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

[motla68]

And we have demonstrable proof it is a use tax on FRNs. It's clear to me that "jesse james" is a tax attorney.

I tried to elude to that earlier in this thread so you could find it on your own, but I guess one has to be a little more blunt about what they are explaining here:

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...ull=1#post5232

Just figured you would have known by now and just forgot, needing a reminder.

[jesse james]

EZrythm you cannot say you have no income and yet use an affidavit stating you are a willing participant of Social Security.
Ever really take an honest look into Social Security?
Earning 3121(a) "wages" is income.
For ease of understanding why you cannot say you dont have income and yet are a willing participant lets say to participate in Social security one earns a Social Security wage. This wage is going to be used as a means of measuring the credits towards benefits.

3121(a) "wages" is defined as all fruit except the term excludes-
1. Strawberry's and-
2. Banana's
Easy enough?

Ok onto defining 3401(a) "wages"
For the purpose of this chapter 3401(a) "wages" is defined as all vegetables except the term excludes-
1. Strawberry's
2. Banana's

Ok now you are wondering if 3401(a) "wages" is defined as all vegetables why in the heck does the 3401(a) "wage" exclude the same exclusions to 3121(a) "wages" that are fruit?
Good question huh?
This is where Hendricksons CtC theory falls apart and the reason why he's in prison today.
See EZRythm this is why the courts say 3401(a) "wages" is expansive to include the private sector along with government employees.
A little logic goes a long way.
By saying whats excluded in 3121(a) for the 3401(a) definition is telling you that 3121(a) "wages" are included in 3401(a).
You know Social Security covers a multitude of jobs or occupations that qualify for crediting the trust account for obtaining immediate and defered benefits offered by the government program.
So instead going the long route of listing every job or occupation they tell you the small list of jobs or occupations that dont qualify for crediting the trust account. This is a much simpler way.

This is exactly how the 3401(a) "wages" are written in Title 26.
Here see for yourself!

(a) Wages
For purposes of this chapter, the term “wages” means all remuneration (other than fees paid to a public official) for services performed by an employee for his employer, including the cash value of all remuneration (including benefits) paid in any medium other than cash; except that such term shall not include remuneration paid—

(1) for active service performed in a month for which such employee is entitled to the benefits of section 112 (relating to certain combat zone compensation of members of the Armed Forces of the United States) to the extent remuneration for such service is excludable from gross income under such section; or
(2) for agricultural labor (as defined in section 3121 (g)) unless the remuneration paid for such labor is wages (as defined in section 3121 (a)); or
[U](3) for domestic service in a private home, local college club, or local chapter of a college fraternity or sorority; or[/U]
(4) for service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business performed in any calendar quarter by an employee, unless the cash remuneration paid for such service is $50 or more and such service is performed by an individual who is regularly employed by such employer to perform such service. For purposes of this paragraph, an individual shall be deemed to be regularly employed by an employer during a calendar quarter only if—
(A) on each of some 24 days during such quarter such individual performs for such employer for some portion of the day service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business; or
(B) such individual was regularly employed (as determined under subparagraph (A)) by such employer in the performance of such service during the preceding calendar quarter; or
(5) for services by a citizen or resident of the United States for a foreign government or an international organization; or
(6) for such services, performed by a nonresident alien individual, as may be designated by regulations prescribed by the Secretary; or
[(7) Repealed. Pub. L. 89–809, title I, § 103(k), Nov. 13, 1966, 80 Stat. 1554]
(8)
(A) for services for an employer (other than the United States or any agency thereof)—
(i) performed by a citizen of the United States if, at the time of the payment of such remuneration, it is reasonable to believe that such remuneration will be excluded from gross income under section 911; or
(ii) performed in a foreign country or in a possession of the United States by such a citizen if, at the time of the payment of such remuneration, the employer is required by the law of any foreign country or possession of the United States to withhold income tax upon such remuneration; or
(B) for services for an employer (other than the United States or any agency thereof) performed by a citizen of the United States within a possession of the United States (other than Puerto Rico), if it is reasonable to believe that at least 80 percent of the remuneration to be paid to the employee by such employer during the calendar year will be for such services; or
(C) for services for an employer (other than the United States or any agency thereof) performed by a citizen of the United States within Puerto Rico, if it is reasonable to believe that during the entire calendar year the employee will be a bona fide resident of Puerto Rico; or
(D) for services for the United States (or any agency thereof) performed by a citizen of the United States within a possession of the United States to the extent the United States (or such agency) withholds taxes on such remuneration pursuant to an agreement with such possession; or
[U](9) for services performed by a duly ordained, commissioned, or licensed minister of a church in the exercise of his ministry or by a member of a religious order in the exercise of duties required by such order; [/U]or
(10)
(A) for services performed by an individual under the age of 18 in the delivery or distribution of newspapers or shopping news, not including delivery or distribution to any point for subsequent delivery or distribution; or (B) for services performed by an individual in, and at the time of, the sale of newspapers or magazines to ultimate consumers, under an arrangement under which the newspapers or magazines are to be sold by him at a fixed price, his compensation being based on the retention of the excess of such price over the amount at which the newspapers or magazines are charged to him, whether or not he is guaranteed a minimum amount of compensation for such services, or is entitled to be credited with the unsold newspapers or magazines turned back; or

