The News

Current Events and Continuing Education for October 3 through October 16, 2016

“Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.”

-James Madison

Please Start Here

(Edward Snowden, come home! It was all just a bad dream; there really is No Such Agency!)

Do you know someone truly steeped in the Kool-Aid?

 I mean someone who finds it easier to believe that the far-better-educated, far-more-suspicious-of-government Americans of a hundred years ago were complete morons who granted authority to the state to take whatever it wished from themselves and their posterity than to imagine that they themselves simply misunderstand the true nature of the income tax? Even while knowing that their beliefs about the tax are derived entirely from the representations of those who profit from those beliefs (like tax bureaucrats and "tax professionals")?

Do you know someone like that? Shake them awake with the latest (fourteenth) edition of CtC!

I'm delighted when anyone wishes to share what I have posted here with others! Sharing this page is an important means of moving toward the restoration of the rule of law-- PLEASE DO IT!! But I'd appreciate your doing so by directing your friends here themselves, rather than by copying and emailing the material.

***

"It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."

-Samuel Adams

Warrantless Searches Are Always Unlawful

The historical record of the Fourth Amendment makes clear that there are no exceptions.

AMERICANS HAVE BEEN SIMMERING WITH ANGER IN RECENT YEARS over revelations about the NSA and FBI hoovering-up everyone's phone-calls, email, "social media" posts and so on, along with other systematic, institutionalized privacy assaults. This widespread ire has been met with predictable political-class nonsense: lies about the extent of the violations, efforts to downplay the significance of the violations, and arguments that it's all for a good cause anyway, so everyone should just get over it.

All of these evasions and obfuscations are bad enough, just for the insult thereby offered to an angry America: "We're not only mugging you, but we also believe you're too stupid to stay incensed about it if we throw some eyewash your way..."

But the apologias and efforts to placate us aren't the worst offenses. Far more pernicious is the real assault on our sensibilities and the frayed sinews of our Constitutional structure in the form of repeated assertions by the perps that these privacy violations are "lawful".

They are not.

     There is no such thing as an unwarranted but "reasonable" search

THE RATIONALE FOR ASSERTING THE "LAWFULNESS" of warrantless extra-domicile and electronic searches and seizures [of physical property and data] has rested on reading the Fourth Amendment as allowing for "reasonable" searches and seizures without the need for warrants. But this is a distorted construction of the amendment's prescriptions and proscriptions; a "constortion", if I may be allowed to coin a term.

Under the constortion, the word "unreasonable" in the amendment is read as isolated from the remainder of the amendment, or as a qualifier of the warrant specifications that follow. Under the constortion, "unreasonable" is seen as included in order to distinguish an imagined "reasonable" search-- which, because "reasonable", needs no warrant-- from an "unreasonable" search, which, because unreasonable, does need a warrant.

But in fact, the historical record makes clear that this is in no way the Framers' intent-- rather, "unreasonable" appears in the amendment solely as an expression of the Framers' view that ANY search or seizure unauthorized by a warrant secured under stringent standards of testimony and cause is thereby inherently UN-reasonable, and a violation of the amendment.

In the amendment, "unreasonable" means "without reason" (an illuminating synonym of which is "unwarranted"). What follows after that term is not a proscription for how "unreasonable" searches or seizures are to be conducted. Instead, what follows are the requirements for the establishment of an amendment-satisfying reason for a search or seizure.

FRANKLY, THE LANGUAGE OF THE AMENDMENT ALONE makes its real meaning plain enough to anyone reading it fairly, and without a wish to constort in service to a government desire to be let off its Constitutional chain. We'll go to the historical original-intent records in a moment, but first, let's just look at that current language:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Fairly read without an intent to misunderstand, there is no way this language can be honestly construed as a Constitutional statement (or even mere implication) that certain searches and seizures can be lawfully conducted without warrants. On the contrary, this language plainly says that right of the people to be secure against searches and seizures without a valid reason shall not be violated, and establishment of a valid reason requires an allegation of probable cause under oath, with particularity, considered by an appropriate officer authorized to issue warrants.

That is, "unreasonable" in the amendment doesn't mean "out of the ordinary", "excessive" or "in violation of reasonable expectations of privacy" as federal courts have variously constorted the amendment over recent decades. Rather, "unreasonable" means just what is says: "conducted without a properly-established reason," and is followed by the requirements by which a valid reason must be established.

However, my perceptions and arguments of the proper reading of the amendment's language needn't be relied upon to make my case. The writings the Founders and Framers provide all the clarification needed against even the most willfully obtuse reading.

     The historical records are clear and definitive

LETS LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE of some contemporaneous alternative versions of the Fourth Amendment. Keep in mind that these measures reflect the fact that at the time it was understood that some kind of warrant was required for any search or seizure, which was why the colonial-era British went to the trouble of issuing "general warrants" even when intending to conduct searches unsupported by sworn allegations and particularity.

Here, as a first example, is the Fourth Amendment counterpart from the Declaration of Rights in the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776:

That the people have a right to hold themselves, their houses, papers, and possessions free from search and seizure, and therefore warrants without oaths or affirmations first made, affording a sufficient foundation for them, and whereby any officer or messenger may be commanded or required to search suspected places, or to seize any person or persons, his or their property, not particularly described, are contrary to that right, and ought not to be granted.

Consolidated, this reads: "[T]he people have a right to be free from search and seizure [of any kind-- houses, papers and possessions, with no limiting specifications provided], and therefore warrants [again, the only mechanism recognized at the time by which any kind of search was permitted] ought not be granted without sworn allegations providing a sufficient foundation, and without particularity."

Similarly, the Virginia Declaration of Rights, another early version of the Fourth upon which the federal Constitutional amendment was modeled, reads in pertinent part:

That general warrants, whereby any officer or messenger may be commanded to search suspected places without evidence of a fact committed, or to seize any person or persons not named, or whose offence is not particularly described and supported by evidence, are grievous and oppressive, and ought not to be granted.

That is, "[S]earch[es]...without evidence [which is to say, testimony, which is to say, sworn]...are grievous and oppressive, and ought not be granted."

