There
ARE Honest, Law-Respecting Federal Judges!
“The IRS was attempting to harass an American citizen who had
established that no tax liability existed.”
The IRS headquarters in New
Carrollton, Maryland is a government building that, despite being
constructed with public funds, contains art referring to elite secret
societies. More importantly, the art conveys a strange message about the U.S.
Constitution, and the American people in general.
CtC WARRIOR*
NATHAN ANDERSON introduces us to one of these good souls-- Judge Dale S.
Fischer of the United States District Court for the Central District of
California. On October 10, and then again on November 6, Judge Fischer stood up
and stood out from the pack. Breaking a long and darkly-tarnished record of
precedents by her colleagues on the bench, Judge Fischer firmly quashed a bogus IRS summons aimed at Nathan, and
then denied a subsequent government Motion for Reconsideration.
*
CtC refers to “Cracking the Code”, a book by Peter Hendrickson exposing
the truth about the federal income tax.
The
summons had demanded bank records in an apparent fishing expedition intended to
secure evidence of receipts which would have been gratuitously used as a
pretext for asserting that Nathan had received "income". Nathan would
then have been put to the trouble of rebutting baseless allegations of
corresponding tax liabilities.
Judge
Fischer's rulings are significant because these summonses have previously been
routinely upheld by federal judges, who all-too-often are mere enablers of IRS
and DOJ bad behavior. In a departure from that corrupt norm, Judge Fischer
recognized that her responsibility is to the law, rather than to the state.
The
rulings are ALSO significant, and much more so, because in and by her rulings,
Judge Fischer recognizes that intrusive efforts like the one attempted by the
government against Nathan must be in pursuit of a lawful purpose-- not to
discover if a valid basis for such intrusions exists. That is, intrusive,
privacy-violating efforts like this can only be permitted in pursuit of an end
for which a legitimate basis has already been established.
The
purpose alleged here was the collection of tax liabilities. Absent proof that
such liabilities had been previously established and assessed, the effort to
submit someone's records to invasion and scrutiny is illegitimate and
unenforceable.
Here,
the IRS was attempting to harass a CtC-educated
American who had established that no liability existed. Thus, there could be no
lawful purpose to the summons, and thus, despite being specifically challenged
to do so by the judge, the agency was unable to produce any evidence of
assessed liability. The best the DOJ and its IRS client could do was the
revealingly desperate argument that since the agency isn't allowed to pursue
collections activities in the absence of an assessment, and WAS pursuing such
activities, the judge should just take it for granted that there must be an
assessment somewhere...
FINALLY,
THE RULINGS IN THIS CASE are ESPECIALLY significant because among the alleged
(but ultimately non-existent) "assessments" cited as the basis for
the summons was one for 2004:Nathan,
a good and long-time CtC warrior, had filed an educated return and claim for
complete refund of everything withheld in 2004, which refu">
No comments:
Post a Comment