Thank you. This is where I keep getting confused about redemption. I'm unclear about how to begin the process. I understand that I need to change my signature card at the bank, but what to do after that I just don't get. I also think that's what the NY tax guy was after. A clear roadmap on how to proceed is needed.Originally Posted by martin earl
Maybe there's one already here on the site, but I simply haven't found it yet.
1. Get an ink stamp that reads: DEMAND IS MADE FOR LAWFUL MONEY PER 12-USC 411.
2. Put that stamp above ALL your endorsements (signatures) of any commercial value or any contract that includes the use of money or Government agreements (applications for DLs etc).
3. Learn more. You will learn why that restriction on all you business dealings is vital.
It all starts with your DEMAND FOR LAWFUL MONEY, even the learning, since FAITH without works is dead.
Be at peace you will get it.
Sorry the weekends are the only time I get to spend quality time with my twins. I do want to respond to all the posts here but it will take me some time. I really like this discussion, and the input from everyone here. The issue I am having is the position being taken, is using citations and theory detached from the codified tax law. I need to support this under the code. For those who don't think the code applies to you, that is another debate. I will have that with you if you want, but for purposes here, lets presume we are all under the code.
I promise to address all questions, I just need time. I do have a life outside tax, and forum debate. Feel free to carry on discussing, I will get back.
Let's just say, If I can validate this approach, I can write an opinion, and can use that to support an audit, but it has to be grounded in current tax law with specific code sections regulation and cases cited. While I am happy to her discussion on private credit, and the like, it isn't really applicable in a position paper, unless specific tax codes embody this theory. I need to be able to use the code, regs and case law, to make a clear and compelling case for this position, and this is what i am struggling with, as I can't find an appropriate exemption in the tax law....
more to follow I promise, keep up the discussion, it is very interesting. I am also thankful some here finally understand why a refund check is not proof enough. If you want to take this position and your income in in excess of 250k, you need support, as taking this position with that much income will trigger an audit, no question.
I will also add, I do have access to ex-IRS agents as resources, and am talking to them about this, but nothing positive so far.
Because of your presumption I do not think you will ever find what you are after except maybe after a few more years. I will show you the early rendition of making the demand:
If you want to believe that then we have seven-going on eight years.
I think the main gap if you will here is that I would never have understood this without developing through the Libel of Review and its history 'saving to suitors'. There is a diversity of citizenship and it boils down to whether you are in contract with the Fed or not; so your premise is keeping you from developing any understanding of American remedy. You only see the one citizenship and do not recognize any diversity.
I was a pal with one of the authors of Are You Lost at C? There is some very esoteric knowledge that is presented too. For example Jim was a financial advisor and sold his complete client portfolio on the eve of the 1997 Crash. (Well, let's call it a Slump.) This requires some knowledge of the Fibonacci Sequence and he was a 32 Degree Mason. So some of this all ties together with the presumption there is more to life than meets the eye.
It also relates to Spiritual Mind Treatments and Mental Equivalence. So this is truly law. Mental equivalence to me anyway is when your understanding of the law is the same as the actual law. So it even goes beyond simple law it is how you make use of law. If you learn to forgive, the law demands the universe take your order - take on your order - become of the same order as you - forgiving and it reciprocates like a mirror.
We are certainly all under the law.
Redeeming lawful money excludes you from the IRC, Title 26 of the USC which is not positive law. By reconciling the US note value with the Federal Reserve note (well, sort of) Congress was able to enact Title 31 into positive law. They had to fudge it though and it is catching up fast, the cover up. Cover ups never go away, they just build lies upon more lies. They fester. The federal judges getting this ruling that they get pay raises at the same rate the Dollar devalues from fractional lending, that is a Tell.
A second-year law student told me matter-of-factly, All common law is is case law. Stare decisis. So you will not find the case law authority you are looking for until somebody at the IRS or DoJ is stupid enough to try prosecuting somebody for redeeming lawful money who understands the precept that is spelled out in the legislative history of the Fed act, they lose at trial and appeal, and win on appeal. For the IRS and DoJ to be that clumsy for the two years that would take is just unrealistic to hope for.
Regards,
David Merrill.
Last edited by David Merrill; 10-21-12 at 12:57 AM.
Jethro! You have the makings of a great scam here. To get it really rolling ... I'd suggest a secret meeting, preferably involving a US Senator, the principals of Jethro's bank, and a central banker (you could channel Paul Warburg if pressed). Here you will hatch a plan to get some legislation passed establishing a new elastic currency, Jethro's Bux. We'll get Congress to declare them legal tender (I hear you can buy a congress-critter quite reasonably). Of course they won't be lawful money (altho redeemable in same) but we can make use of some existing law to collect an excise tax on their use! For distraction, I recommend a 3-million word Internal Jethro Tax Code, non-positive law. Use of your money will extend the federal district out into the States. May need to tweak it here 'n there, PM me, this is brilliant! -- just need to get everyone using them and condition them into believing everything with value is taxable income, not just your beautifully-engraved Federal Jethro notes.
