I can see how "commercial war of genocide and temple desecration" would bring that to mind.
Printable View
I can see how "commercial war of genocide and temple desecration" would bring that to mind.
Attachment 5044
I get it. The IRS presumes everyone is endorsing private credit (of the Federal Reserve). This is their default position ... assuming your income is federal income; you are contracting. Therefore when their computer database shows you with unreported income (ie. W2, 1099) or unpaid tax as an unjust benefit, instead of suing in court (tort) they elect to treat the facts as establishing an implied contract - all the rules & regs of Title 26. Therefore their system issues the Frivolous Penalty, per contract.
But, I am redeemed. Non-contracting. So in my case the IRS is in error.
It occurs to me that your five suitors could also go after the Garnishees bank accounts by Trustee Process. But that would require judgement by judge in favor of the suitor. And that seems unlikely given the invalid oaths and that judges almost always favor the banks. I suppose the odds are slightly better with the clerks - if you can get them to do their job.
Thank you for paying attention and being so smart. That makes it worthwhile for me. Much better than finding out I imagine these things because of a tumor putting pressure on my pituitary gland or something like that.
About the clerks; Angela CAESAR took two months but finally published a Notice of Clerk's Bad Behaviors on PACER. I imagine that was pretty difficult for her.
About Waiver of Tort action. I am having trouble finding any difference in a CP-15 FrivPen billing and Waiver of Tort. I do not think that I have ever seen a frivolous filing penalty ever turn into a prosecution for tax evasion. So maybe that is waiver of tort; when the IRS decides to bill a taxpayer that is the decision to waive a criminal prosecution?
So what is good for the gander is good for the goose?
This is why it helps to hit the clerk with malfeasance accusations. The Rules of Court are published and that is the authority, combined with bonding for the "judges". So this has all paid off.
Greetings;
This is one of the more useful threads around here. I am crosstalking from another thread...
Quote:
Automated Under Reporter (AUR) is the IRS codename for their system that detects & responds to reported income mismatches: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ashleae...cp-2000-notice
Hi Everybody!
A new suitor sent me this link. I think this is the same memorandum as before though, already posted here. If you see anything that might relate to redemption please comment.
https://www.irs.gov/privacy-disclosu...ction-i-a-to-c
Ah, new edition of the Frivolous List, March 2018, but still the GLARING OMISSION - no mention of redemption of lawful money.
CONTENTION: U.S. notes are not income.
Taxpayer claims his U.S. note income can be non-taxable. Taxpayer claims to have learned the secret of the federal income tax: that it's an excise on receipt of Federal Reserve currency. While it is true one can avoid taxation on income by redeeming one's income in lawful money (U.S notes in the form of FRN's), we (the owners of the central bank and all who profit from it) would prefer you don't tell anyone. Thanks.
I have copied this from another thread.
Also, this MENDOZA Order might be being misused already, I don't know.
Thank you David,
I received a copy of my 2017 signed W4 with Lawful Money stamp today from the IRS along with form 3699 (rev. 1-83) attached to the front, it has a box checked on the form that reads "Forms W4 (To be filed with your employers to enable them to determine the amount of income tax to withhold from your wages.) See photo attached.
After much searching I found this on the IRS site:
"General OCEP Audit Guidelines
Return cancelled checks, receipts and other original records the taxpayer submitted during the audit. Use Form 3699, Return of Documents to Taxpayer, or Letter 1020 (DO), Correspondence and Interview Examination. Letter 1020 (DO) advises the taxpayer of the status of the audit and documents returning records to the taxpayer.
Place all pertinent correspondence in the back of the file. (Correspondence enclosures may not be pertinent, see IRM 4.75.16.7.3(1)) Contact the taxpayer to determine whether they submitted any original documents. If so, make copies of the documents and return the originals.
Keep only records you need to document workpaper conclusions in the files.
Caution:
At the first indication of a revocation, the agent must be careful to keep all records that were received from the taxpayer. At the same time the agent must begin compiling an administrative record. For a discussion on proposed revocations and administrative records, refer to IRM 4.75.32, Declaratory Judgment Cases and The Administrative Record.
