Saturday, July 25, 2009

Crooks Catching Crooks

Well, the big story for the last few days is how the FBI and IRS,
those noble crusaders for truth and justice, have busted a bunch of
New Jersey Mayors, and other crooks, in a money-laundering
operation (among other things). So you can all sleep tonight with a
feeling of security, knowing that the federal government is out
there protecting you! Incidentally, here is the rather impressive
list of the people accused and the charges filed against them:

List of Names and Charges in NJ Corruption Probe - 7/23/2009

Political Corruption
- Moshe Altman, 39, of Monsey, NY, charged with conspiracy to commit extortion under color of official right & money laundering
- Charlie Ammon, 33, of Lakewood, NJ, charged with conspiracy to commit extortion under color of official right
- Leona Beldini, 74, of Jersey City, charged with conspiracy to commit extortion under color of official right
- Peter Cammarano III, 32, of Hoboken, NJ, charged with conspiracy to commit extortion under color of official right CLICK HERE FOR ENTIRE LONG LIST

However, even though the New Jersey example is a big one, a
headline along the lines of "Politician Caught Breaking the Law!"
is about as surprising as "Sun Rises in the East!" And the stories
always talk about "corruption." But what does that word mean? It
implies something like this: "Instead of using their power and
influence for the benefit of the general public, they used it for
personal gain!"

Well, I guess you can call that "corruption," or you could just
call it "government." (Many of the people in the New Jersey case
were charged with "extortion," which basically means, "Give me
money or I'll do something bad to you." But isn't that pretty much
the motto of the IRS every day?) Is there anyone in the country who
still believes that the politicians seek office to help us? Is
anyone still really that delusional? Everything the politicians do,
Republican or Democrat, is for their own benefit and nothing else.
For example: FULL STORY


What is Income?

Various Court statements about TAXABLE INCOME:

Stapler v U.S., 21 F Supp 737 AT 739 (1937): "Income within the meaning of the Sixteenth Amendment and the Revenue Act, means 'gain'... and in such connection 'Gain' means profit...proceeding from property, severed from capital, however invested or employed, and coming in, received, or drawn by the taxpayer, for his separate use, benefit and disposal... Income is not a wage or compensation for any type of labor."

Oliver v. Halstead 86 S.E. Rep 2nd 859 (1955): "There is a clear distinction between `profit' and `wages', or a compensation for labor. Compensation for labor (wages) cannot be regarded as profit within the meaning of the law. The word `profit', as ordinarily used, means the gain made upon any business or investment -- a different thing altogether from the mere compensation for labor."

Helvering v Edison Bros. Stores, 133 F2d 575 (1943): "The Treasury cannot by interpretive regulations, make income of that which is not income within the meaning of the revenue acts of Congress, nor can Congress, without apportionment, tax as income that which is not income within the meaning of the 16th Amendment."

Flora v U.S., 362 U.S. 145, (1959) never overruled: "... the government can collect the tax from a district court suitor by exercising it's power of distraint... but we cannot believe that compelling resort to this extraordinary procedure is either wise or in accord with congressional intent. Our system of taxation is based upon VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENT AND PAYMENT , NOT UPON DISTRAINT" [Footnote 43] If the government is forced to use these remedies(distraint) on a large scale, it will affect adversely the taxpayers willingness to perform under our VOLUNTARY assessment system.

Evens v Gore, 253 U.S. 245 (1920): US Supreme court, never overruled "After further consideration, we adhere to that view and accordingly hold that the Sixteenth Amendment does not authorize or support the tax in question. " (A tax on salary) FULL LIST OF CASE HISTORY

A Prophetic 1944 Interview

Norman Mattoon Thomas (November 20, 1884 - December 19, 1968) was a leading American socialist, pacifist, and six-time presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America. He said this in a 1944 interview:

The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of "liberalism," they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.... I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democratic Party has adopted our platform.

This statement reveals several key ideas:

The first is that a third party can win support for its policy positions without winning any elections if one of the two main parties adopts its positions.

The second is that it is a winning political strategy to advantage a small segment of the voters at the expense of a smaller segment. Do that for enough small segments and eventually you will have socialism.

The third is that it is a winning strategy to avoid allowing your ultimate objective, or the constitutional implications, to be framed as the question to be decided by the voters. People wouldn't vote for socialism, or for violating the Constitution, if the question were framed in those terms, but will vote for incremental steps toward it, and fail to understand the opponents when they try to explain to voters what those steps lead to, or that they are unconstitutional.

The problem for libertarians is that liberty doesn't sell as well as government benefits. People don't really appreciate liberty until they have lost it, and too often they will not even realize they have lost it, or they will attribute the loss to something other than their own past election choices. It is easier for most people to imagine a prospective financial gain or loss than a loss of liberty. Money can be counted in a way that liberty can't.

What is the relationship between the Federal Reserve Act and the Federal Income Tax?

"If we American people ever allow monopoly banking to control the issue of currency, first by inflation & then by deflation, these banks & bureaucracies that will grow up around them will deprive we, the people of all our property until our children will wake up homeless on the continent which God gave us for stewardship." - Thomas Jefferson

No comments: