More From Reno At The Ed Brown House
Friday, May 11, 2007
We had a call come in this morning. Sorry that I have taken so long to get this to you all...
If you have been reading the blog here then you already know that the judge filed the appeal on Ed and Elaine's behalf.
The sources that came in today tell us that the judge realizes that he misjudged the lawfulness of the IRS and the federal income tax. Which is why he, himself (the judge mind you!), filed the appeal for the Browns' case.
Now I myself have never heard of anything like that done before. Perhaps cheifsteve can answer if that is legal or not...
Read more at Ed Brown MySpace Blog.
We had a call come in this morning. Sorry that I have taken so long to get this to you all...
If you have been reading the blog here then you already know that the judge filed the appeal on Ed and Elaine's behalf.
The sources that came in today tell us that the judge realizes that he misjudged the lawfulness of the IRS and the federal income tax. Which is why he, himself (the judge mind you!), filed the appeal for the Browns' case.
Now I myself have never heard of anything like that done before. Perhaps cheifsteve can answer if that is legal or not...
Read more at Ed Brown MySpace Blog.
posted by The Freedom Fellowship at
10:36 PM
2 Comments:
Legal? None of it is legal, the judge should just quit that would be legal and right. Stand strong, their day is here!
Hello Reno and friends,
well lets look at this from a legal viewpoint. What the judge is doing is perfecting the I.R.S. claim and that is all. He has not seen the light, or had a sudden attack of a guilt. It is very dangerous for the Browns to deny judgment and to procrastinate about filing an appeal. They
could get help if they wanted it. They need to get busy and file something that the IRS can understand; the judge perfected the I.R.S. argument out of ignorance. Stuff like 'assessment certificate Form 23C', 'Notice of Deficiency', and whether a valid section 6020(b)
return exists. 26 CFR § 1.1-1(a) General rule. (1) Section 1 of the Code imposes an income tax on the income of every individual who is a ‘citizen’ or ‘resident’ of the United States.”
26 CFR § 1.1-1(c) Every person born or naturalized in the United
States and subject to its jurisdiction is a citizen.
Because really you are considered to be a “Federal Person”, see this person defined in Title 26 USC § 7701(a)(30)(A), see also Title 22 USC § 456(f). This is the key
legal premise that most people fail to comprehend.
US v Cruikshank—wherein the court stated:
“The people of the United States resident within any State are subject to two governments: one State, and the other National. . . It is the natural consequence
of a citizenship which owes allegiance to two sovereignties, and claims protection from both. The citizen cannot complain, because he has voluntarily
submitted himself to such a form of government. . .” The court was exposing a plethora of negative factors—to the cognizant—in its
revealing statement; the list of legal factors are as follows:
1) Resident
2) Subject
3) Citizenship
4) Allegiance
5) Sovereignties
And last and most important:
6) Voluntary.
At § 3.17.46.2.4(1), the Internal Revenue Manual provides the following definition:
"Assessment Certificate: To impose a tax as authorized by the Internal Revenue Code,
Assessments are supported by a summary record of assessment signed by an appointed
assessment officer." At § 3.17.46.2.4(1), the IRM further specifies, "All assessments
must be certified by signature of an authorized official on the Summary Record of
Assessment (Form 23C, Assessment Certificate-Summary Record of Assessments). A signed Summary Record of Assessment authorizes issuance of notice and other collection actions (refer to IRC Regulations 301.6203-1)." In Sections 3.17.63.14.7 through
3.17.63.14.21, the IRM specifies that there must be an assessment for each instance of tax
principal, interest and penalty. Elsewhere, the Internal Revenue Manual stipulates that
when copies of assessment certificates are requested, IRS personnel responsible for
disclosure must provide them.
And when they do not comply we have...
28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(1) confers jurisdiction upon this court and waives the sovereign
immunity of the United States regarding claims for sums wrongfully collected under the
internal revenue laws. In a suit under this section, a plaintiff "may challenge the
constitutionality, legality or fairness of any tax statute or amount assessed or collected."
White v. C.I.R., 537 F.Supp 679 (D.Colo. 1982)
26 U.S.C. § 6203 provides that "the assessment shall be made by recording the
liability of the taxpayer in the office of the Secretary in accordance with rules or
regulations prescribed by the Secretary. Upon request of the taxpayer, the Secretary shall
furnish the taxpayer a copy of the record of the assessment."
26 C.F.R. § 301.6203-1 provides, in part, that "... the assessment shall be made by an
assessment officer signing the summary record of assessment. The summary record
through supporting records, shall provide identification of the taxpayer, the character of the liability assessed, the taxable period, if applicable, and the amount of the assessment
... The date of the assessment is the date the summary record is signed by an assessment
officer ..." Both parties state in their briefs that this document is known as Form 23-C
within the Internal Revenue Service.
In the absence of any direct evidence contradicting the Government's position, the
presumption of official regularity controls. "The presumption of regularity supports the
official acts of public officers and, in the absence of clear evidence to the contrary, courts
presume that they have properly discharged their official duties." (Emphasis added)
United States v. Chemical Foundation, Inc., 272 U.S. 1, 71 L. Ed. 131, 47 S. Ct. 1 (1926)
and United States v. Ahrens, 530 F.2d 781, 783 (8th Cir. 1976).
Bothke v. Fluor Engineers+summary assessment #4
[THIS IS THEIR FEAR]:::::: TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I--CRIMES
CHAPTER 47--FRAUD AND FALSE STATEMENTS
Sec. 1001. Statements or entries generally
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any
matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or
judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and
willfully--
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or
device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent
statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial
proceeding, or that party's counsel, for statements, representations,
writings or documents submitted by such party or counsel to a judge or
magistrate in that proceeding.
(c) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the
legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only to--
(1) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a
matter related to the procurement of property or services, personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative branch; or (2) any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.
Ed and Elaine have the responce in hand for the Court and the judge Hell, I gave it to them....
“The citizen cannot complain, because he has voluntarily submitted himself to such a form of government.......he owes allegiance to the two departments, so to speak, and within their respective spheres must pay the penalties.”
—United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home