Page 20 of 21 FirstFirst ... 1018192021 LastLast
Results 191 to 200 of 206

Thread: Exactly what does the IRS agent think?

  1. #191
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    I keep thinking this is one of the more productive threads on StSC. Does anybody know of any new Memorandums?
    It appears that the Treasury's position on redeeming FRNs has changed. See its link below, and notice its excerpt below, especially the first sentence of the last paragraph:

    https://www.treasury.gov/resource-ce...al-tender.aspx

    What are Federal Reserve notes and how are they different from United States notes?

    Federal Reserve notes are legal tender currency notes. The twelve Federal Reserve Banks issue them into circulation pursuant to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. A commercial bank belonging to the Federal Reserve System can obtain Federal Reserve notes from the Federal Reserve Bank in its district whenever it wishes. It must pay for them in full, dollar for dollar, by drawing down its account with its district Federal Reserve Bank.

    Federal Reserve Banks obtain the notes from our Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP). It pays the BEP for the cost of producing the notes, which then become liabilities of the Federal Reserve Banks, and obligations of the United States Government.

    Congress has specified that a Federal Reserve Bank must hold collateral equal in value to the Federal Reserve notes that the Bank receives. This collateral is chiefly gold certificates and United States securities. This provides backing for the note issue. The idea was that if the Congress dissolved the Federal Reserve System, the United States would take over the notes (liabilities). This would meet the requirements of Section 411, but the government would also take over the assets, which would be of equal value. Federal Reserve notes represent a first lien on all the assets of the Federal Reserve Banks, and on the collateral specifically held against them.

    Federal Reserve notes are not redeemable in gold, silver or any other commodity, and receive no backing by anything. This has been the case since 1933. The notes have no value for themselves, but for what they will buy. In another sense, because they are legal tender, Federal Reserve notes are "backed" by all the goods and services in the economy.
    Then see “Commodity” definition below:
    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/commodity



    Now, if one cannot redeem FRNs anymore for anything per above stated policy, is that not in violation of 12 USC 411 and Section 16 of the Federal Reserve Act?

    Is that not also in violation of Public Policy (Public Res. 73-10, 48 Stat 112) by demanding a particular KIND of currency for payment of obligations?

    If now one can only "promise to pay" all obligations with only one KIND of currency (FRNs), then why not use this same KIND of currency (a promise to pay) to "pay" all obligations, following this same stated Treasury policy on non-redemption?

    When the Messiah paid the tax in Mt 17:27, did He tender a coin with Caesar's image on it, in accord with His decision in Mt 22:21?

    Likewise, should we simply tender currency that bears a "promise to pay" image, in accord with this system's monetary policy and instruments?


  2. #192
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    Sometimes I feel this thread is the very most productive thread on the entire website. God I miss Allodial though. Does anybody have a clue what happened to Allodial?
    Yes, very productive thread. No info on what happened to Allodial but my guess is ... his/her objective was reached here; mission accomplished. And then told to stand down or, left on their own.

    We are consistently winning versus the IRS with lawful money remedy. I have seen them occasionally threaten a lawful money tax return with a frivolous penalty. Probably these letters have worked so well for the IRS in the past they continue to send them. Here is a recent example:

    Name:  2016illusion.jpg
Views: 173
Size:  195.2 KB

    Here the IRS tries to create an illusion, saying the tax return claims a frivolous position when in fact it does not. Bit of a psychological operation at play. Gamesmanship. Responding with the law will cause the IRS to back down, eventually. And the threats melt away like January snow.

  3. #193
    Now, if one cannot redeem FRNs anymore for anything per above stated policy, is that not in violation of 12 USC 411 and Section 16 of the Federal Reserve Act?
    I don't read the webpage that way. The law reads: They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand...

    FRN shall be redeemed in lawful money, on demand.



    Quote Originally Posted by lorne View Post
    Yes, very productive thread. No info on what happened to Allodial but my guess is ... his/her objective was reached here; mission accomplished. And then told to stand down or, left on their own.

    We are consistently winning versus the IRS with lawful money remedy. I have seen them occasionally threaten a lawful money tax return with a frivolous penalty. Probably these letters have worked so well for the IRS in the past they continue to send them. Here is a recent example:

    Name:  2016illusion.jpg
Views: 173
Size:  195.2 KB

    Here the IRS tries to create an illusion, saying the tax return claims a frivolous position when in fact it does not. Bit of a psychological operation at play. Gamesmanship. Responding with the law will cause the IRS to back down, eventually. And the threats melt away like January snow.
    Thank you Lorne. This is pleasing to the ear. If you authorize the redemption it "goes through".

  4. #194
    Hello, I have redeemed lawful money for over 3 years and did the deduction on 2014, 2015, and 2016 returns which I filed a bit late. Just this week I received a CP15 notice of penalty charge for my 2014 return. The notice says due by Feb 5, 2018. How are people successfully refuting the frivolous filing penalty? Some have mentioned phone calls to the IRS. What information is being conveyed in the phone conversation? Are suitors just writing back to the IRS and explaining that the redemption of lawful money is not mentioned in any of the frivolous filing categories that are listed in the IRS documentation? Advice or links are greatly appreciated.