General on-site audit guidelines are in IRM 4.75.11, On Site Examination Guidelines. They may be useful in an OCEP audit. Refer also to Exempt Organization’s, Audit Technique Guides, for audit guidelines appropriate for an OCEP based on the type of organization under audit."
Are they really going to audit me for claiming LM?
This is still one of the more informative threads on the entire Internet, in my opinion. This image indicates we are making progress as it is the second report in one day that instead of slapping on the $5K FrivPens the IRS is simply losing returns!
With this particular new suitor, it is a godsend considering he mistakenly added the FICA SSI stuff to his claim. Now he gets a chance to correct it. I think it should be difficult for the IRS to admit that they lost two Returns in a row!
https://youtu.be/dinJO6ut1KI
Hello everybody;
I am posting my suspicion that John SCHLABACH is an agent provocateur. This is to say he is getting a break on past liabilities for generating case law against remedy, for the purpose of discouraging people searching the Internet about Redeeming Lawful Money.
I came across his case in Eastern Washington on PACER by accident. I do not believe that the IRS agents' strategy had anticipated my finding it in progress. So I told John early about MENDOZA being a bogus judge and encouraged him to enlist me to disqualify him on having a vacant office. At that time I recall finding his history with the IRS and realizing, "This guy is in big trouble already." So I had a sinking feeling that he would be available for exactly what is going on.
One suitor tells me,
The remedy is not to believe what you read on the Internet. MENDOZA is not a federal judge. He can judge in equity by consent of the parties and that is where John took it. I told him to be genuine in his efforts and principles he would need to disqualify MENDOZA before he lost in trial court. But now in hindsight I am convinced my suspicions have been truthful. John is hurting a lot less from the "loss" in (vacant) court because he played his role in generating rumors that besmirch a perfect absolute right to be redeemed from central banking dishonors.Quote:
It looks to me like that is exactly what it was about redeem in lawful money, they ruled aginst him last year 2018 but this year it was dropped i guess because of his appeals he filed.
I did find it on a google search of frivolous filing. Not sure what the besmirch remedy is.
Please let us know if SCHLABACH's case is cited in any 3176-sytled Letters from Christine DAVIS. I doubt the IRS attorneys will do more than take advantage of people's Internet gullibility. Meanwhile:
Another common citation for the 3176 styled Letter is 2105. I do not see any new details that might cover redemption.
Prepping Crown indictment I discovered an interesting IRS publication:
https://www.irs.gov/irm/part25/irm_25-025-010r
Search for "chargeback" -
Interestingly this is a distorted description of redemption - redeemed from a world where debt is valued for substance, along with an absurdity that debt can be sustainable. Even clearly in the Bible the Law is Jubilee every 50 years.Quote:
Exhibit 25.25.10-1
Frivolous Arguments
Frivolous arguments are currently described in Notice 2010-33, available at http://www.irs.gov/irb/2010-17_IRB/ar13.html (or its successor notice), the Truth About Frivolous Arguments, and a number of revenue rulings. Please refer to these publications for the most current listing of frivolous arguments. Recognized frivolous arguments include but are not limited to:
Non-negotiable Chargeback (NNCB) - The filer attempts to sell his/her birthright back to the government for a large dollar amount and requests that a "Treasury Direct Account" be set up to hold the money.
In a phone call to the IRS recently a suitor was told that "Non-Negotiable Chargeback" was the FribPen category that Redeemed Lawful Money Returns fell under for charging FrivPen.
Conviction has one Authority unfortunate for the mi trow nerals or finite the metals pronounced mental All the alchemy in this world is a stone's throw from what certainly not the truth rocks say what? nothing till a price is put on it then its what exactly a commodity nobody forgives a commodity just the promised part call it notes land or title blood from a stone is something u cant earn
over 22 posts on this thread but the brilliance rests within
Here is an audio recording that will express things clearly. The IRS agents have been instructed to include Redeemed Lawful Money - Line 21 styled Demands as FrivPen Argument 30 - non-negotiable chargebacks.
I liken it to the IRS Agent being in a bowl, for so long that the rim of the bowl has become a convincing horizon for real. Now redemption from the illusion debt has substance and value is simply unreal. To the Agent under Crown Principal (God) the suitor is attempting to sell out his or her birthright in the tontine.Quote:
Non-negotiable Chargeback (NNCB) - The filer attempts to sell his/her birthright back to the government for a large dollar amount and requests that a "Treasury Direct Account" be set up to hold the money.
