endorsing and SS.......a big question!

[jesse james]

The VENDOR was the metals dealer who bought the metals from my friend. The vendor HAS to report transactions and no one gets around reporting a transaction of over $10k. That is automatic at the banking level. There is NO getting around reporting of a transaction that large. So, now one more time. Since the reporting was made and everyone knows it was made, what does that have to do with the lawyers for the metals vendor saying they would not allow the transaction to go thru with the line for the beneficiary instructions to have "transaction made in 100 percent lawful money" added to it on the wire transfer form?

Probably for the same reasons banks bulk at it also.
Look, I'm not saying lawful money doesnt exist for the simple reason the you can redeem fiat for lawful money or else you wouldnt see it codified.
I beleive lawful money is what ever the money was being used before the reserve act which were US Treasury Notes being backed by gold and silver which are no longer being printed.
Id say the lawyers are stopping the lawful money thingy is because the Treasurey doesnt print US notes any longer.

What would you say if you asked to be paid in dollar coins?
Dollar coins are not issued by the Reserve Banks, but from the Treasury. Dollar coins by merrills theory exist as "lawful money" simpy because they are not minted by the reserve banks. But US Treasury coins, like the reserve dollar, are not backed by gold nor silver. So what are they?
They dont appear to be fiat reserve coins and yet NOT lawful money either.
I'll garantee you that being paid in US Treasury coins still doesnt Estoppel the liability for income taxes.
The notion of being untaxable for redeeming lawful money in the form of "fiat", gold or silver or what ever doesnt make any logical sense.
It doesnt make any sense because the reporting of "income" start directly with having deductions reported via the W3 which the IRS obtains from the SSA.
The SSA gets its information from the employer or contractor from participating in SS.

Look at 3121(a) "wages"

(a) Wages
For purposes of this chapter, the term ?wages? means all remuneration for employment, including the cash value of all remuneration (including benefits) paid in any medium other than cash; except that such term shall not include?

I dont care if you are paid in Treasury Notes. 3121(a) "wages" says paid in any medium....................horse biscuits and marbles are mediums of exchange if thats what the two parties agree to.

[jesse james]

Goldi, have you seen this STOP JESSE 2012 site?

Hahahaha....
Johnny I'm not who you think I'am!
And for the record for this site I'm a local 145 electrician from Iowa.
Johnny seriously that isnt going anywhere..........those who read the links from that site wont do a damn thing when they see how ignorant you are of the law. And might I say you do a fine job of being ignorant of the law for the public to see.
You'll be a laughing stock of your clueless cause Johnny!

[Goldi]

Goldi, have you seen this STOP JESSE 2012 site?

That is hysterical. How did my name come to be an alias of his? In fact jesse2012@gmx.com - whoever you are, remove the name GOLDI from the alias list on your website.

[Goldi]

"Id say the lawyers are stopping the lawful money thingy is because the Treasurey doesnt print US notes any longer." Sorry, but you are not thinking thru your statement. 12 USC 411 has not been abrogated. It is still in force and effect today and nothing changed in 1933 [domestic gold standard abrogated], 1966 [silver standard abrogated], 1970 [International gold standard abrogated] or 1971 [withdrawal of US Notes from general circulation]... So that is not the reason why they don't want the signature restriction. It is because the naked indorsement on the instruments is what causes you to become liable on the interest on the US Bonds placed into circulation with the creation of the new money. US Notes were the INELASTIC currency of the people. The reason that you can demand lawful money is NOT to say you can get something other than FRN's but rather you can use them in a different CAPACITY, that being AS IF they were US Notes of an inelastic nature [making it impossible for you to be held liable for the interest on the bonds]. If they refuse to allow that option it then becomes abject SLAVERY. Oh yeah, they'll get all bent out of shape and pissy, but they cannot stop you from a restricted indorsement on each and every instrument you send thru the banking system.

[jesse james]

That is hysterical. How did my name come to be an alias of his? In fact jesse2012@gmx.com - whoever you are, remove the name GOLDI from the alias list on your website.

Hey...not my problem Goldi your buddy Johnnycash here thinks I'm you (doesnt surprise me) is the one who started that ridicules site.
All Johnny's going to do is piss off some lawyers who might get some shit on the street.
Johnny doesnt think past his nose.....but its funny to think of what legal action he might find himself in over.

[JohnnyCash]

Hahahaha....
Johnny I'm not who you think I'am!
And for the record for this site I'm a local 145 electrician from Iowa.

I just went through the jesse2012.com visitor logs for today 3/24/12. We have visitors from Texas, Calif, Colorado, United Kingdom, and Oregon. But none from Iowa. It appears I've caught you lying yet again.

[JohnnyCash]

... Now, this was a 5 figure transaction. So you tell me...why would the lawyers nix this simple little notation on a wire transfer document to the detriment of a 5 figure transaction if "there is nothing to this" and the whole premise is bull sh@t ????????? Now I know why they did that, but the point of the matter is that the lawyers know what it means too.

I think it's a mistake to assume all lawyers know about lawful money. At least as we here at Planet Merrill do and use it practically. In fact, I think most people are unaware of it, including attorneys. Here is attorney Edwin Vieira Jr. talking about the conundrum of lawful money in Pieces of Eight:

http://jesse2012.com/PO8_819.jpg
http://jesse2012.com/PO8_820.jpg
http://jesse2012.com/PO8_822.jpg
http://jesse2012.com/PO8_824.jpg
http://jesse2012.com/PO8_826.jpg
http://jesse2012.com/PO8_828.jpg

[jesse james]

I just went through the jesse2012.com visitor logs for today 3/24/12. We have visitors from Texas, Calif, Colorado, United Kingdom, and Oregon. But none from Iowa. It appears I've caught you lying yet again.

You have a habit of making a fool out of yourself dont you?
I havent been to that site today nor in the last couple of days.
Way to go.......discrediting yourself like that.
But thats your MO anyway....isnt any surprise!

[JohnnyCash]

I havent been to that site today nor in the last couple of days.

Perhaps. Anyway, I'm encouraged that you're reviving this thread Jesse, the thread where you've previously been shown to be lying. This indicates you remain defiant in the face of central banking's demise. That you will fight to the end. That you're prepared to go down with the ship. We're in for some great entertainment here. Here is the Dallas Fed Executive VP explaining Why We Must End Too Big to Fail -- Now: http://dallasfed.org/assets/document...2011/ar11b.pdf


A rare photograph of J at the helm of HMS Quatloo at battle in the Sea of Unintended Consequences. He was overheard saying:
"I've forgotten more about taxes than you will ever know!"
"Wesley! engage the censorship engine."
"The law is the law!!! BWAAH"

[Goldi]

"I think it's a mistake to assume all lawyers know about lawful money." I certainly did not assert that, but you can TAKE IT TO THE BANK, THAT THE LAWYERS WORKING AT BANKS KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT MEANS. And I had that evidenced to me in a transaction from about 2 years ago where the teller looked at the indorsement restriction and said he had to run it through the lawyers and so sorry for the delay. They approved it. So you cannot tell me the lawyers working for banks don't get this. And in the matter of all lawyers getting it? Well of course not, just the one's who have to know it...at the banking level.