Both of these contemporaneous alternative versions of the Fourth Amendment plainly declare that searches and seizures without sworn allegations and particularity are unreasonable and prohibited. In fact, the Pennsylvania version expressly declares that any search and seizure unsupported by sworn allegations of cause and/or lacking particularity is contrary to the right Constitutionally asserted and secured therein.

James Madison, in arguing before Congress for the inclusion of the Bill of Rights (and, again, speaking in the context of ALL searches and seizures requiring a warrant), described his intent for the Fourth thusly:

The rights of the people to be secured in their persons; their houses, their papers, and their other property, from all unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated by warrants issued without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, or not particularly describing the places to be searched, or the persons or things to be seized.

Massachusetts, in its Constitution of 1780, put it this way:

Every subject has a right to be secure from all unreasonable searches, and seizures of his person, his houses, his papers, and all his possessions. All warrants, therefore, are contrary to this right, if the cause or foundation of them be not previously supported by oath or affirmation; and if the order in the warrant to a civil officer, to make search in suspected places, or to arrest one or more suspected persons, or to seize their property, be not accompanied with a special designation of the persons or objects of search, arrest, or seizure: and no warrant ought to be issued but in cases, and with the formalities, prescribed by the laws.

Plainly, the Framers adopted the Fourth Amendment to ensure that all searches conducted anywhere, at any time and under any circumstances other than arrest for conduct just committed are based on prior establishment of probable cause by sworn testimony, with particularity as to what is to be sought and seized. There IS no "reasonable search" exception that can be construed from the amendment.

The "unreasonable" in the Fourth's language doesn't distinguish one kind of search which needs a warrant from another kind that does not. Instead, it serves to label all non-conforming searches as thereby unreasonable and thus barred by the amendment.

     The law hasn't changed, and modern unwarranted searches are illegal

WHAT WAS UNCONSTUTIONAL YESTERDAY is unconstitutional today, absent an intervening amendment. Searches or seizures of any kind-- anyplace, anytime and of anything-- without a warrant based on a sworn, credible and specific allegation that evidence of a crime will be found are Fourth Amendment violations. There are no exceptions.

"An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never passed."

-16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256

***

P. S. I MENTIONED EARLIER that law-defying courts have constorted a "reasonable expectation" rationale for warrantless searches. This concept merits a little special attention.

The "reasonable expectation" dodge is based on the idea that the government is not restrained by the principle of the Fourth Amendment insofar as it looks at things (or people) who have (as the courts see it) waived their privacy expectations by setting foot outside their shades-drawn, windows-closed homes.

If, the courts reason, you step outside (or send data by means or processes not entirely within your exclusive control), you must or should expect that you or your data will be photographed, followed, eavesdropped-upon or intercepted by government spies. Therefore (goes the argument) such searches are "reasonable" and the government can freely do these things.

This view turns the principle behind the Fourth Amendment on its head. As noted above, there can be no reasonable (and thus permissible) searches or seizures not supported by the requirements specified for a warrant.

However, this "reasonable expectation" argument is also corrupt nonsense on roller skates on its own terms alone. Here's why:

It is true that you may not have a reasonable expectation that NO ONE ANYWHERE will see anything personal and otherwise private when you step outside or create, send, receive or store data outside your house. But you sure as hell have a reasonable expectation that the government won't be looking at it without oath-supported probable cause and particularity.

In fact, that you can go about your business in public or in private unmolested by prying eyes and that only your service provider will see your transmitted data absent a proper warrant being issued is the only reasonable expectation. Any alternative expectation would require a patently UN-reasonable belief that the courts have actual authority to turn the Fourth Amendment on its head, and we all know better than that.

THE TRUTH IS SIMPLE, and requires no nonsense about "expectations" (a concept-- that the measure of someone's rights or of the restrictions placed by the Constitution on the state could rest on "expectations"-- which is on its face nauseatingly demented).

What's been going on with the NSA and FBI and who knows what other perps has been a serial felony, apparently committed over and over against each and every American (not to mention a whole lot of foreigners-- there's nothing in the amendment that says it only prescribes government behavior when Americans are the targets of its attentions...). Don't let creative, self-serving nonsense from the criminals or their co-conspirators fool you into quietly accepting lies that let them off the hook and destroy the rule of law at the same time.

"Resistance to tyranny is obedience to God."

-Thomas Jefferson

NOTE: This article is permalinked here.

For more on this subject, see 'An Unreasonable Assault On The Fourth' in Upholding the Law and Other Observations

NOTE II: Okay, I've done my part. I've done the research, the assembly of data, the analysis and the accessible presentation. Now you've got to do your part.

You've got to see to it that this article is read by everyone, from every judge, member of congress and other public officials to every teenager still in school. You've got to get this article to your friends, your family and your co-workers. You've got to insist that this article be read by every lawyer at IJ, Judicial Watch and the ACLU.

As noted above, the permalink for the article is here. That's the link that should be shared, if you are sharing the article by way of an introductory note (very important!) and a link, whether through twitter, facebook or email.

You can also find a .pdf of the article here. This can be shared as is, or it can be printed for sending around by snail mail.

If you do your part, together we can restore the republic and change the world for the better.

"It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."

-Samuel Adams

Trump Melts Down; Go, Johnson!

IT'S KIND OF A SHAME to see Donald Trump systematically compromise the political capital he had accumulated during the primary campaign. But it's definitely happening.

During that primary season, Trump distinguished himself from the rest of the Republican candidate pack. He earned a victory by articulating a few rational positions regarding foreign policy (i.e., withdrawing from a now useless NATO; pulling troops in from trigger-point deployments in countries which should be bearing their own costs of defense; recognizing that Israel is not the 51st state; and having a grown-up perspective on Russia).

Of course, what good there was suffered from Trump's vulgarity, bombast, inconsistency and other flaws. But most of his outrageous proposals were harmless, being concerned with things outside the control of the office he seeks. Only foreign policy is actually in the hands of the president, and on that front Trump stood out with far better positions than any of his Republican (or Democrat) rivals.

UNFORTUNATELY, UPON SECURING THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION Trump rapidly began collapsing. He has persisted in relying almost entirely on demagoguery in lieu of actual plans for implementing his declared policies, and has done his best to avoid declaring those policies with any exactitude. He has actually hired advisors straight from the war-mongering nuthouses and even picked a VP who embraces the neocon line on the virtues of perpetual war.

Most recently, Trump deeply dissed his supporters by not bothering to prepare for the first debate, suggesting that he is not taking seriously his responsibility as the Republican place-holder to do his level best to win the office. This guy should be working 24/7 to become impressively knowledgeable and intellectually-organized from a policies-and-positions standpoint.

Instead of boning up and working for mastery of what would be his responsibilities, Trump continues to shoot from the lip (and unimpressively even at that). He apparently imagines that just griping about the status quo, without explaining in concrete, well-thought-out terms what he would do differently, is good enough to capture the independents and cross-over Democrats he will have to have in order to win.

Worse, Trump actually revealed a totalitarian side in that first debate with his endorsement of the Constitution-defying "stop and frisk" practices of the New York police department. This is a disturbingly good fit with his un-retracted 2013 condemnation of Edward Snowden.

In the second debate Trump was better-prepared. But he continued to back-pedal on the primary-season foreign-policy positions that were the only thing going for him as a candidate (or at best deliver decidedly mixed messages). And even better-prepared, Trump was markedly unimpressive.

It can certainly still be said that it would be far better to take a chance on Trump than accept the known outcome from the election of Hillary Clinton. But the "far" is becoming less far every day. (Even on the issue of Supreme Court appointments Trump fails to stand out-- one of his announced "short-list" nominees is the lead judge in the outrageous, Constitution-scorning ruling being appealed by this petition to the Supreme Court.)

IN LIGHT OF ALL THE FOREGOING, it's time for a serious reconsideration of the Gary Johnson candidacy. At this point, there is little to lose by doing so.

Trump's disaffection of his base, and his inability or unwillingness to meaningfully work for independent and breakaway Democratic votes means he has less and less chance of winning in November. Johnson's chances are even more remote, of course, but helping ensure a strong showing for the Libertarian party candidate this year can pay dividends in 2020. And frankly, if Johnson gets into the remaining debate, doesn't mimic Trump by being unprepared, and actually articulates his positions competently, he could win.

It is certainly true that Johnson has weaknesses as a candidate, and he isn't even much of a libertarian.* However, even adulterated libertarianism beats business-as-usual Washington all hollow, both from a standpoint of policy superiority and political power.

Although Johnson doesn't understand the income tax, and actually argues in favor of the disastrous "Fair Tax" (indeed, the Libertarian Party as a whole completely misunderstands the income tax, and what a shame that is!), on most other fronts his policies are pretty attractive. I'd rather have what Johnson advocates than what Hillary or Trump does by a million miles, and I'll bet that a very large number of other Americans would find that they feel the same way if they knew the difference.

The bottom line is that I am not viewing Johnson as a standard-bearer for libertarian dogma, nor even as a model representative of the Libertarian Party. But I am viewing him as the candidate who would do the least harm and the most good should he get the office, regardless of his personal attributes or the label under which he runs, and since he is now as likely as Trump to get there, he is now the one who should therefore be getting the support.

Go, Johnson!

*Johnson is not a real libertarian, but Trump and his many predecessors as Republican nominees haven't been real republicans either, at least not insofar as that term is understood by its adherents, nor even as it is portrayed in official Republican platform pronouncements. Maybe I've missed it, but I haven't noticed any reduction in the size of the state or any of the other things supposedly near and dear to the hearts of real Republicans even during periods when nominal members of that party controlled both houses of Congress and the presidency.

*****

SNOWDEN- A Review

Edward Snowden: To the People, a hero. To the state, an enemy. What does that tell us about the state?

SEE THIS FILM! Snowden proves to be a handsomely-made, surprisingly gripping, and very important movie.

There is a great deal to say about this fine effort by Oliver Stone and an all-star cast, at least some of whom, I would wager, vied for a chance to be part of this project. It will be hard to choose what to cover in this review.

Most notable, perhaps, is the film's very effective presentation of the perilous government crimes that Edward Snowden courageously exposed. Until now, those crimes have been difficult to internalize for anyone not a full-time student of public policy and law.

The roll-out of Snowden's revelations in 2013 by the journalists he enlisted for this task was attenuated and clunky. This treatment and effect was understandable-- the media outlets involved didn't want to be accused of sensationalizing the material. Further, of course, what was shared with us then was documents and charts and graphs and descriptions.

Thus, to a great degree, even someone paying close attention to what Snowden shared was left with nothing more than an academic handle on the crimes laid bare. One could calculate the pernicious evil of the "Total Information Awareness" panopticon, but not truly own it. Oliver Stone has cured that problem.

TO PICK BUT ONE EXAMPLE, film-goers actually see an operative in the NSA introduce Edward Snowden to XKeyscore by casually tracking down, in a matter of moments, the completely innocent sister-in-law of a completely innocent banker targeted for blackmail by the CIA unit for which Snowden then worked. But that's just the warm-up.

Within minutes, the NSA staffer proceeds to remotely activate the webcam on the shut-off but still open laptop in the woman's bedroom and casually enjoys watching her strip for a bit. He then goes on to identify and troll through all the online content of the banker's daughter, and then of the girl's cheating boyfriend (revelations of which will ultimately push the girl into a suicide attempt which will serve to create a pressure-point that can be used on the banker).

This alarming incident led Snowden to quit the CIA. It  instills the same resolve in a viewer.

Graphic presentation turns what has been a dry, academic understanding of a program like XKeyscore into an unforgettable scary reality in living color, fangs and all. It brings home our need to reject criminal operations like the CIA and its co-conspirators against the rights, dignity and sovereignty of the People.

SNOWDEN IS RICH with such jewels of perspective. These range from graphical renderings of otherwise dry and arcane programs like XKeyscore to presentation of important ideas, the significance of which is much enhanced by the context provided by the film.

One of the film's most important scenes is of a beach party of the NSA operatives with whom Ed Snowden comes to work shortly before further personal exposure to the evils of the surveillance structure and the mentality behind it prompts his heroic decision to reveal its crimes. During the party the murder-by-drone program being conducted by the Obama administration is discussed.

A few examples of the murders are shared by one operative directly involve in that project (as the fellow says over the radio to a drone operator just after one of the 'Hellfire' missile attacks, "We tag 'em, you bag 'em"). One recounts a strike in which a child was killed, followed a few days later by the dusting of the child's funeral party. Most of the group responds by expressing serious reservations about the morality and legality of their work.

The NSA unit supervisor, also in attendance, takes umbrage with this view. He argues that because everyone is faithfully obeying the orders of their duly-elected or -appointed superiors they can't be doing anything illegal. Ed Snowden, however, cogently responds with the Nuremburg trials and the principle laid down at that time. In particular, Snowden notes that after the trials of the Nazi leaders, the tribunal went on to try and convict the lawyers, judges, bureaucrats and other smaller-fry who vainly relied on one or another version of the "we were just following orders" defense.

This kind of consciousness-raising and anxiety-generation is badly-needed in certain circles in America today (and not just in regard to drone killings and other "war of terror" crimes). Snowden does a great job of putting it out there.

AS I SAID EARLIER, there is way too much of virtue in this film to fairly catalog it all in a brief review like this one. So I will close now with a repeat of my opening words: SEE THIS FILM (and take others with you when you do).

A lot of good will be done in the hearts and minds of everyone who takes this movie in. A lot of good will also be done just by helping the film roll up some big attendance numbers. Those numbers will let the "watchers" know that a lot of Americans are now watching them, and with less than friendly eyes. That may help them find their way to peaceful abandonment of their criminal behavior. With heat comes light.

 As a final note, I was especially pleased when the closing music track of Snowden began to play, and it proved to be a new song inspired by Edward Snowden's heroism by the outstanding Peter Gabriel. It couldn't have been a more perfect ending. See Gabriel's video of the song, below (and then go see Snowden!).

NOTE: Don't miss this week's 'Other Voices' post, which is related to this review.

NOTE II: CoffeeCoaster's Brian Wright has posted an excellent review of Snowden here.

*****

Weeding The Garden

It has to be done now and then...

A FEW WEEKS AGO I POSTED A COMPLAINT about hindrances to everyone's liberation from the evils of the misapplied income tax raised by "gurus" of the "tax honesty" movement. That article focused generally on the injections into the community's consciousness of fallacious pet theories about the tax which serve to keep people from finding their way to the real deal as quickly as they otherwise could.

These distractions are often accompanied by near-comical efforts to disparage CtC through assertions that CtC fails to properly recognize the significance of what the guru imagines is the true key to understanding the tax, while carefully disregarding (or misrepresenting, or contortedly rationalizing) what's actually been going on for the last 13 years:

AS MOST OF YOU KNOW, I address/rebut/debunk a large number of the fallacious theories presented by these stumbling-block gurus in the disturbingly large collection here. The introduction on that page gives what I think is a good reason for going to the considerable amount of trouble needed to inoculate against these infections, and can be viewed as a supplement in that regard to last week's article.

Every now and then I feel compelled for one reason or another to feature a debunk on these pages, though, if a fallacy is new or a revival after a long hiatus, or if it is especially virulent. Today I'm going to spend a little newsletter space (it won't take much) on one such fallacy: The false notion that the Fourteenth Amendment created some new class of uniquely-taxable citizenship (and that this citizenship-- or allegations of this citizenship-- are the basis for the misapplication of the tax in any or all cases).

TO BEGIN WITH, OF COURSE, citizenship has nothing whatever to do with the tax generally. Citizens, residents aliens (which means resident non-US citizens), and non-resident aliens alike are all equally taxable for their engagement in taxable activities (and all can engage in such activities-- there is no preclusion or inclusion based on any of those 'status" factors):

26 CFR § 1.1-1 Income tax on individuals.

(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 and, to the extent provided by section 871(b) or 877(b), on the income of a nonresident alien individual.

By itself, this simple fact proves that there is no such thing as a 14th Amendment-imposed citizenship status on the basis of which the tax is applied. The tax doesn't care what you are or who you are. It just cares whether you did taxable things, and obviously, whether one can do taxable things is not dependent on citizenship.

In fact, give it a moment's thought. Upon the application of some simple information and logic, any form of the "citizenship=taxability" proposition is revealed as not only wrong, but patently absurd.

Keep in mind that:

• the income tax is an excise tax, and excise taxes are privilege taxes;

• being a naturally-born "US citizen" is not a federally-granted privilege, but instead a Constitutionally-secured status, government recognition of which is mandated and not optional whether imagined to arise under the provisions of the 14th Amendment or otherwise; and

•  the income tax cannot, in any event, apply or be construed so as to amount to a capitation, whether on "US citizens" or anyone else, and therefore cannot be a tax on "all that a "citizen" does" or "all gains of a "citizen"..." or anything like that, even if "citizenship" were creatively imagined to be a privilege.

Now, with all that in mind, extend the "citizenship=taxability" notion into practice. It can immediately be seen that this CtC-denial-fever-swamp notion would have the taxing authority amount to the following, "If a US citizen (whatever that may be imagined to mean-- it doesn't matter for purposes of this demonstration), exercises one of my taxable privilege to make money then I can (or will) demand a piece of the action (or a fee, or whatever). But if a Pakistani (or anyone else outside the imagined infirm-status category) does the same, I can't (or won't) demand anything-- they can just exploit my resources to their heart's content, no charge."

As I said, considered just in the light of a little knowledge and simple common sense, this "citizenship=taxability" notion is revealed as absurd.

BUT THERE IS MORE, or another way to make this point which has some particular educational benefit. So, I will briefly go on to point out that the 14th Amendment didn't come to be until 1868, when the income tax was already 6 years old, and operating under the following language from the Revenue Act of 1862 (emphasis added):

Sec. 90. And be it further enacted, That there shall be levied, collected, and paid annually, upon the annual gains, profits, or income very person residing in the United States, whether derived from any kind of property, rents, interest, dividends, salaries, or from any profession, trade, employment, or vocation carried on in the United States or elsewhere, or from any other source whatever, except as hereinafter mentioned, if such annual gains, profits, or income exceed the sum of six hundred dollars, and do not exceed the sum of ten thousand dollars, a duty of three per centum on the amount of such annual gains, profits, or income over and above the said sum of six hundred dollars; if said income exceeds the sum of ten thousand dollars, a duty of five per centum upon the amount thereof exceeding six hundred dollars; and upon the annual gains, profits, or income, rents and dividends accruing upon any property, securities, and stocks owned in the United States by any citizen of the United States residing abroad, except as hereinafter mentioned, and not in the employment of the government of the United States, there shall be levied, collected, and paid a duty of five per centum."

Plainly, the tax was imposed and applied well before even whatever might be imagined to have been the effect or creation of the 14th Amendment; "citizenship" of any kind wasn't a factor at all (much less a requisite factor); and contrary to another notion harbored by the 14th Amendment-focused folks, "citizen of the United States" already existed (lower-case "c" and all, for those trying that hair-split-- you know who you are...).

 I WILL TELL YOU FRANKLY, it pains me hugely to have to write any of this. It is embarrassing. It is necessitated by the sloppiness or sloth of some purported researchers, and the willingness of others to accept whatever is said with an air of sincerity by those sloppy, slothful or outright charlatan "researchers", who carry on about the 'Q' factor and the coefficient of section 6883(d)(5), as in my little cartoon above. But I should not have to waste my time doing it.

I ask all of you to help stamp out these infections wherever you encounter them. It'll be a pain in the ass for you, too, but there is a lot at stake. The truth cannot flourish in a garden filled with weeds.

*Those who are interested can find more on the subject of citizenship and the Fourteenth Amendment here.

Care to post a comment on this article?

Set a brushfire-- E-mail this newsletter to a friend

Return to contents

The Biggest Snow-Job In World History: The Myth That 1913 America Adopted A Marxist Progressive Tax On "All That Comes In"

Thank goodness the sun is now shining...

*****

Brian's Illustrated Refund Claim

A nice federal victory accompanied by graphics to help others and an excellent blog-post explaining it all

LIBERTARIAN ACTIVIST AND AUTHOR BRIAN WRIGHT celebrates his second educated-filing victory this week, adding a complete federal refund for 2015 (with interest) received last week to his complete Michigan refund for 2015 which was posted last spring. Here is the check:

...and here is the filing that produced that complete refund.

Here are Brian's introductory comments concerning educated filings that he wanted me to post for the benefit of others:

—Comment by Brian R. Wright—

It’s important for CtC filers to understand that they are dealing with an immense, ponderous, but rule-based system. The system will obey the rules, 99% of the time, and if you don’t raise any rule-defying flag, you’ll get your property back.

Nobody is out to get you for speaking out or being politically active; I, myself, am living proof of that: I wrote a book about Doreen’s ordeal (The Motor City Witchcraft Trials) and was a witness for Doreen at that proceeding. The prosecution, in front of the judge, quoted to the court from my Website, “… that this was a Kangaroo Court with a capital ‘K’… etc.” The prosecutor was outraged and the judge gave me a dirty look. They KNOW who I am and that I’ve pushed the boundaries of the 1st Amendment in condemning and ridiculing them.

[The only exception is if from very high in the management of that system, they want to single you out because you are threatening to expose them—as the diabolical Men of the Power Sickness VERY HIGH in the US Justice Department (and/or perhaps Homeland Security) pulled the strings to lawlessly per/prosecute Pete and, then, Doreen… not even the Mafia goes after your family or women.]

So read Cracking the Code, DO Cracking the Code—using the simple templates and resources available on Pete’s site losthorizons.com—, and take back your money and power by locating and shutting the spigot by which the Men of the Power Sickness drain your precious bodily fluids. It’s your blood and treasure. Take it and keep it. For heaven’s sake, stand up and man up for yourself and your family.

...and here is Brian's blog post discussing this victory and the importance of standing up for the rule of law in greater depth. It's well worth reading.

FINALLY, BRIAN, A DYNAMO of activism, has even gone so far as to render his "information return" rebuttals from this filing as graphics with explanatory notes for those who are not yet veterans:

GOT TO LOVE this fine, heroic American!

Brian has stepped up and acted to restrain the dangerous and corrupt state and uphold the rule of law, something desperately needed from everyone. His latest victory joins those of the tens of thousands of other awakened and activated Americans represented here, and is another step toward the restoration of the Founders republic and the true rule of law.

Don't you wish your victories were proudly posted, too?

It's easy. Stand up on behalf of the law, and then share the evidence.

That's all there is to it!

Care to post a comment on this article?

Set a brushfire-- E-mail this newsletter to a friend

Return to contents

*****

Click here for the rest of this article

Care to post a comment on this article?

Set a brushfire-- E-mail this newsletter to a friend

Return to contents

*****

Are the presentations and resources offered on this site and in my other work of any value to you?

Tim Kendrick has posted a video on YouTube regarding donations. I didn't know what to do about it to begin with; I don't do what I do intending for anyone to feel obligated in any way.

But of course, no one IS obligated. I will continue to make my work freely-available here, and in my books for only the cost of a cheap paperback.

Thus, even though I post it here below, Tim's very thoughtful personal resolution and encouragement to others is just an invitation for consideration by those who may not be conscious of the fact that I can't do what I do without support. No one is to feel any pressure from it; if it moves anyone to act let it be solely because it seems right.

*****

Why Does The Government Lie About 'Cracking the Code'?

THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION is the key to the restoration of the republic and the rule of law in America. See it below. (NOTE: It's very important that the entire 24 minutes be viewed.)

This video can also be found on YouTube at https://youtu.be/hgzzYl-eeUI.

Here are links to the two pages to which viewers are directed at the end of the film: The Crime of the Century and The Truth About The 16th Amendment.

The other two mentioned in the film are this one (the "bulletin board" stack of 1,200 or so posted refunds and other victories in knowledgably applying the law; and this one (the collection of resisted claims and the outcomes of those little battles).

PLEASE be a real activist about sending this link to every single person in your address book, and about sharing it through facebook, reddit, twitter, and any other distribution channel with which you are familiar. Send it to every journalist you can. It's time to really make something happen.

Accompany your emails and posts with with a strong admonishment to watch the film through, and that doing so will show the viewer an individual-empowering, state-restraining truth about the income tax which the government has been trying to keep hidden from view for 75 years and which that person really needs to know.

BY THE WAY, as is impossible to miss, I have neither the skills nor the tools to make even moderately good films. This is simply not my forte. Anyone able to do better is encouraged to talk to me about that.

As is ALSO impossible to miss, though-- even in my amateur production-- reader video testimonials have GREAT POWER. Send me yours.

Care to post a comment on this article?

Set a brushfire-- E-mail this newsletter to a friend

Return to contents

*****

A Patriot Activist Talks About CtC

"McFloyd" on who got the tax wrong, and who gets it right

*****

What's your answer?

*****

How To Be A Leader In The CtC Community

It's simple

KNOW THE TRUTH ABOUT THE TAX IN DETAIL

LEAD BY EXAMPLE

KNOW WHERE TO FIND THE RESOURCES

BE FAMILIAR WITH THE SCAMS, THE MISUNDERSTANDINGS, AND THE TROLL-POLLUTION

TAKE CHARGE IN YOUR STATE FORUM, HELPING EVERYONE TO THINK CLEARLY AND STAY ON TOPIC

All-in-all, just be the sort of person for others that you would go to yourself for trustworthy leadership.

Leadership is a challenge. But it's not complicated, and you can do it.

Care to post a comment on this article?

Set a brushfire-- E-mail this newsletter to a friend

Return to contents

*****

True American Joe Black Testifies And Shares Victories For Liberty And The Rule Of Law

...as every American should...

EDUCATED AMERICAN GROWN-UP JOE BLACK has stood up and acted to enforce the law upon its domestic enemies-- or, at least, upon agencies of the state whose operators seem to happily exploit ignorance and mis-apply the law at every chance for their personal benefit. Get inspired and encouraged by Joe's video sharing his spirit, his testimony and the acknowledgements he has secured:

Find more testimonial videos here, and please, people, share these around as widely as you can. To learn what, how and why to share your own testimony (with or without mere practical victories to go along with the far more important spiritual victories that are the real heart of CtC), click here.

*****

Did you miss the 'Set Your Church Free' commentaries?

Set Your Church Free

Ignorance of the true nature of the "income" tax has gagged, gutted and seduced-into-disgrace America's ministerial community. This must change.

You're a passenger on a riverboat that relies on regular contributions of fuel from the passengers to keep moving forward. You see an unsurvivable waterfall ahead, and note a soon-to-be-irresistible current growing stronger each day. What does common sense suggest?

Copy and post this one around, people!

 

*****

 

Media Evasion Of CtC Must End, Now

Time, unfortunately, is on the side of the well-funded disinformation specialists class

  

Illuminating anniversaries of this week: October 14-  In 1066, Norman invader William the Conqueror wins the Battle of Hastings over the Saxons, gaining control of England.  In 1322, Robert the Bruce wins Scotland's independence from England.  In 1884, George Eastman patents paper-strip photographic film.  In 1926, Winnie-the-Pooh is published.  In 1943, prisoners at the Nazi death-camp at Sobibor rise up, killing guards and breaking out of the camp.  About half escape.  In 1947, Chuck Yeager breaks the sound barrier in level flight in a Bell X-1 jet.  In 1962, the Cuban Missile Crisis begins when a U-2 spy-plane spots Soviet missiles being installed in Cuba.  In 1968, the United States DoD announces that 24,000 Vietnam vets will be re-rotated back for second tours of duty.  In 1968, Jim Hines becomes the first man to run 100 meters in under 10 seconds.  In 1982, Ronald Reagan launches the federal assault on liberty and the Constitution known as the "War on Drugs".  In 2012, Felix Baumgartner performed a 24-mile skydive, reaching an estimated speed of 843.6 mph before deploying his parachute.

 

Are You Having Trouble Spreading The Word?

SKEPTICISM (SOMETIMES INVOKED BY FEAR) IS TO BE EXPECTED when you're trying to explain to someone that everything they've been encouraged their whole lives to believe about something as entrenched and significant as the income tax is basically nonsense. So here's a way to help cut through the resistance:

Ask your listener how he or she would react if you were to show an announcement from the Commissioner of Internal Revenue admitting that the tax doesn't apply to the earnings of most Americans and is misapplied most of the time because people don't understand how it works? Or how about if you showed a ruling from the Supreme Court saying the same?

Now you just have to explain that you're going to show exactly those things-- but because the state really doesn't want people to know this, these things haven't been said quite as forthrightly as we would all wish. It's going to take a bit more work to take these admissions in than is sufficient for just reading a press release. But it'll be worth the effort...

*****

The Liberating Truth About The 16th Amendment IF YOU'RE NOT SPREADING THIS LINK with every bit of energy you can, to school libraries, homeschool families and community groups, your neighbors, your family members, your pastors and co-congregationalists, journalists, lawyers, CPAs, members of congress, tax-agency workers, Wikipedia, Anonymous, WikiLeaks, the Tax Foundation, everyone in the "tax honesty" movement, the 9/11 truth movement, other activist movements and everyone else, you have only yourself to blame for your troubles with the tax, and a whole lot else of which you might complain. It's on you. WRITE A NICE, FRIENDLY AND BRIEF introductory note explaining what will be seen at the link-- cryptic is bad; excited is good-- and then send this WMI (weapon of mass instruction) far and wide. "I am a great believer in luck, and I find the harder I work, the more I have of it." -Thomas Jefferson

 

Return to contents

 

Real Americans don't accommodate fog, lies and a sliding scale of adherence to the rule of law. Real American men and women stand up for the truth and the law, come what may, knowing that it is only by setting the bar at the top and enforcing it, come what may, that liberties are secured.

 

"Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as freedom should not be highly rated."

-Thomas Paine

 

OUTREACH!!!

JOB ONE, PEOPLE!!! SPREAD. THE. WORD.

ONLY ONE THING WILL WIN YOU YOUR LIBERTY: Spreading the truth. Accordingly, I've assembled outreach resources into a new, dedicated page. Find it here, and please, USE THESE TOOLS!! I can't do this all by myself. 

"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act."

-George Orwell

*****

Test Your "Income" Tax IQ! CtC Warrior SanDiegoScott has put together a great little 20-question quiz to test your knowledge of the law regarding the United States "income" tax.  Test yourself, test your friends and family!  Test your accountant and tax attorney, and help them learn the liberating truth!! Click here to take the test   Click here for more Tax IQ tests

“Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.”

-James Madison

 

How About You?

 

Are You Governing Yourself?

Get The Knowledge, Reclaim Your Power, And Stand With The Founders

 

 

OTHER VOICES: The House Intelligence Committee's Horrible Snowden Report by Barton Gellman Late yesterday afternoon the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released a three-page executive summary (four, if we count the splendid cover photo) of its two-year inquiry into Edward Snowden’s National Security Agency (NSA) disclosures. On first reading, I described it as an “aggressively dishonest” piece of work. With a day or so to reflect on it, I believe it’s worse than that. The report is not only one-sided, not only incurious, not only contemptuous of fact. It is trifling. Continued... Click here to read the rest of this article Did you click and read the rest of Gellman's expose of the House Intelligence Committee's lies about Edward Snowden? Okay, here are the members of that committee, every one of whom should be broomed from office in disgrace: Devin Nunes, 22nd District of California Jeff Miller, 1st District of Florida Mike Conaway, 11th District of Texas Peter King, 2nd District of New York Frank LoBiondo 2nd District of New Jersey Lynn Westmoreland, 3rd District of Georgia Tom Rooney, 17th District of Florida Joe Heck, 3rd District of Nevada Mike Pompeo, 4th District of Kansas Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, 27th District of Florida Michael Turner, 10th District of Ohio Brad Wenstrup, 2nd District of Ohio Chris Stewart, 2nd District of Utah Adam Schiff, 28th District of California Jim Himes, 4th District of Connecticut Terri Sewell, 7th District of Alabama Andre Carson, 7th District of Indiana Jackie Speier, 14th District of California Mike Quigley, 5th District of Illinois Eric Swalwell, 15th District of California Patrick Murphy, 18th District of Florida Joaquin Castro, 20th District of Texas NOW CONSIDER: Aren't you REALLY, REALLY glad YOU'VE had the fortitude and clarity of vision to do the only thing that will restrain Mordor-on-the-Potomac from the kind of outrages we can thank Ed Snowden for revealing to us by taking control of how much of YOUR WEALTH facilitates government misbehavior?   Now ask yourself this: Have I really done all that I can to urge everyone I know to also stand up and act in the only way that will really bring about change in my lifetime?    *****  Even as ardent a statist as Abraham Lincoln, in announcing his willingness to burn the Southern states to the ground in order to keep them paying the tariff for the benefit of Northern interests in his first inaugural address on March 4, 1861, paid at least lip service to the Founders design of leaving control over the fuel available to feed the fires Washington wants to light in the hands of the individual citizenry when he said, "Doing this I deem to be only a simple duty on my part; and I shall perform it, unless my rightful masters, the American people, shall withhold the requisite means..." Held over great reading recommendations: Disinformation-How it works by Brandon Smith ***** The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude by Étienne de la Boétie *****       Return to contents

 

Illuminating anniversaries of this week: October 15- In 1878, the Edison Electric Company begins operations.  In 1917, Dutch dancer Mata Hari is executed by France as a German spy.  In 1940, Charlie Chaplin's 'The Great Dictator' is released.  In 1971, Iran begins its 2500th Birthday celebration.

 

Are You Ready For More Power?     "Peter Hendrickson has done it again! 'Upholding The Law' does for individual liberties what 'Cracking the Code' did for tax law compliance: exposes the reader to the unalienable truth!" -Jesse Herron, Bill Of Rights Press, Fort Collins, Colorado Click here for more information And don't miss: Was Grandpa Really a Moron picks up where 'Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About The Income Tax' leaves off. Click here for more information

 

There is little more important to the long-term health of America than how our children are educated..

HOMESCHOOL YOUR KIDS!

 

Want to get on the Newsletter mailing list?  Just email your name to SubscribeMe 'at' losthorizons.com using the address you want added!

*****

Some Observations Regarding Educated And Accurate Filing

 

CtC-Educated Lawyers: It's Way Past Time For You All To Queue Up!   [Y]ou really need to familiarize yourself with Pete Hendrickson's absolutely magnificent work at his website and in his book(s).  He has, brilliantly and lucidly, "cracked the code" regarding the federal income EXCISE tax(es)." -Mark C. Phillips, JD   "...I find your work fascinatingly simple to understand." -Jerry Arnowitz, JD   "Your book is a masterpiece!" -Michael Carver, JD   "Received your book yesterday.  Started reading at 11 PM, finished at 4 AM."  "I have 16 feet (literally 16' 4.5") of documents supporting just about everything in your book." "Your book should be required reading for every lawyer before being admitted to any Bar."  "I hope you sell a million of them."  -John O'Neil Green, JD   “Thanks again for your efforts, Pete. They mean an awful lot to a lot of people.” “…as an attorney, I am humbled by your knowledge and ability in navigating the law.  THANK YOU for your hard work and sacrifice.” -Eric Smithers, JD   "I am an attorney and want to give a testimonial to your book, which I find to be compelling. I am exercising these rights for myself and my adult children. I'm even considering making this my new avenue of law practice." -Nancy "Ana" Garner, JD   Learn what these colleagues already know, then step forward and become part of a coordinated, mutually-supportive squadron focused on developing strategy and deploying the law in courtrooms across the country.  There's a lot of suing that needs doing right now.   Are you ready for a challenge that'll put some real meaning behind all the effort you went through to get your credentials?  Send me an email.

 

Have You Taken A Military, Law Enforcement or Public Office Oath To Uphold And Defend The Constitution?

 

Renew Your Promise

 

IGNORANCE TAX: An unnecessary exaction suffered out of ignorance as to its lawful objects and the means of its application by someone too lazy, frightened or misled to learn how it really works and to what it really applies.  See "Income Tax", "Social Security Tax", "Medicare Tax" and "Federal Unemployment Tax".

 

"It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error." -United States Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson   The Choice Is This Stark   Wear this new T-Shirt proudly, and tell the enemies of the law that if they don't like Constitutional limits, they should find someplace else to live!

 

SPOTLIGHT on ACTIVISM

 

*****

 

'Don't Tread On Me' Polo Shirts Say It All!

 

 

Click Here To Get Yours Now!

 

*****

 

More Than Two Thirds Of The Several States That Collect "Income" Taxes Have Now Acknowledged The Truth About The Law As Revealed In CtC, And Have Issued Complete Refunds Accordingly!  See The Following Chart...

 

 

 

'The BOSTONIAN'S Paying the EXCISE-MAN, or TARRING & FEATHERING' (1774)

(How our forefathers responded to arrogant "Rule of Law defiers"...)

 

*****

 

HELP SPREAD THE LIBERATING TRUTH ABOUT THE TAX

“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident.”

-Arthur Schopenhauer

 

Get your FREE* CtC bumper sticker and help spread the word!

Just send a stamped, self-addressed envelope to Lost Horizons, Bumper Sticker Offer, 232 Oriole Rd., Commerce Twp., MI 48382 (*If you want to throw a few bucks into the envelope to help with costs, that'd be nice, but it's entirely optional...)

*****

 

The Willingness Of Some People To Trade Liberty For Convenience Is Without Limit Some Observations About Current Political Efforts To Evade The Truth, Such As The "Fair Tax" Scheme   Regarding "Tax Reform"

 

"Taxes are not raised to carry on wars, wars are raised to carry on taxes."

-Thomas Paine

 

Where To Find Things On This Site

 

Law Professor James Duane Says: "Don't Talk To The Police.  Period."

 

Honest Cops Agree

 

*****

 

Films That Belong In Every Home Library

 

Ever Wonder How Much An Unrestrained FedState Would Like To Tap You For?

 

*****

 

 

Warrior David Larson shares this beautiful little farce, wryly observing that, "Depositors have "..not lost one penny.." - OK we could agree on that simple statement  ..how about the purchasing power of that same penny 'not lost'?"

 

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

 

REGARDING MONEY

 

*****

 

Illuminating anniversaries of this week: October 16- In 1775, Portland, Maine is burned by the British.  In 1781, the Continental Army captures Yorktown, Virginia.  In 1793, Marie Antoinette is guillotined.  In 1875, Brigham Young University is founded in Provo, Utah.  In 1964, China conducts its first successful nuclear weapon test.  In 1969, George Hennard entered a restaurant in Luby, Texas, and killed 23 patrons and wounded another 20 before committing suicide.  The incident led to the adoption by the Texas legislature of the "shall issue" principle in regard to CCW applications, a reversal of the policy blamed for the fact that no one in the restaurant but Hennard had a weapon that day.

 

Set a brushfire-- E-mail this newsletter to a friendd

 

Last Word

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."

-Samuel Adams, Architect of the First American Revolution

 

OK, Now Back To Your Regularly Scheduled Programming:

 

 

Is this newsletter of any value to you? If so, please consider a donation to help keep it available, or it soon won't be. Donations can be sent to:   Peter Hendrickson 232 Oriole St. Commerce Twp., MI  48382

 

Order Books, Warrior-Wear, or The CtC Companion CD

 

An "Income" Tax Related Site Map

 

E-mail this Newsletter to a friend

 

Want to get on the Newsletter mailing list?  Just send an email from the address you want added to SubscribeMe 'at' losthorizons.com with "Subscribe me" in the subject line, and your name in the body!

 

PLEASE CONTINUE TO DILIGENTLY SPREAD THE LIBERATING TRUTH ABOUT THE TAX!!!

 

*****

 

Your Comments To comment on any article in this newsletter (or to read comments of others), click on the below. (It may take a while for your newly-posted comments to appear; also, please understand that this is NOT a place for posing questions about individual tax situations.)

 

Return to contents

 

*****

 

About The Author   Pete Hendrickson is possibly the most effective lawyer in history, even while never having set foot in a law school, nor ever being a card-carrying member of "the bar". He is the first American in history to secure a complete refund of Social Security and Medicare ‘contributions’ withheld from his earnings (along with all other property taken for federal taxes); further, since 2003 students of his legal analyses and arguments in ‘Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America’’ (CtC), and its sequel, 'Was Grandpa Really a Moron?' have been routinely retaining and recovering billions of dollars which otherwise-- wrongly, but as a matter of course-- would have gone to federal or state government treasuries. This despite concerted efforts by government to suppress his work, and in some cases vigorously oppose the claims by his students.   Hendrickson is also a widely-read essayist on matters of politics, public policy and law; many of these works are collected in his second book, ‘Upholding the Law And Other Observations’.  He is a member of Mensa; an award-winning artist; and has paid his dues as a youth soccer coach.  He is a long-time political activist as well, and has served as co-chair and platform convention delegate of Michigan’s largest county Libertarian Party organization; as a consultant to the National Right to Work Foundation and Citizens for a Sound Economy; as a member of the Heartland Institute; and as a member of the International Society for Individual Liberty.  He is a frequent radio-show guest on stations across the country.   Hendrickson's business career has included nearly a decade-and-a-half at the leading edge of the renewable-energy industry, both as Director of Purchasing and Materials Management and member of the R&D board at Starpak Energy Systems, the mid-west's then-largest solar heating and energy-recovery-and re-utilization company; and as founder and president of AFJ Inc., a high-efficiency lighting design, manufacture and installation firm.   Beginning in the mid-1990s and continuing for the twelve years before his present full-time focus on the restoration of the rule of law in America, Hendrickson directed purchasing activities for the $84 million-a-year multi-family-housing division of the Farmington Hills, Michigan branch of Edward Rose and Sons, with responsibility for 18,000+ apartments, direct supervision of 35 technicians and agents, and incidental authority over several hundred divisional workers.  He also ran the division's 10 cable television earth-station and distribution systems in four states, and designed and administered the company's website.   On rather the other end of the spectrum, amidst these more mundane pursuits Hendrickson co-founded and was the primary creative force behind a small board- and card-game company that enjoyed a modest success for several years.   Hendrickson makes his home in southeast Michigan, with his wife and two children.  He is currently working on his next book.

 

© All written and graphic material on this page and website are copyrighted by Peter E. Hendrickson, unless otherwise attributed