Strictly speaking, there is no federal common law... To use court cases in support is a violation of Due Process. But of course, you people are into violating the rights of people just like not answering questions and advancing ad hominem attacks, right?Pottapaug1938 wrote: Actually, the good doctor does know quite a bit about both constitutional and international law, as a quick perusal of his previous posts will show. It is YOU, "Jurist", who knows nothing about either. Of course, you can prove me wrong; and a quick citation of appellate court cases buttressing your points will accomplish that quite nicely.
You can also directly answer his questions, instead of ducking them like you did.
LB Bork
Moderators: Prof, Judge Roy Bean
Re: Biggest sovereign leaders/names/gurus
-
- J.D., Miskatonic University School of Crickets
- Posts: 1812
- Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 10:02 pm
- Location: Southern California
Re: LB Bork
To cite court cases is to violate due process? Where did you get that idea from?The Jurist wrote:Strictly speaking, there is no federal common law... To use court cases in support is a violation of Due Process.
You're the one who has yet to answer a single one of my questions (or anyone else's for that matter).The Jurist wrote: But of course, you people are into violating the rights of people just like not answering questions and advancing ad hominem attacks, right?
Dr. Caligari
(Du musst Caligari werden!)
(Du musst Caligari werden!)
Re: LB Bork
I am still waiting for the original answers to the article that was written-off as loony by the one that admits he is attorney on board. Once the article is properly debunked, maybe the questions you asked will be answered. So far all I have gotten is childish, non-responsive gibberish.wserra wrote:Actually, though, we have already started, with Caligari's and my questions about where you find anything about "private law" in the Constitution. You either ignore it or favor us with your "EPIC FAIL" opinion, something akin to a second-grader's "Nyah, nyah, nyah".The Jurist wrote:What to start going into law now?
And, an epic fail is an epic fail.
Re: LB Bork
The noted attorney (aka, Daniel B. Evans) said the article he posted ignored the fact that 'resident' was noted in the regulation. So what? Apples and oranges to the subject matter discussed. So, you people were asked about what a resident was all about first. Answer please.Dr. Caligari wrote:If you think the word "resident" in the income tax regulations means something other than the common, dictionary definition, why don't you tell us what it means? And where that definition is found?The Jurist wrote:All right, what is a resident? Where is this defined? We really need to know this.
In fact, why don't you make one statement about the law-- any statement? Is it because you know that we would cite numerous cases showing you're wrong within 5 minutes after you post?
Last edited by The Jurist on Thu Sep 30, 2010 12:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Knight Templar of the Sacred Tax
- Posts: 7668
- Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 12:59 pm
- Location: Texas
Re: LB Bork
No, you haven't received gibberish, childish or otherwise.The Jurist wrote:I am still waiting for the original answers to the article that was written-off as loony by the one that admits he is attorney on board. Once the article is properly debunked, maybe the questions you asked will be answered. So far all I have gotten is childish, non-responsive gibberish.wserra wrote:Actually, though, we have already started, with Caligari's and my questions about where you find anything about "private law" in the Constitution. You either ignore it or favor us with your "EPIC FAIL" opinion, something akin to a second-grader's "Nyah, nyah, nyah".The Jurist wrote:What to start going into law now?
And, an epic fail is an epic fail.
Get it straight, buster. The rest of the world is not here to prove to you what you want proved. If you want to copy and paste a specific statement from the article and explain why you think it's correct, be my guest. If we are so inclined, we will respond.
We'll decide whether the article needs to be "debunked," and we'll decide, if needed, whether the "debunking" is properly done.
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet
-
- Conde de Quatloo
- Posts: 5631
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 5:08 am
- Location: Der Dachshundbünker
Re: LB Bork
I think I'm tired of this one already, he's not just stupid, he's a real dickhead, too.
Epic Fail? Goodness, you're not in middle school are you? Or is that your own self assessment of your life?
Get ready for the ignore.
Epic Fail? Goodness, you're not in middle school are you? Or is that your own self assessment of your life?
Get ready for the ignore.
Supreme Commander of The Imperial Illuminati Air Force
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.
Re: Tax deniers get targets painted on their bums
Oh no! Not this worthless position. Two words: Grace Commission.wserra wrote:Well, Bork generously offers the public an opportunity to break the bonds of the United States (while, of course, still leeching on such matters as a common defense, roads, schools and countless others).
And it appears that "wserra" likes his Marxism.
Boy, that sure is a deceptive statement... You must have a big brush to broad-brush that one. Also, nice touch on using the word "people" to encompass everyone. Great attorney trick. Another great attorney trick, this deciever left out a lot of the content of which that was taken from. Talk about MASTER DECEPTION. Afraid of something?wserra wrote:Q: Do I have to pay state and federal Income Taxes after I terminate my federal status?
A: As a general rule: No.
Oh, I understand. Bork doesn't "tell people not to pay"; he just says they don't have to. Glad we cleared that up.
Question wserra: Does anyone have to be involved in criminal activity, or be associated with criminals?
Last edited by The Jurist on Thu Sep 30, 2010 6:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Recycler of Paytriot Fantasies
- Posts: 4287
- Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 6:02 am
Re: LB Bork
Ok, i'm just a layperson here, so everything i know about the rules of evidence i learned from Law and Order. Here goes:The Jurist wrote:Oh my, Observer.... I will have fun getting back to you.The Observer wrote:.
I am seeing that you people PRESUME a bit here at Quatloos.
I must ask, have you ever studied the rules of evidence?
Lawyer1: Your Honor, the 14th Amendment create a system of private law!
Lawyer2: Objection! Assumes facts not in evidence.
