First of Many Defeats against the IRS

Attorney Tom Cryer has defeated the IRS and wants everyone to hear his message that you do not have to live in fear. These defeats are becoming more common as America's citizens are getting smarter. Smart citizens means smart jurors.

Tom's victory, however, is not a reason to stop paying taxes. People are not that awake yet. A case in point is the New Hampshire five month standoff with Ed and Elaine Brown. They were found guilty of tax evasion (fought and lost) and are now serving several years in prison. See their story blog:

Knowing how to defend yourself is vital in any challenge. Keep in mind that Tom is an attorney and an expert on the U.S. Constitution and associated tax laws. He risked his freedom and his property for our and his quest to prove the IRS lies and deceit. You the unskilled, evader would probably not stand a chance in the current "kangaroo" court system that routinely ignores the Supreme court decisions.

Watch the video and learn that there is hope for any of you that are already in trouble. Also be very suspicious of the advertisements on T.V. that advertise erasing IRS debt. I know of several people who got burned using them. Do your research well if you go that route. Look up on the Internet the reputation of the firm, and get at least three well searched references that you can contact. Enjoy the message from Tom. JQ

More blogs at:

Tags: bankruptcy, CT, defeat, Fight, IRS, Milford, Tom Cryer (all tags)



Go, Ed and Elaine Brown!!

Go to jail, you fucking morons, and NEVER GET OUT.  I pay my taxes without whining like a moron.  And if you don't I hope that the IRS cracks your back like a walnut.

by dataguy 2007-10-10 10:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Go, Ed and Elaine Brown!!

How ignorant you are of tax code. Do a little research before you go off talking crap like that. I am as liberal as the next MyDD'er  but even I concede that the federal income tax is a fraud. Tax code is very complex, but to put into 3rd grade elementary terms because that seems to be all you can understand. Here we go: Tax code is always, ALWAYS written in a literal way. It specifically explains who is being taxed, and what is being taxed. Now if you read the tax code carefully about the federal income tax, it only pertains to profits and gains from a corporation. There is also dozens of supreme court rulings on this:THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX DOES NOT INCLUDE INCOME FROM WAGES AND LABOR.  As the IRS would like you to believe. I did research on this for a project at school. And in no way am I claiming to be expert. But, given the premise that tax must be written in a literal way, if you read the income tax code from the IRS, it is neither clear, nor literal. And what you get from it is completely different than what it is used for today. I haven't paid my federal income tax in two years because THERE is NO law saying I have to. Just google some supreme court rulings. A reference year may be the 1920 ruling. Which explicitly said : THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX DOES NOT INCLUDE INCOME FROM WAGES AND LABOR.And before everyone starts trolling me actually do some research before you spout sound-bites from the IRS and federal reserve. From a moral perspective, we are all slaves including this government to the federal reserve and the international bankers that profit off the US gov't printing money in the form of charging the US gov't interest on the money issued! Monetary policy is one thing this party needs to address.

by SocialDem 2007-10-10 11:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Go, Ed and Elaine Brown!!

I don't understand you one bit.

Section 61(a) of the Tax Code (26 USC 61(a)) says: "Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, gross income means all income from whatever source derived, including but not limited to the following items: (1) Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items ..."

There is certainly no exclusion in the Tax Code which would carve out wages from this definition of "gross income."  Wages are clearly income as defined by Congress.

The Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution plainly authorizes an income tax: "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."

The case which you reference, Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (1920), provides a definition of "income" for purposes of the Sixteenth Amendment: "Income may be defined as the gain derived from capital, from labor, or from both combined."  I wish you luck in arguing that that definition does not include wages.

There is no Supreme Court case that says "The federal income tax does not include income from wages and labor."

I find it unfortunate that you haven't paid any taxes for the last two years based upon what appears to be a serious misunderstanding of the law.  Many people with similar beliefs are in prison right now, wasting their lives.  Since we only get one life apiece, I urge you to reconsider your position.

by Steve M 2007-10-10 01:17PM | 0 recs
This is a commercial piece

and this guy should be banned.

by dataguy 2007-10-10 10:51AM | 0 recs
Re: First of Many Defeats against the IRS

I had a friend who worked as a lawyer representing the IRS in Tax Court.  It sounded like a really weird job, smacking down the exact same kooky arguments time and time again.

by Steve M 2007-10-10 11:07AM | 0 recs
Re: First of Many Defeats against the IRS

Part of your concerns are valid, you all pay your taxes as I pay mine. This is not an encouragement to evade, but rather a free speech exercize to prove that the IRS is in trouble. They can and do get beat in court because of its illegal application of the law.

Aside from that, I believe in a fair and legal tax for America. The Irs has been used as an instrument of civil abuse against many key political administrations, including the Clinton's and before.

My biggest issue with the IRS is that all of you 4-5 months of labor confiscations, aside from the nerve of the government thinking they own you, 100% of that money does not build a single road, build a school, or fix a bridge. Actually all of it almost some 400 Billion worth goes to a super secret bank as interest on FIAT currency.

Read my blog, and get informed. Your wage garnishments are not paying anything other than a group of Global bankers. They take your money and offer back a reciept for interest paid.

Currently we owe 9 Trillion Dollars. That number has been going up endlessly since 1913 and within the next 10 years the interest alone will require 2 more months of your salary. This system is doomed to fail and it will fail.

See my link for a start.
Read Walkers reports at the GAO Etc. You will find it under my Blog archive.

Think beyon your reaction, as I understand, I had the same one anger and disbelief that we should not contribute to our country. Do a little research into the Fed. and the IRS law and write back. If you still feel the same way I will respect that.

For know the fact is that you contribute 4-5 months of your money to America and America gives you nothing in return. I am not OK with that.

Rocco J. Frank Jr.

by rfrank118 2007-10-10 11:38AM | 0 recs
Re: First of Many Defeats against the IRS

I looked at your website. It seemed like you associated only with republicans like Atwater in all your pictures. Though to your credit, you did put a snarky caption with respect to Gingrich. Still, right off the bat, you do not have much benefit of doubt with me. But as a newcomer, I still give you SOME benefit of doubt, and whether it goes up or not depends on how you interact with us.

However, I did read your agenda. And I actually agree with a lot of the points. You do not blindly ask for taxes to be cut in every area. You do ask for increased gasoline taxes. But you do question some taxes and there is NOTHING IMMORAL about that. It's just a different approach than what many here are inclined to go along with. As someone who prefers to cut taxes in some areas and reallocate expenses from pork projects to basic infrastructure, I am inclined to adopt a similar approach even if we may not agreee on all the details. I feel government has an obligation to prove that it is spending the current level of revenue wisely before it comes to the public to raise taxes. I never liked the fact that taxes became a part of ideologies rather than one of many approaches used to achieve the goals of an ideology.

Folks, unless someone here can shed more light on our diarist and this specific case, lay off the bashing. He has been civil enough to respond to one of us already. So he deserves a chance. At least that is my opinion.

I do find it amusing how some democrats dont lose sleep over a Hillary or many other democrats working with Republicans to pass through approvals of preemptive long wars with questionable goals that kill many people needlessly and consume resources that rob from important social programs, but have less tolerance if anything is remotely uttered in areas like taxes where lives are not at stake.

by Pravin 2007-10-10 11:53AM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads