TRUTH-IN-TAXATION HEARING QUESTIONS, Part 1

Document 100.1.1.0.0 # 13 of  22 ...............The 299 IRS
Questions.........  Part one of two parts.

TRUTH-IN-TAXATION HEARING QUESTIONS
Who has a legal obligation to pay the tax? Q: 1 thru 32
Does the IRS have legal jurisdiction inside the 50 states? Q: 33 thru 62.
Was the 16th Amendment properly and legally ratified? Q: 63 thru 121.
How can an ambiguous law be enforced? Q: 63 thru 121.
Is labor something that can be taxed? Q: 122-191.
What constitutes "income"? Q: 122 thru 191.
Significant anomalies exist between the "laws" and the procedures of the
IRS. Q: 192 thru 231.
The Courts work in complicity with DOJ/IRS to deny due process. Q: 232 thru
280.
How can the government force you to waive your Constitutional rights? Q: 281
thru 299.
 LIABILITY
1. Admit that the Internal Revenue Code is found at Title 26 of the United
States Code.
2. Admit that Title 26 of the United States Code is broken down into
Subtitles.
3. Admit that income taxes are set forth in Subtitle A of Title 26.
4. Admit that Subtitle A contains Sections 1 through 1564.
5. Admit that estate and gift taxes are set forth in Subtitle B of Title 26.
6. Admit that Subtitle B contains Sections 2001 through 2663.
7. Admit that employment taxes are set forth in Subtitle C of Title 26.
8. Admit that Subtitle C contains Sections 3101 through 3510.
9. Admit that miscellaneous excise taxes are set forth in Subtitle D of
Title 26.
10. Admit that Subtitle D contains Sections 4041 through 4999.
11. Admit that alcohol, tobacco, and certain other excise taxes are set
forth in Subtitle E of Title 26.
12. Admit that Subtitle E contains Sections 5001 through 5872.
 13. Admit that procedures and administration to be followed with respect to
the different taxes addressed in Subtitles  through E are set forth in
Subtitle F of Title 26.
14. Admit that Subtitle F contains Sections 6001 through 7872.
15. Admit that Congress enacted the Privacy Act at 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(3).
 16. Admit that when the Internal Revenue Service requests information from
an individual, the Privacy Act requires the IRS to inform each individual
whom it asks to supply information, on the form which it uses to collect the
information or on a separate form that can be retained by the individual --
 (a) the authority which authorizes the solicitation of the information and
  whether disclosure of such information is mandatory or voluntary;
 (b) the principal purpose or purposes for which the information is intended
to be used;
  (c) the routine uses which may be made of the information, as published
pursuant to paragraph (4)(D) of this subsection; and
 (d) the effects on him, if any, of not providing all or any part of the
requested information.
17. Admit that Congress enacted the Paperwork Reduction Act at 44 U.S.C.
3504(c)(3)(C).
 18. Admit that the Paperwork Reduction Act requires the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget to include with any information requests, a
statement to inform the person receiving the request why the information is
being collected, how it is to be used, and whether responses to the request
are voluntary, required to obtain a benefit, or mandatory.
 19. Admit that the Internal Revenue Service complies with the Privacy Act
and Paperwork Reduction Act by setting out the required statements on the
IRS Form 1040 Instruction Booklet.
 20. Admit that the Privacy Act and Paperwork Reduction Act statements which
the Internal Revenue Service currently uses with respect to the federal
income tax state that: "Our legal right to ask for information is Internal
Revenue Code Sections 6001, 6011, 6012(a) and their regulations. They say
that you must file a return or statement with us for any tax you are liable
for. Your response is mandatory under these sections."
 21. Admit that Internal Revenue Code Section 6001 states: "Every person
liable for any tax imposed by this title, or for the collection thereof,
shall keep such records, render such statements, make such returns, and
comply with such rules and regulations as the Secretary may from time to
time prescribe. Whenever in the judgment of the Secretary it is necessary,
he may require any person, by notice served upon such person or by
regulations, to make such returns, render such statements, or keep such
records as the Secretary deems sufficient to show whether or not such person
is liable for tax under this title. The only records which an employer shall
be required to keep under this section in connection with charged tips shall
be charge receipts, records necessary to comply with Section 6053(c) and
copies of statements furnished by employees under Section 6053(a)."
 22. Admit that Internal Revenue Code Section 6011 states: "(a) General
Rule. When required by regulations prescribed by the Secretary and person
made liable for any tax imposed by this title, or for the collection
thereof, shall make a return or statement according to the forms and
regulations prescribed by the Secretary. Every person required to make a
return or statement shall include therein the information required by such
forms or regulations . . .(f) Income, estate and gift taxes. For requirement
that returns of income, estate, and gift taxes be made whether or not there
is tax liability, see subparts B and C."
 23. Admit that subparts B and C referred to at Internal Revenue Code
Section 6011(f) contain Internal Revenue Code Sections 6012 through 6017a.
 24. Admit that Congress displayed its knowledge of how to make someone
"liable for" a tax at 26 U.S.C. 5005, which states that: "(a) The
distiller or importer of distilled spirits shall be liable for the taxes
imposed thereon by section 5001(a)(1)."
 25. Admit that Congress displayed its knowledge of how to make someone
liable for a tax at 26 U.S.C. 5703, which states that: "(a)(1) The
manufacturer or importer of tobacco products and cigarette papers and tubes
shall be liable for the taxes imposed therein by section 5701."
 26. Admit that the persons made liable at Internal Revenue Code Sections
5005 and 5703, for the taxes imposed at Internal Revenue Code Sections
5001(a)(1) and 5701, respectively, are the persons described at Sections
6001 and 6011 required to make returns and keep records.
 27. Admit that Section 1461 is the only place in Subtitle A of the Internal
Revenue Code where Congress used the words: "liable for."
28. Admit that the person made liable by Congress at Section 1461 is a
withholding agent for nonresident aliens.
 29. Admit that there is a canon of statutory construction, "expressio unius
est exclusio alterius", which means the express mention of one thing means
the implied exclusion of another.
 30. Admit that Congress could have, but did not, make anyone else other
than the withholding agent referred to in Section 1461, "liable for" any
income tax imposed in Subtitle A.
 31. Admit that up until 1986, the statement required by the Privacy and
Paperwork Reduction Acts set out in the IRS Form 1040 instruction booklet,
mentioned only Internal Revenue Code Sections 6001 and 6011 as the authority
to request information.
 32. Admit that the United States Supreme Court has held in C.I.R. v. Acker,
361 U.S. 87, 89 (1959), and in U.S. v. Calamaro, 354 U.S. 351, 358-359
(1957), that a regulation that purports to create a legal requirement not
imposed by Congress in the underlying statute is invalid.
 JURISDICTION
 33. Admit that at Section 7608(a) of the Internal Revenue Code, Congress
set forth the authority of internal revenue officers with respect to
enforcement of Subtitle E and other laws pertaining to liquor, tobacco, and
firearms.
 34. Admit that at Section 7608(b) of the Internal Revenue Code, Congress
set forth the authority of internal revenue officers with respect to
enforcement of laws relating to internal revenue other than Subtitle E.
 35. Admit that the term "person" as that term is used in Internal Revenue
Code Section 6001 and 6011 is defined at Section 7701(a)(1).
 36. Admit that Internal Revenue Code Section 7701(a)(1) states: "The term
person shall be construed to mean and include an individual, a trust,
estate, partnership, association, company or corporation."
 37. Admit that trusts, estates, partnerships, associations, companies and
corporations do not have arms and legs, do not get married, do not eat,
drink and sleep, and are not otherwise included in what one not trained in
the law would recognize as a "person."
 38. Admit that Internal Revenue Code Section 6012(a) states that: "(a)
General Rule. Returns with respect to income taxes under subtitle A shall be
made by the following: (1)(A) Every individual having for the taxable year
gross income which equals or exceeds the exemption amount or more . . . ."
 39. Admit that Internal Revenue Code Section 1 imposes a tax on the taxable
income of certain "persons," who are "individuals" and "estates and trusts."
(See 26 U.S.C. 1.)
 40. Admit that the "individual" mentioned in Internal Revenue Code Section
6012 is the same individual as mentioned in Internal Revenue Code Section 1.
 41. Admit that the "individual" mentioned by Congress in Internal Revenue
Code Section 6012 and Internal Revenue Code Section 1 is not defined
anywhere in the Internal Revenue Code.
42. Admit that 26 C.F.R. 1.1-1 is the Treasury Regulation that corresponds
to Internal Revenue Code Section 1.
 43. Admit that at 26 C.F.R. 1.1-1(a)(1), the individuals identified at
Section 1 of the Internal Revenue Code are those individuals who are either
citizens of the United States, residents of the United States, or
non-resident aliens.
44. Admit that the "residents" and "citizens" identified in 26 C.F.R. 1.1-
1(a)(1) are mutually exclusive classes.
45. Admit that as used in 26 C.F.R. Sec. 1.1-1, the term "resident" means an
alien.
 46. Admit that 26 C.F.R. Section 1.1-1(c) states that: "Every person born
or naturalized in the United States, and subject to its jurisdiction, is a
citizen."
 47. Admit that a person who is born or naturalized in the United States but
not subject to its jurisdiction, is not a citizen within the meaning of 26
C.F.R. 1.1-1.
 48. Admit that on April 21, 1988, in the United States District Court,
Southern District of Indiana, Evansville Division, in the case of United
States v. James I. Hall, Case No. EV 87-20-CR, IRS Revenue Officer Patricia
A. Schaffner, testified under penalties of perjury that the terms "subject
to its jurisdiction" as used at 26 C.F.R. 1.1-1(c) meant being subject to
the laws of the country, and that meant the "legislative jurisdiction" of
the United States.
 49. Admit that in the same case, Patricia A. Schaffner testified under oath
the term "subject to its jurisdiction" could have no other meaning than the
"legislative jurisdiction" of the United States.
 50. Admit that when Patricia A. Schaffner was asked to tell the jury what
facts made Mr. Hall subject to the "legislative jurisdiction" of the United
States, the prosecutor, Assistant United States Attorney Larry Mackey
objected, and the court sustained the objection.
 51. Admit that the Internal Revenue Service is never required by the
Federal courts to prove facts to establish whether one is subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States.
 52. Admit that the United States Department of Justice and United States
Attorneys, and their assistants, always object when an alleged taxpayer
demands the Government prove that they are subject to the jurisdiction of
the United States, and the federal courts always sustain those objections,
which means that the federal courts routinely prohibit the introduction of
potentially exculpatory evidence in tax crime trials.
 52(a). The IRS keeps a system of financial records on federal judges, IRS
Criminal Investigation Division Special Agents, and U.S. Attorneys, which
records cannot be accessed by the subject(s) under the FOIA or Privacy Act.
 53. Admit that unless specifically provided for in the United States
Constitution, the federal government does not have legislative jurisdiction
in the states.
 54. Admit that on December 15, 1954, an interdepartmental committee was
commissioned on the recommendation of the Attorney General of the United
States, Herbert Brownell, Jr., and approved by President Eisenhower and his
cabinet, named the Interdepartmental Committee for the Study of Jurisdiction
Over Federal Areas Within the States, and charged with the duty of studying
and reporting where the United States had legal authority to make someone
subject to its jurisdiction. (Note: this report hereinafter referred to as
"the Report.")
 55. Admit that in June of 1957, the "Interdepartmental Committee for the
Study of Jurisdiction over Federal Areas Within the States" issued "Part II"
of its report entitled "Jurisdiction Over Federal Areas Within the States."
56. Admit that the Report makes the following statements:
  a. "The Constitution gives express recognition to but one means of Federal
acquisition of legislative jurisdiction -- by State consent under Article I,
section 8, clause 17... Justice McLean suggested that the Constitution
provided the sole mode for transfer of jurisdiction, and that if this mode
is not pursued, no transfer of jurisdiction can take place."
  b. "It scarcely needs to be said that unless there has been a transfer of
jurisdiction (1) pursuant to clause 17 by a Federal acquisition of land with
State consent, or (2) by cession from the State to the Federal Government,
or unless the Federal Government has reserved jurisdiction upon the
admission of the State, the Federal Government possesses no legislative
jurisdiction over any area within a State, such jurisdiction being for
exercise by the State, subject to non- interference by the State with
Federal functions,"
  c. "The Federal Government cannot, by unilateral action on its part,
acquire legislative jurisdiction over any area within the exterior
boundaries of a State,"
  d. "On the other hand, while the Federal Government has power under
various provisions of the Constitution to define, and prohibit as criminal,
certain acts or omissions occurring anywhere in the United States, it has no
power to punish for various other crimes, jurisdiction over which is
retained by the States under our Federal-State system of government, unless
such crime occurs on areas as to which legislative jurisdiction has been
vested in the Federal Government."
 57. Admit that the phrase "subject to their jurisdiction" as used in the
Thirteenth Amendment means subject to both the jurisdiction of the several
states of the union and the United States.
 58. Admit that the "subject to its jurisdiction" component of the
definition of citizen set out at 26 C.F.R. Section 1.1-1(c) has a different
meaning than the phrase "subject to their jurisdiction" as used in the
Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
 59. Admit that a Treasury Regulation cannot create affirmative duties not
otherwise imposed by Congress in the underlying statute. corresponding
Internal Revenue Code section.
 60. Admit that Congress defined a "taxpayer" at Section 7701(a)(14) of the
Internal Revenue Code, as any person subject to any Internal Revenue tax.
 61. Admit that one who is not a citizen, resident, or non-resident alien,
is not an individual subject to the tax imposed by Section 1 of the Internal
Revenue Code.
 62. Admit that an individual who is not subject to the tax imposed by
Section 1 of the Internal Revenue Code, is not an individual required to
make a return under the Requirement of Internal Revenue Code Section 6012.
 SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT/AMBIGUITY OF THE LAW
 63. Admit these facts: the 27th Amendment was proposed by Congress on
September 25, 1789. Some of the State legislatures ratified the proposal on
these dates: Maryland, on December 19, 1789; North Carolina on December 22,
1789; South Carolina on January 19, 1790; Delaware on January 28, 1790;
Vermont on November 3, 1791; and Virginia, on December 15, 1791. This number
of States was not sufficient for ratification of this amendment. Then some
84 years later on May 6, 1873, Ohio ratified this amendment. Interest in
this amendment was rekindled when on March 6, 1978, Wyoming ratified this
amendment. After this, other States ratified the amendment: Colorado on
April 22, 1984; South Dakota on February 1985; New Hampshire on March 7,
1985; Arizona on April 3, 1985; Tennessee on May 28, 1985; Oklahoma on July
10, 1985; New Mexico on February 14, 1986; Indiana on February 24, 1986;
Utah on February 25, 1986; Arkansas on March 13, 1987; Montana on March 17,
1987; Connecticut on May 13, 1987; Wisconsin on July 15, 1987; Georgia on
February 2, 1988; West Virginia on March 10, 1988; Louisiana on July 7,
1988; Iowa on February 9, 1989; Idaho on March 23, 1989; Nevada on April 26,
1989; Alaska on May 6, 1989; Oregon on May 19, 1989; Minnesota on May 22,
1989; Texas on May 25, 1989; Kansas on April 5, 1990; Florida on May 31,
1990; North Dakota on May 25, 1991; Alabama on May 5, 1992; Missouri on May
5, 1992; Michigan on May 7, 1992; and New Jersey on May 7, 1992.
64. Admit that in the case of Dillon v. Gloss, 256 U.S. 368, 374-375 (1921),
the Supreme Court concluded:
 We do not find anything in the article which suggests that an amendment
once proposed is to be open to ratification for all time, or that
ratification in some of the states may be separated from that in others by
many years and yet be effective. We do find that which strongly suggests the
contrary. First, proposal and ratification are not treated as unrelated
acts, but as succeeding steps in a single endeavor, the natural inference
being that they are not to be widely separated in time. Secondly, it is only
when there is deemed to be a necessity therefor that amendments are to be
proposed, the reasonable implication being that when proposed they are to be
considered and disposed of presently. Thirdly, as ratification is but the
expression of the approbation of the people and is to be effective when had
in three- fourths of the states, there is a fair implication that it must be
sufficiently contemporaneous in that number of states to reflect the will of
the people in all sections at relatively the same period, which of course
ratification scattered through a long series of years would not do. These
considerations and the general purport and spirit of the article lead to the
conclusion expressed by Judge Jameson 'that an alteration of the
Constitution proposed to-day has relation to the sentiment and the felt
needs of to-day, and that, if not ratified early while that sentiment may
fairly be supposed to exist, it ought to be regarded as waived, and not
again to be voted upon, unless a second time proposed by Congress.' That
this is the better conclusion becomes even more manifest when what is
comprehended in the other view is considered; for, according to it, four
amendments proposed long ago-two in 1789, one in 1810 and one in 1861-are
still pending and in a situation where their ratification in some of the
states many years since by representatives of generations now largely
forgotten may be effectively supplemented in enough more states to make
three-fourths by representatives of the present or some future generation.
To that view few would be able to subscribe, and in our opinion it is quite
untenable. We conclude that the fair inference or implication from article 5
is that the ratification must be within some reasonable time after the
proposal.
 65. Admit that the date of September 25, 1789, when the 27th Amendment was
first proposed, is "widely separated in time" from the date of March 6,
1978, when Wyoming ratified this amendment.
 66. Admit that pursuant to the United States Constitution, Congress is
authorized to impose two different types of taxes: direct taxes and indirect
taxes.
 67. Admit that the constitutionality of the 1894 income tax act was in
question in the case of Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co., 157 U.S. 429,
aff. reh., 158 U.S. 601 (1895), and that in this case, the Supreme Court
found that Congress could tax real and personal property only by means of an
apportioned, direct tax. Finding that the income from real and personal
property was part of the property itself, the Court concluded in this case
that a federal income tax could tax such income only by means of an
apportioned tax. Further finding that as this particular tax was not
apportioned, it was unconstitutional.
68. Admit that for Congress to tax today real or personal property, the tax
would have to be apportioned.
 69. Admit that for Congress to tax income from real and personal property
without the authority of the 16th Amendment, such taxes would have to be
apportioned.
70. Admit that in 1913, the following law, Revised Statutes 205, was in
effect:
 "Sec. 205. Whenever official notice is received at the Department of State
that any amendment proposed to the Constitution of the United States has
been adopted, according to the provisions of the Constitution, the Secretary
of State shall forthwith cause the amendment to be published in the
newspapers authorized to promulgate the laws, with his certificate,
specifying the States by which the same may have been adopted, and that the
same has become valid, to all intents and purposes, as a part of the
Constitution of the United States."
 71. Admit that Revised Statutes 205 provided that "official notice" of a
State's ratification of an amendment must be received at the State
Department.
 72. Admit that on or about July 31, 1909, Senate Joint Resolution 40
proposing the ratification of the 16th Amendment was deposited with the
Department of State and the same was published at 36 Stat. 184, and that
this resolution read as follows:
 SIXTY-FIRST CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES OF
 AMERICA AT THE FIRST SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday, the fifteenth day of
March, one thousand nine hundred and nine.
 JOINT RESOLUTION.
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of
America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein),
That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution
of the United States, which, when ratified by the legislatures of
three-fourths of the several states, shall be valid to all intents and
purposes as a part of the Constitution:
 "Article 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."
 J. C. CANNON,
 Speaker of the House of Representatives.
 J. S. SHERMAN,
 Vice-President of the United States, and
 President of the Senate.
73. Admit that on July 27, 1909, the same Congress adopted Senate Concurrent
Resolution 6, which read as follows:
 CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That the
