Pete Hendrickson is a coward like the cowards before him

[Joey Smith]

The post below is spot-on. When these gurus get hauled into court, they start trying to slip out on procedural grounds instead of putting their pet theory on the block. Recalls mulletboy Larken Rose and how he abandoned his pet theory before this trial (and conviction).

At this point, there is only one good answer. Hendrickson *knows* that the court will rule against him, and doesn't want that to happen. It might be ego, or it might be economic self-interest (to keep the book sales alive), or it might be an unconscious defense mechanism to protect his delusions. But the conclusion that he is ducking the hard truth is now inescapable.

You're suggesting he doesn't really want the court to address his legal theories. I agree....

Yes, it's interesting that Hendrickson has repeatedly claimed, in so many words, that the courts are somehow afraid to confront his nonsensical theories, when he is the one bobbing and weaving.

Hey, Peteroski, hey PeteMeister, hey Peterino! Why not just come out and assert your Cracking the Code theory directly, in court. File a brief with the Court wherein you assert that, as a matter of law, your private sector non-federally privileged earnings not connected to the exercise of a government privilege are simply not taxable? Word it any way you like, Pete. Take a stand, buddy.

What's the matter, Pete? Are you being bothered by a thought -- a thought lodged back there somewhere in some little part of your brain, a thought that is not delusional -- a thought that recognizes that your Cracking the Code tax scam is a loser -- in short, a thought, a recognition, that you are a loser?

[The Operative]

Gee Joey, I can understand that you have strong feelings about tax denier gurus like Pete, but did this really need another thread?

[Famspear]

Some of Pete's followers also sense that trying to assert the Cracking the Code tax scam is a losing proposition, as evidenced by threads like this one:

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=2035

--entitled "TAKING THE NEUTRAL POSITION".

The Crackheads are so frustrated by defeat after defeat that they have taken to stuff like this:

For those having issues with past non-CTC return filings, a forum member pointed out that one of the best strategies is to take a neutral position. This means stop arguing the law, stop "proving your innocence", and/or stop taking other contrary positions. Instead, you neither deny nor accept liability. You simply correct your records in a CTC-educated manner and direct the IRS to show you have a federal tax liability. You rebut all presumptions and positions contrary to your information. You are willing to pay what is due by law, but not a penny more.

You can move to a neutral position at any time. This places the burden of proof on the IRS....

(back on 23 July 2009, the first posting in the aforementioned thread).

Here's another post, on 25 July:

.....Careful!!!

Are you taking the position that the "person" in 6671(b) can be subject to the 6702 penalty?

It's not your job to even presume that!

DON'T TAKE A POSITION!!!

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... c&start=15

Here's a gem from 27 July:

Unless one has a non-neutral position to prove, why would one petition the Tax Court to get permission to argue a position? One can simply take a neutral position and keep remedy in the administrative realm.

Another Crackhead responds with:

Undedrstood [sic]...

By "administrative realm", you mean the endless correspondence between myself and the IRS? LOL...

Here's some more, from 30 July:

My thought is that the third parties who submitted a W-2 or 1099 did take a legal position and did make legal determinations when they filed the information return. The Internal Revenue is taking the position that the third parties made correct legal determiations [sic] and are attempting to use this information as the reason for changing your testimony. The Internal Revenue appears to take the position that the third parties['] information is correct and your is frivolous, but on the record there is no proof the information return is any more correct than your sworn testimony.

If you do not understand how the third parties made the legal determinations, as the third parties are alleging the paymets [sic] to you took on a paticular [sic] legal character, which has not been proven. And on what basis of law did the third parties make these allegations, on what facts and evidence did the Internal Revenue use to determine the allegations are valid filings and are the reason for "changing" your testimony..

The position needs to be substantiated, either by the third party itself or by the Internal Revenue proving facts and evidence verifying and proving the third parties legal determinations are valid as a matter of law. Until one or the other is accomplishied [sic] by the Internal Revenue the third parties testimony is hearsay.

Tha [sic] was my thoughts [sic] on the matter

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... c&start=45

And, on August 1:

This is all great stuff, guys and I will shift to a more neutral position but it seems to me that in so doing, this approach will only lead to an endless string of correspondence between me and the IRS - I ask questions and they make demands. I ask more questions and they make more demands, etc, etc, etc... This could take a loooooooooong time. When do they throw in the towel? Do they [the IRS personnel] throw in the towel?

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... c&start=45

On September 24:

I have tried everything I know to explain to the IRS why I filed the way I filed. Correspondence after correspondence. I've taken the neutral position and requested their help in explaining what it is about the tax laws that I'm not understanding. They ignore my pleas and tell me that the information I provided (I didn't supply information - just asked questions) does not substantiate a change in the proposed additional taxes due. They're not evern reading what I send them. The 90 days on my Notice of Deficiency is almost up and I've nowhere to turn. Even talked to a local tax lawyer who refused to take my case. What now?

I've omitted the screen names of the various posters. It doesn't seem to matter. They're all expressing variations on a Sisyphusean theme......