NOTICE: This is an archived forum maintained only for search purposes.

Member services are being moved and revamped at www.iwarrior.net.

Thank you for your interest and participation.

This is a general forum pertaining to discussions on all modes and classifications of taxes and taxation.

Unread post April 6th, 2012, 3:07 pm
jessejames44 Apprentice

Apprentice

Heres the latest advice Merrill has given

If you have been endorsing private credit from the Fed then you are in that signature agreement to send them a return of your income for that privilege. You should redeem lawful money rather and get into that habit. I think you will start learning how to negotiate the returns because you are already part way there with Pete HENDRICKSON's material. He was never applying the remedy in the law though. He never promoted non-endorsement.


Ok, for one, the law states nothing remotely related to endorsing money as the cause for the income tax imposition.
Also, the law states that a W4 is ONLY in effect on commencment of "employment".

Where does this quack get the idea that lawful money is the cause?

Weston White Lead Researcher

Lead Researcher
User avatar

Location: Fresno, California

Speaking for myself, I have no idea where this whole redeemable/lawful money thing comes from nor why it seems to have such a following, then again so does still the 861-Argument.

jessejames44 Apprentice

Apprentice

Weston White wrote:
Speaking for myself, I have no idea where this whole redeemable/lawful money thing comes from nor why it seems to have such a following, then again so does still the 861-Argument.

This Libra guy from LH who goes by johnthetaxist and johnnycash I cant beleive how he can wake up and put on his underwear right.
At one point in time he was trying to convince me that the banks report how much money you have in the bank account which the IRS uses to determine your taxes.
I asked him if he signs a W4 when opening a bank account!
He couldnt say anything constructive in answering.

I mean how can he put on his underwear correctly. He contradicts himslef with saying Pete is correct and merrill is also.
If you really think about both premises in many ways they contradict themselves.

Unread post September 17th, 2012, 7:12 am
David Merrill Lead Researcher

Lead Researcher
User avatar

jessejames44 wrote:
Heres the latest advice Merrill has given

If you have been endorsing private credit from the Fed then you are in that signature agreement to send them a return of your income for that privilege. You should redeem lawful money rather and get into that habit. I think you will start learning how to negotiate the returns because you are already part way there with Pete HENDRICKSON's material. He was never applying the remedy in the law though. He never promoted non-endorsement.


Ok, for one, the law states nothing remotely related to endorsing money as the cause for the income tax imposition.
Also, the law states that a W4 is ONLY in effect on commencment of "employment".

Where does this quack get the idea that lawful money is the cause?



I had no idea someone was calling me a quack until the other day.

Your naked contract with the Fed - what most people know as "endorsement" agrees that you will bond with your substance the extra money created by fractional lending off your endorsed funds. Without your endorsement that creation of money would be counterfeiting.


Regards,

David Merrill.

Here is a great example of redeeming lawful money, dated strangely today:




[center]Image[/center]


Interestingly that image is stored on a website about this thread's author.

Unread post September 18th, 2012, 8:03 am
johnny Novice

Novice

Hello Weston. I see you've done some work on the site; very nice.

I see "JesseJames" has been badmouthing me too. You probably already know I suspect he is Jay ADKISSON, founder & leader of the quatlosers. He's all over the internet trying to keep folks away from the truth regarding income taxation in America. Oddly enough, his primary weapon is ... psychology!

In his "JesseJames" persona he plays some type of arrogant patriot with no history, you'll notice he never supplies any scans or personal documentation. Mainly he just mocks & bashes those of us who found freedom, who found the way out of the federal plantation.

I'd encourage you to pay attention to David Merrill, he lead me out of the sheep pen, out of human animal husbandry. I have first-hand knowledge of that IRS victory scan he posted above.
http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?681-Company-beats-IRS-penalties-with-Lawful-Money
LAWFUL MONEY was the key, IMHO. I have seen the un-redacted documents with my own eyes. And of course I haven't paid taxes in 5 years.

And yes, I created that jesse2012.com site; recently it's become more a repository of images.

Unread post September 18th, 2012, 8:51 pm
Weston White Lead Researcher

Lead Researcher
User avatar

Location: Fresno, California

Thank you, I am planning on modifying this template on a new theme framework. And yes, it would be so very nice if those of us in the THM could limit our divisiveness.

Unread post September 24th, 2012, 5:55 pm
David Merrill Lead Researcher

Lead Researcher
User avatar

Here is an elegant Default Judgment.

Unread post November 2nd, 2012, 8:22 pm
jessejames44 Apprentice

Apprentice

Why dont you tell everyone here the truth Johnny?

You have an agreement with your 1099 payors (who you claim are your other bussinesses) to report less than 600 hundred dollars to the IRS.

You are a phony Johnny...complete through and through phony!

Btw Johnny, have you ever come up with any statutory evidence that endorsing paper causes the federal tax imposition?



I have the statutory evidence that participating in Social Security is the root cause of withholding. In fact, I have the statute stating social security's 3121(b) "employment" is an excise activity, taxable. Even have a court case stating the same.

Unread post November 3rd, 2012, 1:57 pm
TDL Lead Researcher

Lead Researcher
User avatar

Location: Cybiria

I have the statutory evidence that participating in Social Security is the root cause of withholding. In fact, I have the statute stating social security's 3121(b) "employment" is an excise activity, taxable. Even have a court case stating the same.

Well, you got my attention re. this material ... Please, would you link-to and/or attach copies/images? Thanks.

Unread post November 4th, 2012, 8:38 pm
jessejames44 Apprentice

Apprentice

Well TDL I posted the statute on your website months ago only to be virtually ignored.
Seems nobody really cared to hear why they were really being taxed and getting frivolous penalty's. They were more interested trying to get out of paying a fine by legal technicality.

The court cite stating Social Security is an excise taxable activity is from ADASK which you have a link to on your website.

Anymore I could careless about helping people. They wont help themselves so why should I remain repeating myself?
Seems tax protesters are equally drama queens as they are hell bent on beleiving scams work.
I can understand why ADASK is bitter to people who tax protest, anymore I feel the same. I'm done leading horses to water only to see them not drink.
They deserve their legal misery from beleiving a fool and his scam than being honest with themselves to humbly listen to what I and ADASK has been telling them about Social Security.



Heres a demonstration of what I'm talking about.

Ask Merrill to see if he can procure any statutory evidence suggesting, even remotely suggesting, that endorsing fiat causes the W4 withholding form.

I can trace it back to participating in Social Security. Hell I can even procure an administrative regulation that an individual doesnt have to sign a W4 if that person doesnt want to participate in Social Security.
I get paid every week in check form, go to the bank and sign it and receive FRN's and dont have any W4 on file. I have no deductions taken and no reporting to the SSA who's the agency that inputs the W3 data into the government system which the IRS uses to determine a refund or deficiency.


You want to seriously learn how and why you pay taxes TDL?
My suggestion to you then would be to forget everything you ever heard about every guru's stupid idea's out there and research the how's and why's employers report to the government.
It always, as far as the private sector is concerned, points back to participating in Social Security, employment or self-employment.

Next

Return to General Tax Questions

cron