Leading Tax Expert"), push an organization (TheTaxPeople.net), which I feel at least offers bad tax advice at a high price and at worst is a pyramid marketing scam, I will not sit idly by while that person uses the logo of a respected professional group (NAEA) to do so.

It seems like a good number of NAEA members agree with me about TheTaxPeople.net and on the issue of the use of the NAEA logo.

If my efforts lead to the NAEA taking a strong stance against groups like TheTaxPeople.net and to tighter controls on the use of the NAEA's name and logos, then I feel the abuse I get from people like you and Mr. Kassel are well worth the price.

It's quite alright Paul. Keep doing what you are doing. You haven't cited a single piece of bad tax advice from TheTaxPeople.net. You seem to have a hard-on for me and Mike Cooper for some reason and appear to be a jealous, frustrated old man with a great deal of time on your hands. You frequently cross the line into slander and those actions will put us in court where you will have to prove your charges. So, post this wherever you wish. The time for you to put up or shut up is coming and I relish the opportunity to see you in court . . . Speaking on behalf of TheTaxPeople.net, we are proud to be a vendor at the largest IRS tax conventions in the country.

A single piece of bad advice? They sold deductions by means of a pyramid scheme. Where do you start? You would sign those posts as "Regional Director" of TTP, right?

Did you write to someone who criticized your connection to TTP: "Tell me the last time anyone gave a shit what you thought? Millions have read and seen me....a toilet seat has seen your contributions to society."

To a CPA named Paul Thomas, also criticizing your defense of TTP: "You are that stupid, Paulie. It appears the state board of accountancy n Georgia will let anyone in. Again, the web site [TTP] is CORRECT. It is not meant to be a dissertation on taxes. Reading is fundamental, Paulie..you should try it some time."

To a CPA named William Gustoffson, doing the same: "You are merely proving a complete and utter lack of knowledge about what TTP is and what we offer. Maybe if you get a chance you can come visit me at the IRS Nationwide Tax Forums the next several weeks in Chicago, St. Louis, Las Vegas or New Orleans. Until you get more information, you are just making yourself look rather foolish."

My recollection is that this is just a small sample. Many others criticized you - including possibly me, I don't remember, I certainly expressed my opinion about TTP - and got the same treatment. Moreover, you threatened everyone with being sued. Did you ever sue anyone?

Finally, there was this TTP flyer. See where (bottom of first page) it refers to how you, Cota and two others "have been attending IRS conventions around the nation! They are representing TheTaxPeople.net and they are recruiting TAX PROFESSIONALS!" It then goes on to quote Cota about the great reception you've been getting from "top IRS executives".

Frankly, Mr. Kassel, you should count your blessings. Yes, you left the shitshow early. But a number of others went to jail.

[notorial dissent]

Mr Kassel, thank you for telling your part of it. I think I do see how you got where you were, what I still don't understand is why? I don't see why you stayed though when you had to have known the information they were peddling, and that is what they were doing, to put not too fine a point on it was purely and totally and seriously bogus. That I do not understand.

[The Observer]

Thanks for sharing your viewpoint of your past involvement with TTP. After reading your post, I came away with the distinct feeling that there was a disconnect between the minimal involvement you claimed that Cota and you had and the consequences that you both experienced. Any person not knowing the full background would have gotten the impression that the government pounded both of you for merely being around Cooper and TTP. Granted, I know nothing of your background so I cannot claim to have any special insight of motivations that might explain why you would have gotten involved. But regarding Jesse Cota, I have some insight as to why he would have thrown caution to the wind.

Cota, as has been mentioned several times in this thread and other places on this site, was an executive with the IRS, serving as the District Director for Laguna Niguel District. He had arrived at this prestigious position as a career employee, and being in the right place at the right time, was recruited into the executive program as part of the IRS' drive to increase the number of minorities in upper and middle management. The reason it appears Cota ended up choosing a career in the government was due to him, after graduating, not being offered entry positions in the accounting field from the "Big 5" accounting firms. This seemed to be a sensitive issue for Cota, since he mentioned it several times in my presence during his tenure, ostensibly as a way of demonstrating to his audience that these firms were wrong by not hiring him, since he had been selected an executive of the IRS. There was also the implication that now being an executive would mean that prestigious firms should be recruiting him once he retired from the IRS.

But apparently such recruitment did not happen, since Cota ended up in the ranks of TTP. My theory is that Cota was so eager to to get a position that had power, prestige, perks and pay that he didn't spend much time worrying whether he was going to get into trouble. This was the best that Cota was offered, and rather than sit at home and be content that he had a decent pension or opened his own practice (which is not out of the ordinary - I know of several former directors who have done so), he just went along with the scheme. And I have doubts that Cota spent much time trying to steer TTP away from the course that Cooper set for it. Anyone who had a decent amount of ethics and knowledge could recognize that this was a scam from the beginning. But could Cota's pride allow him to tell Cooper he wasn't interested and walk away? I guess Cooper spent some time flattering and sweet-talking Cota as well.

So I find it hard to accept your explanation that Cota was preaching a different message from what Cooper was selling. I read over one of the publicity papers that TTP put out at the time Cota joined up; I was flabbergasted since I already knew that the firm was a scam operation. And to read that Cota was endorsing the claims and deductions as being legitimate, there was no other explanation for why he was there.

I have to agree with Wserra's position that the punishment handed out to you was light; I think Cota got off light as well, even if it was a felony conviction and resulted in a couple of years of time - he should have gotten more, given the fact that he was an IRS employee and leader. I can't imagine for a moment that every IRS executive that Cota was meeting with somehow thought that there was a patina of legitimacy about what he was pushing to them; I daresay that a few must have told Cota he was playing with fire or advised him to get out.

[wserra]

he [Jesse Cota] should have gotten more, given the fact that he was an IRS employee and leader.

While Kassel wasn't a District Director, he was an RO.

[The Observer]

Then Kassel was extremely blessed to avoid prosecution, trial, conviction, sentencing, and imprisonment.

Moreover, you threatened everyone with being sued. Did you ever sue anyone?

I don't know, but apparently his behavior on the 'Net resulted in litigation against him and sanctions from a court; read about it here.

Mr. Kassel, I don't believe that you should continually be beaten around the head for your past behavior. My philosophy is that once a person has been judged and fully satisfied that judgment, the past should be buried. Unfortunately the Internet, as you see, doesn't forget. And it certainly doesn't help when you resurrect the past in an attempt to spin the circumstances to paint you in a more favorable light; after all, on this site we tend to do research on any claims made here. I am sure you think you have been totally frank and honest about your involvement and culpability with TTP - and you have, to a point. And that is the problem I see here. You have not accepted 100% responsibility for your actions which is demonstrated by you blaming your attorney and the judge for the outcome - an outcome that you, as a former revenue officer, probably or should have known would happen. It would have been far better for you to omit the spin and admit that you tried to avoid punishment that was just.