President of the United States be requested to transmit forthwith to the
executives of the several States of the United States copies of the article
of amendment proposed by Congress to the State legislatures to amend the
Constitution of the United States, passed July twelfth, nineteen hundred and
nine, respecting the power of Congress to lay and collect taxes on incomes,
to the end that the said States may proceed to act upon the said article of
amendment; and that he request the executive of each State that may ratify
said amendment to transmit to the Secretary of State a certified copy of
such ratification.
 Attest: Charles G. Bennett
 Secretary of the Senate
 A. McDowell
 Clerk of the House of
 Representatives
74. Admit that not only did this resolution request that certified copies of
favorable State ratification resolutions be sent to Washington, D.C., the
States were expressly informed to do so by Secretary of State Philander
Knox, who sent the following "form" letter to the governors of the 48 States
then in the Union:
"Sir:
 "I have the honor to enclose a certified copy of a Resolution of Congress,
entitled 'Joint Resolution Proposing an Amendment to the Constitution of the
United States,' with the request that you cause the same to be submitted to
the Legislature of your State for such action as may be had, and that a
certified copy of such action be communicated to the Secretary of State, as
required by Section 205, Revised Statutes of the United States. (See
overleaf.)
An acknowledgment of the receipt of this communication is requested.
 I have the honor to be, Sir,
 Your obedient servant,
 P. C. Knox"
75. Admit the following facts:
 a. When California provided uncertified copies of its resolution to
Secretary of State Philander Knox, Knox wrote the following to California
Secretary of State Frank Jordan: "I have the honor to acknowledge the
receipt of your letter of the 27th ultimo, transmitting a copy of the Joint
Resolution of the California Legislature ratifying the proposed Amendment to
the Constitution of the United States, and in reply thereto I have to
request that you furnish a certified copy of the Resolution under the seal
of the State, which is necessary in order to carry out the provisions of
Section 205 of the Revised Statutes of the United States".
 b. When Wyoming Governor Joseph Carey telegraphed Philander Knox news that
the Wyoming legislature had ratified the 16th Amendment on February 3, 1913,
Philander Knox telegraphed in return as follows: "Replying to your telegram
of 3rd you are requested to furnish a certified copy of Wyoming's
ratification of Income Tax Amendment so there may be no question as to the
compliance with Section 205 of Revised Statutes."
 76. Admit that on February 15, 1913, a State department attorney, J. Rueben
Clarke, informed Secretary of State Philander Knox, in reference to the
State of Minnesota, "the secretary of the Governor merely informed the
Department that the state legislature had ratified the proposed amendment."
 77. Admit that, in the official records deposited in the Archives of the
United States, there is no certified copy of the resolution of the Minnesota
legislature ratifying the 16th Amendment.
 78. Admit that in the documents possessed by the Archives of the United
States, there are no certified copies of the resolutions ratifying the 16th
Amendment by California and Kentucky.
79. Admit that Mr. John Ashcroft is currently the Attorney General of the
United States.
 80. Admit that when Mr. Ashcroft was Governor of Missouri, the Missouri
Supreme Court rendered the following decision in a case involving Mr.
Ashcroft, that case being Ashcroft v. Blunt, 696 S.W.2d 329 (Mo. banc 1985),
where the Missouri Supreme Court held:
 The senate and the house must agree on the exact text of any bill before
they may send it to the governor. There may not be the slightest variance.
The exact bill passed by the houses must be presented to and signed by the
governor before it may become law (laying aside as not presently material
alternative procedure by which a bill may become law without the governor's
signature.) The governor has no authority to sign into law a bill which
varies in any respect from the bill passed by the houses.
 81. Admit that during hearings regarding the ratification of the 16th
Amendment in Massachusetts, Mr. Robert Luce made the following statement to
the Massachusetts Committee on Federal Relations: "Question by the
committee: Are we able to change it? Mr. Luce: No, you must either accept or
reject it."
 82. Admit that on February 11, 1910, Kentucky Governor Augustus Willson
wrote a letter to the Kentucky House of Representatives wherein he stated as
follows:
 This resolution was adopted without jurisdiction of the joint resolution of
the Congress of the United States which had not been transmitted to and was
not before the General Assembly, and in this resolution the words 'on
incomes' were left out of the resolution of the Congress, and if transmitted
in this form would be void and would subject the Commonwealth to unpleasant
comment and for these reasons and because a later resolution correcting the
omission is reported to have passed both Houses, this resolution is returned
to the House of Representatives without my approval.
83. Admit that no State may change the wording of an amendment proposed by
Congress.
 84. Admit that on February 15, 1913, J. Reuben Clarke, an attorney employed
by the Department of State, drafted a memorandum to Secretary Knox wherein
the following statements were made: "The resolutions passed by twenty-two
states contain errors only of capitalization or punctuation, while those of
