Complete Labor Law Poster for $24.95
from www.LaborLawCenter.com, includes
State, Federal, & OSHA posting requirements

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Over 15 monts and still waiting

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Over 15 monts and still waiting



    VRWC3 wrote:
    On Mon, 30 May 2005 17:53:35 GMT, [email protected] (BlackWater) wrote:
    If you don't pay your taxes they WILL come for youand you WILL be thrown into jail. Doesn't matter howyou'd like to interpret the constitution - the StateNEEDS tax money and it's gonna GET it. Doesn't matterhow much you torture the letter of the law, the StateIS gonna get paid and that's that.
    I've been trying to persuade Dale, et. al. of this simple fact of existence for some time now. The bottom line is that today, we have more sound reasons for rebellion than did our founders.
    Of that fact I am aware.

    Alvin & Heidi Toffler wrote a very interesting book War and Anti-War,
    which speaks to information being the coin of the realm, so to speak,
    and wars of information vs. the old wars of bullets and blood.
    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...glance&s=books

    Conventional media doesn't cover anything that is important. It's
    mindless drivel to make the populace 'think' they're informed.

    As an information war, it is quite obvious why "they" don't want The
    People actually reading the tax rules. If just 25 million people know
    the truth, how long do you think it will be, before the other 150
    million start to look at the rules.

    It is a long uphill battle, because we must first UN-brainwash the
    masses. My wife was discussing some tax related thing with her
    supervisor. Given the prolific posting I have been forced to do on the
    subject, my wife, though not as steeped in it as I have, nevertheless
    has read the appropriate parts. She said to her boss that she HAS READ
    THE LAW. The supervisor's reply, "The law doesn't have anything to do
    with that".

    This is an intelligent, educated woman. Or at least she was until that
    statement.

    The IRS TERRORIST organization has so scared people that they won't
    even LOOK at the law.... So much for the sanctity of the written law.


    --
    LEGAL DISCLAIMER
    I am not a Tax Lawyer, Nor do I play Dan Evans on the internet.
    I am not a Certified Public Accountant, Nor do I play Paul Thomas on
    the internet.
    I am not an Enrolled Agent, Nor do I play Richard Macdonald on the
    internet.
    DO NOT TAKE MY WORD FOR ANYTHING IN THIS POST.
    Go look it up for yourself. That is the only way to know you have
    found the truth.

    I may be contacted off group via this page:
    http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/Contact.html

    Examine what the government doesn't want you to see, here:
    http://www.861.info/


  • #2
    Over 15 months and still waiting

    "Dale Eastman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected] ink.net...

    Dale still avoids these questions of who has Constitutional
    Power to Tax, Congress or the Secretary of the Treasury
    since February 2004. Of course Dale does not want to really
    discuss the Constitution and Taxes as it will completely
    invalidate his position.

    Under the Constitution of the United States, the Congress
    is given the power to tax.

    The Executive Branch is granted no such power so it has only
    the power to enforce the will of Congress by enforcing and
    collecting the taxes imposed by Congress.

    1. Under the Constitution (Fundamental Law) does the Secretary
    of the Treasury have the power and authority to exceed the statutory
    mandates of Congress in the collection of taxes imposed by Congress?
    Yes, or No?

    2. Under the Constitution (Fundamental Law) does the Secretary
    of the Treasury have the power and authority to ignore the statutory
    mandates of Congress and not collect the taxes imposed by Congress?
    Yes, or No?

    3. Can the Department of the Treasury write a legally valid regulation
    that is not in accordance with Statutes enacted by Congress.
    Yes or No?

    4. Can a Person make a legally valid interpretation a Treasury Regulation
    in ways that are not in accordance with Statutes enacted by Congress.
    Yes or No?

    "A legislative regulation is to be upheld unless "arbitrary, capricious, or
    manifestly contrary to the statute."
    Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.

    "Congress has not delegated power or authority to make such a regulation."
    LYNCH v. TILDEN PRODUCE CO, 265 U.S. 315 (1924)

    The existence of an ever-so-rare "taxpayer-friendly" Treasury regulation
    (however inconsistent with the statutory text) may be relevant to whether
    penalties for blameworthy failure to pay can be assessed, see Cheek v.
    United States, 498 U.S. ____, ____ (1991) (slip op., at 9-11), but it
    cannot control the determination of whether the tax was due and owing
    according to Congress's command.
    -- United States v. Burke, KTC 1992-106 (S.Ct. 1992)

    Dale also won't answer questions about the interaction of
    Statutes and Regulations because he cannot do so without
    destroying his assertions:

    26 CFR 1.861-8(f)(1)(vi)(H) The INCOME DERIVED FROM
    GUAM by an individual who is subject to section 935;

    Larken Rose lists this clause on the first page of his
    assertions as a source of income, it is also listed as
    listed in the 861evidence.com webpage.

