Author #5
Forum Replies Created
-
Bing,
Thanks for your comments and I agree with most of them. I’ms till not sure with the British origins of the trouble you describe. I’d like to correct one thing. The Federal District and Circuit courts are not in the executive branch, but rather in the legislative branch.
1. They were created by legislation and are therefore legislative.
2. They officiate mainly over franchises whose main goal is to collect revenues for the government. Tax collection is a legislative function under Article 1, Section 8, Clauses 1 and 3 of the constitution. No branch can delegate any of its powers to another branch, and therefore, Congress cannot delegate its authority to lay and collect taxes to the Executive Branch. To do otherwise would be to permit the taxation function to be separated from the representation function.
3. Franchises are contracts and contracts are property.
4. Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2 is the main authority for their creation. They claim to be Article III courts, but they are LYING and there is no basis for such a claim.
Therefore, the IRS, the Treasury, and the Federal District and Circuit Courts are all in the Legislative Branch, despite what the lying U.S. Government Manual and even the courts themselves say:
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/gmanual/index.html
These are subtle points, and earlier versions of What Happened to Justice didn’t clarify this point, but I am told this problem has been fixed in the current WHTJ and is also described in:
Government Conspiracy to Destroy the Separatiin of Powers, Form #05.023
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
Search the above for the phrase “legislative branch” and you will learn more about this subject.
-
Dear friends,
Looks like the SEDM folks came up with a remedy for the prosecution of those using IRS form 4852 that Pete was indicted for. I just found a solution for this problem from the folks at SEDM:
Form W-2CC, Form #04.304
http://sedm.org/Forms/Tax/CorrErrInfoRtns/…2/FormW-2CC.pdf
I found the above form on the following page:
Correcting Erroneous IRS Form W-2's, Form #04.006
http://sedm.org/Forms/Tax/CorrErrInfoRtns/…ngIRSFormW2.htm
I would LOVE to see them prosecute Pete or anyone else with THIS substitute for the form. They would end up prosecuting themselves instead!
Enjoy!
-
The following article also addresses the subbject of this topic:
Commercial Lien Strategy
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/Arti…ienStrategy.htm
-
Bing,
You are quite a hoot, and right on.
Go get-em….rover! Don't let go till you get your pound of flesh.
-
The Path to Freedom document mentioned above is the protocol. It is featured on the tax page and the freedom page in red.
-
You didn't refresh the page. If you are using Internet Explorer, you need to hit F5 with the page loaded or exit the IE application and restart it. We just tried and it works.
-
Steve,
You are not following the protocol for this website:
1. Your questions are answered in:
Path to Freedom, Form #09.015
DIRECT LINK: http://sedm.org/Form…thToFreedom.pdf
FORMS PAGE: http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
2. Information about nonresident aliens and how to determine if you are one, which is also pointed to in the above pamphlet:
Non-Resident Non-Person Position, Form #05.020
DIRECT LINK: http://sedm.org/Forms/MemLaw/NonresidentNonPersonPosition.pdf
FORMS PAGE: http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
3. Information about “trade or business”, which is also in the Path to Freedom Pamphlet:
The “Trade or Business” Scam, Form #05.020
FORMS PAGE: http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
DIRECT LINK: http://sedm.org/Forms/MemLaw/TradeOrBusScam.pdf
The “Trade or Business” Scam
http://famguardian.o…usinessScam.htm
Follow what is in the Path to Freedom, which is our “protocol”, and you will answer your own questions. If you don’t care enough to read the 44 pages in that pamphlet or if you insist on being spoon fed or entertained every step of the way by frequenting these forums, then you don’t deserve to be free and ought to go back to being a good little government slave. Yes, massa.
Liberty is not a spectator sport. Only the vigilant and the self-educated are free. You will never learn what you need from listening to others or from going to a government school or university. Welcome to the matrix.
-
Steve,
The information for doing FOIAS is contained in sedtion 1.3 of the following:
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm#1.3.__DISCOVERY
Forms 3.014 and 3.015 are the FOIAs for master file information.
-
I believe this is one piece of evidence that can be used against George Washington:
George Washington who was not only extremely wealthy http://gwpapers.virg…l/property.html but participated in devil worship as witnessed in this newspaper account http://books.google…….OY4K8A#PPA25,M1 as you can see in the 4th paragraph where it states
“The Artillery discharged a Volley. The Plate was then delivered to the President, who, attended by the Grand Master, pro tem, and three most Worshipful Masters, descended to the Cavazion trench and deposited the plate, and laid it on the Corner Stone of the Capitol of the United States of America; on which was deposited Corn, Wine, and Oil, when the whole congregation joined in reverential prayer, which was succeeded by Masonic chanting honors, and a volley from the artillery.”
Hosea 2:8 For she did not know that I gave her corn, and wine, and oil, and multiplied her silver and gold, which they prepared for Baal.
Matthew 6:7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.