I will also add, I do have access to bank-examiners, attorneys, high net-worth individuals, and am talking to them about ....
LOL Oh my gosh.
This looks like a good place for me to jump in.
This thread has taken off faster than I can keep up, which tells me that there must be a vital interest in this topic.
I think that part of the misunderstandings surrounding lawful money stem from some preconceived notions about some people's business practices.
However, not everyone signs W-4 forms, files tax returns or even has bank accounts or driver licenses.
Some of us do have such things, but our income may be so low we get EIC, or perhaps we have no income at all.
So there are many reasons why some people don't file tax returns or pay income taxes.
It has been my personal experience that the IRS is mainly interested in the income (whatever that term may really truly mean) which is
reported to them on information returns. Once income is reported on 1099 forms and W-2 forms or any other info forms, it is taxable by the IRS.
Redeeming lawful money is not applicable there, because it would be after the fact that a contract was signed with the Fed system via SSN,
W-4, signature endorsement at the bank, W-8BEN or whatever, which makes the contracting person a taxpayer, regardless of what they redeem their FRN's for after they receive them.
I think SEDM has done a very good job of documenting how one becomes a taxpayer person via SSN, W-2, etc.
Lawful money however starts with a man or woman standing on land somewhere between the Atlantic ocean on the east, Pacific ocean on the west, and south of the Canadian border, but north of the Mexican border.
This man or woman was forced to memorize, during their younger years while subjected to compulsive schooling, something about a document called the United States Constitution, which is said to be the basis for the government of the geographical territory on which the wo/man is standing.
This document is very interesting and says many things in a strange kind of language which resembles English enough that it can be read by literate English speakers, whether native or otherwise.
In this document is written "Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States", "No capitation, or other direct tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken" and then there is an amendment #16 which says "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
At first this looks like a contradiction but the Supreme Court assures us it's not, in Brushaber v. Union Pacific R.R. 240 U.S. 1, and Stanton v. Baltic Mining, 240 U.S. 103.
"No new power of taxation"....that's good.
The wo/man now engages in lawful private business with other wo/men using cash or other things as a medium of exchange, reports nothing to anyone, and has no trouble with the IRS at all.
If the wo/man has a DL and a bank account with SSN, s/he writes on the back of checks something like this:
"deposit for credit on account or exchange for lawful money of equal face value"
thereby making clear that s/he wants no part of fractional reserve lending and its attending fee schedule and false weights and balances.
S/he gets her cash, reports nothing to anyone, and also has no trouble with the IRS.
This has been my experience with lawful money.
Last edited by Treefarmer; 10-21-12 at 04:36 AM.
Treefarmer
There is power in the blood of Jesus
Thank you for that Treefarmer;
I think this photo might better amplify your point.
The Driver License Store (Colorado).
Suitors are the wealthiest people I know for sure. They understand wealth as energy and that the only thing anybody can truly own is what they can create - meaning ego. So it comes down to perceptions.
Last edited by David Merrill; 10-21-12 at 09:18 AM.
NYGMan-Tax, if you are looking for basis in law, you need to be looking in the correct law.
The TAX CODE is not the correct law, private property laws and public use laws of private property are where you need to look.
FACTS: Federal Reserve NOTES (and CREDIT) are private property issued under 12 USC. Their public USE is regulated by the OWNER of the property (the Federal Reserve BANK).
The TAX CODE is simply a sub-textual set of laws pertaining to the members of the public who ACTUALLY USE THE PRIVATE PROPERTY OF ANOTHER.
Title 12 USC comes FIRST, the TAX CODE is the sub-text rules are for its enforcement for people who do not demand REDEMPTION from Title 12 and all laws that follow.
It is a simple matter of LAW, creation creates ownership, the CREATOR of Federal Reserve Credit is the OWNER and when anyone or anything uses that property, they assume the obligations of doing so.
I do not use the property of the Federal Reserve therefore, I am under NO obligation to pay them for the use of their Property.
You are an attorney, feel free to provide your evidence that if I do not use your property (in FACT, I DEMAND NOT TO USE your property), I am under any obligation (assumed or presumed) to pay you a fee or penalty.
The Tax CODE is restricted to those people who by use or endorsement volunteer themselves to use the private (but publicly available) property of a Private Corporation known as THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK.
Their notes are SEALED by the owner, and although they have this notice on them "THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS PUBLIC AND PRIVATE" there is no law requiring anyone to accept or even tender them as payment of debt.
If it was the case that there was not other NOTES, in circulation that were 'legal tender' the NOTICE would read:
"THIS NOTE IS THE ONLY LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS PUBLIC AND PRIVATE AND CANNOT BE REDEEMED FOR LAWFUL MONEY NOR REFUSED FOR PAYMENT OF DEBTS".
Federal reserve notes do not even reach the standard of LEGAL TENDER because no law requires them to be accepted as a legal tender for payment of debts.
Last edited by martin earl; 10-22-12 at 12:33 AM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
