Exactly what does the IRS agent think?

[David Merrill]

Thanks for that David!, I can understand the need for privacy in these matters. Pete while doing great work to explain a system that is nearly incomprehensible failed to realize he was going to get railroaded. After that fiasco it seemed all was lost. Your revealing the lawful money remedy filled in what CtC missed. I am surprised it took me as long as it did to come across your early videos. It really does help to fall back on the basics of money, its origins, progressions and mutations. The Proverbs 11:1 quote says it all.

Privacy is a consideration but the simplicity of it negates the need for you to look over this fellow's 1040 Form.

I remember last year this time, he was calling me to basically do his taxes for him. This fellow is a banker at a large international bank and he is licensed to prepare people's Income Tax Forms and he wanted me to do his taxes over the phone for him? I was on my phone in a sporting goods store browsing for a backpacking trip, I remember with my photographic memory. He began redeeming lawful money midway through 2009. So I told him that any paycheck's withholdings for the first half, before he began redeeming by demand, he should not claim those funds on the 1040, but all the paycheck amount total for the latter half he should write that on there for his Refund. I recommend that you leave the SSI and other bennies alone. Treat that like an insurance policy and you are paying premiums.

It is that easy. And maybe I am lazy but the suitor understood and the IRS gave him the Refund. Both states he worked in during 2009 gave him full state Refunds too.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[Brian]

So essentially the prior years where I was not aware of this remedy should be written off and filed/paid as "normal". I'm not really interested in SSA or Medicare at this time, so no worries there (one thing at a time). Claiming previous years as "redeemed lawful money" is asking for a fight? Even though it is essentially fraud?

[David Merrill]

So essentially the prior years where I was not aware of this remedy should be written off and filed/paid as "normal". I'm not really interested in SSA or Medicare at this time, so no worries there (one thing at a time). Claiming previous years as "redeemed lawful money" is asking for a fight? Even though it is essentially fraud?

The accusation would be fraud by omission. It is not quite valid because you cannot blame anybody for not teaching you something. You can only blame yourself.

The presumption is that you have been signing the backside of your paychecks for quite some while now and that signature is worth something. The bankers (including you) have been banking on that signature so it makes no sense to really follow through with that indictment proactively. You might use it for a defense though, if you are being prosecuted.

I explain this to people all day long it would seem. Like a career. So I could be quite convincing in front of a jury. Maybe you could too. There are all sorts of rules though and they tried to destroy my mind with psychotropic pharmaceuticals. The suitors saved my life! One suitor wrote an email telling me not to sign anything. His parents were both in state-sponsored psychiatry - it is all an eloquent ballet. He was there when I needed him and it seems that I am there when people need me too. I cannot describe it, really. Indescribable. English fails me. I call it advanced-resonance inductive plasma physics.

It's like static/noise. I am trained in electronics. It was not all at once but the epiphany was gradual - noise is just anything too complex for me to understand. So to a technician, noise is nothing. But you can have noise now, and noise in the future and you can subtract the now from the future and you have something - the difference. If you wait too long, the difference is so complex it is only more noise. I was with RAMTRON when they furnished the Microelectronics Research Laboratory for UCCS working on the first FRAM (Ferroelectric Random Access Memory) slides. And I went over to OSI, later called LMSI (Laser Magnetic Storage International) to develop the CDs and DVDs too. When I see a micro-SD-Card holding 16Gbytes of data I know how that can happen because I was there birthing it from the womb in a few men's minds. It's not rambling believe it or not - there is a Groove.

The moment I was taught my Signature is worth something; that it contains something called Honor was on or around March 11th, 1971:

See how my name changed from David Merrill to DAVID MERRILL VAN PELT?

http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_certification.jpg

http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_certification2.jpg

http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_certification3.jpg

The bottom of the last image there - that's when I got a SSN. I did that. My Dad gave me a brief lecture about scribing a signature and sticking with that. What he did not tell me was that I had made something that was mine - it does not belong to the government. And he did not tell me about honor, honorable as he was; that it is the only thing you can possess, property is use in trust - but you can die with honor. You cannot die with property.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[David Merrill]

These images if you think about it, are more convincing than the actual Refund Check! This one is special because it shows contemplation by the NY State DoR:

http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/3503/staterefund125adjustmen.jpg

That demonstrates that the State revenue agent considered the Return carefully enough to realize our suitor failed to put his $125 school tax credit on there.

http://img807.imageshack.us/img807/3503/staterefund125adjustmen.jpg

Lines 18 and 33 make a very important statement, especially in light of the first image. Contemplation. After contemplation, the State agents have deduced that because there is no federal tax liability, there is no State liability. Line 46 in light of lines 72,73 and especially 78 reveal the rest of this redemption of lawful money story. There it shows that this fellow has for whatever reason been sending thousands of $$$$ to the State in Withholdings, yet he does not owe any taxes; so he gets it all back, and even an additional Credit of $125.


Regards,

David Merrill.

I am trying to align these sanitized images up so that they are most convincing.

http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/6...report2010.png

Firstly, the suitor was promised a full Refund.



Then he was notified that there would be an adjustment, which turned out to be the NY School Tax Credit of $125 added to his Refund. Sweet!



The funds have been deposited for the suitor.

Note especially the comments above the deposit screen. The remedy extends electronically as well.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[David Merrill]

Here is an interesting addition to our compendium of IRS Agent thought:

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=238262,00.html

[Frederick Burrell]

Great stuff David, thanks for posting it. KISS. fB

[David Merrill]

Thank you fB.

[Anthony Joseph]

binding law upon the IRS, and any other United States claiming entity, to accept and recognize the non-taxable nature of lawful money of exchange.

Let me repeat... ZERO MENTION OF THIS EXERCISE OF TRUE REMEDY ANYWHERE ON THEIR "WARNING" POSTING.

I would like to thank David Merrill, again, for being God's "conduit of truth" for those who truly seek it out. I am not aware of anyone else who openly and freely teaches this specific remedy to more people than him and for as long as he has been doing it. I for one am grateful.

[Richard Earl]

I'm still having trouble though. I notice that citizens were paying income taxes well before 1933.

"In order to help pay for its war effort in the American Civil War, the United States government imposed its first personal income tax, on August 5, 1861, as part of the Revenue Act of 1861 (3% of all incomes over US $800)." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax#United_States

I'm trying to figure out the logic behind the redemption as per 12 USC 411 and the 16th Amendment to the US Constitution:

Amendment XVI
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.

Although I think the Amendment was made in 1913 (first 20 year charter?)

[David Merrill]

binding law upon the IRS, and any other United States claiming entity, to accept and recognize the non-taxable nature of lawful money of exchange.

Let me repeat... ZERO MENTION OF THIS EXERCISE OF TRUE REMEDY ANYWHERE ON THEIR "WARNING" POSTING.

I would like to thank David Merrill, again, for being God's "conduit of truth" for those who truly seek it out. I am not aware of anyone else who openly and freely teaches this specific remedy to more people than him and for as long as he has been doing it. I for one am grateful.

That is some high praise indeed! - A servant of the Most High...

That sure explains the consistency! Thanks AJ, for honorable mention. I recall one moonless summer night I was playing around with night vision and was going through a pitch black field. Passing some bushes I found a rolled up carpet with feet protruding from the end. I approached figuring I had discovered a discarded body. After closer study though if found breathing. The drunken fellow apparently had rolled himself up in the carpet and then fell down in it for a nap. I was heading for the grocery anyway so I prepared a bag of snacks and $20 with some cheap sandals too and dropped them off to him on the way back. I woke him and gave him the charity bag. He said, God bless you.

I walked away thinking that the highest treasure ever! It seems a little silly now. But for my charity, I received a genuine blessing from the Creator of the entire Universe! [The next time I walked by I found an empty bottle of vodka... hmm.]

