James Bruce Thornberry, CID and Bob Hurt

[Famspear]

You are in trouble when you are under criminal investigation by the Internal Revenue Service and you are down to the point of asking Bob Hurt for help.

This relates to an action to enforce an IRS summons against James Bruce Thornberry. See United States v. Thornberry, case no. 8:08-mc-00085-EAK-TBM, U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida (Tampa).

On October 20, the Court issued an order enforcing the IRS summons.

Bob Hurt, in his lawman page, has posted this email from Thornberry:

Date: Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 8:01 AM
Subject: bruce in tampa...USDC & CID issue for group...matter is urgent
Bob
wondering if you could pass along my musings to the group to possibly draw upon any experience, first-hand or otherwise.
IRS/CID has been after me since March for my fingerprints, writing and photograph so that they could prove that i'm the signatory for certain documents sent to local Tampa agents as payment for past supposed tax debt. while each of you may have your own opinions about the Kennedy prom notes, etc., the fact should still remain that i did a new novation with the agents, paid with PNs and defaulted them twice. in the world of contracting, i am now the creditor and them the debtors. but as most of you know, with the IRS, contract law, or any law for that matter, is not an obstacle. the whole point of me fighting this is that CID has initiated a criminal investigation for use of fraudulent instruments and IF and WHEN they get my fingerprints on record, probably an arrest would not be far behind.
so let me mention briefly the recent court background (you can pull the docket up at Pacer: USA v Thornberry, case # 8:08-mc-00085-EAK-TBM)
(Thornberry, James Bruce).
they used the USDC here in Tampa to Show Cause for me to comply with the summons 2039 (the illegal BATF summons that is no longer assigned to the IRS). my case has essentially been to point out the unlawful use of summons 2039, used a counterclaim to show their many, many unlawful actions, and ending with the 2005, We The People, Shulz case (among many cites) to show that the Supremes did in fact rule in Shulz that the 2039 had no valid, lawful import and could be ignored.
the problem is...how do i lawfully ignore it for now until appeal without getting arrested and them "take" my fingerprints at that time???
first the magistrate ruled in USA favor, i filed an objection to the judge and then she ruled in her Order in favor of USA (although i feel that the judge may have never actually seen the matter and that her lackey assts actually did the Order because it was the weakest dribble you've ever seen, completely ignoring factual Memorandum of Law, ignoring ALL unrebutted, agreed and stipulated to many, many unlawful actions not the least of which was the unlawful summons 2039.
so as i read the FRAP (Fed Rules of Appellate Procedure), that's where my disillusionment grew even larger.
it clearly states that i have 30 days to file a Notice of Appeal, and maybe 60 days IF the USA is a party.
but let me continue please...
i have been contacted by the CID agent to conform with the Order this week.
IF i do that willingly, that's not good.
IF i don't go to CID, it appears from everything that i've read in FRAP, that even though i can Notice Appeal, then Appeal, the only possible protection from complying with the Order now is to get to the Appeal stage before Friday, then file a Motion to Stay and then there is still no guarantee that i would not be arrested via arrest warrant via DOJ via USDC for not complying with Court's Order.
i've said all this to ask, does anyone really know what, if any, protections that i might have for not complying with the Court's Order until after the 11th Appeals has heard my appeal?
if i'm arrested for not complying, then they've got my fingerprints, etc., anyway. I COULD WIN on appeal at a later time and still lose because they've got a Court Order NOW upholding an Unlawful summons 2039.
ideally, i would like to take the 30-60 days before filing a Notice of Appeal, then take my 30 days to file an Appeal to stretch out the timeframe to get many other matters in my life worked on, etc. before an Appeal's Court ruling.
while i would like to believe that i would have the right to "DUE PROCESS", namely, not complying with any Order during the 30-60 days following when an appeal is allowed by FRAP, it just doesn't appear from reading FRAP II, Rule 3 and Rule 4, Right of Appeal When Taken, that these rules PROVIDE ANY PROTECTION FROM HAVING TO COMPLY WITH THE COURT'S ORDER FOR THE SUMMONS 2039.
thanks in advance to anyone that takes the interest in reading and providing feedback. my personal contact info is below.
regards,
*God** Bless America!*
* J. Bruce Thornberry
without prejudice
[personal contact information not reproduced]

(bolding added).

Gee, I wonder why Thornberry is worried about the government having his fingerprints. After all, he's innocent, right?

[Judge Roy Bean]

Bob Hurt, in his lawman page, has posted this email from Thornberry:

Date: Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 8:01 AM
Subject: bruce in tampa...USDC & CID issue for group...matter is urgent
Bob
wondering if you could pass along my musings to the group to possibly draw upon any experience, first-hand or otherwise.
IRS/CID has been after me since March for my fingerprints, writing and photograph so that they could prove that i'm the signatory for certain documents sent to local Tampa agents as payment for past supposed tax debt. while each of you may have your own opinions about the Kennedy prom notes, etc., the fact should still remain that i did a new novation with the agents, paid with PNs and defaulted them twice.

I love seeing these kinds of things. It proves my point that the Internet and stupidity go hand-in-hand. Seriously, where do you think Thornberry found not only the idea, but the forms?

in the world of contracting, i am now the creditor and them the debtors.

Now if there only were such a world for these nimrods to operate in. Wait a minute - that gives me an idea! Why not create an on-line world where things worked the way they like to think? It would be an instant hit among the nutball community. Never mind. They wouldn't pay to subscribe and if they did, they'd try using PNs.

but as most of you know, with the IRS, contract law, or any law for that matter, is not an obstacle. the whole point of me fighting this is that CID has initiated a criminal investigation for use of fraudulent instruments and IF and WHEN they get my fingerprints on record, probably an arrest would not be far behind.