EZRythm......prior the 1939 code you didnt see these Social Security exclusions in chapter 24's 3401(a) "wages".
Social Security didnt even exist until 1935.
This is why hendrickson is in jail because he wrote a book of his interpretive opinion that didnt line up with the actual law.
I hope you see why an affidavit such as yours isnt going to do anything except possible be used against you in a court of law.
You say you dont have income but yet by participating in Social Security you do because 3401(a) "wages" covers Social Security wages except for the exclusions. Whats excluded from Social Security is also excluded from the chapter 24 deduction and withholding requirement.
The only way you cannot have statutory "wages" is by either having a job that is excluded from the definition or dont even participate in the program altogether.

[jesse james]

I tried to elude to that earlier in this thread so you could find it on your own, but I guess one has to be a little more blunt about what they are explaining here:

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...ull=1#post5232

Just figured you would have known by now and just forgot, needing a reminder.

Well you better start producing the law that says the use of FRN is the cause of taxation otherwise its just a bunch hearsay in a court setting.

[motla68]

Well you better start producing the law that says the use of FRN is the cause of taxation otherwise its just a bunch hearsay in a court setting.

I better or what? LOL, whatever man. Have you even heard of the Federal Reserve Act?

[jesse james]

I better or what? LOL, whatever man. Have you even heard of the Federal Reserve Act?

Its funny how you think redeeming lawful money will hold in court and yet you cannot procure any statute the courts can use to see your side. Zilch, nada, nothing!
The bottom line is it wasn't redeeming lawful money that attributes your success....................its your nonparticipation in Social Security. Just accept it!
Redeeming doesnt stop reporting to the government. Reporting revolves around participation of SS.
All redeeming is was to get gold back fiat. It was just a transitional period.........................they took it away havent they as you dont get gold backed paper........infact you get the same fiat currency.

[Treefarmer]

EZrythm you cannot say you have no income and yet use an affidavit stating you are a willing participant of Social Security.
Ever really take an honest look into Social Security?
Earning 3121(a) "wages" is income.
For ease of understanding why you cannot say you dont have income and yet are a willing participant lets say to participate in Social security one earns a Social Security wage. This wage is going to be used as a means of measuring the credits towards benefits.

3121(a) "wages" is defined as all fruit except the term excludes-
1. Strawberry's and-
2. Banana's
Easy enough?

Ok onto defining 3401(a) "wages"
For the purpose of this chapter 3401(a) "wages" is defined as all vegetables except the term excludes-
1. Strawberry's
2. Banana's

Ok now you are wondering if 3401(a) "wages" is defined as all vegetables why in the heck does the 3401(a) "wage" exclude the same exclusions to 3121(a) "wages" that are fruit?
Good question huh?
This is where Hendricksons CtC theory falls apart and the reason why he's in prison today.
See EZRythm this is why the courts say 3401(a) "wages" is expansive to include the private sector along with government employees.
A little logic goes a long way.
By saying whats excluded in 3121(a) for the 3401(a) definition is telling you that 3121(a) "wages" are included in 3401(a).
You know Social Security covers a multitude of jobs or occupations that qualify for crediting the trust account for obtaining immediate and defered benefits offered by the government program.
So instead going the long route of listing every job or occupation they tell you the small list of jobs or occupations that dont qualify for crediting the trust account. This is a much simpler way.