eleven states contain errors in the wording" (page 7). "Furthermore, under
the provisions of the Constitution a legislature is not authorized to alter
in any way the amendment proposed by Congress, the function of the
legislature consisting merely in the right to approve or disapprove the
proposed amendment."
85. Admit that the Sixteenth Amendment reads as follows:
 "Article 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."
86. Admit that the Sixteenth Amendment does not read as follows:
 "Article 16: The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on
incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the
several states, and from any census or enumeration."
87. Admit that the Sixteenth Amendment does not read as follows:
 "Article XVI. 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 census enumeration."
88. Admit that the Sixteenth Amendment does not read as follows:
 "Article 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 renumeration."
89. Admit that the Sixteenth Amendment does not read as follows:
 "Article XVI. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes from
whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and
without regard to any census or enumeration."
90. Admit that the Sixteenth Amendment does not read as follows:
 "The Congress shall have power to levy and collect taxes on income from
whatever sources derived without apportionment among the several States, and
without regard to any census or enumeration, which amendment was approved on
the ---- day of July, 1909."
91. Admit that the Sixteenth Amendment does not read as follows:
 "Article 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 of enumeration."
92. Admit that the Sixteenth Amendment does not read as follows:
 "Article XVI. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on
incomes, from whatever source derived, with-out apportionment among the
several states, and without regard to any census of enumeration:"
93. Admit that the Sixteenth Amendment does not read as follows:
 "Article XVI. The congress shall have power to levy and collect taxes on
incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the
several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration, and did
submit the same to the legislatures of the several states for ratification;"
 94. Admit that state officials who prepare and send "official notice" of
ratification of constitutional amendments to federal officials in
Washington, D.C., do not have any authority to change the wording of the
ratification resolution actually adopted by the State legislature.
 95. Admit that the "income" tax at subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code
cannot be lawfully and constitutionally collected if the 16th Amendment is
not a valid amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
 96. Admit that the income taxes imposed by Subtitle A are not apportioned,
so if the 16th Amendment was not ratified, the taxes imposed by Subtitle A
are not constitutional under Pollock v. Farmers Loan & Trust, 158 U.S. 601
(1895).
97. Admit that in 1913, Congress passed the following income tax act:
 A. Subdivision 1. That there shall be levied, assessed, collected and paid
annually upon the entire net income arising or accruing from all sources in
the preceding calendar year to every citizen of the United States, whether
residing at home or abroad, and to every person residing in the United
States, though not a citizen thereof, a tax of 1 per centum . . . and a like
tax shall be assessed, levied, collected, and paid annually upon the entire
net income from all property owned and of every business, trade, or
profession carried on in the United States by persons residing elsewhere.
 98. Admit that Mr. Brushaber challenged this income tax as being
unconstitutional. (See Brushaber v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., 240 U.S. 1
(1915).)
99. Admit that in the Brushaber decision, the United States Supreme Court
held that the tax on income was an excise tax.
 100. Admit that in the Brushaber decision, the United States Supreme Court
held that the purpose of the 16th Amendment was to prevent the income tax
from being taken out of the class of excise taxes where it rightly belonged.
 101. Admit that in the Brushaber decision, the United States Supreme Court
discarded the notion that a direct tax could be relieved from apportionment,
because to so hold would destroy the two great classifications of taxes.
102. Admit that the Union Pacific Railroad was a United States Corporation
located in the Utah Territory.
103. Admit that the privilege of operating as a corporation can be taxed as
an excise.
 104. Admit that in Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189, 205-206 (1920), the
United States Supreme Court held a tax on income was a direct tax, but could
be imposed without apportionment because the 16th Amendment gave Congress
the 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.
105. Admit that the United States Supreme Court stated in Eisner:
 a.   The Sixteenth Amendment must be construed in connection with the
taxing clauses of the original Constitution and the effect attributed to
them before the Amendment was adopted. In Pollock v. Farmers' Loan and Trust
Co., 158 U.S. 601, under the Act of August 27, 1894, c. 349, section 27, 28
Stat. 509, 553, it was held that taxes upon rents and profits of real
property were in effect direct taxes upon the property from which such
income arose, imposed by reason of ownership; and that Congress could not
impose such taxes without apportioning them among the States according to
population, as required by Art. 1, section 2, c1.3, and section 9, cl.4, of
the original Constitution.