I'm still having trouble though. I notice that citizens were paying income taxes well before 1933.

"In order to help pay for its war effort in the American Civil War, the United States government imposed its first personal income tax, on August 5, 1861, as part of the Revenue Act of 1861 (3% of all incomes over US $800)." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax#United_States

I'm trying to figure out the logic behind the redemption as per 12 USC 411 and the 16th Amendment to the US Constitution:


Although I think the Amendment was made in 1913 (first 20 year charter?)

That is an interesting observation. I recall mention of this earlier, in the article I produced the first video about.

In 'Pollock v. Farmer's Loan & Trust Co.' 158 U.S. 601 (1895) the Supreme Court had declared the income tax of 1894 to be repugnant to the Constitution...

The fiat currency began around 1863 and there is some history of fractional lending (reserve banking) beginning in Canada at that time with Crown Dominion Notes. I believe that was shock testing in preparation for the same dishonest (elastic) currency practices here in America.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[Brian]

I'm still having trouble though. I notice that citizens were paying income taxes well before 1933.

"In order to help pay for its war effort in the American Civil War, the United States government imposed its first personal income tax, on August 5, 1861, as part of the Revenue Act of 1861 (3% of all incomes over US $800)." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax#United_States

I'm trying to figure out the logic behind the redemption as per 12 USC 411 and the 16th Amendment to the US Constitution:


Although I think the Amendment was made in 1913 (first 20 year charter?)

Pages 12-17 might yield some historical context to your questions. Good book...but incomplete.

http://losthorizons.com/CtCforFree.pdf

Note the time frame where the overall trend turns up. Hmmm

http://www.taxhistory.com/graphs/14a.html

Here is my understanding of this. Pollock was about the direct taxation of "income" from government sponsored bonds, notes, funds, etc that were personally owned "real property" by the people involved in the suit. The SCOTUS ruled it unconstitutional. The 16th amendment was designed to overturn this ruling and allow the Gov to direct tax "income" aka gain or profit from Gov sponsored entities/privileged activities. It was also sold as an amendment to tax the rich. Brushaber essentially confirmed this saying the 16th conferred no NEW taxing power but returned the Pollock issue back to an excise, or a tax on an activity or privilege.

So now turning to Title12/411. Congress gave the FED an enormous privilege to create private credit with CONgresses blessing. A massive coup occurred that no one realized. Most people's revenue back then was way less then the exemptions aka no filing. There were also many other alternative flavors of money in competition with the FRN. The Fed managed to drive the competing forms of money out of existence and inflate the common person's revenue up into the taxing range (greater then the exemption level). Add the depression and WW2 into the mix (victory tax/withholding) and we are left where we are today.

However that one section 411 leaves a choice. It has too or this whole system WOULD be unconstitutional. They had to leave one very narrow path with a cliff on one side and an abyss on the other. The statutory language regarding issuance USN's is still in effect. The treasury says that a FRN can perform as either. It all boils down to the nature of the money. Private or Public?

One more thing: Ron Paul's new bill has this section in it.
(2) no State may assess any tax or fee on any currency, or any other monetary instrument, which is used in the transaction of interstate commerce or commerce with a foreign country, and which is subject to the enjoyment of legal tender status under article I, section 10 of the United States Constitution.

Why put that there if there is not already something to that effect in action now?

[Richard Earl]

thank you David & Brian!

[David Merrill]

More like; Thank You Brian!

That is very enlightening.

The warning I always give with Pete's CtC though is that without remedy written in the law, he leaves people hoping to argue certain interpretations of the IR Code. Fatal!


P.S. Please link us to PAUL's new bill.

[stoneFree]

I already did here:

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?202-H.R.-1098-Free-Competition-in-Currency-Act-of-2011

[David Merrill]

Thank you for the links. I am really quite happy that StSC is growing and busy so that I cannot even keep up. The content, like that link though - icing on the cake!