Let's look closer:
I met a fellow who enjoys parsing syllables today. I can use that. Even if I never see him again, I now know it is a real thing.
Continued...
In the definitions of terms above there is mention of coil field. This allows for a certain amount of compression or change in charge. I used the crystals of potassium nitrate for the first infant SD Cards storing a "1" or "0" within the crystal and reading it back. Memory. But the delta Q was the simulated bliss, creating gravity through interdimensional charge compression - like manna does when superconductivity balances the right and left hemispheres across the DNA wires in the third ventricle.
This simulation of bliss under the delusion of sustainable debt is complacency.
So I do see you've sent in supporting schedules that demand for lawful money all transactions per 12 USC 411 95 ate choo. That I cannot argue with you...
-- IRS agent
Thanks for the admission.
I was thanking the IRS agent. When she said "that I cannot argue with" it sounds like an admission that there's nothing wrong with demanding lawful money. There's no law or rule against it - I can't argue it. It's within your rights. It's not on the list of items we issue friv pens for but... But I've been instructed to mis-classify it as Argument 30 - non-negotiable chargeback and threaten you with a friv pen anyway. Boss says I have to to keep my job.
The option to claim Exempt status remains although it's a bit harder to find now after the redesign of the Form W4. Page 2 under Exemption from withholding instructs you to write "Exempt" in the space below 4(c). Note that even if Exempt from Federal Income Tax withholding, as an "employee" you're still subject to Medicare and SS tax withholdings. That's just part of being in "employment."
What does this mean? The IRS agents have been instructed to include Lawful Money Redemption as frivolous? I just prepared all my tax forms and proof of lawful money demand to mail in to the IRS for the first time, but this is scaring me now. More and more people are obviously redeeming Lawful Money.
Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars is fictional, but based in real and substantial psychology. It tells of the Elite and Illuminati conjuring macroeconomics hidden in a little calculus. So I worked it out.
Yes! That's very good. But I was referring to the phone call clip you provided. How can that IRS agent just say that they don't process anything with the Demand for Lawful Money verbiage? Are they now sending FrivPen letters to anyone who files a Lawful Money return? I guess I am wondering if there is a solid way to fight against a FrivPen letter if one receives it after having filed a Lawful Money return. I'm still new to all this....
The refusal for cause properly published stays progress. I have mentioned that the Albany Remand is under attack; that KAHN is doing his best to end the evidence repository at over 100 Docs, most of them Refusals for Cause.
However there are some very convincing success stories that requesting a formal assessment or audit, with the participation of the subject "taxpayer" will induce an honest refund. This plays on the right to be heard. The response to the IRS Letter is to engage the agent to continue evaluation of the tax liability.
That was a phone conversation. The Lesson Plan:
- true identity
- record forming - Refusal for Cause
- redeeming lawful money
This includes being on the brain trust. Here is some recent Crosstalk.
Especially Step 2 - that is where I teach a suitor how to express redemption in terms the IRS attorney understands. Very effective.
Just about anybody who is redeeming lawful money is aware of me and how to get communications going. So I have to say that almost every FrivPen on this kind of income tax return comes to my attention. There have only been about ten FrivPens throughout my entire journey drafting remedy. There is always a problem with the return and I help spot it and we correct it. We invariably refuse the FrivPen presentment for cause.
In the Albany Remand there was one suitor who was signing "Without Prejudice" - a patriot dreg. I kept missing it and it developed but since we corrected his R4C process he has received the forgiveness letter.
Attachment 5789
Attachment 5790
Attachment 5791
DM offers some sage advice -- TAKE IT TO HEART -- requesting a formal assessment or audit, with the participation of the subject "taxpayer" will induce an honest refund. This plays on the right to be heard. The response to the IRS Letter is to engage the agent to continue evaluation of the tax liability.
Used to have a suitor here "Martin earl"....give a read to his posts in the following link.....DON'T BE AFRAID....YOU'RE IN THE RIGHT !!
http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...ll=1#post24356
I am never surprised when i visit this site and that fishing discourse better known as The lesson plan a lesson plan or lessened up. Verbatim Employment its a form of commerce you is per / forming or acting like a federally formed employee onlyjust a Me can demand only a you gets the benefits from the privateers IRS internally you service to say agents. How verbally speaking is just volunteered information. Verbiage its legally binding standing and style demanding lawfully requires its own statutory style No agents for this station or office can give Me legal advice. Becoming your own agent with the lesson plan . Two distinctions i did it myself and i have donated a portion to (express redemption in terms of my own gratuitous benefit) Or having the distinction of becoming a suitor and expressing satisfaction or disappointment in being taught some expressed benevolence . I am suggesting if your worries are formed you've already expressed deferral . I however have no distinctions on benevolence if sharing is done privately thats distinct if its a I am wondering if there is a solid way to fight against a FrivPen letter if one receives it after having filed a Lawful Money return. I'm still new to all this.. i distinctly see a private message as the expressive method for discourse. DBA vs DBOTP on the phone a true name isn't identified on a Business # Tax player payer slayer why talk to anyone its FrivPho calls
When the wisdom gets imparted or impaired ? When our strength compliments us the compassion for a weaknesses sustains us. Its a small justice Just /us gringo
The debt scavenger most reliably goes silent in the face of a proper Refusal for Cause.
Attachment 5918
Notice how there is no return address anywhere, making a proper R4C difficult to the novice at redemption.
Attachment 5919
This suitor knows who to notify, his Refusal for Cause:
Attachment 5920
It is always the municipal office in charge, as the judiciary is a farce. STEWART, not KAHN.
One suitor has received, or rather his employer has, a Lock-In Letter demanding a certain amount of withholdings.
This is inconsequential as the money will be refunded pursuant to law. The suitor led me to an interesting link:
Withholdings 2020.
On the W-4 front;
The IRS waited until 12/4 to supply us with the new W-4 Form for 2021. They prepared us with a draft though:
Attachment 6290
Last year, for 2019, the W-4 Form was obscured about conditions for writing in "EXEMPT".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w42nh6dRMnA&t
To be clear about the attached returns, the suitor filed 130 days ago, both state and federal but did not put any demand on the state (CA) return. Line 58. So the IRS went silent and sent in the state, returning a $500 refund instead of the withholdings of over $7K. The $500 refund is refused for cause.
For the full explanation - stay tuned to this thread. Or check into my Lesson Plan ($2K) if you need some guidance. There is no need to involve your employer at all. Any IRS agent can call your employer and start a fight without any paper at all - a fight that will get you fired. Nasty business! If the IRS compels withholdings just consider it a savings account until you can file your return.
Here is a form for people who were redeeming but filed as endorser. Frivolous Return Program law.
Here is the link at the IRS.Quote:
An untimely claim for a refund/abatement on a non-frivolous Form 843 is received.
Note: To be considered timely, taxpayer must file a claim for a refund on Form 843 within 3 years from the time a return associated with the penalty is filed or 2 years from the date the penalty was paid, whichever period expires later.
This letter followed a delayed refund of withholdings.
I think it prudent to Refuse for Cause the form letter since it specifies that the income is taxable interest.
P.S. I am confused about the phone camera angle:
Attachment 6548
Yeah. That's better!
Mr. PAZ (818) 743-8890 is geared up with an online redemption tax accountant service. He gets consistent results.
Attached find the only exception - but look at Page 4 - he is bringing redemption to the DEATH PROMISE. Quite literally that means death promise.
MORTGAGE
Remember that debt (death) and redemption (life) are mutually exclusive ultimates. Where there is one, the other does not exist.
A mortgage is a "dead pledge". It is property that produces income, but the income proceeds go to the creditor without buying down the debt.
Redemption is the buying back of the pledge (property).
In medieval times, the title of the property would change hands from debtor to creditor with clauses in the contract allowing the debtor to redeem the property from the creditor.
Very good explanation. Wonderful!
In conjunction with bottomry and Rules of Admiralty we can get a rounded portrait of central banking. Plus the Bretton Woods Agreements, SDR's and the Amendments all point us to understand the role of War and Emergency with martial rule.