    Regards, kevin in Phoenix

  5. #195
    Did Congress & Trump Provide the Ultimate TAX Remedy? Hidden In the Rules?

    https://www.youarelaw.org/did-congre...-the-new-bill/

    I am researching this...

    This may also be the "exigent circumstances" justifying a Garnishment action in Admiralty by a Clerk in USDC to bypass the seditious Judges!

    And use those funds to offset damages from current IRS collections.

    See Rule B (1)(c) below:

    https://www.federalrulesofcivilproce...d-garnishment/

    Last edited by doug555; 01-20-18 at 01:49 AM.

  6. #196
    Something settled into my mind while having a delightful phone conversation with Francon.

    With five garnishments in admiralty underway in the USDC DC, wherein the Garnishees (TRUMP and MNUCHIN) reside, that admiralty rules might not apply to the redeemed. Admiralty as a jurisdiction in America must arise from below the high tide mark, or be related to an insurance contract. The insurance contract can be drawn up at sea or anywhere inland.

    The fractional lending requires insurance (FDIC or a Credit Union assurance). Suppose after all these years we have been pressuring the system into actual special deposit? I recall how a chain of credit unions closed down but years back is when some intrepid redeemed trustees began opening many trust accounts and moving large amounts of money through the credit union chain.


    Name:  closed credit union s.jpg
Views: 124
Size:  489.1 KB


    Out of the blue, trustees began hearing that they must quit all non-endorsing of checks. When the trustees claimed that they would sign as they pleased, the chain shut down.

    I have always advocated that we do not bother patrolling or even monitoring the lawfulness of the activity happening behind the teller window. So my presumption has always been that nobody gives a flip and all the money is processed the same, in the vault. That it is all insured and fractionalized upon. The branch managers do nothing to make sure that those bills deposited or set aside upon a check deposit were set aside "special deposit" in the vault for when that particular redeemed customer came back for "his or her money". And for amounts less that (let me guess) $1000 that is still true.

    My imagination has that the board of trustees for this credit union chain serving at the pleasure of the OCC (Office of the Comptroller of the Currency) realized they had been breaking the law, by treating these deposits as though they are insured for fractional lending/reserve banking. Or maybe the OCC looked over the books and noticed a discrepancy worth mentioning?

    The closure was silent correction. No discussion. Like pulling a weed and burning it.

  7. #197
    Can anyone help me find evidence of Coast Guard Geodetic Survey Marks/Monuments being placed on mountain tops to justify bringing Admiralty/Maritime Law onto the Land?

    http://www.peakbagging.com/Benchmark.htm

    Benchmark Placement on Mountain Tops

    Most of you reading this have probably been to a lot of summits which have had a benchmark in a prominent location that was easy to see. There may be a large rock at the summit and the benchmark will be cemented in place at the very highest point. Surveyors are concerned with visibility to other survey monuments and thus may place the benchmark near, but not actually on the highest point. The elevation of the benchmark will in these cases be lower than that of the true summit and the position as measured in latitude and longitude will not be that of the highest point.

    ........................................
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survey_marker
    Survey markers, also called survey marks, survey monuments, or geodetic marks, are objects placed to mark key survey points on the Earth's surface. They are used in geodetic and land surveying. Informally, such marks are referred to as benchmarks,[1] although strictly speaking the term "benchmark" is reserved for marks that indicate elevation.
    ........................................

    See: http://freedom-school.com/admiralty-...me-exposed.pdf
    Admiralty Maritime Jurisdiction Exposed.pdf (excerpt from page 7 below):

    "As long ago as 1851 the Supreme Court recognized that the Congress has the power to extend the
    jurisdictions of admiralty and maritime causes to the land under the commerce clause
    and deprive the
    people of the right of a trial by jury. The following holding by the high court pretty much says it all.

    "This power [of admiralty jurisdiction] is as extensive upon land as upon water. The
    Constitution makes no distinction in that respect. And if the admiralty jurisdiction, in
    matters of contract and tort which the courts of the United States may lawfully exercise
    on the high seas, can be extended to the lakes under the power to regulate commerce, it
    can with the same propriety and upon the same construction, be extended to contracts and
    torts on land when the commerce is between different States. And it may embrace also
    the vehicles and persons engaged in carrying it on. It would be in the power of
    Congress to confer admiralty jurisdiction upon its courts, over the cars engaged in
    transporting passengers or merchandise from one State to another, and over the
    persons engaged in conducting them, and deny to the parties the trial by jury. Now
    the judicial power in cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, has never been
    supposed to extend to contracts made on land and to be executed on land. But if the
    power of regulating commerce can be made the foundation of jurisdiction in its
    courts, and a new and extended admiralty jurisdiction beyond its heretofore known
    and admitted limits, may be created on water under that authority, the same reason
    would justify the same exercise of power on land." Propeller Genessee Chief et al. v.
    Fitzhugh et al. 12 How. 443 (U.S. 1851)

    .....................................