Psalm 2:1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
-
Bing,
Mega-dittos to that. Very well put. Couldn't have said it better.
-
Franklin,
Sounds good to me.
-
Franklin,
Some answers, as far as we understand. Admin or Author #2 may have different ideas:
1. The process of taxation is the process of converting private property into a public use and a public purpose. If that conversion is done without the express consent of the party affected by the conversion, then a crime has been committed in violation of 18 USC 654. That crime is called “conversion”. In that sense, taxation involves a process of eminent domain, whereby the government takes private property for public use. The Fifth Amendment requires that any taking of private property must involve compensation. The only exception to this rule is found in the following:
Quote:?Men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,-'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;' and to 'secure,' not grant or create, these rights, governments are instituted. That property [or income] which a man has honestly acquired he retains full control of, subject to these limitations: First, that he shall not use it to his neighbor's injury, and that does not mean that he must use it for his neighbor's benefit [e.g. SOCIAL SECURITY, Medicare, and every other public ?benefit?]; second, that if he devotes it to a public use, he gives to the public a right to control that use; and third, that whenever the public needs require, the public may take it upon payment of due compensation.?[Budd v. People of State of New York, 143 U.S. 517 (1892)]
Note the only option above that DOES NOT involve compensation is when a person donates their private property to a public use. That donation process is accomplished by your own voluntary self-assessment and ONLY by that method. Before such a self-assessment, you are a “nontaxpayer” and a private person. After the assessment, you become a “Taxpayer” and a public officer in the government engaged in the “trade or business” franchise. The IRS cannot do it without your consent. AFTER you have done it, you implicitly give your consent to allow the public the right to control that use of the property donated. This is why IRS form W-4 is identified as Tax Class 5: Estate and Gift Taxes. Payroll withholdings are GIFTS. They don't become taxes and assessments until you attach the W-2 “gift statement” to an assessment called a 1040 form and create a liability with your own signature. There is no other way to lawfully create an income tax liability without violating the Fifth Amendment takings clause. If you assess yourself, you consent to become a public officer. The IRS won't admit this, and you can't lawfully elect yourself into a public office, but this in fact is how the de facto unlawful system currently functions.
2. The above item explains why the IRS cannot execute a lawful assessment without your knowledge consent: Because if they didn't have your consent, then it would be criminal conversion! That is why every time they do an assessment, they have to call you into their office and present it to you to procure your consent in what is called an “examination”. If you make it clear that you dont' consent and hand them the following, they have to delete the assessment because it's only a proposal. See:
Why the Government Can't Lawfully Assess Natural Persons With an Income Tax Liability Without Their Consent, Form #05.011
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
3. No IRS form nor any provision in the Internal Revenue Code CREATES any new public offices in the government.
4. The I.R.C. only taxes EXISTING public offices lawfully exercised ONLY in the District of Columbia and in all places expressly authorized pursuant to 4 U.S.C. 72.
5. Anyone who files a false information return connecting a person to the “trade or business”/”public office” franchise who in fact does not ALREADY lawfully occupy a public office in the U.S. government is guilty of impersonating a public officer in criminal violation of 18 U.S.C. 912.
6. Information returns are being used as the equivalent of federal election forms, where third parties can and often do UNLAWFULLY “elect” private people into public offices in the government without their consent, without their knowledge, without any compensation, and in criminal violation of 18 USC 912 and 18 USC 211.
7. The W-4 cannot and does not create an office in the U.S. government, but allows EXISTING public officers to elect to connect their private earnings to a public use, a public office, and a public purpose. The IRS abuses this form to unlawfully create public offices, and this abuse of the I.R.C. is the heart of the fraud: They are making a system that only applies to EXISTING public offices lawfully exercised in order to:
7.1 Unlawfully create new public offices in places where they are not authorized to exist.
7.2 Destroy the separation of powers between what is pubic and what is private.
7.3 Institute eminent domain over private labor using false third party reports. Omission in preventing such fraud accomplishes involuntary servitude in vioaltion of the Thirteenth Amendment, 42 USC 1994, and 18 USC 1581.
7.4 Destroy the separation of powers between the federal and state governments. Any state employee who participates in the federal income tax is serving in TWO offices, which is a violation of most state constitutions.
7.5 Enslave innocent people to go to work for them without compensation, without recourse, and in violation of the thirteenth amendment prohibition against involuntary servitude. That prohibition, incidentally, applies EVERYWHERE, including on federal territory.
Hope this clarifies how the FRAUD operates.
-
My understanding is NO, if they don’t hold “public office”. Ordinary workers or civil service employees are NOT “public officers”. See the following:
Non-Resident Non-Person Position, Form #05.020, Section 12
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htmFor the difference between “public office” and “public employment”, see section 10 of the following:
Trade or Business Scam, Form #05.001
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htmI.R.C. Subtitle A is a franchise tax on public offices, which the I.R.C. calls a “trade or business”. “Public office” and “public employment” are NOT the same.
