Hendrickson Finally Admits His Supreme Court Loss

[Dr. Caligari]

It's not easy to find, but if you click on a link in Hendrickson's September 4 Newsletter, and then click on another link in that linked document, you will eventually find this paragraph:

Update



Ah well, bad behavior runs deep. In Mid-July, even while out of session, the Supremes again declined to hear the case, without comment-- doubtless based on the fact that it is technically moot, as noted above. It remains up to the rest of us to look after the rule of law, and prevent the bogus lower court "rulings" from being exploited by the law-defiers.

[Thule]

the Supremes again declined to hear the case

The Supremes said "Stop!" back in '65.

[Famspear]

the Supremes again declined to hear the case

The Supremes said "Stop!" back in '65.

Or, as His Blowhardiness Himself, His Pompously Pontificating Peterness, has stated:

In ANY other case in which these issues arose, the court would unquestionably just overrule or remand the case with appropriate instructions, as a matter of course and without a second thought. That it [the Supreme Court] did not do so emphasizes the fact that the spread of the information revealed in CtC [Peter Hendrickson's Cracking the Code] is understood at all levels of the state as the catalyst for the transformational shift of power away from those in whose hands it is now concentrated.......

http://www.losthorizons.com/lawsuit.htm

("ANY" in all capitals in the original).

What a blowhard!

[notorial dissent]

Or, as it happens in reality, there wasn’t anything that raised even the remotest issue and they agreed with the trial court’s determination.

[Pottapaug1938]

Or, as His Blowhardiness Himself, His Pompously Pontificating Peterness, has stated:

In ANY other case in which these issues arose, the court would unquestionably just overrule or remand the case with appropriate instructions, as a matter of course and without a second thought. That it [the Supreme Court] did not do so emphasizes the fact that the spread of the information revealed in CtC [Peter Hendrickson's Cracking the Code] is understood at all levels of the state as the catalyst for the transformational shift of power away from those in whose hands it is now concentrated.......

http://www.losthorizons.com/lawsuit.htm

("ANY" in all capitals in the original).

What a blowhard!

Unquestionably? Only if you don't have the slightest clue as to how the Supreme Court works. Even a cursory review of the Court's docket shows dozens of cases which the Court declines to review because there just isn't enough there to merit their consideration. Simply put, it's the Court's way of saying that you have no case. And, BTW, Petey -- the Court did NOT decline to hear your case while out of session. They declined to hear it in June, before their term ended; and it was in July that this was announced.

My faith in Petey remains unshaken. I KNEW that he'd find some way to pretend that this massive defeat is actually a glorious victory....

[Famspear]

A losthorizons user called "livingaftermidnight" provides a link to Quatloos, and writes the following:

They have a forum [the Quatloos forum] and it's dedicated to blasting Pete and CtC and it seems to be made up of a bunch of IRS employees and other tax industry people. They are very condescending.

So, what is up with them? Some of the information they post is about CtC people that "have gotten beat in court" over CtC-related filings. What's the truth about all this?

(bolding added)

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... b603#20553

Wow. A bunch of "IRS employees" and "tax industry people." What an unsavory lot. And those Quatloos regulars are - gasp! -- condescending to the posters at losthorizons! Let's see now, the posters at losthorizons consist in large part of criminals, tax cheats, severely delusional people who follow the nonsensical writings of a narcissistic ex-con named Peter Eric Hendrickson who is currently awaiting trial on still more federal felony charges that could result in a conviction that would send him back to federal prison. Can you imagine that? IRS employees and "other tax industry people" being condescending toward a bunch of criminals?

What's the world coming to?

Of course, in the bizzaro world of Hendrickson's losthorizons and his Cracking the Code tax scam, every defeat is counted as a "victory." Even when Hendrickson's petition is rejected by the United States Supreme Court, Hendrickson and his dimwits simply dismiss the loss and announce that the trial court ruling -- which Hendrickson himself appealed unsuccessfully -- is simply "void."

If court rulings are "void," then why appeal them?

And if a denial of a petition by the United States Supreme Court is not really a defeat, then why the need to file the petition in the first place? What was the PeterEricBlowhardMeister trying to accomplish by filing the petition, having it denied by the Court, then filing a petition for rehearing, and then having that petition denied as well?

