A-yup....I agree Chex & robert henry.....I now see the fine print on the bottom --> "Public domain form".
A-yup....I agree Chex & robert henry.....I now see the fine print on the bottom --> "Public domain form".
Please note that the letter I sent to B of A included a certified copy of my demand, filed with the Register of Deeds for the county, so it was not hearsay. There were no other demands already in the bank's possession. Their attempted denial of the demand is puzzling, but as someone already observed, they are not going to give us the ammo to sink their ship, so they attempt plausible deniability. Where this will become relevant, I believe, is when there is another financial crisis, and the banks decide to seize 10% of all deposits, which they can do, since these are merely unsecured loans to the bank, the way their account agreements are written. But my demand takes my account out of their loan reserve, because lawful money cannot be used for fractional reserve lending (I refuse to let them lend against my credit). Further, the lawful money in the account makes it a special deposit account, such that they must return my money in kind (money is fungible, so they don't have to return the same exact notes, just other lawful money, which, under the legal tender laws, could just be more FRN's). But, because it is a special account, it is not an unsecured loan, so should not be subject to seizure. That is, I did not loan them the money, acting as a federal reserve private bank, dealing in FR debt securities. I actually deposited some lawful money for safekeeping, so the bank is acting as bailee, and I would be a first priority creditor in a bankruptcy action. I imagine this status will have to be clarified in a lawsuit after the general seizure...
Freed
For time's sake I collect several posts. Freed - I am sure glad I read yours!
This W-4T Form does not involve the employer? - Meaning it is the IRS that informs your employer to stop withholding? The employee fills it out and sends it directly to the IRS?
My sentiment exactly. It would be cool if the IRS informed the employer to stop withholdings. That is the only way I would like the W-4T. Then again get the full refund through the 1040 Form. It has a flaw though that it requires you alter the Form at Line 21 by placing the stamp or writing the demand. Altered Forms attract Frivpens.
Does anybody see Michael Joseph's claim to walking in Melchizedek rather than Levi relevant. Melchizedek is a foreshadowing of Yehoshuah (Jesus) the Messiah. Melchizedek accepted tithes from Abraham and as Son was not expected to tithe himself.
Those endorsing are expected to tithe into the priestcraft of Mammon (false balances) to save the sacrificial system! Thanks for that journey this fine morning.
Last edited by David Merrill; 01-10-14 at 02:21 PM.
Excellent Catch!! [Very bottom.]
Public domain form is outside the Box!
OOOPS!
I am glad somebody flagged Famguardian on that form. It is not an IRS Form! That smells like trouble, selling altered forms?
Crosstalk -
I came across this on StSC. Turns out this W-4T (W-4 Withholdings Termination) is a bogus Form fabricated by Famguardian. It is designed to fool employers into stopping withholdings. I bet when the IRS calls the Payroll Department though, the employee is terminated.
Look at the very bottom – outside the box. This might be a saving grace with the IRS – that the form is in the realm of lawful money and therefore cancels the contract of the W-4 Withholdings Form. So my suggestion would be to serve this on the record through a LoR on the IRS by suing the Secretary in our standard form. Then wait and see if the IRS tells the employer to stop withholding on you.
Last edited by David Merrill; 01-10-14 at 02:50 PM.
If you don't have the name what else do you go by? A number?
Last edited by Chex; 01-10-14 at 03:33 PM.
I should have attached this, in the form of a Massachusetts Trust.
There is nothing magical about a name. Being truthful though allows access to all trusts. [Or at least to keep your trust structure private.] If you know your name (True Name = First and Middle names) then you obtain the right of refusal (to be assumed the trustee responsible for settling charges for example). This is the structure of the Libel of Review. The objective is to acquire an evidence repository for your Refusals for Cause.
I'm convinced that working for barter or lawful money is the only way to avoid using THE NAME, but I also understand that for many that just isn't practical.
My point was I don't think the trust becomes collapsed upon demanding lawful money. At least not the trust organization of THE NAME. It is after all, a legal fiction created by the State, and my feeling is the State will continue using it, even if the beneficiary stops using it.
I could not agree with you moreI could not agree with you moreI don't think the trust becomes collapsed upon demanding lawful money.This is my question to you KeithIt is after all, a legal fiction created by the State and the State will continue using itHow do you know you are the beneficiary of the trust ? What made you the beneficiary of the trust ? You have a contract for that trust?even if the beneficiary stops using the trust
What proof do you have stating that there is an account for the trust and you are the beneficiary?