This is exactly how the 3401(a) "wages" are written in Title 26.
Here see for yourself!

(a) Wages
For purposes of this chapter, the term “wages” means all remuneration (other than fees paid to a public official) for services performed by an employee for his employer, including the cash value of all remuneration (including benefits) paid in any medium other than cash; except that such term shall not include remuneration paid—

(1) for active service performed in a month for which such employee is entitled to the benefits of section 112 (relating to certain combat zone compensation of members of the Armed Forces of the United States) to the extent remuneration for such service is excludable from gross income under such section; or
(2) for agricultural labor (as defined in section 3121 (g)) unless the remuneration paid for such labor is wages (as defined in section 3121 (a)); or
[U](3) for domestic service in a private home, local college club, or local chapter of a college fraternity or sorority; or[/U]
(4) for service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business performed in any calendar quarter by an employee, unless the cash remuneration paid for such service is $50 or more and such service is performed by an individual who is regularly employed by such employer to perform such service. For purposes of this paragraph, an individual shall be deemed to be regularly employed by an employer during a calendar quarter only if—
(A) on each of some 24 days during such quarter such individual performs for such employer for some portion of the day service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business; or
(B) such individual was regularly employed (as determined under subparagraph (A)) by such employer in the performance of such service during the preceding calendar quarter; or
(5) for services by a citizen or resident of the United States for a foreign government or an international organization; or
(6) for such services, performed by a nonresident alien individual, as may be designated by regulations prescribed by the Secretary; or
[(7) Repealed. Pub. L. 89–809, title I, § 103(k), Nov. 13, 1966, 80 Stat. 1554]
(8)
(A) for services for an employer (other than the United States or any agency thereof)—
(i) performed by a citizen of the United States if, at the time of the payment of such remuneration, it is reasonable to believe that such remuneration will be excluded from gross income under section 911; or
(ii) performed in a foreign country or in a possession of the United States by such a citizen if, at the time of the payment of such remuneration, the employer is required by the law of any foreign country or possession of the United States to withhold income tax upon such remuneration; or
(B) for services for an employer (other than the United States or any agency thereof) performed by a citizen of the United States within a possession of the United States (other than Puerto Rico), if it is reasonable to believe that at least 80 percent of the remuneration to be paid to the employee by such employer during the calendar year will be for such services; or
(C) for services for an employer (other than the United States or any agency thereof) performed by a citizen of the United States within Puerto Rico, if it is reasonable to believe that during the entire calendar year the employee will be a bona fide resident of Puerto Rico; or
(D) for services for the United States (or any agency thereof) performed by a citizen of the United States within a possession of the United States to the extent the United States (or such agency) withholds taxes on such remuneration pursuant to an agreement with such possession; or
[U](9) for services performed by a duly ordained, commissioned, or licensed minister of a church in the exercise of his ministry or by a member of a religious order in the exercise of duties required by such order; [/U]or
(10)
(A) for services performed by an individual under the age of 18 in the delivery or distribution of newspapers or shopping news, not including delivery or distribution to any point for subsequent delivery or distribution; or (B) for services performed by an individual in, and at the time of, the sale of newspapers or magazines to ultimate consumers, under an arrangement under which the newspapers or magazines are to be sold by him at a fixed price, his compensation being based on the retention of the excess of such price over the amount at which the newspapers or magazines are charged to him, whether or not he is guaranteed a minimum amount of compensation for such services, or is entitled to be credited with the unsold newspapers or magazines turned back; or

EZRythm......prior the 1939 code you didnt see these Social Security exclusions in chapter 24's 3401(a) "wages".
Social Security didnt even exist until 1935.
This is why hendrickson is in jail because he wrote a book of his interpretive opinion that didnt line up with the actual law.
I hope you see why an affidavit such as yours isnt going to do anything except possible be used against you in a court of law.
You say you dont have income but yet by participating in Social Security you do because 3401(a) "wages" covers Social Security wages except for the exclusions. Whats excluded from Social Security is also excluded from the chapter 24 deduction and withholding requirement.
The only way you cannot have statutory "wages" is by either having a job that is excluded from the definition or dont even participate in the program altogether.

