861 Status

[Investor]

Again, you'll have to excuse my lack of knowledge re: current events with the TP crowd (I took an extended vacation outside of la-la land). Is there anyone still advocating the 861 position, or is this "included" angle the soup du jour now?

[Nikki]

Do you actually think a little thing like prison had any impact on Mr. Rose?

He's still beating the same old drum.

[Investor]

I actually downloaded and read Larken's "thesis" on IRC 861 several years ago. I have never seen such a simplistic piece of "literature" with such glaring omissions. He brought the use of elipses (...) to conceal the truth to a new low.

[Famspear]

Here's something from another web site (no copyright issues):

On August 29, 2006, Charles Thomas (Tom) Clayton, M.D., was found guilty by a jury in Federal court in Austin, Texas, of two counts of willfully making false statements on tax returns and six counts of willfully failing to file tax returns. According to The Courier of Montgomery County, "Clayton's defense at the trial centered on the '861 argument' -- a defense used numerous times in previous years, but never successfully [ . . . . ]" http://www.hcnonline.com/site/news.cfm? ... 2215&rfi=6 According to an April 7, 2006 Justice Department news release shortly after he was indicted, Clayton failed to file income tax returns for years 1999 through 2004 while receiving over $1.5 million in gross income. The government also charged that for years 1997 and 1998 Clayton filed false amended returns, claiming refunds of over $160,000.[link to Quatloos omitted]

Criminal investigators of the Internal Revenue Service had gathered information on Clayton during the IRS investigation of Larken Rose. According to the prosecutor's office, Clayton "disregarded multiple written notices from the Internal Revenue Service informing him that his 861 argument was without merit," and Clayton "had also been told the same thing by two Certified Public Accountants." News release, Dec. 15, 2006, Office of Johnny Sutton, United States Attorney for the Western District of Texas, U.S. Department of Justice, San Antonio, Texas. http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_rel ... on.sen.pdf

On December 15, 2006, Clayton was sentenced to five years in prison and a fine of $50,000, plus a requirement that he pay over $7,400 in prosecution costs. Clayton is incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institution at Bastrop, Texas, and is scheduled for release in June of the year 2011. http://www.bop.gov/iloc2/InmateFinderSe ... &x=23&y=16

Under the sentence, Clayton will be subject to supervision for one year following his prison term. Id.

I believe Clayton helped finance Larken Rose.

[Doktor Avalanche]

Again, you'll have to excuse my lack of knowledge re: current events with the TP crowd (I took an extended vacation outside of la-la land). Is there anyone still advocating the 861 position, or is this "included" angle the soup du jour now?

Young Mulletboy is indeed beating the same old drum, and he's got a few followers over at YouTube.

[Doktor Avalanche]

I actually downloaded and read Larken's "thesis" on IRC 861 several years ago. I have never seen such a simplistic piece of "literature" with such glaring omissions. He brought the use of elipses (...) to conceal the truth to a new low.

The people who buy into his crapola are just as intellectually dishonest, especially when I point out if Larken did a stretch in the Grey Bar Motel for the very 861 argument he advocates then he couldn't possibly have the answer.

Not that a little thing like "truth" ever dissauded any of these people.

[webhick]

You know, I always thought that the 8th amendment would be a good TP argument...but I have yet to find anyone trying it (correct me if I'm wrong - I usually am). After all, having to fill out tax forms, do payroll, etc are some of the cruelest things you can do to a person. And simply punishing citizens of a country for simply being citizens is also very unusual.

Perhaps no one is using it because it falls flat faster than the other arguments.

[Doktor Avalanche]

You know, I always thought that the 8th amendment would be a good TP argument...but I have yet to find anyone trying it (correct me if I'm wrong - I usually am). After all, having to fill out tax forms, do payroll, etc are some of the cruelest things you can do to a person. And simply punishing citizens of a country for simply being citizens is also very unusual.

Perhaps no one is using it because it falls flat faster than the other arguments.

I never actually considered that angle, webhick, but once again you make some amazingly shrewd remarks.

Yeah...I wonder why the TP crowd hasn't screamed about taxes being "cruel and unusual" punishment.

[webhick]

You know, I always thought that the 8th amendment would be a good TP argument...but I have yet to find anyone trying it (correct me if I'm wrong - I usually am). After all, having to fill out tax forms, do payroll, etc are some of the cruelest things you can do to a person. And simply punishing citizens of a country for simply being citizens is also very unusual.

Perhaps no one is using it because it falls flat faster than the other arguments.

I never actually considered that angle, webhick, but once again you make some amazingly shrewd remarks.

Yeah...I wonder why the TP crowd hasn't screamed about taxes being "cruel and unusual" punishment.

You know, I have a good mind to write a book on how the 8th amendment makes taxes illegal, get it published, and then go on a bunch of talk shows and gleefully announce "It's all bullshit! Don't you see! I made it up! That's why it's in the fiction section!"

But I don't think I can stretch it out to 300 or so pages. Heck, I'm not sure I can stretch it out to make up more than two paragraphs. I guess that would make it an eBook.

[Doktor Avalanche]

You know, I always thought that the 8th amendment would be a good TP argument...but I have yet to find anyone trying it (correct me if I'm wrong - I usually am). After all, having to fill out tax forms, do payroll, etc are some of the cruelest things you can do to a person. And simply punishing citizens of a country for simply being citizens is also very unusual.

Perhaps no one is using it because it falls flat faster than the other arguments.

I never actually considered that angle, webhick, but once again you make some amazingly shrewd remarks.

Yeah...I wonder why the TP crowd hasn't screamed about taxes being "cruel and unusual" punishment.

You know, I have a good mind to write a book on how the 8th amendment makes taxes illegal, get it published, and then go on a bunch of talk shows and gleefully announce "It's all bullshit! Don't you see! I made it up! That's why it's in the fiction section!"

But I don't think I can stretch it out to 300 or so pages. Heck, I'm not sure I can stretch it out to make up more than two paragraphs. I guess that would make it an eBook.

Can I be your manager?

[Doktor Avalanche]

I take back what I said about there not being anyone who wasn't persuaded about the futility of Larken Rose's exercise.

I submit fuzzrabbit, a lost soul who found salvation and I have to say his transformation was a life affirming experience for us all.

[LPC]

You know, I always thought that the 8th amendment would be a good TP argument...but I have yet to find anyone trying it (correct me if I'm wrong - I usually am).

Just when I thought I had thought of every possible crazy argument, you come up with a new one.

And I was surprised to find that it's been tried, at least in the context of IRS enforcement actions. For example:

"Appellant appears to argue (1) that the IRS's enforcement of the tax laws against him is discriminatory, and (2) that the IRS's actions constitute "cruel and unusual punishment" in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The former argument is unsupported by facts in the record and, as such, would require additional fact-finding to pursue. Therefore, we decline to consider it. The latter is plainly meritless. See Zwick v. Freeman, 373 F.2d 110, 119 (2d Cir. 1967) (holding prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments not applicable to purely civil penalties not criminal in nature)."

United States v. Arthur L. Ogonoski, 2005 TNT 182-11, No. 04-4099 (2d. Cir. 9/19/2005) (affirming judgment in favor of the United States for back taxes and penalties).

[webhick]

Just when I thought I had thought of every possible crazy argument, you come up with a new one.

I might be able to come up with some more. I once had an ending point on the 2nd Amendment with regard to tax law, but I abandoned it before really tracking it backwards (for something else that caught my eye).

And I was surprised to find that it's been tried, at least in the context of IRS enforcement actions. For example:

"Appellant appears to argue (1) that the IRS's enforcement of the tax laws against him is discriminatory, and (2) that the IRS's actions constitute "cruel and unusual punishment" in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The former argument is unsupported by facts in the record and, as such, would require additional fact-finding to pursue. Therefore, we decline to consider it. The latter is plainly meritless. See Zwick v. Freeman, 373 F.2d 110, 119 (2d Cir. 1967) (holding prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments not applicable to purely civil penalties not criminal in nature)."