Treatise on the Law of Public Offices and Officers
Book 1: Of the Office and the Officer: How Officer Chosen and Qualified
Chapter I: Definitions and Divisions
?2 How Office Differs from Employment.-A public office differs in material particulars from a public employment, for, as was said by Chief Justice MARSHALL, “although an office is an employment, it does not follow that every employment is an office. A man may certainly be employed under a contract, express or implied, to perform a service without becoming an officer.” [1]
“We apprehend that the term ‘office,'” said the judges of the supreme court of Maine, “implies a delegation of a portion of the sovereign power to, and the possession of it by, the person filling the office; and the exercise of such power within legal limits constitutes the correct discharge of the duties of such office. The power thus delegated and possessed may be a portion belonging sometimes to one of the three great departments and sometimes to another; still it is a legal power which may be rightfully exercised, and in its effects it will bind the rights of others and be subject to revision and correction only according to the standing laws of the state. An employment merely has none of these distinguishing features. A public agent acts only on behalf of his principal, the public, whoso sanction is generally considered as necessary to give the acts performed the authority and power of a public act or law. And if the act be such as not to require subsequent sanction, still it is only a species of service performed under the public authority and for the public good, but not in the exercise of any standing laws which are considered as roles of action and guardians of rights.” [2]
“The officer is distinguished from the employee,” says Judge COOLEY, “in the greater importance, dignity and independence of his position; in being required to take an official oath, and perhaps to give an official bond; in the liability to be called to account as a public offender for misfeasance or non-feasance in office, and usually, though not necessarily, in the tenure of his position. In particular cases, other distinctions will appear which are not general.”[3]
[A Treatise on the Law of Public Offices and Officers, Floyd Russell Mechem, 1890, pp. 3-4, ?2;
SOURCE: http://books.google.com/books?id=g-I9AAAAI…ntsec=titlepage]
“Public Official.? A person who, upon being issued a commission, taking required oath, enters upon, for a fixed tenure, a position called an office where he or she exercises in his or her own right some of the attributes of sovereign he or she serves for benefit of public.? Macy v. Heverin, 44 Md.App. 358, 408 A.2d 1067, 1069.? The holder of a public office though not all persons in public employment are public officials, because public official’s position requires the exercise of some portion of the sovereign power, whether great or small.? Town of Arlington v. Bds. of Conciliation and Arbitration, Mass., 352 N.E.2d 914.”
[Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1230]
-
Professor Bing,
Would you please enlighten us all about what you believe might be inaccurate with SEDM or FG materials based on your viewing of the above video series. We are all curious and would like to be enlightened. Your constructive feedback will probably be used to improve this website, I surmise.
Incidentally, you can find the Law of Nations on FG at:
http://famguardian.org/Publications/LawOfNations/vattel.htm
SEDM apparently agrees with you on the need for self-government. They have a document that can be used to form your own government, just like the video suggests:
SFG Articles of Confederation, Form #10.003
-
Zagnuzer,
This is not the correct place to ask questions about SEDM forms. This is Family Guardian, not SEDM and they are separate. If you don't get the answer you want, then post it on SEDM forums, not here. Therefore, this response relates to zip codes generally rather than the specific form to which you refer.
What you are engaging in is the very type of presumption that we are trying to eliminate. Many patriots commonly assume that use of a zip code implies federal territory. However, keep in mind:
1. Domicile is what determines tax liability, not your mailing address. Your mailing address is not legal evidence of your choice of domicile, but only one of the factors for determining it ABSENT express declaration.
2. The government never argues this in court, so it isn't material, so why make it an issue? You're just making needless work and anxiety for yourself.
3. We have never seen any evidence that connects a zip code ONLY to federal territory.
4. We have never seen any evidence that use of zip codes constitutes consent to any type of federal franchise and evidence is the only thing upon we rely as a basis for belief.
5. We have never seen nor heard about any litigation where use of zip codes was material to establishing the domicile of the defendant.
6. Government forms that establish your domicile usually use two addresses. Mailing Address and “Permanent Address” or “Residence”. Both of these addresses include a zip code usually.
7. You can overcome any presumption of domicile on federal territory simply by stating on the address “Not a Domicile”, making the zip IRRELEVANT.
Domicile is covered in the article below:
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/Reme…ForTaxation.htm
The above also appears in the following:
Flawed Tax Arguments to Avoid, Section 7.9
http://famguardian.org/Publications/Flawed…ArgsToAvoid.pdf
If you have any evidence in your possession that contradicts the above, please provide it so we can post it. Otherwise, please quit immitating your oppressors by engaging in religion and presumption. This website is not a repository for religion, but a clearinghouse for EVIDENCE that can be used to prove your status in a court of law. Presumptions are not evidence nor a substitute for evidence, and all you have offered are presumptions so far.
Be patient with yourself in studying and learning. You have a lot of unlearning and deprogramming to do in order to undo the deception and half truths you learned in governmennt schools and government publications as you grew up.