Only in the bizarro, delusional world of losthorizons and similar tax protester "communities" can these kinds of things be explained away.

[Imalawman]

Nice to have you back Famspear...

[Famspear]

Nice to have you back Famspear...

Thanks. Actually, I've never left - I just haven't been posting much lately. The real world is topsy turvy for me right now.

[LPC]

Some of the information they post is about CtC people that "have gotten beat in court" over CtC-related filings. What's the truth about all this?

(Crickets....)

Livingaftermidnight, CtC losses are kind of like bad breath. Your friends won't tell you, but total strangers will.

So here's the truth you won't see at LH: When the government filed the civil action against Hendrickson and his wife for the erroneous refunds paid to them, the government also filed six similar suits against some of his followers. The other suits were against Sharon K. Artman of Largo, Fla.; Michael J. Dowling of San Diego; Joy M. Ferguson of Henderson, Nev.; Melvin L. Gerstenkorn of Topeka, Kan.; Larry B. Golson and Debra G. Golson of Montgomery, Ala.; and James A. Spitzer of Winter Park, Fla. The government was successful in every case. See, e.g., United States v. Ferguson, 2007-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) par. 50,461 (D. Nev. 2007).

The judgment against James A. Spitzer was affirmed by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, and sanctions were imposed for bringing a frivolous appeal. United States v. James A. Spitzer, 245 Fed.Appx. 908, 2007 WL 2376783, 2007 TNT 163-5, No. 07-11073 (11th Cir. 8/21/2007), aff'ng No. 06-00479-CV-ORL-22JGG (U.S.D.C. M.D. Fla. 2/13/2007) (erroneous refund of $16,614 ordered repaid). In a later order, the District Court also ordered Spitzer to pay double attorneys' fees to the United States, in the amount of $16,285.35, "as a sanction for his frivolous and bad faith defense of the entire case." Id., at Docket #49 (7/25/2007). Spitzer later filed a motion with the District Court to vacate its judgment, claiming that the lower court had lacked subject matter jurisdiction and had ignored his challenge to the constitutionality of the income tax as an unapportioned "direct tax." The District Court summarily denied the motion and the Circuit Court affirmed on appeal on the grounds that Spitzer was simply trying to re-litigate the case he had already lost. United States v. James A. Spitzer, 2009 TNT 128-7, No. 08-15824 (11th Cir. 7/7/2009). (A footnote in the opinion notes that the sanctions previously imposed had not yet been paid.)

[Gregg]

correct me it I'm wrong, but hasn't every CTC case ever tried in any court been shot down?

[jkeeb]

Since you are not wrong, no one will correct you.

[Famspear]

Since you are not wrong, no one will correct you.

Fundamental Truths:

Based on the current definition of a meter of length, the speed of light in a vacuum is 299,792,458 meters per second.

The laws of physics are the same for all inertial observers (all observers in uniform motion).

Murphy was an optimist.

Peter Eric Hendrickson's Cracking the Code tax evasion scam has lost in court every single time.

[Dezcad]

The Blowhard has responded, and removed any link to here previously posted on LH:

Actually, pretty much everything that will be said or posted by such folks about CtC should prompt two questions: Why are they going to the trouble of posting anything at all? Is it just some kind of imagined public-spiritedness? Sure, and I've got this bridge... Obviously they focus on CtC and furiously post their lies and discouragements because they are folks who very much have a stake in the preservation of the big lie-- that is, their oxen are being gored over here, and they'd like to stop it by any means necessary.

The second question that anything said or posted by this sort of person or group should prompt is: What REALLY happened? This is because you can be sure that whatever they are saying is at least nine-tenths wrong (if it concerns CtC).

For instance, the IRS shill that runs that site has posted things about "tax preparers" being "enjoined". He has mentioned several, most of whom I can't comment on, as I have no idea who they are. But I DO know Don Gray, who the quatloser describes as having been enjoined in an expression of official dispute of the accuracy of CtC. This is completely mendacious (and actually a nearly perfect opposite of the truth). See http://losthorizons.com/thedenierspage.htm#Gray for the accurate story.

This fellow has also posted carefully-constructed lies about Patrick Mooney's lawsuit, also attempting to suggest that it represents a "loss for CtC". The truth is that Patrick Mooney was ruled against by the Tax Court when he tried to challenge a "frivolous" penalty that had been withheld from an otherwise complete refund made to him (see http://losthorizons.com/tax/MoreVictories16.htm ). Furthermore, the tax court merely ruled that Patrick had "failed to prosecute his case" (without explanation), not that anything he argued was inherently wrong.

Another case that this liar posts about is that of Joe Fennell. Joe Fennell was not arguing a CtC issue-- he was attempting to challenge an old assessment concerning a year prior to CtC being published, and for which he had ignored a notice of deficiency when it was issued long before ever even hearing about the book. He went into TC arguing that the ignored NOD was defective, and lost. This had nothing to do with CtC, other than to emphasize that even acquiring a complete knowledge of the truth about the tax from study of CtC can't reverse EVERY mistake made in the past.

Then, of course, quatlosers love to post bs about the various assaults on me over the years. Most notable is the desperate roll-out of the fiction that I was ruled against in district and appellate courts in the "lawsuit" launched against me in 2006 precisely for the purpose of giving IRS tools like these something to post about.

The idea is that most folks seeing the nonsense posted by the shills won't go to the trouble of looking further and discovering that these "rulings" were carefully structured to look superficially real while actually being void. see http://www.losthorizons.com/lawsuit.htm . Read it all, carefully. That page also reveals the truth about the small handful of unfortunates also subjected to a never-repeated-since assault as part of this corrupt charade. Quatlosers crow that CtC was "defeated" in these cases, but nothing could be further from the truth. Read the page through.

In the same vein, the quatlosers have attempted to "dismiss" the DoJ dismissals of previous assaults on CtC and me as inconsequential (unsurprisingly). However, visit http://losthorizons.com/tax/TheDOJFolds.htm and see the dismissals themselves (and the background info), as well as the relevant law.

Those victories are anything but inconsequential, and they did not happen because of a government "change in plans", as the quatloser has suggested in at least one post I've had the misfortune to see. (Indeed, the implication of that post-- that the feds would back off like this from charges that they thought they could make stick-- is ludicrous. If the feds hadn't faced recognized losses in these cases, they would have followed through, and then pursued their "other plans" also. For more on this, see http://www.losthorizons.com/LastShotFor ... htm#Update , where you can see the IRS's own records of their futile five-year effort to figure out some pretext for silencing me by charging me with something-- which began well before they admitted defeat on the "promotion of an abusive tax shelter" nonsense and sought the dismissals.)

The bottom line is that the beneficiaries of the "ignorance tax" will do anything to protect the lie. Don't help them by just taking in their bs. Also, don't post their lies, or links to their lies on this forum. That simply serves their bad purposes, by giving them access to many more eyes than they could get any other way.

[Imalawman]

wow, now that's scary. Either he's:
1. Incredibly stupid,
2. An accomplished huckster, or
3. he's 100% natural, batshit crazy.

Take your pick, because based on that drivel, its one of those three options.

[Quixote]

Someone had to post it.

ARTHUR: I command you as King of the Britons to stand aside!
BLACK KNIGHT: I move for no man.
ARTHUR: So be it!
[hah]
[parry thrust]
[ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT's left arm off]
ARTHUR: Now stand aside, worthy adversary.
BLACK KNIGHT: 'Tis but a scratch.
ARTHUR: A scratch? Your arm's off!
BLACK KNIGHT: No, it isn't.
ARTHUR: Well, what's that then?
BLACK KNIGHT: I've had worse.
ARTHUR: You liar!
BLACK KNIGHT: Come on you pansy!
[hah]
[parry thrust]
[ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT's right arm off]
ARTHUR: Victory is mine!
[kneeling]
We thank thee Lord, that in thy merc-
[hah]
BLACK KNIGHT: Come on then.
ARTHUR: What?
BLACK KNIGHT: Have at you!
ARTHUR: You are indeed brave, Sir knight, but the fight is mine.
BLACK KNIGHT: Oh, had enough, eh?
ARTHUR: Look, you stupid bastard, you've got no arms left.
BLACK KNIGHT: Yes I have.
ARTHUR: Look!
BLACK KNIGHT: Just a flesh wound.
[bang]
ARTHUR: Look, stop that.
BLACK KNIGHT: Chicken! Chicken!
ARTHUR: Look, I'll have your leg. Right!
[whop]
BLACK KNIGHT: Right, I'll do you for that!
ARTHUR: You'll what?
BLACK KNIGHT: Come 'ere!
ARTHUR: What are you going to do, bleed on me?
BLACK KNIGHT: I'm invincible!
ARTHUR: You're a loony.
BLACK KNIGHT: The Black Knight always triumphs!
Have at you! Come on then.
[whop]
[ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT's other leg off]
BLACK KNIGHT: All right; we'll call it a draw.
ARTHUR: Come, Patsy.
BLACK KNIGHT: Oh, oh, I see, running away then. You yellow
bastards! Come back here and take what's coming to you.
I'll bite your legs off!

[Lambkin]

wow, now that's scary. Either he's:
1. Incredibly stupid,
2. An accomplished huckster, or
3. he's 100% natural, batshit crazy.

Take your pick, because based on that drivel, its one of those three options.

Are you trying to say that a batshit-crazy stupid huckster can't be accomplished? It only requires finding some gullible people who are crazier and dumber than himself. Feel the power of the Internet!

[Pottapaug1938]

As Charlie Pierce says in "Idiot America"....

Three Great Premises of Idiot America:

1) Any theory is valid if it sells books, soaks up ratings, or otherwise moves units.

2) Anything can be true if somebody says it on television.

3) Fact is that which enough people believe. Truth is determined by how fervently they believe it.

To the word "television", I would add "radio, or the Internet".

[webhick]

Actually, pretty much everything that will be said or posted by such folks about CtC should prompt two questions:

Lemme guess: "Should I blindly believe everything Darth Hendrickson tells me?" and "Maybe all those court losses are real?"

Why are they going to the trouble of posting anything at all? Is it just some kind of imagined public-spiritedness?

DAMN. Wrong again. I'm always bad at guessing games.

Oh, to answer your questions. People post here about your scam because you're ruining people's lives. Because of you, people have lost money, homes, and families. Yes, those people who bought your book and followed your lead have been slapped with thousands of dollars in fines and penalties, owe back the funds they erroneously received using your methods, have had their paychecks garnished, liens put on their homes, and their families are tired of their bullshit so count them out, too.

Sure, and I've got this bridge...

And I bet that for a nominal fee paid to you, they can cross that bridge and magically become de-taxed.

Obviously they focus on CtC and furiously post their lies and discouragements because they are folks who very much have a stake in the preservation of the big lie-- that is, their oxen are being gored over here, and they'd like to stop it by any means necessary.

Or, more likely, that you have a bigger stake in your "theory" panning out. Just imagine the book sales that you'd get if you won, not to mention the TV Interviews, maybe a Nobel prize - hell, I bet you can even get a reality TV show on FOX. And then all your adoring CTCers can bow and kiss your feet for all eternity while you silence anyone who disagrees with you. Kind of like you do on the forum. Anyone who has been there a while knows this just as much as you do - you have yet to actually gore any oxen - you just ban them from your property so none of the other oxen can hear what is actually going on.

The second question that anything said or posted by this sort of person or group should prompt is: What REALLY happened?

Don't you really mean: In response to anything that is said or posted by Quatloos, you should ask yourself "What would Pete tell me happened?"

This is because you can be sure that whatever they are saying is at least nine-tenths wrong (if it concerns CtC).

Says the guy with the biggest stake of all in this "battle." How many book sales would you lose? How much would it hurt your ego if you didn't have a hoard of lemmings?

For instance, the IRS shill that runs that site has posted things about "tax preparers" being "enjoined". He has mentioned several, most of whom I can't comment on, as I have no idea who they are. But I DO know Don Gray, who the quatloser describes as having been enjoined in an expression of official dispute of the accuracy of CtC. This is completely mendacious (and actually a nearly perfect opposite of the truth). See http://losthorizons.com/thedenierspage.htm#Gray for the accurate story.

Perhaps they could look a the Press Release from the Department of Justice (as in the people who prosecute this kind of thing) for the facts: http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2007/March/07_tax_167.html

[..snip..]
This is where I get lazy and just point you to Dan's Dossiers on Clunky Scam Artists: http://tpgurus.wikidot.com/peter-hendrickson

Then, of course, quatlosers love to post bs about the various assaults on me over the years. Most notable is the desperate roll-out of the fiction that I was ruled against in district and appellate courts in the "lawsuit" launched against me in 2006 precisely for the purpose of giving IRS tools like these something to post about.

I love that last sentence. It looks like you're saying that that idea that the court ruled against you in 2006 to give us something to talk about is all a lie. You have to watch your contradictions there.

BTW, what exactly is BS about your losses back then? 'Cause I'm looking at the appellate decision that pretty much bitch slaps you. You lost because you're wrong. You lost the supreme court thingy you tried to do earlier this year. LOST. L-O-S-T. Oh, and IIRC, they also bitch slapped you earlier this year when they basically said that your Supreme Court thingy wasn't even worth the effort of discussion.

The idea is that most folks seeing the nonsense posted by the shills won't go to the trouble of looking further and discovering that these "rulings" were carefully structured to look superficially real while actually being void. see http://www.losthorizons.com/lawsuit.htm .

Riiiight. It's more likely that you don't want your followers to see the actual text of the cases so they can read how the court told you that you are WRONG.

Read it all, carefully.

Kind of like how your parents used to feed you when you were a baby... Only yours apparently used to feed you directly from the jar which explains why your bullshit is so watered down. With baby spit.

Quatlosers crow that CtC was "defeated" in these cases, but nothing could be further from the truth. Read the page through.

They argued CtC and lost. How is that not the truth?

In the same vein, the quatlosers have attempted to "dismiss" the DoJ dismissals of previous assaults on CtC and me as inconsequential (unsurprisingly).
[..snip..]
Those victories are anything but inconsequential, and they did not happen because of a government "change in plans", as the quatloser has suggested in at least one post I've had the misfortune to see. (Indeed, the implication of that post-- that the feds would back off like this from charges that they thought they could make stick-- is ludicrous. If the feds hadn't faced recognized losses in these cases, they would have followed through, and then pursued their "other plans" also.[/quote]
Um, they do that kind of stuff all the time. They want the best possible odds of putting your ass on a diet in the Graybar Hotel & Gym. So, they're going to go after the charges that they can get to stick best.

where you can see the IRS's own records of their futile five-year effort to figure out some pretext for silencing me by charging me with something-- which began well before they admitted defeat on the "promotion of an abusive tax shelter" nonsense and sought the dismissals.)

From what I've seen, the DOJ isn't all that good about enforcing those orders.

The bottom line is that the beneficiaries of the "ignorance tax" will do anything to protect the lie.

I always thought that the "ignorance tax" was those frivolous penalties they keep slapping on your followers. Because, when all is said and done, they end up a billion times worse off than when they started.

Also, don't post their lies, or links to their lies on this forum. That simply serves their bad purposes, by giving them access to many more eyes than they could get any other way.

Oh, Darth doesn't want a dissenting opinion on his forum. I'm , I tell you. It's just too bad that he didn't warn people there that if they post the truth on his forum again, they get jettisoned out the airlock. Or, if there's enough of it, he'll wipe the forum again. Can't have anyone thinking for himself there, huh?

[LPC]

Hendrickson has applied the same reading comprehension skills and semantic word games he applied to the Internal Revenue Code while writing CtC, and has concluded none of the court rulings against him or his followers are actually against him or his followers.

Should we be surprised?

[Quixote]

Here's a question. If PH is found guilty, do you think he will be immediately remanded into custody, or will he be allowed to remain out on bail until sentencing?

I wonder because if he is immediately taken into custody, who will inform his sheeple that he is in the jailhouse?

Also, if PH is in jail for any length of time, who will look after the Lost Horizons site and forum? Or will it all degenerate into chaos, riddled with viruses and such, until it goes dark for not paying the service provider?

Think Pete has planned for that contingency?

Given Pete's proven ability to ignore reality, it's quite possible that he will not admit he has been convicted.

Could the DOJ ask that LH be shut down if Pete is convicted?