    And

    26 USC SECTION 935. [REPEALED. PUB. L. 99-514, TITLE
    XII, SECTION 1272(d)(2), OCT. 22, 1986, 100 STAT. 2594]

    Is this clause in the Regulation still valid when the
    statute referenced was been repealed in 1986, 19 years ago?

    -----

    These are just a few of the many questions that Dale Eastman has
    Refused to answer or just thrown up walls of BS as a diversion
    since at least February 2004.

    Would anyone want to buy a used tax argument
    with a losing track record from Dale.
    --
    Richard A Macdonald, CPA/EA
    Dedicated student of Fr Luca Paccioli, Master Juggler.
    Gib mir schokolade und niemand wird verletzt!!




    Comment


    • #3
      Over 15 months and still waiting

      "Dale Eastman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
      news:[email protected] ink.net...

      Dale still avoids these questions of who has Constitutional
      Power to Tax, Congress or the Secretary of the Treasury
      since February 2004. Of course Dale does not want to really
      discuss the Constitution and Taxes as it will completely
      invalidate his position.

      Under the Constitution of the United States, the Congress
      is given the power to tax.

      The Executive Branch is granted no such power so it has only
      the power to enforce the will of Congress by enforcing and
      collecting the taxes imposed by Congress.

      1. Under the Constitution (Fundamental Law) does the Secretary
      of the Treasury have the power and authority to exceed the statutory
      mandates of Congress in the collection of taxes imposed by Congress?
      Yes, or No?

      2. Under the Constitution (Fundamental Law) does the Secretary
      of the Treasury have the power and authority to ignore the statutory
      mandates of Congress and not collect the taxes imposed by Congress?
      Yes, or No?

      3. Can the Department of the Treasury write a legally valid regulation
      that is not in accordance with Statutes enacted by Congress.
      Yes or No?

      4. Can a Person make a legally valid interpretation a Treasury Regulation
      in ways that are not in accordance with Statutes enacted by Congress.
      Yes or No?

      "A legislative regulation is to be upheld unless "arbitrary, capricious, or
      manifestly contrary to the statute."
      Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.

      "Congress has not delegated power or authority to make such a regulation."
      LYNCH v. TILDEN PRODUCE CO, 265 U.S. 315 (1924)

      The existence of an ever-so-rare "taxpayer-friendly" Treasury regulation
      (however inconsistent with the statutory text) may be relevant to whether
      penalties for blameworthy failure to pay can be assessed, see Cheek v.
      United States, 498 U.S. ____, ____ (1991) (slip op., at 9-11), but it
      cannot control the determination of whether the tax was due and owing
      according to Congress's command.
      -- United States v. Burke, KTC 1992-106 (S.Ct. 1992)

      Dale also won't answer questions about the interaction of
      Statutes and Regulations because he cannot do so without
      destroying his assertions:

      26 CFR 1.861-8(f)(1)(vi)(H) The INCOME DERIVED FROM
      GUAM by an individual who is subject to section 935;

      Larken Rose lists this clause on the first page of his
      assertions as a source of income, it is also listed as
      listed in the 861evidence.com webpage.

      And

      26 USC SECTION 935. [REPEALED. PUB. L. 99-514, TITLE
      XII, SECTION 1272(d)(2), OCT. 22, 1986, 100 STAT. 2594]

      Is this clause in the Regulation still valid when the
      statute referenced was been repealed in 1986, 19 years ago?

      -----

      These are just a few of the many questions that Dale Eastman has
      Refused to answer or just thrown up walls of BS as a diversion
      since at least February 2004.

      Would anyone want to buy a used tax argument
      with a losing track record from Dale.
      --
      Richard A Macdonald, CPA/EA
      Dedicated student of Fr Luca Paccioli, Master Juggler.
      Gib mir schokolade und niemand wird verletzt!!




      Comment

      The LaborLawTalk.com forum is intended for informational use only and should not be relied upon and is not a substitute for legal advice. The information contained on LaborLawTalk.com are opinions and suggestions of members and is not a representation of the opinions of LaborLawTalk.com. LaborLawTalk.com does not warrant or vouch for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any postings or the qualifications of any person responding. Please consult a legal expert or seek the services of an attorney in your area for more accuracy on your specific situation.
      Working...
      X