Page 21 of 21 FirstFirst ... 11192021
Results 201 to 206 of 206

Thread: Exactly what does the IRS agent think?

  1. #201
    I can see how "commercial war of genocide and temple desecration" would bring that to mind.

  2. #202
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    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...
    Name:  waiveroftort_Blacks9.jpg
Views: 130
Size:  99.0 KB

    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.

  3. #203
    Quote Originally Posted by lorne View Post
    Name:  waiveroftort_Blacks9.jpg
Views: 130
Size:  99.0 KB

    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.

  4. #204
    Greetings;

    This is one of the more useful threads around here. I am crosstalking from another thread...

    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

  5. #205
    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

  6. #206
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    130
    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.

Posting Permissions

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