United States v. Arthur L. Ogonoski, 2005 TNT 182-11, No. 04-4099 (2d. Cir. 9/19/2005) (affirming judgment in favor of the United States for back taxes and penalties).

"not applicable to purely civil penalties not criminal in nature"... Crap... That phrase is only going to flesh out a TP argument. I know, because I'm rolling the thought process around in my head now.

[Nikki]

... I'm rolling the thought process around in my head now.

Why does that phrase invoke the image of a lava lamp filled with a mixture of KoolAid, nitroglycerine, and LSD?

[webhick]

... I'm rolling the thought process around in my head now.

Why does that phrase invoke the image of a lava lamp filled with a mixture of KoolAid, nitroglycerine, and LSD?

How did you know?

[Blackbeard]

You know, I always thought that the 8th amendment would be a good TP argument...but I have yet to find anyone trying it (correct me if I'm wrong - I usually am). After all, having to fill out tax forms, do payroll, etc are some of the cruelest things you can do to a person. And simply punishing citizens of a country for simply being citizens is also very unusual.

Perhaps no one is using it because it falls flat faster than the other arguments.

I always thought that to be unconstitutional, a punishment must be both cruel and unusual. While it is certainly cruel, with the vast majority of the public required to fill out tax forms, it is certainly not unusual.

[webhick]

You know, I always thought that the 8th amendment would be a good TP argument...but I have yet to find anyone trying it (correct me if I'm wrong - I usually am). After all, having to fill out tax forms, do payroll, etc are some of the cruelest things you can do to a person. And simply punishing citizens of a country for simply being citizens is also very unusual.

Perhaps no one is using it because it falls flat faster than the other arguments.

I always thought that to be unconstitutional, a punishment must be both cruel and unusual. While it is certainly cruel, with the vast majority of the public required to fill out tax forms, it is certainly not unusual.

I don't think I was clear. It's an unusual punishment (per the cruel and unusual punishment wording). How many murderers, shoplifters, and kiddie diddlers have to fill out yearly tax forms as part of their punishment? Citizenry is the only crime whose punishment is the filing of tax forms. It's unusual when you compare it to the other crimes (which usually involve probation, jail time, community service, etc).

[SteveSy]

You know, I always thought that the 8th amendment would be a good TP argument...but I have yet to find anyone trying it (correct me if I'm wrong - I usually am). After all, having to fill out tax forms, do payroll, etc are some of the cruelest things you can do to a person. And simply punishing citizens of a country for simply being citizens is also very unusual.

Perhaps no one is using it because it falls flat faster than the other arguments.

I always thought that to be unconstitutional, a punishment must be both cruel and unusual. While it is certainly cruel, with the vast majority of the public required to fill out tax forms, it is certainly not unusual.

As facetious as that is, that thought process is used to usurp just about every part of the constitution. Remove common sense and anything is probable in the legal realm; a common practice by the legal elite. 99.999999999% it only works in the government's favor....try that in favor of the people and you're laughed at and considered an idiot.

[Famspear]

Blackbeard wrote:

You know, I always thought that the 8th amendment would be a good TP argument...but I have yet to find anyone trying it (correct me if I'm wrong - I usually am).

Regarding an 8th Amendment argument -- when in doubt, just check to see if Irwin Schiff tried it. From the Wikipedia article on Schiff:

Schiff had filed Federal income tax returns through the tax year 1973. For years 1974 and 1975, however, he refused to disclose his income. Instead, he sent unsigned 1040 forms to the Internal Revenue Service with the title ("U.S. Individual Income Tax Return") changed to read "U.S. Individual Income Confession." Instead of disclosing income, he included assertions of various constitutional rights on the forms, claiming essentially that under the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth, and Thirteenth Amendments he would not be an "involuntary serf" of the U.S. government.

--from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irwin_Schiff

(footnotes omitted)

[Famspear]

Oops, the 8th Amendment comment was a webhick quote, as quoted by blackbeard.