Results 1 to 10 of 34

Thread: Response from the Secretary

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by ManOntheLand View Post
    Understood, but my employer receiving an IRS order to garnish my wages will probably think he is a judge and is not likely to recognize me as the "court of record" over the man in the black robe, is he? So if my Libel of Review case has been dismissed or even called frivolous on the record, how does that help me? Am I still left having to convince third parties not to obey the IRS?
    This is why I do not espouse these methods as a silver bullet. They are quite dependable but it would seem that the suitor has to have a certain degree of metaphysical prowess. We like to sling: Remedy is between your ears.

    For whatever reason you insist on slicing a snapshot or some kind of single-dimensional perception of what is going on here. I do not control the behavior of others. I simply guide them in the basics of being in authority (court of record) over the record. This is why I keep getting this feeling that you are a shill slurring remedy rather than genuinely here to learn and improve your conditions. If you trust me any more than I trust you maybe you could sanitize up a bill and PM an image?

    Another possibility is that you believe there are merits to Pete HENDRICKSON's Cracking the Code. So I will explain once again how as intelligence nexus for a group of very intelligent people one suitor involved with the Lost Horizons doctrine had Pete over for a visit. During this time I visited the suitor in his office and he disclosed something about Pete that I do not believe he discloses to any of the CtC adherents.

    Pete HENDRICKSON depends solely on The Right to be Heard. The Signature Line on the 1040 is signed under penalty of perjury. So it is very convenient for all these 1040 Forms in America to presume the Taxpayer is indeed telling the truth. Therefore the Refund Checks are issued out of electronic machinery and people post their Refund on Lost Horizons and then the 1099 or W-4 comes in from the Client/employer and the IRS runs an assessment on that sworn testimony and then recants on the Refund. When the Taxpayer tries to withdraw the image of the Refund from Lost Horizons they are summarily banished and have no voice to warn others.


    So,if they do not "unfile" or remove the Federal tax lien, what is the suitor supposed to do then?

    The suitor will continue to have the NOFTL. Refusal for Cause properly done through the Libel of Review evidence repository and including a formal Notice and Demand will likely keep any enforcement actions like levy and lien from being executed against the billing. There are noticibly sparse injuries after a proper evidence repository is established.


    That thread seems to be focused on 1040 filings. I am interested in how they react to the Libel of Review in the event one is already dealing with a notice of lien or levy and trying to get it withdrawn or "unfiled".

    There is very little "reaction" to the Libel of Review (LoR) because it is dismissed. There is however very little repeated billing.

    Has any suitor tried filing for a Form 843 abatement of amounts that are the subject of a notice of lien or levy, informing IRS in the abatement request that they are redeeming lawful money and/or that they filed a Libel of Review?

    Here it helps to understand the concept of presentments - affidavit and rebuttal. Just recently a suitor got a $5K FrivPen with $.53 accrued interest and ten days to pay up. - The three-page letter urging he call for more information. Well he utilized the 843 Form for late September in the amount of some $13K.

    It is a big hassle considering the IRS agent is being paid to create these presentments. To a skilled eye though, the new presentment is obviously unrelated to the R4C and 843 Form. Therefore the process in the evidence repository worked fine! It is easy to think that the presentments should have ended there but the IRS agent can offer up contracts all day long and is being paid to do so. A R4C would probably work real nifty but I suggest the 843 Form too with the R4C process since that is what it is for. [The agent is compelled to see the Form and therefore the R4C has a built-in Proof of Service in addition to the Registered Mail and PACER services.] Since the suitor redeems lawful money there is no assumption of jurisdiction, like you have argued about filling and signing their forms.

    I am filling out a response because you insist on pressing around here. - This time in red font even. If you want to show me an image of a bill - what was it? $80K? Then upon confirmation you are not just here to undermine remedy for everybody else I will likely take an interest in your implementation of remedy. Maybe even let you into the brain trust and then you can actually report here your progress on the forums?

    I should warn you in advance that there are skeptics watching this website who are either IRS agents or are in contact with IRS agents so do not disclose anything on the forums unless you want that additional burden - to be a target for an example.



    Regards,

    David Merrill.
    Last edited by David Merrill; 06-08-13 at 09:00 AM.

Posting Permissions

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