    The below links are offline during the government shutdown:

    https://www.ngs.noaa.gov/datasheets/

    https://www.ngs.noaa.gov/datums/vertical/

    https://www.ngs.noaa.gov/Tidal_Elevation/
    Last edited by doug555; 01-22-18 at 10:57 PM.

  8. #198
    I based an indictment upon a monument on Mt Herman, Colorado.

    Name:  Herman pastoral.jpg
Views: 93
Size:  214.7 KB

    There were three permanently mounted on the summit. Two of them pointed to the main one at ninety degrees. I knew there was something special about it from Mount Hermon of the Bible and how it overlooks Megachurch, USA from The North.

    Name:  Monuments Mount Hermon.jpg
Views: 95
Size:  172.7 KB

    My intention was to utilize the monument as an escape from admiralty. - To prove that we are air-breathing high above the high-tide mark.

    Name:  Hermon 1.jpg
Views: 95
Size:  200.6 KB

    Name:  Hermon 7.jpg
Views: 94
Size:  222.0 KB

    While camping a couple months later, I heard some strange pounding from my camp across the way. I did not think much of it but a few hours later went over to the summit and found that a group of men had carried a sledgehammer up and destroyed the metal cap. The two pointer caps remain there.

    You may be on to something but I focus on DeLOVIO:

    Name:  Constitution_pages.zip (1).jpg
Views: 94
Size:  77.6 KB

    Here is my thinking - Fractional lending and reserve banking depend entirely on insurance. FDIC is the primary insurance but all endorsed bills are insured against the national debt for security. Therefore redemption restores one to that Mandatory Exception from the false balances of elastic currency.

    But there is more. A FrivPen is Waiver of Tort... continued.
    Last edited by David Merrill; 01-25-18 at 11:45 AM.

  9. #199
    Name:  Waiver of Tort.jpg
Views: 93
Size:  130.5 KB

    This is the municipal CODE of the Five Boroughs. My "new technology" is to apply Admiralty Rules for garnishments against TRUMP and MNUCHIN. For example:

    Name:  indictment return small.jpg
Views: 94
Size:  101.2 KB

    Name:  Rubin leaving small.jpg
Views: 92
Size:  127.7 KB

    Secretary Robert RUBIN resigned suddenly, in time for the Five O'Clock News. Look at the date above.

    But if I am redeemed, MELCHIZEDEK then I have no business with LEVI. Sure enough. There is nothing going on because I am not separate. This is how difficult it is to climb over your egoistic mind and pull your head out of debt long enough to reconquer your idea set - brain trust. I am not alone. I am ONE with many. Unity.



    It goes way back - Jim's NOFTL (Notice of Federal Tax Lien) was not released. It disappeared.

    Name:  are you lost Diagram 1.JPG
Views: 97
Size:  153.8 KB

    I thought it strange that Jim could never get Wiley Young DANIEL to pull off his administrative cap and put on original jurisdiction - his Article III cap. But then that is the point. For a party in interest to come up out of the sea, and state claim on land, they must first file a petition in the USDC.

    Unless of course that party endorses private credit.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Last edited by David Merrill; 01-25-18 at 11:04 AM.

  10. #200
    In response to the 'Waiver of Tort' mentioned above...

    Here is an "Official Claim through a International Alien Tort Claim published by the Government of The United States of America!" for proceeding in an INTERNATIONAL VENUE for the "Trafficking of Persons" committed by the United States and the United States of America against Americans via COLB & SSN instruments.

    https://reignoftheheavens.com/?p=3388


    Since both the United States and the United States of America are private corporations, who "own" all USDC Courts, it appears that only an INTERNATIONAL VENUE is suitable for recourse.

    See also: The Government of The United States of America and the American National Union of The United States of America declares independence from the British Empire!

    https://reignoftheheavens.com/?p=3458

    Notice item #7:
    7: The British Empire created private international agreements under its private international law
    that included but not limited to the Atlantic Charter of nineteen hundred and forty one, and
    trafficked persons into the use of private Trusts (Internal Revenue) to facilitate human trafficking
    under the guise of Social Security, forced payment of taxes to allegedly fund the 'government' when
    those funds are really a 'tribute' payment to the Crown and the Vatican, and
    Notice page 4, 2nd last paragraph:
    The British Empire British Agents shall never be allowed to file one more charge against anyone
    outside of their borders, nor trafficked in persons within its borders
    Our "persons" have been trafficked under the guise of Social Security into offshore (Puerto Rico & Virgin Islands) internal revenue trusts... so would signing onto these 2 documents help those who are now dealing with the recent IRS Frivolous Filing charges and installment payment plans forced thereunder?

    P.S. This may also help...
    See: THE NEW INCOME TAX LAW (HR 1) DESTROYS the IRS, the DOJ, and ALL the JUDGES!
    http://www.tax-freedom.com/BrokenSystem.pdf

Posting Permissions

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