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

Member services are being moved and revamped at

Thank you for your interest and participation.

Reserved for insight into matters pertaining to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, i.e., 12 U.S.C. § 411, et al.

Unread post May 15th, 2013, 7:24 am
David Merrill Lead Researcher

Lead Researcher
User avatar

This is a new form of fun. You can see how this suitor got his refund very quickly - and filed the 1040 Form inside the counterclaim! That is really special... The IRS agents and attorneys actually found the 1040 Form Attached to the Suit, and hurried up to send him his Treasury check!!

Unread post May 16th, 2013, 2:26 pm
jessejames44 Apprentice


A few things!

1. What refund check?
Theres no proof a refund was issued! You saying there was, or taking the word there was, isnt valid.

2. The IRS has on their website that the arguement of claiming FRN's are not taxable because they are not lawful money is "frivolous".

3. How do you know there was an IRS lawyer involved and not just some desk data input jocky who didnt want to deal with this letter?

Unread post May 30th, 2013, 10:22 am
johnny Novice


It's nice to see jessejames back to spread his special blend of arrogant FUD & disinfo. Just another clue that David Merrill is hot on the trail. And isn't it true that David was the second user ever banned from I guess some truth is a little too truthy for the Quatlosers to defend against, eh?

And can you answer why no longer lists Jay as "Creator of the anti-scam website" ?



Unread post May 31st, 2013, 7:57 am
jessejames44 Apprentice


How am I spreading disinfo?
The link didnt show any refund. The post as far as I can tell is just a story.

All I asked was to see this supposed refund Merrill is claiming. And saying a lawyer was involved when there is no way to show there was isnt exactly convincing.

I dont read Forbes and I'm not Jay.

What does being banned have to do with truth?
How does being banned from a website confirm merrill is correct?
Last I checked he was banned because he didnt supply the neccessary evidence to back his claim. He was repeatedly asked and warned to procure the evidence before he was banned........and he didnt!
Your posts require approval because you make the same inconclusive claims.....besides being very arrogent in nature.

Do you always accuse someone of something without proper verification?

I see Merrill is having problems with posters on his website over filing 1040's.
You are also having problems with the IRS. ....go figure!

And I see you are lying again over at Losthorizons by making the claim that CtC works for you for the last 8 years when you and I both know you havent filed a 1040 in years to honestly make that claim.
Thats not exactly being honest now is it.....but then again you never were honest.....not even with yourself are you honest.

Unread post June 7th, 2013, 4:09 pm
johnny Novice


No Jesse, it is our side supplying the evidence. I have yet to see you supply a single scan or document. Everything you say is suspect.

Since you deflected my question about Forbes I'll answer it myself. Why does Jay's blog at no longer list him as the creator of QUATLOOS? The initial answer is Jay's no longer proud of his little-visited creation and is back-peddling away from it. But that seems inconsistent with his nature. Perhaps the real answer is - Forbes has taken stock of the nasty "anti-scam" website, put all the clues about banking & taxation together and realized... the main purpose of is actually to defend the world's largest scam! That is to say the Federal Reserve/IRS scam run by criminal bankers in cooperation with US government. Perhaps Forbes doesn't want its reputation tainted by association.

The user "ManOntheLand" was found to be defending this same scam:
MOtL described your point eloquently. That is why I was not spending any time reading his posts. Then he resorted to calling people numbskulls for being honest...

It might be interesting to examine what went down for yourselves. Look at his last posts and my responses. It was in my opinion, and according to my intuition a little more than no sense of jurisdiction, he had an agenda of protectionism for the IRS. ... #post10857

There you go, an agenda of protectionism for the IRS. Just like our JesseJames44 here.

Unread post June 8th, 2013, 8:19 am
jessejames44 Apprentice


There is no government Treasury check on merrills site to saying reduced filing works.
That post by merrill shows nothing of a treasury check.......nothing.

Like i said I dont read forbes and could careless about money.
It looks like you read forbes though. Are you a bit jealous that you arent on forbes?
You're always flaunting your checks around like its some sort of status symbol showing everyone how much money you have.

Unread post June 8th, 2013, 9:19 am
johnny Novice


I probably have more real money than you, but that's neither here nor there. What's interesting to me is all the effort you put in to detract from those, like myself, who beat the IRS. That is particularly validating of our success; after all, if we posed no real threat to the bankster's IRS scam then the darkside would not need disinfo agents like yourself posing as freedomfighters behind fake IPs to counteract us. I agree with David that you, jessejames44, have an agenda of protectionism for the IRS.

One other thing, from your posts I can tell you're clearly versed in law, likely a lawyer, yet you don't post as yourself. I've listened to attorneys before and found their answers & contributions very helpful. Yet you hide behind a fake persona with fake IP-address. That speaks to an admission of defeat on your part, it tells me you cannot win this on the merits, you cannot win with facts, logic & law and must rely on name-calling, appeals to emotion and other tricks. THANK YOU FOR THE VALIDATION!

Unread post June 8th, 2013, 1:44 pm
jessejames44 Apprentice


Funny thing about you "beating" the havent filed in years so how do you know you beat the irs?

As far as beleiving what merrill have a past history of beleiving what ever the nut-case says.....even if its wrong and unfounded.

And no, I'm not MOTL either.

I've already stated facts, logic and law. I even went into length about the mechanism of "reporting" and how "reporting" is directly associated with earning "wages", not frns, which eminate from Social Security.....but you decided to beleive merrills unfounded opinion instead.

Unread post June 8th, 2013, 6:49 pm
johnny Novice


First off, thanks for showing the love, Jesse. 2008 was the last year I filed a tax return, the same year I read Cracking the Code. and then received a full refund. I then discovered David Merrill was who I should be listening to (after you & the Quatlosers couldn't argue against lawful money & banished him, THANK YOU) I then started demanding lawful money instead of private Fed Reserve money and stopped filing. Why? Because I make lawful money not taxable income. How? By making a demand for lawful money backside of the paycheck. Now the banksters must make do without Johnny's cash. No tears shed there.

The question I have for you jessejames44, is, do your handlers know how much you actually help our side by calling those of us demanding lawful money "numbskulls"? Bit of a gimme, that.

Unread post June 8th, 2013, 10:26 pm
jessejames44 Apprentice




Return to Redeeming Lawful Money