Get Your Billions Back, America: 2014

[marcel]

So, the "exigent circumstance" that makes court review impracticable is ... the court's judge has altered the oath?

IRS criminal behaviour

I have followed David for many years and stamp the checks "redeemed per 12 USC 411, as agent"

But... when dealing with the IRS, i am a firm believer in the kitchen sink approach.

that starts by:

1) Sending a self executing contract in the form of an affidavit with something like Paul Andrew Mitchells 31 questions to the IRS commissioner by proof of service, Certified Mail, to the Commissioner, with a notarized affidavit that has your revocation, and termination of your signatures from the beginning of time as your recission of the first election to be taxed for fraud, failure to disclose, and discrimination by employers of your right to work if you refuse to fill out a witholding statment.
2) Sending the same to the Congressman and Senator from your area. (how will i manage my affairs if you dont answer these questions).
3) Sending the same to the Inspector general of the Secretary of the Treasury.

4) After 30 days sending an opportunity to cure giving another 10 days to rebut the affidavit of obligation. Finally a default judgement based upon silence, tacit agreement and maxims of law. Have 3 adult witnesses be your witnesses to any responses and issue as a tribunal a certificate of default judgement.

5) After the 45 days or? and Default has occured then filing your W2's as exempt on information and belief, and qualify your autograph All rights retained, nonassumptsit, by: ____________________.

6 I file notice and demands in affidavit form, to return my property instead of tax returns (too many traps on a 1040) after showing photos of stamped checks redeemed and and affidavit of no tax liability by silent acquiescence, laches, and estopple, from first Obligation affidavits, the section 83 definition for income (David Myrlands stuff) being the excess of the exchange of services for an arms length agreement of what my services are worth and no "income" (excess) was paid to me, and the fact that no territorial constitutional jurisdiction exists to apply Congressional law on me in the geographical area known and defined in the California Constitution of 1850, and that taxation has been declared by the Supreme Court as an "exaction" (unlawful extortion), etc. demanding to show cause any oath of office by the Commissioner, or who is sending any letters, the authority to violate the 4th, 5th, 1st (redress of greivance) and the State repetition of the same, impair the obligation of a contract between me and my boss, by a third party intervener (IRS), unlawful orders are bills of attainder (judgement without jury trial), IRS is not judicial branch (cant issue orders) and cannot make rules (not legislative branch) etc.

7) I file a 1 or 2 page FOIA, demanding to have the IRS show any documents purporting to act as an "assessment" or "notice of Lien", or "lien", or "notice of levy" or "Levy" ,and any factual evidence i am an employee of the Federal government, and the full legal names and address for service of process for anyone making any claims upon me.

8) in response to the FOIA i have a signed statement that the IRS does not have to "create" documents that would be required to answer my request and it "appears" you are challenging your responsibility to pay taxes.
I replied, thank you for the admission you have no assessments for the 10 years requested and that no liens or levys exist (even tho your garnishing on a bogus levy) and if in fact any factual evidence comes out in the future at any trial I will be charging you (IRS FOIA officer) with concealment 18 USC 2071, 1001 of material facts, have a nice day.

The kitchen sink re IRS taxation:
1) The IRS was never created by Congress and have no oath of office making them impersonating public officials (treasury officers).
2) the Congress has no jurisdiction to legislate laws that apply outside of Washington, D.C. (see my video : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVooIVtYvnk

[fano24chevy]

Thank you ag maniac! I will indeed ponder the verbiage for potential utilization...

[ag maniac]

I'd love to see the verbiage used in response to your 3176C letter.

Here's some "verbiage" to ponder -- from StSC member 'martin earl'. He redeemed the three 3176C's on the following year's return.....an extra 15k removed from the Nat'l Debt !!

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?1994-Notice-to-the-secretary-of-the-Treasury-and-Frivolous-filing-penalties&p=20394&viewfull=1#post20394

[fano24chevy]

Thank you David! I have just emailed my particulars within the template to you. I will work on the balance of the documents we discussed tomorrow

[David Merrill]

Template Garnishment

I strongly suggest that you pay me for my Lesson Plan and not to try making this fly without my experience. I have attached a Template. This is right on the knife-edge October of 2017. The big improvement is this is now in the venue of the Defendant/Respondent.

Here is the Rule.

Rule B(1)(c) If the plaintiff or the plaintiff's attorney certifies that exigent circumstances make court review impracticable, the clerk must issue the summons and process of attachment and garnishment. The plaintiff has the burden in any post-attachment hearing under Rule E(4)(f) to show that exigent circumstances existed.

The two oaths are Refused for Cause in the same style that cause this federal "judge" to redact his signature and DoB from his own oath before the clerk posted it on PACER!! Circle the altered sentence, the CODE, and write "NO!!" And of course stamp the bills on the backside or write your Demand.

[David Merrill]

I see your R4C on the 3176C from July. That was clean process.

Contemplate garnishment on the Secretary under Rule B(1)(c) with this R4C on the FrivPen bill. I will help you.

[fano24chevy]

[enlightened]

I have been redeeming lawful money since 2013. However 2015 filing filed in 2017 resulted in the 3176C letter. Simply responding stating that I have redeemed lawful money along with copies of checks showing this will get them to nullify the frivpen letter?

Lorne,

Like I said verbiage to the masses and truth for select few.

[marcel]

Heh. The fact remains ... my response letters worked. No tax liability and no tax paid.

Rather than all that Puerto Rico rigmarole you may find it easier to simply redeem lawful money:

[lorne]

verbiage:
1. Wording of a superabundant or superfluous character, abundance of words without necessity or without much meaning; excessive wordiness.
2. Diction, wording, verbal expression.

https://www.dailywritingtips.com/do-...bage%E2%80%9D/

[enlightened]

I'd love to see the verbiage used in response to your 3176C letter.

[marcel]

I'm sure the IRS would like us all to believe redeeming lawful money is a frivolous position. But it isn't. It's not even listed on the IRS list.

Look again at your 3176c letter ... we are proposing to assess a $5000 penalty ... How do you respond to proposals? In my case I didn't agree to their proposal and no Frivolous Penalty was assessed. Even better, the IRS agreed with me (and David Merrill) that the redeemed lawful money reported on the Form 1099 was not taxable income. No tax liability and no tax paid!

[enlightened]

[enlightened]

Yes I am aware. I will promptly R4C it via Registered mail tomorrow.

I have already recieved full fed refunds for 2013-2014-2015and 2016. This notice was for 2015 which was filled in 2017 (employer did not send in time prior to my out of country trip) It looks like 2017 filings are being heavily scrutinized.