Ex-ctc'er to CtCer's

jkeeb
Pirate Judge of Which Things Work
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:13 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Ex-ctc'er to CtCer's

Post by jkeeb »

I didn't read this until after my prior post.....now just to be sure, is my above scenario in your opinion, plausable?
Easily. If exam sees a U/R code on the transcript, they generally should call U/R and tell them to send the case over. If the case is closed, exam will ignore the U/R code. In this case, if exam has an earlier or later year, the fact that U/R closed, no change, will be meaningless.

There is also the distinct possibility that the idiot in U/R actually closed the case to exam, sent it there, and used the wrong closing code--generating the letter the guy received.
Remember that CtC is about the rule of law.

John J. Bulten
ASITStands
17th Viscount du Voolooh
Posts: 1088
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:15 pm

Re: Ex-ctc'er to CtCer's

Post by ASITStands »

jkeeb wrote:There is also the distinct possibility that the idiot in U/R actually closed the case to exam, sent it there, and used the wrong closing code--generating the letter the guy received.
That is indeed a good possibility!

The Underreporter case was closed "to" Examination. Hadn't thought of it that way.

In other words, it should have been transferred to Examination without the Closing Notice. It was the imposition of the closing code that generated the closing notice. Interesting.
User avatar
wserra
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Posts: 7624
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 6:39 pm

Re: Ex-ctc'er to CtCer's

Post by wserra »

ASITStands wrote:Interesting.
There are some subjects about which I treasure my ignorance.
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume
User avatar
webhick
Illuminati Obfuscation: Black Ops Div
Posts: 3994
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:41 am

Re: Ex-ctc'er to CtCer's

Post by webhick »

LOBO wrote:Any guesses on which cases he's going to misread and cite over here?
Per the LH thread, it looks like they're going to get their misinformation from Chuck Conces. Darth Hendrickson will probably not enjoy his Pez dispensers being loaded by a different con artist.
When chosen for jury duty, tell the judge "fortune cookie says guilty" - A fortune cookie
ASITStands
17th Viscount du Voolooh
Posts: 1088
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:15 pm

Re: Ex-ctc'er to CtCer's

Post by ASITStands »

And, now they're posting e-mail addresses. Will they never learn to reserve silence?

It's amazing to me that anyone would post their e-mail address on a public forum when the subject-matter is known to be controversial. Yes. I know those are throw-away addresses.

It just doesn't seem sensible to post your last name and location with an e-mail address.
User avatar
wserra
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Posts: 7624
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 6:39 pm

Re: Ex-ctc'er to CtCer's

Post by wserra »

dude101 wrote:
ASITStands wrote:Here's the purported victory trumpeted by 'dude101,' as posted to Lost Horizons.

Scott MacNeilage's 2006 federal "Notice of Deficiency" closing notice has been posted

Haven't reviewed the documents yet to determine what actually happened.

Maybe some of the regulars will get to it before I have a chance.
wow - you really did know my name and you looked up the number! amazing...

of course there are lots more victories on Pete's site just like this one...

ENJOY.
...
What a joke you fear mongers are!

These closing notices go out after months of review by the best IRS has and after they have reviewed our letter(s) wherein we clearly state why our 1099's and w-2's are being amended: ie, that our reciepts are from private sector payors which have no federal relationships.

READ the documents! The IRS does and they take their sweet time and then they issue the closing notices as shown above...This is what you guys have to explain. Why is that closing notice going out after months of review and consideration...HMMMMMMMMM? SIMPLE MISTAKES THIS LATE IN THE GAME AND EVEN WHILE THEY ARE ATTACKING PETE?

Maybe this is just some dastardly way to set us all up!@ WOW! You explain it - it would seem the IRS agrees with our letters of explanation...
Well, not exactly, Scott.

I resurrected this five-year-old thread because of the ironies it contains. There are many.

As of last December, the govt is levying on MacNeilage in the total amount of $282,056.04. That amount includes $65,000 in frivpens. Obviously the IRS caught on to MacNeilage's CTC-uneducated filings, and assessed deficiencies, as has happened with so many Worriers.

When that happened, MacNeilage just moved on to the next scam: Van Pelt's "redeeming lawful money". Remember him from our list? That didn't work out so well, either. Dismissed, levy continues.

So MacNeilage moves on to scam number three: try to file a fake judgment against the govt. He takes Van Pelt's advice: he opens a miscellaneous docket (12-mc-316, CACD) and tries to file a judgment he made up. Judge Collins slaps him down:
On August 17, 2012, Plaintiff Scott Daniel, also the plaintiff in Scott Daniel v. Timothy Franz Geithner, case number 12-cv-01781-RGK (AJWx), attempted to file a “Complaint for Registration of Foreign Judgment” under a newly opened case number. This document is deficient in every possible way, and is nothing but a transparent attempt to circumvent the fact that case number 12-cv-01781-RGK (AJWx) was dismissed in its entirety on July 5, 2012. Plaintiff purports to attach to his “Complaint for Registration of Foreign Judgment” a default judgment obtained against defendant Timothy Geithner in case 12-cv-01781-RGK (AJWx), but no such judgment was obtained in that case. On the contrary, Plaintiff lost that case, and Defendant prevailed. Further, any judgment obtained in a case pending before this court would not be a “foreign” judgment. Nor has Plaintiff complied with any of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure relevant to obtaining a default or registering a foreign judgment.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s “Complaint for Registration of Foreign
Judgment,” attached hereto, is NOT to be filed, but instead REJECTED, and is ORDERED returned to Plaintiff. Plaintiff shall immediately notify, in writing, all parties previously served with the attached document that the document has not been filed with the Court.
Think MacNeilage notified anybody?

As we've repeatedly pointed out, the only principle these folks have is the Agent Smith one: "Me, me, me." Start with the premise that "I don't owe income tax" and go wherever you need to go, no matter how dumb or dishonest, so long as that's the result.

And note all of the nice things dude101 (Macneilage) says about the Q posters, whose predictions were dead on.

What a joke we fear mongers are!
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 13806
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm

Re: Ex-ctc'er to CtCer's

Post by notorial dissent »

Well, the joke is certainly on them at any rate.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.