Btw, a copy of
CtC from anywhere except the link above may not
be a current edition. CHECK. It matters. Also, there
ARE no e-book, Kindle or .pdf versions of
CtC. Don't get taken in by efforts to sell you--
or even give you for free-- any such thing.
*****
"The preservation of a free government requires, not
merely that the metes and bounds which separate
each department of power be invariably maintained, but
more especially that neither of them be suffered to
overleap the great barrier which defends the rights
of the people. The rulers who are guilty of such
encroachment exceed the commission from which they derive
their authority, and are TYRANTS. The people who
submit to it are governed by laws made neither by themselves
nor by an authority derived from them and are slaves….."
-James Madison
***
No one can guarantee
success in all they do in life. But anyone can
guarantee that they DESERVE success in anything they
do.
Four Questions For Brett
Kavanaugh
A little Constitutional-fidelity test for Donald Trump's latest
Supreme Court nominee.
So,
Article III, Sec. 2 Cl. 3 Says...
ARTICLE III, SEC. 2, CL. 3
of the U.S. Constitution says: "The Trial of all Crimes, except in cases of
Impeachment, shall be by Jury..." This language is prescriptory, imposing a mandatory requirement on
the government. No excepting language allowing for
trial by plea bargain, or authorizing alternative
means of adjudicating criminal guilt, is provided,
and the inclusion of the one is the exclusion of all
others.
Trial by jury is therefore not a "right" or
"entitlement" which can be waived by a defendant.
While the Sixth Amendment provides for some
entitlements that can be so waived, such as a
defendant's enjoyment of a "speedy" trial, the trial by jury itself is not made
optional by the amendment.
Trial by jury is obligatory; it cannot
be waived; and it is a Constitutional violation to
pretend that the requirement can be evaded by simply
refusing to apply the label "trial" to an
alternative proceeding by which criminal
responsibility is determined.
WE MADE JURY TRIAL OBLIGATORY to
protect us from the sort of state under which the catalog of
federal crimes is unconstrained in its growth by any
practical considerations; the vast
majority of accusations lead to "confessions"; and the People
rarely exercise their hugely-important,
Leviathan-restraining authority to determine the
validity of government-made laws. In other words, we made
jury trial obligatory to protect us from what we
suffer now.
Those who wrote the Constitution
implanted the jury trial requirement because they
knew its power as a bulwark of liberty-- the
preservation of which is the sole purpose of the
state. Their intent is clear in the words of Art.
III, Sec. 2, Cl. 3, and in their explanations for
those words:
"It is not only his [the juror's]
right, but his duty . . . to find the verdict
according to his own best understanding, judgment,
and conscience, though in direct opposition to the
directions of the court."
-John Adams
"I consider trial by jury as the only
anchor yet imagined by man by which a government can
be held to the principles of its Constitution."
-Thomas Jefferson
"The jury has the right to judge both
the law as well as the fact in controversy."
-John Jay
"The friends and adversaries of the
plan of the [Constitutional] convention, if they
agree on nothing else, concur at least in the value
they set upon the trial by jury; or if there is any
difference between them it consists of this: the
former regard it as a valuable safeguard to liberty,
the latter represent it as the very palladium of
free government."
-Alexander Hamilton
"If it [jury power] is not law, it is
better than law, it ought to be law, and will always
be law wherever justice prevails."
-Ben Franklin
In light of the foregoing, it is clear
that all federal criminal plea bargains are
Constitutional violations.
What say YOU, Brett?
***
Then There's The Fourth Amendment...
LET'S TALK ABOUT SEARCHES AND
SEIZURES. The Fourth Amendment says,
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.
Does this mean that the People DON'T
have a right to be secure against whatever some
official subordinate to the Constitution-- which
includes judges as well as members of the
legislative and executive branches-- deems to
be a "reasonable" search and seizure?
Well, first of
all, let's remember that the Fourth Amendment came
about as a rejection of the British practice
of conducting searches and seizures-- under certain
government-approved circumstances-- without
particularization and sworn attestation of cause.
These un-particularized and unsworn searches and
seizures were deemed reasonable and necessary
exceptions by British courts, and were conducted
under what was known as a
"general warrant".
Right off the bat, then, it is
clear that the Framers did not intend the Fourth
Amendment to allow "excepted" searches and seizures under
certain circumstances, on the basis of a judicial view
that such exceptions are not "unreasonable"
(including under the pretense that everyone stepping
out into public thereby waives one's "reasonable"
privacy rights vis-a-vis the state). It is exactly
against the pretense of such exceptions that
the Fourth Amendment was imposed.
BUT WE DON'T NEED TO RELY on mere logic
and common sense to get to the truth of the matter.
Keeping in mind that in the eyes of the Founders and
Framers the only way a search could ever be
conducted was pursuant to a warrant-- and that
deeming searches and seizures conducted under
certain circumstances to be "exceptions" to the
requirements of the Fourth Amendment is the
functional exact equivalent of a
"general warrant", lacking only that label-- let's look at what
those who wrote and ratified the Fourth Amendment
considered to be "unreasonable":
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.
But what do YOU think, Brett?
***
Here's Another Thing: The Constitution DOESN'T
Say It's Authority Over State Actors Ends At The
Water's Edge...
IT IS ONLY BY VIRTUE of the US
Constitution that the federal government exists at
all. That government-- and all its officials and
agents acting in its name, or with financing and
other resources provided under its auspices--
can lawfully do nothing except pursuant to a
Constitutional allowance.
