Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 311121314 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 137

Thread: Treasury Letter from 1984

  1. #121
    Name:  maxresdefault.jpg
Views: 7707
Size:  138.4 KB

    I've explained it many times like this:

    [1] The redemption of scrip for lawful money 'sponsors' the instrument into "lawful money land"--it is akin to acceptance (i.e. being the primary creditor on the instrument or at least on your issue);
    [2] the tax obligation associated with naked indorsement of private credit is on the perceived gain when the FRB/bank accepts/cancels the instrument for you thusly you gain from private credit and owe the tax --THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE UNDERLYING FICA/SSA contribution --you are paying even FICA with lawful money then once the FRB-SSA-Treasury systems get processed.

    I'm not sure how more clearly it can be explained. Its to do with checks/notes thusly it to do with bills of exchange, UCC, cancellation/discharge/acceptance/notes/dishonor/honor. It might help to look at the matter from a '1099-C perspective'. If I cancel/sponsor it for your 'use' then you are gaining (from doing nothing) thusly you get taxed on a 1040 schedule--like as in capital gains. Think: getting paid TWICE--once for the labor/principal that improved/passed through the estate that you jointly own, the second time from money the FRB/bank sponsored by cancelling your bill. (Tikkun Anthology?)

    The FRB by design can't originate lawful money. You aren't gaining from your own money. HOW MANY TIMES MUST IT BE EXPLAINED? That doesn't affect FICA / insurance contribution requirement except it makes the inclusion LAWFUL MONEY. For those who hate 'the tax man' just maybe ***YOU** are the tax man (filling out IRS forms? collecting tax and paying it in?)! Thinking it affects FICA is like thinking because you won $20M in the lottery that you shouldn't have to pay the wire transfer fee--FICA is perhaps more like a "social credit" systemic maintenance fee.

    THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION IS ONE OF THE PRIMARY CREDITORS TO THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT AND HAS BEEN SINCE ITS INCEPTION. ALL OF THE LAWS PERTINENT TO SECURITIES REGULATION ARE DESIGNED TO PROTECT YOUR INVESTMENT (SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, INVESTMENT COMPANY ACT OF 1940)--THOSE LAWS WERE MEANT TO CURB THE TRUSTEES OF THE POOLED ASSETS OF THE ORIGINAL INVESTORS (YOU!).
    Name:  TRADES1.png
Views: 569
Size:  100.0 KB

    WHAT ORGANIZATION IS THE CUSTODIAN FOR BOOK ENTRY SECURITIES AND SUCH INVESTMENTS IN THE UNITED STATES? THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM/BANKS

    It should be clear how the FRB and the SSA link together --the FRB has the role of custodian for US Government securities, the SSA is investor. HOW MANY TIMES MUST THIS BE STATED? DOES IT HAVE TO BE ON TALKSHOE TO BE BELIEVED?

    Name:  TRADES2.png
Views: 552
Size:  80.6 KB
    Name:  SSA_MUCH.jpg
Views: 502
Size:  78.2 KB
    Name:  SSCard.jpg
Views: 872
Size:  186.4 KB
    HOW MANY TIMES MUST IT BE SAID THAT EACH FRB IS A CLEARINGHOUSE AND THAT CLEARINGHOUSES ISSUE OR HAVE CLEARINGHOUSE CERTIFICATES RATHER THAN LAWFUL MONEY?

    Related:
    Last edited by allodial; 01-15-15 at 02:59 AM.
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

  2. #122
    Thank you in advance for sanitizing and sharing examples; here or on a new thread.

    My point in that cryptic post is that examples are wasted on people who need examples.

  3. #123
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    in an intended free America
    Posts
    100
    David Merrill/all,

    As promised, full disclosure of what I have stated in this thread. If you need more I will provide it within reason.

    The Notice of Levy was for over 10k. I had a second set of penalties for over 10k of which I paid off without a wage levy. I did not want my employer involved any further.

    You will notice the change in novation starting with the 2014 file (actually 2015 tax year, deposit from 2014 check) - handwritten on the front, and adding 95(a)(2).

    Thank you.
    imm
    Last edited by itsmymoney; 01-16-15 at 12:03 AM.

  4. #124
    I think the only way you can get everything resolved is in the court but it has to the correct court where jurisdiction and relief can be granted and all their other rules and regulations apply.

    All your paper work is in order; grabbing all oaths of office and bonds and for the record put the operations manager Kelly Taylor not an IRS lawyer on the stand because she is the one that did this to you; and have the judge ask Taylor why this was done to you when the law states that everyone/anyone can claim lawful money and why I am being subject to punishment for it if it’s the law written in the USC.

    You will be setting case law not just for you but for the record; you can’t have someone talk for you because an attorney first duty is to whom?

    David/Doug and the others including the law armed you with all the ammunition you need and you should be compensated for all the harassment.

    If more people were educated about their own finances and the law you could have a jury trial, and if you can hand pick that jury that knows there is something other what they think is a tax.
    Last edited by Chex; 01-16-15 at 01:14 AM.
    "And if I could I surely would Stand on the rock that Moses stood"

  5. #125
    I also suspect the language should focus on redemption rather than demand. If demand then subsequent to redemption.
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

  6. #126
    Your being nice about it allodial isn't it the demand for and the redemption of? Demand that the law be followed.
    Last edited by Chex; 01-16-15 at 01:26 AM.
    "And if I could I surely would Stand on the rock that Moses stood"

  7. #127
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    in an intended free America
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Chex View Post
    I think the only way you can get everything resolved is in the court but it has to the correct court where jurisdiction and relief can be granted and all their other rules and regulations apply.