Thank you jesse james for your explanation of Pete HENDRICKSON's errors.

Now that you have brought up details of USC title 26, could you also please discuss how a person, who is a US citizen, becomes subject to title 26 statutes?

Since title 26 has never been enacted into positive law, but is only "prima facie evidence of the law", and since the Internal Revenue Service is not an agency of the Unites States Government
diver_justice_response-1.pdf,
I would like to know by what contract or mechanism a US citizen becomes subject to the Internal Revenue Code?

By way of explanation, it would also be nice if you could mention to what the Revenue Code is Internal?

Thank you for your participation in this forum.
I appreciate your inquisitiveness.

[motla68]

Its funny how you think redeeming lawful money will hold in court and yet you cannot procure any statute the courts can use to see your side. Zilch, nada, nothing!
The bottom line is it wasn't redeeming lawful money that attributes your success....................its your nonparticipation in Social Security. Just accept it!
Redeeming doesnt stop reporting to the government. Reporting revolves around participation of SS.
All redeeming is was to get gold back fiat. It was just a transitional period.........................they took it away havent they as you dont get gold backed paper........infact you get the same fiat currency.

LOL LOL, yeah this is getting more comical by the post. Guess you have not perused through the archives of this forum yet. I have succeeded in court, setoff county valerim taxes on property, setoff yearly renewal of a vehicle registration, hospital bill, stopped check cashing fees all using lawful money language on it and most I did not even mention the statute cite for it. In stopping check cashing fee part of their procedure is to put a SSN into their card reader to get the job done. Yes I do use a SSN but it is not in the same context as your use of it, I am listed as Grantor, not beneficiary and I did not even have to sign anything to get it.

COURT. The person and suit of the sovereign; the place where the sovereign sojourns with his regal retinue, wherever that may be. [Black's Law Dictionary, 5th Edition, page 318.]

COURT. An agency of the sovereign created by it directly or indirectly under its authority, consisting of one or more officers, established and maintained for the purpose of hearing and determining issues of law and fact regarding legal rights and alleged violations thereof, and of applying the sanctions of the law, authorized to exercise its powers in the course of law at times and places previously determined by lawful authority. [Isbill v. Stovall, Tex.Civ.App., 92 S.W.2d 1067, 1070; Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Edition, page 425]

Court is wherever you are at any given time when communicating with a commercial agent, it is then you are first identified who you are and what jurisdiction before proceedings continue.

See the book of Galatians chapter 4, ascending from the age of minority to the age of majority.

[jesse james]

LOL LOL, yeah this is getting more comical by the post. Guess you have not perused through the archives of this forum yet. I have succeeded in court, setoff county valerim taxes on property, setoff yearly renewal of a vehicle registration, hospital bill, stopped check cashing fees all using lawful money language on it and most I did not even mention the statute cite for it. In stopping check cashing fee part of their procedure is to put a SSN into their card reader to get the job done. Yes I do use a SSN but it is not in the same context as your use of it, I am listed as Grantor, not beneficiary and I did not even have to sign anything to get it.

COURT. The person and suit of the sovereign; the place where the sovereign sojourns with his regal retinue, wherever that may be. [Black's Law Dictionary, 5th Edition, page 318.]

COURT. An agency of the sovereign created by it directly or indirectly under its authority, consisting of one or more officers, established and maintained for the purpose of hearing and determining issues of law and fact regarding legal rights and alleged violations thereof, and of applying the sanctions of the law, authorized to exercise its powers in the course of law at times and places previously determined by lawful authority. [Isbill v. Stovall, Tex.Civ.App., 92 S.W.2d 1067, 1070; Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Edition, page 425]

Court is wherever you are at any given time when communicating with a commercial agent, it is then you are first identified who you are and what jurisdiction before proceedings continue.

See the book of Galatians chapter 4, ascending from the age of minority to the age of majority.

Ahhhhh..............more pieces to the puzzle that redeeming money is NOT the source of your success.
You said you are listed as "grantor" and not beneficiary of the ssn.