By the same token, everything done with
government resources by
government officials and agents,
and everything done pursuant to alleged governmental
authority,
is subject to all
the limitations, restraints, restrictions and
requirements imposed by the Constitution. Those
limitations, restraints, restrictions and
requirements are nowhere made subject to any
geographical limitations.
Whither go the power and authority of
the United States, then, so go every Constitutional
control and specification regarding the exercise of
that power and authority.
WHAT THIS ALL MEANS is that setting up
and operating places on foreign shores for the
torture of prisoners-- or for doing anything with
anyone in any way different from how things are done
"by the book" in Poughkeepsie or Peoria-- is
illegal. Likewise, kidnapping people off the
streets of Milan or at the Canadian border or
wherever, and handing them over to torturers (or
just jailers) in other countries is illegal.
Picking out someone located in a
foreign country who isn't even firing on Americans
there, much less attacking America itself,
and obliterating him with a drone-fired missile
sans
even any pretense of due process,
is illegal. Even just supplying logistical and
intelligence assistance to foreign governments in
the knowledge it will be used by THEM to do such
things is illegal.
For instance, a U.S. intelligence
operative supplying satellite data which helps
Saudis murder Yemenis is using American-bought and
-owned resources in direct violation of the Fifth
Amendment. The amendment prohibits the United States
from depriving ANY PERSON (not just "any American")
of life, liberty or property without due process of
law. This prohibition obviously applies to doing
these things by proxy or on behalf of others just as
much as it does to the operative opening the
bomb-bay doors directly.
And the pretense that any such illegal
things are spared the proscriptions and
prescriptions because Congress has issued an
"Authorization for the Use of Military Force" (AUMF)
holds no water. Even leaving aside the questionable
legitimacy of an AUMF by which the Executive assumes
the authority to choose those with whom the United
States is at war (see below for more on that),
crimes such as those described here are not events
occurring in the heat of battle, where some
concessions to the exigencies of immediate
self-defense are inescapable.
These crimes are coldly calculated and
coldly conducted by people in no personal danger
whatever. They are committed against people who have
never been shown by any fair and reliable process to
have ever acted against any American or American
interest.
Further, even if Congress could
authorize the Executive to pick and choose those
against whom he will make war using our stuff,
Congress can't authorize him to ignore the
Constitution while doing so (and the Judicial branch
can't Constitutionally pretend otherwise, in light
of the very straightforward terms of the Supremacy
Clause).
I'd like to hear your thoughts about
all of that, Brett.
***
Finally, For Now-- Let's
Talk About Delegation
HERE'S ANOTHER THING THE CONSTITUTION
DOESN'T SAY: that Congress can delegate any
of its law-making authority to anyone. In fact, the
Constitution says the opposite, expressly vesting
such authority exclusively in Congress. Because the
Supreme Law makes that call (rather than just
empowering Congress to do whatever it wants on all
fronts), Congress cannot.
Further, because the Constitution makes
that delegation call, and all acts of Congress must
be in harmony with it, delegation of law-making
authority cannot even be authorized by resort to the
"necessary and proper" clause. That clause only
provides Congress with law-making latitude in regard
to powers vested in any branch of the United States
by the Constitution itself, and again, re-delegation
isn't among those powers.
SINCE ONLY CONGRESS HAS and can have
law-making power (and law-making power means the
authority to impose duties of commission and
omission-- that is, what anyone must do, and what
anyone must not do), it would seem to follow that
the executive (and the courts, for that matter)
CANNOT impose duties of commission and omission on
anyone. That is, no mere regulation promulgated by
some executive agency can command or proscribe the
action of any American (or anyone else).
Because Congress cannot delegate what
the People have delegated to it alone through the
Constitution, any act of Congress which doesn't
spell out its prescriptions and proscriptions can't
have the blanks filled in by bureaucrats at some
agency, however convenient such a thing might seem
to the legislators or the bureaucrats. We, the
People, have directed that our 535
personally-selected representatives are to do the
work of filling in all those blanks.
If Congress taking care of its proper
responsibilities means that there are an awful lot
fewer blanks to fill, well, that's one of the
biggest reasons we set things up this way. Our
object, in establishing the state and doing so in
the manner that we did, was not to initiate or
authorize the minute supervision and control of
everything any or all of us do. Rather, it was to
ensure that we were unhindered in our exercise of
liberty and pursuit of happiness in any way not so
obviously necessary that it could be readily
understood and articulated by any given collection
of our representatives.
We were, in framing the Constitution,
mindful of the wisdom of Marcus Tullius Ciceroca,
who cogently observed: "More laws, less justice". We
viewed things the way Thomas Jefferson did, who
spoke for all of us in saying, "I would rather be
exposed to the inconveniences attending too much
liberty than those attending too small a degree of
it."
In fact, it can be said as axiomatic
that any legislative purpose which requires more
effort to spell out in every detail than Congress
itself is willing to spend is Constitutionally
invalid, and even the impulse to embrace such
purposes is deeply suspect. As Tacitus said, "The
more corrupt the state, the more it legislates".
SO ALTHOUGH THE SUPREME COURT has
shamefully allowed Congressional delegations of
legislative authority over the years on one
contorted rationale or another, in light of the
foregoing the court having done so has been a
corruption and all laws not complete in and of
themselves as written and enacted by Congress should
be deemed unconstitutionally vague. Or so it seems
to me...
What's YOUR opinion, Brett?
"Like a muddied stream or a polluted
fountain is the righteous man who gives way before
the wicked."
-Proverbs 25:26
"A nation of sheep begets a government
of wolves."
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound
of cure...
I SENT A CHALLENGE THE OTHER DAY to the
only Republican candidate for the US House in my
district who I would support in any event:
Kerry, I'm seeking
agreement from all candidates for federal office on
the foreign policy recommendations at
losthorizons.com/A/WashingtonWisdom.htm.
Can I count on yours?
-Pete
I LIKE KERRY. Among his many virtues,
Kerry was very sympathetic to Doreen during her
ordeal; is a regular
DDay
celebrant with us; and during his previous term in the
House (2012-2014), Kerry outperformed the vast
majority of the pack in terms of good votes and
legislative initiatives-- a fact attested-to by the
mainstream Republican establishment fielding a
candidate against him (the odious Dave Trott) at its
earliest opportunity.
If United States foreign policy weren't
a key driver and rationale behind the growth and
perpetuation of the massive and dangerous Leviathan
state, my litmus test would be unnecessary and I
would happily give Kerry my vote. I'd even help
pound pavement for him.
BUT US FOREIGN POLICY IS the key driver
and rationale behind the Leviathan state. Thus, I
have to ask Kerry my question.
That
policy, over the last 29 years, especially, has
focused on destabilizing portions of the world (or
has simply been so confused, incompetent or
corruptly-directed as to have that as its invariable
outcome, in any event). The chaos and strife that
result are used as pretexts for funneling vast amounts
of wealth from those who created it into the pockets of the those in the
obscenely-swollen military-industrial-congressional complex.
Lunatic and pretense-based foreign
policy, then-- invariably justified by resort to the
needs of "allies" (who do nothing for us) or the
threats of "enemies" (who do nothing to us)-- is the
driving force and rationale behind the alleged need
for huge tax revenues flowing to Washington. The
perception of that need causes many Americans to
reflexively support the "ignorance tax" scheme
without giving it a moment's critical examination.
James Madison summarizes this
dynamic in one grim paragraph:
“Of all the enemies to public liberty
war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it
comprises and develops the germ of every other. War
is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts
and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the
known instruments for bringing the many under the
domination of the few. In war, too, the
discretionary power of the Executive is extended;
its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and
emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of
seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing
the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect
in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of
fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing
out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of
manners and of morals engendered by both. No nation
could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual
warfare.”
Tom Paine says it in a single sentence:
“Taxes are not raised to carry on wars,
wars are raised to carry on taxes.”
IT'S THIS SIMPLE: We can't have an
aggressive, imperialistic foreign policy or presence
and also have a limited, Constitution-abiding
government at home.
We either have today's status quo-- a
grossly-and-ever-more-expensive hobgoblin charade,
or we have freedom and prosperity for ourselves and
our kids.
I'd rather have freedom and prosperity.
My choice (if shared by a sufficiency
of other voters) might mean that Raytheon and General
Dynamics management and shareholders pocket less
gold in the future. And it might mean that Britain, Israel, Egypt and
Saudi Arabia must learn how to play well with
others (as is lately being done by South Korea and
Germany, to the telling
condemnation of current US
foreign policy beneficiaries).
But that's ok. I think these are small
prices to pay in order to secure the heritage for
which the Founders shed blood and which I want for
my children.
How do you feel about this? And what
does YOUR candidate say?
HAVING HAD A LOT OF REQUESTS over the
years for the resumption of newsletter archiving
(which I had done a number of years ago but
abandoned due to the load it imposed on my time), I
have invested some time in figuring out a more
efficient process. I'm happy to say that archiving
is now again being done.
Archived editions for 2018 and 2017 are
now posted so far; more going further back will be added as
time permits. Current newsletter pages will be
archived as they are replaced with new editions.
It could just be one: "Wow!"-- but I'll
say a bit more than that anyway...
FIRST OF ALL, I want to thank everyone
who came this year and made the Eleventh Annual
Declaration Day Party a truly wonderful event--
despite the record heat (we hit 97 that day-- a
108-year record for June 30 in Michigan). Doreen and
I had a great time, and all of you are responsible
for that.
I didn't have the camera out much this
year, so I don't have much in the way of pictures to
share, but I do have a few. One in particular gives
me a chance to do a special shout-out to Dan and
Jane Moore who, in addition to Dan's really
outstanding smoked salmon (which he said he made
using Alder wood something I now heartily recommend
to anyone out there with a smoker), brought this
devil's food beauty:
Delicious and delightful, and while the
picture doesn't make it clear, this thing was
enormous-- big enough to serve everyone in
attendance with a piece! (And guys, next time we get
down your way we'll bring that giant cooler you made
to carry this in, and which you overlooked while
packing up in the dark after the fireworks.)
ANOTHER NICE thematic touch was this
little gem brought by Jerry and Kathy:
FINALLY, here are a couple of shots of
this year's Curmudgeon's Croquet (won for the second
year in a row by Dead-Eye George Papp):
(Yes, that's Barney among the otherwise
uniformly humanoid pack of political and cultural
parasites. Our Katie was at that age at that time.
The hatred runs deep.)
ONCE AGAIN, a great time was had by
everyone. The food was excellent; the company was
better; Sarah's joyful surprise was priceless; and
the fireworks on the lake were awesome, as always.
Donald Trump Has Handed The
CtC Community A HUGE Opportunity
However, urgent immediate action is required. Please don't let this gift slip away, people!!!