    All your paper work is in order; grabbing all oaths of office and bonds and for the record put the operations manager Kelly Taylor not an IRS lawyer on the stand because she is the one that did this to you; and have the judge ask Taylor why this was done to you when the law states that everyone/anyone can claim lawful money and why I am being subject to punishment for it if it’s the law written in the USC.

    You will be setting case law not just for you but for the record; you can’t have someone talk for you because an attorney first duty is to whom?

    David/Doug and the others including the law armed you with all the ammunition you need and you should be compensated for all the harassment.

    If more people were educated about their own finances and the law you could have a jury trial, and if you can hand pick that jury that knows there is something other what they think is a tax.
    Chex,

    Thanks for your insight. However, the files I posted were mostly to prove to the suitors that I 'had the goods' behind my words, and to evidence the reasons why I decided not to RILM for 2013 and 2014. The Levy occurred on CTC returns, not lawful money. However, I agree that Kelly Taylor should pay for her evil deeds but I believe the ship has sailed on that one, I'm afraid.

    In summary of the past few pages of posts:
    1) The Treasury Demand file is demanding RILM only on NET PAY transactions - NOT GROSS.
    2) In step with that letter, I demanded lawful money only on the NET PAY checks as you can see by the 2013 files. This may pass muster with IRS, and I believe many suitors employ this method, however after Doug555's explanation on why this could be iffy I decided to wait until 2016 to put-the-ink-to-the-1040-paper, so to speak. BECAUSE I have been greatly punished financially, I am just a bit wary of taking the reduction only on net pay. Can you blame me?
    3) As seen in the 2014 file, my first 2015 check/slip demand contains handwritten USC 411 and 95(a)(2) language on the FRONT of both. And, I've included basically the same language on the back of the check. You can see the difference in method from my prior demands.
    4) I still need to go down to County and record my notarized new Demand for ALL transactions in lawful money. Covers GROSS PAY, all tax deductions, ATM wd's, whatever. Speaking of which: got a copy of the bank notary's Commission Certification when she signed my new Demand. Q: Can I trust her copy (as evidence) or should I get her recorded copy from the County?

    You will notice the difference in tact here. I am forsaking the chance at TWO YEARS worth of RILM (on NET PAY only) because of what I believe to be a correct and more proper interpretation of facts, law and evidence-gathering behind the 'ALL transactions' method. But others want me to 'just jump in' because it worked for them. That's what I did with CTC returns. How'd that work out for me? I'd rather be safe than sorry.
    Last edited by itsmymoney; 01-16-15 at 02:39 AM.

  8. #128
    Quote Originally Posted by Chex View Post
    Your being nice about it allodial isn't it the demand for and the redemption of? Demand that the law be followed.
    The validity of Werfel's office seems highly questionable (i.e. is he a 'firewall'?). I would direct all related correspondence to the Treasurer of the United Staets, to the Secretary of the Treasury and to Christopher J. Meade, Chief Counsel, U.S. Department of the Treasury and cc: the State AG, the U.S. district attorney or the chief justice of whatever U.S. district court office is nearest you. Regarding demanding that the law be followed -> writ of mandamus. These days when i see "Acting {anything}" I'd tend to look up the organization chart or look for a deputy or departmental counsel to include in case the "Acting {anything}" is a 'firewall' (without bond, proper oath or office).

    Quote Originally Posted by itsmymoney View Post
    4) I still need to go down to County and record my notarized new Demand for ALL transactions in lawful money. Covers GROSS PAY, all tax deductions, ATM wd's, whatever. Speaking of which: got a copy of the bank notary's Commission Certification when she signed my new Demand. Q: Can I trust her copy (as evidence) or should I get her recorded copy from the County?
    Off the top, usually notaries are prohibited from notarizing something to which they are a party. If you want to make a 'bulletproof package', I'd go to the county clerk or whoever the official is to get a certified copy.
    Last edited by allodial; 01-16-15 at 02:46 AM.
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

  9. #129
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    in an intended free America
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by allodial View Post
    The validity of Werfel's office seems highly questionable (i.e. is he a 'firewall'?). I would direct all related correspondence to the Treasurer of the United Staets, to the Secretary of the Treasury and to Christopher J. Meade, Chief Counsel, U.S. Department of the Treasury and cc: the State AG, the U.S. district attorney or the chief justice of whatever U.S. district court office is nearest you. Regarding demanding that the law be followed -> writ of mandamus. These days when i see "Acting {anything}" I'd tend to look up the organization chart or look for a deputy or departmental counsel to include in case the "Acting {anything}" is a 'firewall' (without bond, proper oath or office).



    Off the top, usually notaries are prohibited from notarizing something to which they are a party. If you want to make a 'bulletproof package', I'd go to the county clerk or whoever the official is to get a certified copy.
    allodial,

    That was my original thought and instinct, so I will follow-thru with the county-recorded certified copy of her commission. Thanks for confirming.

  10. #130
    CTC returns are in the past today is a new day and no ship has sailed because it’s all about the money and the education you/me/us learned which is now the truth of the matter, let them bring up the past, its today’s issues you’re dealing with.

    As far as demanding lawful money is on everything as far as I’m concerned, I don’t care if it’s a pack of gum.

    County records are good but I think it goes far beyond a record, something else is missing that makes more force and IDK yet what that is.

    Sure I see the highly questionable firewalls allodial, but we all know this is the food chain one part of the problem and what a great day in court it would be to hand all of them a subpoena and have them state for the record you can’t follow the law.

    I would make friends with a real good reporter and give him a education and take him/her to court with me, the media loves this type of news, there not done with Lerner yet.

    OMB notarized evidence documents of 12USC411 and others.

    You can argue with the counter trolls all you want it’s the boss you want.
    Last edited by Chex; 01-16-15 at 03:57 AM.
    "And if I could I surely would Stand on the rock that Moses stood"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •