IRS: The Shadow of Tyranny

"The hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax."

Even Einstein couldn't figure it out.

The income tax has never inspired a single person on Earth to earn, save, or spend money.

So much for the 10th Amendment, and the 2nd sentence of the Declaration of Independence.

Originally posted by hinky
This argument has been to the supreme court, several times; and regardless of how it is looked at; Ohio really is a State and Ohio did join the Union in 1803.

They were granted statehood in 1953 retroactively. So yes, Ohio did become a state in 1803, but not until 1953, which, of course, was after they had already illegally ratified the Sixteenth Amendment in 1911.

reply to post by PETROLCOIN


Here isa link that thoroughly explains Ohio's statehood issue. It uses a few multisyllable words, but it is understandable.

There is a reason why this is considered a frivolous action by courts. Ignorance or just not accepting facts is not a defense in court.

Originally posted by hinky
There is a reason why this is considered a frivolous action by courts.

That reason is because the courts are controlled by the very people who perpetrated the income tax fraud on the American people.

That's like going to a low-level member of a drug cartel and telling him drugs are illegal so they should stop trafficking them. Do you really they're going to say "Oh, darn it! You got us! Shucks! Okay, we'll stop!"?

Your argument is as invalid as the law it is based on.

Your making a presumption that there is a Federal law forbidding drug usage, please show me that Federal law. Federal law only...

reply to post by hinky


uscode.house.gov...

That was a poor retort. Try harder next time.

Originally posted by PETROLCOIN
reply to post by hinky

 

uscode.house.gov...

That was a poor retort. Try harder next time.

Yeah I know.

Funny how your quoting Title 21 as a basis of law when the same US Code has Title 26, the basis of the tax law. Both these Title use the same basis for law derived from the Constitution.

So now, it looks like you just pick and choose which laws you want to follow. No legal basis as both Titles have a common source named The US Code. You quoted The Controlled Substance Act of 1970. This is current law.

Now we can go here which is the exact same site you used for drug law and explore The Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

Originally posted by hinky
Both these Title use the same basis for law derived from the Constitution.

That is where you are wrong, my friend. One of them is in accordance with the Constitution. The other is not. I'll give you a hint at which one isn't: yours.

The Controlled Substances Act does not violate the Constitution. The Income Tax does in many ways which have already been stated and which, for the convenience of your flawed argument, you have chosen to ignore.

reply to post by PETROLCOIN


You might as well stop arguing with an IRS employee shill... You can never win, you see they make their money illegally, tell hinky to just sell drugs on the side then, well they'll be using two illegal avenues to gain their living!

See they don't care what the law is they are just worried about losing their income, no income tax= no need for IRS = another DESERVING American out of a job!

reply to post by hinky


The Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution to be different from the tax happy monarchy of England. Why would they allow for such things to happen again?

They wouldn't.

reply to post by PETROLCOIN


You have just ignored the real law and spout the made up law you want even when specific points you mentioned are pointed to you to show you why you are wrong. You are ignoring legal court cases and legal rulings to argue points that have already been settled in court.

To be mean, I would call you stupid, but I really think your just trolling at this point; because I truly think it is impossible to be this stupid.

Originally posted by Modern Americana
reply to post by hinky

 

The Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution to be different from the tax happy monarchy of England. Why would they allow for such things to happen again?

They wouldn't.

You are absolutely right!

Our Founding Fathers would have started a second revolution about 30 years ago.

I have been fighting the IRS and State Revenue SOB's for over 40 years. Remember where I posted you have to know your enemy. I just grow tired of seeing stupid kids who think they have discovered a secret and it ends up costing them thousands of $$ or several years of their life because of ignorance.

If you pay attention to the clowns who hawk these tax evasion schemes you will find several things in common. All sell books which makes them money. None of them follow their own advice, but if they do, they are in jail from "the man keeping them down" and you need to buy their newest book.

Thanx for posting an interesting thread.
.

reply to post by hinky


Again, you are forgetting who controls the courts.

Would a murderer plead guilty if he knew he could get away with it?

I am not trolling. I am stating facts. I would call you a troll, but I know making these faulty arguments is just what you are paid to do.