ON TUESDAY, JULY 3, Donald Trump leaked
his "short list" of nominees to replace retiring
justice Anthony Kennedy. On the list is Raymond Kethledge, who is distinguished
from the rest of the pack by having revealed himself
on paper as an oath-breaker and a clever, committed enemy of the
Constitution. (On Monday, July 9, Trump named Brett
Kavanaugh as his initial nominee, but see
this discussion of how that is likely to play
out, leaving what is said here unchanged.)
In March of 2016, Kethledge spat squarely on the First
Amendment-secured right to freedom of speech and the
Fifth Amendment-secured right to due process.
Kethledge did this by affirming, with the most
corrupt and contorted rationalizations, Doreen
Hendrickson's engineered conviction on an unprecedented charge
of criminal contempt of court for refusing to make
court-ordered sworn declarations that she believes
in the truth of government-dictated,
government-serving, false testimony.
A Pair Of Old And Useful Windows On
Current Events In The Middle East
Reaching into the past for information
thwarts the agenda of present-day "fake news"
mongers.
IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN MY EXPERIENCE that
one of the best ways to shield oneself from the
effects of propaganda is to look to sources of
information from before an issue became someone's
cause, or before the spin war began, or became
sophisticated, or became self-referential and
self-sustaining. Early information is unspun and far
more likely to be accurate.
In that vein, I would like to share two
older documents regarding places and people in the
Middle East, in the hope that they might help
support clear thinking about the present-day
situation insulated from what has long been a
ferocious disinformation campaign attempting to gain
control over the future by exercising control over
what people are to believe true about the past. What
value these docs may have will be up to each reader.
Over the years I have posted dozens of
debunks of dozens of similar packages of nonsense,
as can be seen
here. These debunks are thorough and
dispositive. Continued promotion of any of them can
only be seen as the deliberate sowing of
disinformation and discord.
These endless injections of distracting
and misleading gibberish (whether obvious gibberish
or subtler gibberish that actually gives a surface
impression of harmonizing with, or even
supplementing
the truth about the tax) serve-- either
deliberately or mindlessly-- to keep the community
out of focus and disunited in purpose. Thus, this
community is rendered a blunt instrument at best,
where a razor-sharp stake for the vampire's breast
is needed.
Thus, the weight brought to bear on
that stake, whatever the condition of its point, is
light when it ought to be-- and needs to be-- crushingly
heavy.
A simple way for everyone to get a lot
done, fast, that no one is doing.
SO, MONTHS AGO I posted the following
on this page (and it has remained here ever since):
IF EVERY STATE GROUP (or anyone else) were
to devote some time and effort
to scheduling and hosting presentations of
this video to CPA and legal firms, a whole lot of
good could be done in a very short order.
The requirements are simple. Book an hour
with the chosen firm, with the understanding that all
professional staff will be assembled for the presentation.
A thoughtful introduction should make this inexpensive
and easy.
Explain that all you are asking for is
an opportunity to show a video in which some facts about
the income tax are revealed on the basis of which tens
of thousands of Americans have recovered $billions from
the IRS and three dozen state tax agencies over the
course of more than 14 years now, by way of a quarter
of a million claims made with the tax agencies, and
even in the face of agency resistance of several different
kinds.
DON DON LA VIGNE, a long-time warrior
and real American grown-up, shares a nice and inspiring
testimonial on what
CtC has done for him for over nine years now:
*****
"Like a muddied stream or a polluted fountain
is the righteous man who gives way before the wicked."
-Proverbs 25:26
"A nation of sheep begets a government
of wolves."
CAN YOU EVEN IMAGINE how abysmally
stupid someone would have to be to continue to doubt
or deny that
CtC has revealed the actual, complete and insurmountable
truth about the income tax in light of the overwhelming
mountain of
historical,
legal,
practical and
logical evidence to the contrary? (Not to mention
the
outright lies and even
ludicrous hoaxes the executive and some corrupt
members of the judiciary have been caught at in desperate
efforts to conceal the truth...)
Plainly any such denier must either be
abysmally stupid or be an abysmally corrupt government
official or other person who sees him or herself as
benefitting from the lies about the tax by which America
has suffered for 75 years now.
Isn't this true?
An old joke, but in regard to this deceiver,
not a laughing matter at all.
““When principles that run against your
deepest convictions begin to win the day, then battle
is your calling, and peace has become sin; you must,
at the price of dearest peace, lay your convictions
bare before friend and enemy, with all the fire of your
faith.
Looking For A Litigator Who
Wants To Do Well While Doing Good
THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENT presents details
of a long-running (and still-ongoing) violation of the
speech, conscience and due-process rights of two Americans.
The offenses, in a nutshell, involve a federal district
court attempting to dictate to these two folks-- word
for word-- sworn "testimony" they are ordered to make
in a legal contest with the government.
Click the link below to read the brief.
You'll find it thoroughly supported with relevant testimony
by the chief perpetrator and other similarly unambiguous
exhibits.
"Power concedes nothing without a demand.
It never did and it never will. Find out just what any
people will quietly submit to and you have the exact
measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed
on them, and these will continue till they have been
resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The
limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of
those whom they suppress."
-Frederick Douglass
"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
*****
"A slave is one who waits
for someone to come and free him."
…The US may be
the only country in the world where people working
in the non-federal private sector must commit
perjury in order to owe and pay ‘God’s things
to Caesar’?
If you work in the
private sector, stop falsely swearing that your
private-sector earnings are federal “income”1.
Perjury is a crime. Exercise the law’s
provision for protecting your private-sector
earnings from the 154-year-old2 indirect
excise known as the federal income tax.
Rebut fraudulent allegations made by your payers
regarding the legal nature of your work and
the earnings derived therefrom, so that you
pay only your fair share. Join the hundreds
of thousands of honest, law-abiding Americans
who have been doing so for more than a decade.
Learn how for free at losthorizons.com.
1--“We must reject…
…the broad contention submitted in behalf of
the government that all receipts—everything
that comes in—are income…”.
United States Supreme
Court, So. Pacific v. Lowe, 247 U.S. 330, (1918)
2—The income tax in
the United States was first instituted into
law on July 1, 1862, during Lincoln’s presidency
under the excise laws of the United States.
The preamble to the 1939 Internal Revenue Code
traces its roots to this original income tax
law.
Trolls Against The Truth: A
Dis-Information Campaign
UNLESS YOU'VE LOOKED, you can have no idea
of the volume, intensity and mendacity deployed in the
government's efforts to discourage Americans from learning
what is revealed in
CtC. It's truly astonishing.
A lot of folks are aware of the show-trial
events in which my wife and I have received state-engineered
public beatings meant to scare people away from the
truth about the "ignorance tax" scam. But many are unaware
of the overall campaign. This is a shame, really, because
a focused propaganda effort like this one is a very
powerful acknowledgement of the significance of
CtC's revelations.
While the majority of Americans do not
yet know how
CtC protects them from the vampire state, the vampire
itself certainly does. Dis-information campaigns like
this one make that very clear.
FORMER CBS REPORTER SHERYL ATKISSON describes
some aspects of this sort of dis-information campaign
in the following video. Despite the annoying preliminary
15 seconds or so of advertising, her presentation is
very much worth watching:
(H/T to Greg Belcher for finding
and forwarding this great presentation.)
Losthorizons.com is one of those websites specifically-targeted
by the corrupt interests at Wikipedia described by Atkisson.
The behind-the-scenes folks at that site won't allow
links on their pages to anything posted at
losthorizons.com, nor even just text corrections
of misinformation in their pages about the income tax.
That's the least of it. Click
here for some specific discussion of the enormous
scare campaign that's been actively spreading false
information in hope of discouraging legitimate media
attention, as well as men and women simply seeking the
truth about the tax and liberty from the scourge of
the "ignorance tax".
PLEASE GIVE SOME SERIOUS THOUGHT to the
fact that YOU being secure in your own freedom rests
on others learning the truth as well, and recognize
that it falls to you to help overcome the dis-information
campaign. Post and share
your videos;
share your victories; help silence the agents-provocateur
and distraction-injectors whose nonsense is discussed
and debunked
here; and widely (and frankly, impatiently) share
this page,
this page and
this page, challenging everyone in your address
book to disconnect the phone and the TV for an afternoon
and get educated.
Doing these things will be what makes it
happen, Cap'n.
An Excellent New Video About
The Government Effort To Suppress
CtC Has Hit YouTube!
DEREK CUSHMAN HAS POSTED a powerful presentation
on government lies, propaganda and misinformation about
CtC designed to discourage more Americans from reading
the book and getting free of the misadministration of
the tax:
Watch it and share it, folks. This film
will help a lot of people who have been taken in by
the lies understand how they've been manipulated, and
prompt a proper desire to learn the truth about the
tax.
Well done, Derek!
P.S. If there were a thousand videos out
there debunking government lies and encouraging Americans
to learn the truth like this one does, the "ignorance
tax" scheme would collapse in a month. So,
where's yours?
Please Help losthorizons.com
Be As Effective As Possible!
OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS I've heard from
a number of folks that a firewall known as "Comodo"
blocks access to this website. This is apparently a
glitch in that program. This site is safe, as can be
seen by going
here.
Please share this info with others in your
own address book so it gets around-- obviously those
suffering the ill effects of this defect in Comodo won't
be able to see it here themselves until they go into
their firewall settings and manually whitelist
losthorizons.com.
In Passing... Three cheers
for Russia, which has stepped up to join Iran
in aid of its long-time ally Syria against the
noxious "Islamic State" nutcases that have sprung
up like toadstools in the wake of the destabilization
of the Middle East by the noxious neocon nutcases
running Washington for the last 15 years.
More Educated Americans Testify,
Showing Why The Deep State Fears CtC
"If the taxpayers of this country ever
discovered that we operate on 98% bluff, the entire
system will collapse."
-Reported remark by an internal revenue
service officer to Sen. Henry E. Bellmon (R. Okla.)
on April 15, 1971.
"The Tax Code represents the genius of
legal fiction... The IRS has never really known
why people pay the income tax... The IRS encourages
voluntary compliance, through FEAR."
-Jack Warren Wade Jr., former IRS officer
in charge of the IRS Nationwide Revenue Officer Training
Program, in his book ‘When You Owe The IRS’
CtC-EDUCATED, AMERICAN HERITAGE-LOVING
grown-up Don La Vigne shares his testimony
here. Tom Romin shares
his testimony
here. Greg Sutton shares his
here. Enjoy Robert Harvey's testimony
here. Don's, Tom's and Greg's and
Robert's words, like those of others that can be found
here, are solid examples of why the Deep State fears
CtC.
It's this simple: If you study
CtC you will know the truth about the tax.
Further, you will know that you know the truth,
beyond any doubt.
ONLY
CtC will give you that certainty, because
CtC is exclusively and uniquely complete and correct,
as can be seen by any of thousands of different acknowledgements
of every possible kind, from
this to
this to
this to
this.
Most telling, in its own way, is the government
robotically resorting for years now to the strawman
of
falsely ascribing to CtC the ridiculous arguments
that "wages are not income" and that only federal, state
and local government workers are subject to the tax.
This false ascription is then used as the basis for
claiming the book is "false and frivolous"-- a lame
and transparent dodge begging the question of why the
state won't acknowledge what the book
REALLY says and then attempt to dispute THAT.
Once you know the truth revealed in
CtC, acting in accordance with that truth WILL liberate
you from being an ignorance tax serf. This, the deep
state fears mightily.
In short, the "ignorance tax" scheme can
only survive if Americans can be bluffed into not seeking
out the truth, and if those who learn that truth can
be discouraged from acting on that truth.
But those who know the truth, and know
they know the truth, cannot not act.
Acting on the truth is a moral imperative,
as well as a legal imperative.
The undaunted actions of those who know
the truth are "calls" against the bluff. Each "call"
ratchets-up the spread of the truth exponentially and
forces state acknowledgement of that truth, one way
or another; and each such acknowledgment takes America
one step closer to
freedom
from the 75-year state-unleashing, people-restraining
"ignorance tax" scheme.
I HAVE DONE MY BEST to lead this country
to liberty from the mis-applied income tax. I have labored
hard. I've shed a lot of sweat, a fair bit of blood
and more than a few tears. But I seem to be pretty poor
at that kind of work.
When I have asked all of you for what I
firmly believe is a necessary resource to move the ball
downfield and give all of us the best chance at justice
and an end to the assault on the rule of law-- simple
testimonial videos requiring nothing from any of you
but the phone in your pocket and three minutes of speaking
from the heart-- I have had only a handful of people
answer my call.
I CAN'T KEEP GOING THIS WAY. I have to
be able to turn my attention away from writing new persuasive
or skepticism-addressing articles week after week, and
toward research, analysis and educational presentations
that will benefit everyone already in this community.
I need time to do some suing, and to bring together
the resources and talent toward that end.
As said, it is my firm belief that your
testimonial videos are the resource that I need to make
big things happen, and they are unquestionably the thing
I need to allow me to turn my attention away from trying
to get horses to drink at the waterhole to which I have
led them. Your words, in your great numbers and all
in your own different ways, will do that better than
anything I write possibly could.
And yet, you are not providing them. This,
despite my having been asking you for them for many
years now.
Therefore, with enormous reluctance, I
am making portions of this website restricted access
only. People have been urging me to do this for years
now, telling me I should impose a charge to access my
work-product, so as to enable me to keep producing.
I have never been inclined to charge fees
for access. I ask for donations, and will continue to
do that, and if they do not come, then I will conclude
that my work is of no value to anyone, and I will close
shop.
But I now WILL charge a special something
for access to some key portions of that work-- testimonial
videos, as discussed, described and demonstrated
here.
SELECTED PAGES CONSTITUTING primarily "legal
resources" pages now require passwords for access, and
to get a password, I need your video. Similarly, if
an email comes my way asking for guidance or assistance,
it had best have a video attached, if I don't already
have yours posted.
I hate to play it this way, but I want
to win.
I'll tell you a story from when I was coaching
my kids in soccer. Both of my kids at a certain age
in their careers had run into a wall common to all but
the very exceptional. They had gotten to be pretty good,
and they wanted to enjoy the benefits of their hard
work. But the arrival of this interest coincided with
a new self-consciousness which made them reluctant to
risk failing and looking foolish. So, they were hanging
back from seizing the main chance when it appeared,
and driving for the goal.
My solution was to post on the wall of
our dining room a couple of simple points about self-discipline,
the chief of which is this: You can't score a goal if
you don't take a shot.
That's how it is here, too. If you don't
stand up, you are laying down, and you'll never score
that goal.
Here is what my kids live by now, in their
own version of that lesson. I hear it from them all
the time as they excel (accompanied by the sound of
a father's breast swelling with pride): Go hard,
or go home.
You, too. Go hard, or go home.
Send those videos.
Do I ask for a lot? I want your victories
to post, your financial support, your efforts at spreading
the word, and your beautiful faces and inspiring words,
too. It IS a lot.
But I'll let Thomas Paine explain:
"Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered;
yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder
the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we
obtain too cheaply, we esteem too lightly. Heaven knows
how to put a proper price on its goods; and it would
be strange indeed, if so celestial an article as freedom
should not be highly rated.”
We each have our reasons, and our story.
It's time, and it's needed, for you to share yours with
the world.
"The day we see truth and do not speak
is the day we begin to die."
-Martin Luther King, Jr.
What does it for you?
Is it simply because no moral and upstanding
person has any choice when it comes to telling the truth
over his or her signature, whether on tax forms or anywhere
else?
Is it recognition of the critical importance
of the rule of law, and the knowledge that if everybody
leaves its caretaking to someone else, it will soon
be lost to us completely?
Is it the money?
Maybe it's just simple respect for your
own rights as a human being, who is not and cannot be
not involuntarily subordinated to others?
Maybe it's just simple respect for your
general civic responsibility to be the grown-up and
enforce frugality and restraint on a big, powerful creature
of our own devising which otherwise is like a badly-raised
teenage boy given whiskey and car keys and let loose
on the road to wreak havoc?
Or is it, perhaps, a more acute anxiety
that if our bonfire of a state isn't damped, and quickly,
it'll soon burn down the house around us all?
What IS it that firms up your jaw and stiffens
your resolve?
It's time to take off the bushel and
share your light!
I would like you to think about what it
is that motivates you for a few moments (or all day,
if you like), and then send me your thoughts. I want
to put YOUR reasons to work inspiring folks who don't
yet understand what this is all about.
In this day and age, the most effective
way for you to share your thinking for the benefit of
others is to video-record yourself talking about how
you feel, and explaining what inspires and motivates
YOU.
All you need is a webcam or cell-phone
equipped with a camera. If you don't have, or know how
to use, one of these, have a friend help.
If needed, write a little script for yourself.
Better, though, to just speak extemporaneously, after
spending a little time sorting out your thoughts and
getting down into your heart. Perhaps make it a video
of someone in your family, or a close friend, interviewing
you.
Dress "business casual". Be well-groomed.
Keep yourself to no more than 2 or 3 minutes,
and keep in mind that the purpose is not to educate,
but to INSPIRE, ENCOURAGE and ENERGIZE. Your video will
be one of many to be shared.
You needn't feel any obligation to be profound,
and you shouldn't try to explain anything about the
law, other than to say that you have read it and you
know it's on your side. You just need to be sincere,
and uplifting. Your object is to make your audience
want to have what you have, and to be where you are
in your heart.
Keep in mind that you're speaking to an
audience that doesn't yet know ANYTHING about the subject,
and whose first reaction is, "This must be illegal;
this must be dangerous; this is too good to be true."
You want to pull that audience right past such things,
and straight to a focus on truth, morality, and our
American heritage of liberty and the rule of law.
Remember: INSPIRE, ENCOURAGE, ENERGIZE.
Speak about rights. Speak about morality,
and the obligation of a grown-up and responsible person
to speak the truth and to enforce the Constitution.
Speak about everyone's duty
to give to God what is God's, always, and to Caesar
only what is really Caesar's. Speak of your obligation
to respect yourself, and to look out for the current
and future well-being of your children and your fellow
citizens. Speak of
CtC, and what its information has done for your
understanding and resolve. Show the book.
If you have had victories, describe them.
Better still, show them, if possible.
Be clear about just what you accomplished:
EVERYTHING back-- Social Security, Medicare and all;
a "notice of deficiency" closing notice; an on-paper
agreement or acknowledgment that your earnings weren't
subject to the tax and everything withheld or paid-in
was an "overpayment"; a transcript showing all $0s;
or whatever happened.
When you speak of state victories, name
the state. If you had to overcome balkiness from a tax
agency before winning any victory, describe that, too!
If you're in a battle now, speak of your
resolve to uphold the law, come what may. If you haven't
yet begun to act, speak of your decision to do so, and
your plans.
Remember, your purpose is to INSPIRE, ENCOURAGE
and ENERGIZE.
If you're dealing with ongoing balkiness,
describe that, too, if you wish-- but be sure to explain
why you're not discouraged, and why you are not standing
down, not slinking back into the barn, and not choosing
to endorse the lies.
Mention what you do for a living, whether
you're a doctor, homemaker, lawyer, trucker, IT guy
or gal, or a retiree or student. Help people understand
that the company of grown-up activist Americans they
are being invited to join cuts across all demographics
and all interests-- with the common denominator being
respect for the law and love of the principles on which
this great country was founded.
This is your chance to get a LOT accomplished.
We've all had frustrating occasions of
trying to explain all this to a friend, neighbor, family
member or co-worker, only to pile up against the wall
of a mind not yet ready to listen and learn. Here is
your chance to address a self-selected audience of folks
who have themselves decided that it's time for them
to begin paying attention, and have clicked on your
testimonial for exactly that reason.
Further, think about this: You want judges,
bureaucrats, CPAs, lawyers, the HR people where you
work, your pastors, your neighbors and everyone else
to acknowledge the truth about the tax openly and straightforwardly.
How and why would these folks do this if YOU won't?
You want these folks to learn the truth.
Why would they even recognize that there is a truth
to be learned if you won't attest to having learned
it yourself? You've got to stand up, face forward and
chin up and tell these folks that you have studied and
checked and verified and seen the evidence and seen
the government evasions and you know that the tax is
not the capitation that the beneficiary government wants
everyone to think it is but a benign, but strictly limited
thing, and that they need to study and learn that, too.
Again, if you have victories to show, that's
nice, and powerful, too. But you don't have to have
victories to display in order to declare your knowledge
of what the law says. I've never flown around the world,
but I've seen the evidence and considered the arguments,
and I'm not hesitant to declare it a sphere...
Even those of you who haven't yet studied
CtC have surely read
this short document, and have verified everything
in it for yourself. You should therefore be declaring
its veracity and its message, loud and proud. Again,
if you won't say it, how can you hope that others will
ever even bother to look at the facts?
Be the change you want to see in the world,
or there won't be any change.
So, please make and send those videos
right away! You can share them with me via a cloud-based
drive space like OneDrive.Live.com or GoogleDrive, or
mail DVDs to me at 232 Oriole St., Commerce Twp., Michigan
48382, or even email to me if each file is no more than
20 megs (and you can break a video up if need be-- I
can reassemble them). Render as .mpg or mp4, if possible;
if not, send them how you have them and I'll make them
work.