I posted for johnthetaxist....aka "stonefree", "johnycash" in another forum a statute pretty much explaining this little tid bit of info "issues of law and fact regarding legal rights and alleged violations thereof" you listed above in Isbill v. Stovall, Tex.Civ.App., 92 S.W.2d 1067, 1070; Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Edition, page 425.

TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 1983
1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.

My question posed to Johnthetaxist better known as "Johnycash" or "stonefree" here on this forum was how can the government force anybody to participate in a welfare program causing them to become a 2nd class "US citizen" who cannot access certain protections of the Bill of Rights as one of the People?

Thanks for agreeing with me.

[stoneFree]

Perhaps jesse hasn't been called.

"But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God."
1 Corinthians 1:23

[jesse james]

Thank you jesse james for your explanation of Pete HENDRICKSON's errors.

Now that you have brought up details of USC title 26, could you also please discuss how a person, who is a US citizen, becomes subject to title 26 statutes?

Since title 26 has never been enacted into positive law, but is only "prima facie evidence of the law", and since the Internal Revenue Service is not an agency of the Unites States Government
diver_justice_response-1.pdf,
I would like to know by what contract or mechanism a US citizen becomes subject to the Internal Revenue Code?

By way of explanation, it would also be nice if you could mention to what the Revenue Code is Internal?

Thank you for your participation in this forum.
I appreciate your inquisitiveness.

Your answer to all these questions is understanding where you stand within the law/laws.
Know the difference between a "US citizens" and the "People".
I gave plenty of court cites explaining how to identify the difference.
I'd start with reading the jurisdiction clause of the 14th amendment, then read those cites I provided, look up an SS5 form to see what or who you are under perjury of being, and read the IRS website about what or who gives them authority to collect.
Read regulation 26CFR 1.1-1(c) to get an idea whos being taxed and subject to title 26.

Sec. 1.1-1 Income tax on individuals.
(a) General rule.
(1) Section 1 of the Code imposes an income tax on the income of every individual who is a citizen or resident of the United States and, to the extent provided by section 871(b) or 877(b), on the income of a nonresident alien individual

Any mention of using FRN as the cause for the tax imposition in this regulation?......................nope, nada, zilch, nothing to that nature. So do you beleive the Reserve Act from 1913 that doesnt say squat about imposing anything has anything at all to do with citizenship, 14th amendment, and the impositions found Title 26?

(c) Who is a citizen. Every person born or naturalized in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction is a citizen.

Amendment XIV
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.

Heres what the IRS has to say about the 14th amandment.

1. Contention: Taxpayer is not a “citizen” of the United States, thus not subject to the federal income tax laws.
Some individuals argue that they have rejected citizenship in the United States in favor of state citizenship; therefore, they are relieved of their federal income tax obligations. A variation of this argument is that a person is a free born citizen of a particular state and thus was never a citizen of the United States. The underlying theme of these arguments is the same: the person is not a United States citizen and is not subject to federal tax laws because only United States citizens are subject to these laws.

The Law: The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution defines the basis for United States citizenship, stating that “[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” The Fourteenth Amendment therefore establishes simultaneous state and federal citizenship. Claims that individuals are not citizens of the United States but are solely citizens of a sovereign state and not subject to federal taxation have been uniformly rejected by the courts. The IRS issued Revenue Ruling 2007-22, 2007-14 I.R.B. 866, warning taxpayers of the consequences of making this frivolous argument.

See any mention of the IRS taxing the People of the United States of America?.......................................... ....nope! and they cant as the People are above their government!
But "US citizens" are NOT above the Peoples government!.......................they are subjects!

This is my arguement for those redeeming a check and yet have taxes deducted and withheld.......................they have jurisdiction over you. The 14th amendment gives them jurisdiction as you are still redeeming under their jurisdiction.
You have to first understand where you are standing within the law to identify the capacity you are operating in. Once you understand this you can easily figure a way out of the jurisdiction.
EZRythm thinks he can just write up an affidavit that he attest to not having income, but yet admits he is willing to participant in the same mechanism that turns his earnings into bonified reportable statutory "income". And the kicker here is hes sending this affidavit to a government agency that will use it against him as an attempt at tax fraud................how ignorant or smart is that?