U.S. Supreme Court ... By: RetSquid. on 16 Dec 08, 07:36:38 U.S. Supreme Court
The Revenue Act of 1918 approved February 24, 1919, c. 18, 210, 211, 212(a), 213(a), 40 Stat. 1057, 1062, 1064, 1065, imposes a tax upon the net income of every individual including 'income derived from salaries, wages, or compensation for personal service ... of whatever kind and in whatever form paid,' LUCAS v. EARL, 281 U.S. 111 (1930)
"In interpreting ... By: RetSquid. on 16 Dec 08, 07:35:29 "In interpreting the meaning of the words in a revenue Act, we look to the 'ordinary, everyday senses' of the words."
Commissioner v. Soliman, 506 U.S. 168, 174 (1993)
Thank You. By: Leviodin. on 20 May 08, 17:36:08 Thank You.
this is the proper ... By: IRSFRAUDEXPOSED. on 24 Apr 08, 03:35:13 this is the proper way to handle your situation regarding fileing for a proper and accurate return , correcting your w2 and getting a return for what was withheld.
there is alos a guy ... By: passyourdrugtest. on 03 Jul 08, 17:36:32 there is alos a guy called Eric WhoRU on wtprn who deals exclusivly on jurisdiction (mp3.wtprn[dot]com/WhoRU08.html)
Jusidiction , yes ... By: passyourdrugtest. on 03 Jul 08, 17:29:55 Jusidiction , yes in the matter that its more of liability if you dont have any liability then they have no jurisdiction. I have gotten all the cabon copy bs scare letters but only a few ever require reply . you dont have to prove they dont have jurisdiction , they do . all u have to do is respond by fileing the 1040 that is the proper form to respond to a false withholding. im sure if you listen enough you will hear about that but the book does explian it all. losthorizons web also
I have been ... By: bellyoffire. on 03 Jul 08, 15:42:18 I have been following Bill cooper on this topic. He says that IRS has 0 jurisdiction, so you don't even have to file a return but first you have to deal with the jurisdiction that the irs will default on. You also prove that the Dept of Justice does not have jurisdiction to fight on behalf of the IRS. I don't hear Peter talk about any of this at all. Does he in his book?
The 16th amendment ... By: MannaBoBannaPeople. on 23 May 08, 23:24:22 The 16th amendment doesn't matter it gave NO NEW POWERS. It only supported what was already there... IRS tax is for the most part a Corp. Tax and a tithe if you will to your master...
pete hendrickson author of cracking the code explains how a information return creats potinsial liability to a income tax that has to be filed on to accept or correct
U.S. Supreme Court ... By: RetSquid. on 16 Dec 08, 07:36:38 U.S. Supreme Court
The Revenue Act of 1918 approved February 24, 1919, c. 18, 210, 211, 212(a), 213(a), 40 Stat. 1057, 1062, 1064, 1065, imposes a tax upon the net income of every individual including 'income derived from salaries, wages, or compensation for personal service ... of whatever kind and in whatever form paid,' LUCAS v. EARL, 281 U.S. 111 (1930)
"In interpreting ... By: RetSquid. on 16 Dec 08, 07:35:29 "In interpreting the meaning of the words in a revenue Act, we look to the 'ordinary, everyday senses' of the words."
Commissioner v. Soliman, 506 U.S. 168, 174 (1993)
Thank You. By: Leviodin. on 20 May 08, 17:36:08 Thank You.
this is the proper ... By: IRSFRAUDEXPOSED. on 24 Apr 08, 03:35:13 this is the proper way to handle your situation regarding fileing for a proper and accurate return , correcting your w2 and getting a return for what was withheld.
U.S. Supreme Court ... By: RetSquid. on 16 Dec 08, 07:42:00 U.S. Supreme Court
The Revenue Act of 1918 approved February 24, 1919, c. 18, 210, 211, 212(a), 213(a), 40 Stat. 1057, 1062, 1064, 1065, imposes a tax upon the net income of every individual including 'income derived from salaries, wages, or compensation for personal service ... of whatever kind and in whatever form paid,' LUCAS v. EARL, 281 U.S. 111 (1930)
part three of four in a interview with pete hendrickson explaining the methods supplied by congress to correct your income tax status and make a return for what was wrongfully withheld
Nothing....yet. ... By: bosunbilly. on 22 Dec 08, 04:11:35 Nothing....yet. Wait until he goes to trial on February 10, 2009.
Watch him lose.
I do hate being right.
The first 3 DOJ ... By: markp64. on 21 Dec 08, 20:48:27 The first 3 DOJ attacks.....PETE WON!
The injunction..............PETE WON!
Future harassment...........PETE WINS!
You sound like an ignoramus.
ig?no?ra?mus
noun, plural
an extremely ignorant person.
ig?no?rant?
adjective
1. lacking in knowledge or training; unlearned: an ignorant man.
2. lacking knowledge or information as to a particular subject or fact: ignorant of quantum physics.
3. uninformed; unaware.
Boy you get around ... By: markp64. on 21 Dec 08, 20:35:43 Boy you get around don't you! Tell me there lil' billy, why are you so vigilant in defending the IRS? If one were to read your comments, they might get the idea that you are an agent of the IRS. What is your agenda? Why don't you stop being a "right" fighter and hop on our side and at least read the book and check out the info on the website.
You have been making ridiculous comments about Pete now for some time. What has happened to him since all of this began........NOTHING!!
That the authority ... By: RetSquid. on 16 Dec 08, 07:46:47 That the authority conferred upon Congress by 8 of article 1 'to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises' is ***EXHAUSTIVE AND EMBRACES EVERY CONCEIVABLE POWER OF TAXATION HAS NEVER BEEN QUESTIONED***, or, if it has, has been so often authoritatively declared as to render it necessary only to state the doctrine. Brushaber v. UPRR Company
This is the text of ... By: RetSquid. on 16 Dec 08, 07:45:31 This is the text of the Amendment:
'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.'
It is clear on the face of this text that it does not purport to confer power to levy income taxes in a generic sense,***AN AUTHORITY ALREADY POSSESSED AND NEVER QUESTIONED.*** Brushaber v. UPRR Company
"why do u allow ... By: bosunbilly. on 05 Sep 08, 01:19:20 "why do u allow thouse who u trade your labor for pay to hold part of your earned pay? thats slavery"
No, that's the law - like it or not.
Congratulations on earning yourself some sustained attention from the IRS.
gee how close was ... By: IRSFRAUDEXPOSED. on 04 Sep 08, 00:28:38 gee how close was that. to each his own , the irs has not just said hey u owe this amount , pay now or else. i have not given permission to withhold my pay from me in 5 years and never will. why do u allow thouse who u trade your labor for pay to hold part of your earned pay? thats slavery
That would be the ... By: bosunbilly. on 27 Aug 08, 00:50:21 That would be the other dickhead, my friend Famspear.
And he's correct, by the way.
r u the dickhead ... By: passyourdrugtest. on 26 Aug 08, 23:51:27 r u the dickhead who post on wiki ?
Cracking The Code - ... By: bosunbilly. on 26 Aug 08, 22:49:20 Cracking The Code - The Fascinating Distortion About The Truth Of Taxation In America by Peter "I Got My Ass Handed To Me In The 6th" E. Hendrickson.
| Videos are copyright their respective owners
Latest comments made on this video:
By: RetSquid. on 16 Dec 08, 07:36:38
U.S. Supreme Court The Revenue Act of 1918 approved February 24, 1919, c. 18, 210, 211, 212(a), 213(a), 40 Stat. 1057, 1062, 1064, 1065, imposes a tax upon the net income of every individual including 'income derived from salaries, wages, or compensation for personal service ... of whatever kind and in whatever form paid,' LUCAS v. EARL, 281 U.S. 111 (1930)
By: RetSquid. on 16 Dec 08, 07:35:29
"In interpreting the meaning of the words in a revenue Act, we look to the 'ordinary, everyday senses' of the words." Commissioner v. Soliman, 506 U.S. 168, 174 (1993)
By: Leviodin. on 20 May 08, 17:36:08
Thank You.
By: IRSFRAUDEXPOSED. on 24 Apr 08, 03:35:13
this is the proper way to handle your situation regarding fileing for a proper and accurate return , correcting your w2 and getting a return for what was withheld.