Note:  As goes our nation in the push by the Socialist Council on Foreign
Relations, so goes the rest of the "free" world. The CFR through its
enforcement arm, the Communist United Nations, will eventually eliminate all
freedom in this world.  Only you and I can stop it.  Removing the funding
provided directly by the US Taxpayer (all of our income taxes go out of the
country) will be a huge blow to the Elitists who seek to be the world
dictator thru the UN.

We have a Constitution and our Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments) that
makes us free.  Right?  Then visit:
 http://www.trimonline.org  http://www.getusout.org
http://www.thenewamerican.com   http://www.givemeliberty.org
     http://www.jbs.org      Http://www.getawarrant.com
Then take a look at these sites:       http://www.dixierising.com
http://www.dixienet.org  http://www.palmetto.org
http://www.southerncaucus.org   http://www.spofga.org
http://www.southern-style.com  http://www.nca.mybravenet.com

  {    Only Notes 1 & 2 are duplicates of previous messages text.  All text
preceding these notes is new.    }
NOTE # 1: This is the TWENTY FOURTH doc in a string of about 38 regarding
the Income Tax, How it was illegally forced upon us, the collusion of
various nation banks, including The Bank of England, the Banks of Europe,
the Banks of the USA that make up the Non-Government organization known as
the Fed and the bankers themselves dedicated to making this a Socialist
Nation. As David Rockefeller reportedly said in 1973 when he and others
formed the Trilateral Commission, "We will have this a Socialist Nation by
the end of the year 2000."  Well, with the help of our past Communist
President, he damned well nearly did it.  If Comrade Gore had been elected,
it would be now! The last doc in this series is a plan that was presented to
President Bush when he visited Florida recently.  It was put directly into
his hands.  He has not acted upon it. We The People must initiate a campaign
of letters, faxes, e-mails, and phone calls to him and others in our
otherwise corrupt government letting them know of our displeasure.  For God
and Country, Chet.

NOTE # 2:  [  Should you wish to be removed from my mailing list, please
send a message with the word remove in the subject line.  If you got this
from a mail list, such as xxxxxx@xxxxxgroups.com  or something like that,
then it is up to the moderator or owner of the list to remove my access
based upon complaints of my material, abuse, or removal of your access if
you request it. ]         Should you wish a copy of a numbered message
(this is the 24th one)   that you may have missed, please e-mail me off net
for a copy of it and I will be very happy to provide it. Chet.

You may forward this to every member of Congress by using a Mail Blaster
application available on the Internet as follows:
Step 1.  Access your web browser.   Step 2.  Type in the search block:
http://www.mailblasterdot.com
Step 3.  Click on   Send Batch E-Mail which is on the left end of the
screen.
Step 4.  Type in your E-mail Address.   Step 5.  Click on Subject: Type in
the subject of your document.
Step 6.  Click on Message: Now here you can type in your message or you can
paste a previously copied file here.  You can also edit your message after
you finish with the message and before sending it.
Step 7.  Then click on   select a file.  Here you may click on:
 demhouse.txt (Socialist Democrat House Members) or,
 democsen.txt (Socialist Democrats Senate Members) or,
 newsorg.txt (Many of the "anchor" news folks have their email address here
for you to use) or,
 rephouse.txt (Republican House of Representatives Members) or,
 repubsen.txt (Republican Senate Members) or,
 senators.txt (All Senators).
Step 8.  After selecting the group to receive your message then click on
send batch. It will go to everyone listed in the batch.
Remember: Nothing beats a letter AND a phone call.

End of Part one. See 100.1.1.1 for part two.
A
Chester L McWhorter Sr, c/o 504 N. Brighton Rd, Lecanto, Occupied Florida.
34461. Ph: 352-344-9073..Fax: same. E-mail: robertthebruce@naturecoast.net
 24 of 38 100.1.1.0.0 End



     "Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the
citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged
sword.  It both emboldens the blood, just it narrows the mind.  And when the
drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and
the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of
the citizenry.  Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by
partiotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so.
How do I know?  For this is what I have done.  And I am Caesar."--Julius
Caesar.

 

Part 25

<Back The Bankruptcy of the United States

American Patriot Friends Network APFN

"...a network of net workers..."

APFN Contents Page:Click Here

Message Board

APFN Home Page

Hit Counter