Remember, the restoration of institutional
respect for individual rights and the rule of law depends
on enough individuals insisting upon it. Do your part
to let those starting to rub the sleep from their eyes
know that there is a community already waiting for their
fellowship with open arms and open hearts and shining
spirits.
See how some of your fellow warriors for
the truth have done their parts in videos sent over
the years, many of which are posted
here.
"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."
Getting Free Of The "Income" Tax Scheme Is As Easy As
Falling Off A Bike
To get an idea of how today's "income" tax scheme works,
try this little exercise:
Think of the federal government as a guy named Bob,
who lives down the street from you in a town that is
really big on bicycles. Bikes get used for commuting,
deliveries, shopping, etc.. In fact, other than walking,
bicycles are the exclusive form of transportation in
your town.
Your neighbor Bob has a by-the-mile bicycle-renting
business-- "Bob's Bicycles". Bob's Bicycles is far and
away the biggest business in town.
Part of Bob’s success is because he does a lot of contract
business. However, Bob doesn't just get paid by riders
who have signed an agreement with him, or even just
those using Bob's bikes. Bob gets something every time
anybody in town does any riding at all, through an odd
combination of circumstances that took many years to
come together.
Here's how it happened...
Bob's Bicycles was launched long ago by the great grandfather
of the present Bob (Bob IV). Great Grandpa Bob started
out not only with a main location for his contract business--
he also had the bright idea of setting up spots around
town where he parked some of his bikes for use by the
more occasional rider, on an "honor system". Anyone
could take and use one of these bikes, but they were
expected to keep track of their mileage, and send Bob
a "1040 Mileage Ridden/Rent Due Form" (and the appropriate
rent), periodically. The initial design of the form
was like this:
I, ______________,
rode a Bob's Bicycle a total of _____ miles
this year.
At Bob's rental
rate of $.15 per mile, I owe Bob $______
I said that Great Grandpa Bob planned to deal with these
occasional riders on the "honor system", and that's
true. But he liked his money, too, and didn't want to
miss anything that was due him. So, after setting up
the "self-serve" locations, Great Grandpa Bob went around
handing out "W-2, 1099 or K-1 Rider Reporting Forms"
to every other business in town. The forms-- accompanied
by notices that if Bob didn't get his rent from someone
riding a bicycle in connection with any business, he
would sue the company involved-- said:
You Can’t Fight Well When You Don’t Know
What You’re Fighting About
If you are having an argument
with the IRS or any other tax agency,
You are NOT being presumed to have made “corporate
profit”.
You are NOT being alleged to have received “foreign
income”.
You are NOT entangled in an invisible “adhesion
contract”.
You are NOT being obligated by a law whose subject
is never identified.
You are being targeted because REAL EVIDENCE exists
that YOU PERSONALLY HAD “INCOME” to which the revenue laws apply--
even though that evidence is almost certainly incorrect,
and CAN be corrected.
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!!
"Never must thou take up a false cry, or join hands
with the guilty by giving false witness in their favor. Never must
thou follow with the crowd in doing wrong, or be swayed by many
voices so as to give false judgment; even pity for the poor must
not sway thee when judgment is to be given."
-Exodus 23:1-3
Doing A Little High-Payoff Math
IF EACH PERSON receiving this newsletter each week distributed as
few as 100 of any of
the great outreach tools featured here to co-workers, friends,
neighbors and family members (or just strangers on the street, in
the mall, etc...), we could have SEVERAL MILLION new Americans
suddenly introduced to the liberating truth about the tax!
Just like that! In one week!
C'mon, people, let's roll on this!
“Most of the important things in the
world have been accomplished by people who have kept on trying when
there seemed to be no hope at all.”
When directed to a page by topic or link, read everything.
I know that this can mean the investment of a lot of time, attention
and effort, but although some may imagine otherwise, I don't write
as much as I do because I can't think of any other way to spend
my time...
Furthermore, when you encounter a hyperlink within, or associated
with, the text you are reading, follow it!
It is pretty common these days for web-based material to be littered
with hyperlinks. Sometimes the purpose is to provide definitions
or examples, in order to ensure that folks reading the original
material aren't presented with a word or reference which they don't
understand. Sometimes the links lead to illustrations pertinent
to the original text.
It is common-- and perfectly understandable-- for folks who are
confident that they are familiar with language or references within
the main text they are reading to get in the habit of skipping over
included links. I do it all the time, myself!
However, I very rarely include links for definitional or explanatory
purposes; and when I DO make a link out of text in one page it is
generally to another self-contained page, rather than merely illustrative
material. These other pages contain material the clear understanding
of which I deem highly important for the proper and complete understanding
of the original page. (Links to
CtC, the
Victories pages,
CtC Warriors and so on are obvious exceptions to this general
rule. On the other hand, a link to the victory
Highlights or 'Every
Which Way But Loose' pages, which might seem like such exceptions,
are not. The special selection of victories on those pages, and
the filed docs and tax-agency correspondences included therewith,
themselves constitute highly instructive material which merits careful
attention. Thus care needs to be taken in all cases.)
Please make a habit of clicking on all provided links and at least
looking briefly to ensure that the linked page is one with which
you are completely familiar from another study session.
Finally, please keep in mind that, annoying though it may seem at
first blush (but not, I trust, upon reflection), I constantly tweak
material already posted. Obviously this doesn't mean that every
page is in flux at all times, but it does mean that if you are directed
to a page that IS familiar, it's worthwhile to read it through again
if it's been a while since your last having done so.
