Author #2
Forum Replies Created
Folks,
My answer has been filed and served. You can read about it at:
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/News…tack-050502.htm
At the top of the page under “Answer to Complaint”.
Bing,
Hilarious!…and well said. Thank you for that very astute comment.
Update:
Jim Mattatal's whereabouts is now known. He is in the downtown Los Angeles jail. We are told that anyone who wishes to go and see him must consent to a two week background check. This is obviously a devious means to discover who his undisclosed clients were. His last tangle with the law was six days in jail for contempt because he refused to divulge confidential information about his clients. This is their answer to how to get the information. The reason they want this informaiton about his clients is that he has allegedly prepared and/or administered trust documents for people. The government wants to bust the trusts so they can seize assets of “nontaxpayers”. THIEVES!
This is everything we know at this time.
Michael,
You can also get the IRS Form 4598 on Family Guardian. We posted it a couple weeks ago:
http://famguardian.org/TaxFreedom/Forms/IRS/IRSFormsPubs.htm
Someone sent us a crisp, new copy and we scanned it in high resolution and made it into a PDF.
BobT12 and JWR,
Thanks for the show of moral support, guys! I'm glad to finally have the opportunity for formal and exhaustive legal discovery. Everything I compile by depositioning the liars who are participating in this persecution will be posted up on Family Guardian for all to read and reuse. I'm really looking forward to running them through all the IRS Deposition Questions, and offering them a chance to rebut anything on the site on the record with a court reporter present. I already attempted to do that in the friendly meeting on 7/10/03, but they ducked out and have been operating in bad faith ever since then. They are going to dig a deep hole for themselves. Maybe We The People will finally thereby get the answers their Petition for Redress of Greivances on the record from people who backed themselves into a discovery corner by slandering my reputation with absolute lies that are completely unsupported by any evidence whatsoever.
Deb,
Thanks. This will be in MF Decoder verion 1.90. In the meantime, you can use the Print Dialog box to print the FOIA request to a Word file and then edit it manually before you send it out.
Ratter14,
I know you mean well, but you're misleading people with your careless and uninformed comments. The only people who earn “wages” are those who volunteer to participate in withholding by filing a W-4 under 26 CFR 31.3401(a)-3(a). Consent exists if a person earns “wages”, and so there is not reason to prosecute an employer who withholds on “wages”. What you mean to say is that:
Quote:“Are there any previous examples of people placing their employers under arrest for not following the law as they ostensably withold from the EARNINGS of people who do not consent and therefore do not earn 'wages'?”Please don't use the word “wages”! Use “earnings” or you are just confusing everyone. You need to read Chapter 5 of the Great IRS Hoax. This point is made very clear in section 5.6.7 and I'm not going to repeat myself here. If you keep this up, I'm going to have to delete your comments because I don't want anyone mislead.
Sonik/Ratter14
You guys are confused about citizenship and that confusion is infecting other members of this forum. Please quit spreading misinformation on this forum. Don't EVER call anyone a “US National”. You can call them a “USA national” or a “national” or a “state national”, but NOT a “U.S. national”. That name is reserved within federal law for people born in American Samoa or Swain's Island and they are different than people born in states under federal law. Putting the word “US” in one's citizenship status just creates a false presumption that people are associated with the “United States” under federal law, and we need to avoid such presumptions. I've fixed this and further clarified it in the citizenship paper as well at:
Sorry if my unclear explanations in the past may have mislead anyone. It was not intentional, but simply carelessless.
Bing,
VERY persuasively said. Bravo!
ratter14,
Thanks for the offer. The research needed is still accurate. Right now, I think the best area to focus on is starting liberty clubs in major cities. I'm putting together documentation and structure to equip people who want to start their own clubs and support groups. When it's ready, then I'll put the word out and post the materials to get everyone started.
I have a legal research project for you if you want to camp out at the library. Send me a private message with your phone number and I'll tell you what I need. This project will blow away people once I'm done with it and it will be very useful in litigation as well. It will take probably a couple man weeks to get done.
Sonik,
Based on your new conversion, you may wish to buy the United States Supreme Court Plus CD-ROM for $79. It has ALL Supreme Court opinions all the way back to about 1849 on a single CD-ROM. I have it and it's GREAT.
Sonik,
Thanks for sharing that with us all. I'll use these cites in a new book I'm working on that has the same name as this forum…after I verify them all, of course.
The meaning of “liberal” has completely reversed from the way it started. Ludwig Von Mises did a very careful etmological study on this subject on his website at:
http://www.mises.org/liberal.asp
The word has the OPPOSITE meaning now to what it had when our venerated George Washington spoke those words.
Ratter 14,
The best article on the subject to print out and give to him is:
See also the article entitled “We Have Only One True Church”:
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/Arti…rch_2003-08.pdf
This may change his mind.
BOBT12,
Well said! Thank you for sharing that insight with us all.