Now this is almost pathetic in an odd sort of way. I guess the theory he's working under is you have to be fingerprinted and photographed before they can arrest you. 'Round here, that is done while you're in custody.

so let me mention briefly the recent court background (you can pull the docket up at Pacer: USA v Thornberry, case # 8:08-mc-00085-EAK-TBM)
(Thornberry, James Bruce).
they used the USDC here in Tampa to Show Cause for me to comply with the summons 2039 (the illegal BATF summons that is no longer assigned to the IRS). my case has essentially been to point out the unlawful use of summons 2039, used a counterclaim to show their many, many unlawful actions, and ending with the 2005, We The People, Shulz case (among many cites) to show that the Supremes did in fact rule in Shulz that the 2039 had no valid, lawful import and could be ignored.
the problem is...how do i lawfully ignore it for now until appeal without getting arrested and them "take" my fingerprints at that time???

Jim - go ahead and ignore it. Like you figured, they can't arrest you unless you give them your fingerprints.

first the magistrate ruled in USA favor, i filed an objection to the judge and then she ruled in her Order in favor of USA (although i feel that the judge may have never actually seen the matter and that her lackey assts actually did the Order because it was the weakest dribble you've ever seen, completely ignoring factual Memorandum of Law, ignoring ALL unrebutted, agreed and stipulated to many, many unlawful actions not the least of which was the unlawful summons 2039.

Ah yes, the "unrebutted affidavit" crappolla. Works every time. Oh, wait. You must have done something wrong. The process is correct. Maybe you just left off a few pages.

so as i read the FRAP (Fed Rules of Appellate Procedure), that's where my disillusionment grew even larger.
it clearly states that i have 30 days to file a Notice of Appeal, and maybe 60 days IF the USA is a party.
but let me continue please...
i have been contacted by the CID agent to conform with the Order this week.
IF i do that willingly, that's not good.
IF i don't go to CID, it appears from everything that i've read in FRAP, that even though i can Notice Appeal, then Appeal, the only possible protection from complying with the Order now is to get to the Appeal stage before Friday, then file a Motion to Stay and then there is still no guarantee that i would not be arrested via arrest warrant via DOJ via USDC for not complying with Court's Order.

Wow - a moment of near-lucidity.

i've said all this to ask, does anyone really know what, if any, protections that i might have for not complying with the Court's Order until after the 11th Appeals has heard my appeal?

Yep. Try Van Pelt's saving to suitors gibberish. It's at least as effective as the novation gibberish.

if i'm arrested for not complying, then they've got my fingerprints, etc., anyway. I COULD WIN on appeal at a later time and still lose because they've got a Court Order NOW upholding an Unlawful summons 2039.
ideally, i would like to take the 30-60 days before filing a Notice of Appeal, then take my 30 days to file an Appeal to stretch out the timeframe to get many other matters in my life worked on, etc. before an Appeal's Court ruling.

Ah, the delay ploy - have you heard the term "frivolous?"

while i would like to believe that i would have the right to "DUE PROCESS", namely, not complying with any Order during the 30-60 days following when an appeal is allowed by FRAP, it just doesn't appear from reading FRAP II, Rule 3 and Rule 4, Right of Appeal When Taken, that these rules PROVIDE ANY PROTECTION FROM HAVING TO COMPLY WITH THE COURT'S ORDER FOR THE SUMMONS 2039.
thanks in advance to anyone that takes the interest in reading and providing feedback. my personal contact info is below.
regards,
*God** Bless America!*
* J. Bruce Thornberry
without prejudice
[personal contact information not reproduced]

This will be an excellent example for yet another win when and if he's not sanctioned.

[The Observer]

how do i lawfully ignore it for now until appeal without getting arrested and them "take" my fingerprints at that time???

Dear Mr. Thornberry:

The answer is simple - have your fingerprints removed from your fingers. Although a doctor would be recommended for this procedure, I'm sure you could come up with a cheaper method in line with your paytriot philosophy. And even though you may be in terrible pain, just think of the immense satisfaction you will gain knowing how frustrated those CID guys are because they can't arrest you without fingerprints.

[Quixote]

how do i lawfully ignore it for now until appeal without getting arrested and them "take" my fingerprints at that time???

Dear Mr. Thornberry:

The answer is simple - have your fingerprints removed from your fingers. Although a doctor would be recommended for this procedure, I'm sure you could come up with a cheaper method in line with your paytriot philosophy. And even though you may be in terrible pain, just think of the immense satisfaction you will gain knowing how frustrated those CID guys are because they can't arrest you without fingerprints.

That is just crazy enough for you to start giving seminars at $3000 a pop on a guaranteed method for paytriots to drop off the grid. You could sell fingerprint filing kits, or for the truly serious, amputation kits.

[notorial dissent]

Uh, no, the truly scary part is that they would sell.

[The Observer]

Uh, no, the truly scary part is that they would sell.

I had some qualms over my post for that exact reason. I am still thinking about removing it simply because I know somewhere there is an idiot who would believe it and and try it.

[Quixote]

Uh, no, the truly scary part is that they would sell.

I had some qualms over my post for that exact reason. I am still thinking about removing it simply because I know somewhere there is an idiot who would believe it and and try it.

Remember when you thought there was a limit on stupidity.

[The Observer]

Uh, no, the truly scary part is that they would sell.

I had some qualms over my post for that exact reason. I am still thinking about removing it simply because I know somewhere there is an idiot who would believe it and and try it.

Remember when you thought there was a limit on stupidity.

I think it was the opposite - my original signature said something to the effect that the only difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has it limits.