Judge: Well, Counselor? Can you show me the actual words in the 14th Amendment where it does that?
Lawyer1: Um, er, no i can't.
Judge: Sustained!
Lawyer1: But on this website it says so!
Lawyer2: Objection! Hearsay!
Judge: Sustained!
DAH-DUNK!
Three cheers for the Lesser Evil!
10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4
10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4
Re: Biggest sovereign leaders/names/gurus
Same question to you LPC, Does anyone have to engage in criminal activity, or be associated with criminals?LPC wrote:Yep, that's sovereign citizen gibberish all right.[snip]Like the capital ‘C’ citizen ruse, what people are trying to accomplish here is to claim that they are not 14th Amendment citizens. The problem is they probably are due to the fact they have done nothing to terminate the citizenship.
Thanks for helping confirm our opinions.
Re: LB Bork
Is Greg violating the Forum rules by using profanity, and also being a bit middle schoolish?Gregg wrote:I think I'm tired of this one already, he's not just stupid, he's a real dickhead, too.
Epic Fail? Goodness, you're not in middle school are you? Or is that your own self assessment of your life?
Get ready for the ignore.
Just curious.
Re: LB Bork
Am Jur, and Black's Law Sixth. But attorneys break the law all the time. An interesting custom and usage that they seem to get away with all too much.Dr. Caligari wrote:To cite court cases is to violate due process? Where did you get that idea from?The Jurist wrote:Strictly speaking, there is no federal common law... To use court cases in support is a violation of Due Process.
-
- Quatloosian Federal Witness
- Posts: 7618
- Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 6:39 pm
Re: Tax deniers get targets painted on their bums
Well, yes, two words do appear to delimit your knowledge. "Epic fail". "Grace Commission". Once you get past two words, "Jurist" changes the subject.The Jurist wrote:Oh no! Not this worthless position. Two words: Grace Commission.wserra wrote:Well, Bork generously offers the public an opportunity to break the bonds of the United States (while, of course, still leeching on such matters as a common defense, roads, schools and countless others).
For example, the Grace Commission's conclusions - right or wrong, constantly misleadingly cited - were that one-third of available taxes were wasted, one-third were never collected (in part because of people like Bork) and "therefore" the remaining income tax revenues never got past debt service and transfer payments (which includes a couple of minor programs called "Social Security" and "Medicare"). Whatever you make of this - and yes, it's more complicated than that - the relevance is unclear. What do you think finances national defense? Education subsidies? It's hardly as though OMB says, "OK, let's go out and waste one-third of income tax collections, but nothing from other sources of revenue".
"Marxism" is only one word. You might be able to handle one more.And it appears that "wserra" likes his Marxism.
I see. When Bork wrote that, he was only addressing the one unspecified person who asked the question. That's why he put in it his FAQ.Boy, that sure is a deceptive statement... You must have a big brush to broad-brush that one. Also, nice touch on using the word "people" to encompass everyone. Great attorney trick.wserra wrote:Q: Do I have to pay state and federal Income Taxes after I terminate my federal status?
A: As a general rule: No.
Oh, I understand. Bork doesn't "tell people not to pay"; he just says they don't have to. Glad we cleared that up.
Gregg's right - this guy's too dumb to be as entertaining as I thought he was going to be. Delete his posts? Hell, no. He makes it clear that Bork is every bit the scammer we say he is. If I were Bork, I'd probably say he's one of us, setting him up to look bad.
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume
- David Hume
Re: LB Bork
I beg to differ, Firstly, Quatloos made a claim without justification, not the world. Facts are precise and not to be broad brushed and wherefore Quatloos must prove its claim with accuracy.Famspear wrote:Get it straight, buster. The rest of the world is not here to prove to you what you want proved.
Secondly, my name is not buster (temper showing there, Famspear)
**Where did everyone go... There must be a lot of 9 to 5ers on board here**
-
- Quatloosian Federal Witness
- Posts: 7618
- Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 6:39 pm
Re: LB Bork
All 150 volumes?The Jurist wrote:Am Jur,Dr. Caligari wrote:To cite court cases is to violate due process? Where did you get that idea from?
All 700 pages?and Black's Law Sixth.
Q. Where'd you get that crazy idea of Coulomb's Law, Jurist?
A. Physics.
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume
- David Hume
-
- Conde de Quatloo
- Posts: 5631
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 5:08 am
- Location: Der Dachshundbünker
Re: LB Bork
I might be, we don't have a set in stone list of standards here, common sense, grace and context go a long way towards justifying a lot around here. And honestly, I only called you a dickhead because I thought it may be rude to call you an asshole on your first day.Is Greg violating the Forum rules by using profanity, and also being a bit middle schoolish?
But there's always tomorrow.
Supreme Commander of The Imperial Illuminati Air Force
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.
-
- Judge for the District of Quatloosia
- Posts: 3704
- Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 6:04 pm
- Location: West of the Pecos
Re: LB Bork
My troll-alert light has finally reached full intensity and the don't care light is blinking more and more rapidly.
Someone please tell me why this shouldn't go into the pissing contest trashbin.
Someone please tell me why this shouldn't go into the pissing contest trashbin.
The Honorable Judge Roy Bean
The world is a car and you're a crash-test dummy.
The Devil Makes Three
The world is a car and you're a crash-test dummy.
The Devil Makes Three
-
- Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
- Posts: 6134
- Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:26 pm
- Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.
Re: LB Bork
The (ahahaha) Jurist is a troll in the mold of Harvester, lorne and Van Pelt. Like them, he is constantly issuing challenges which demand proof of things that have been discussed many times before on Quatloos; but when he is challenged for citations to court cases which buttress his assertions, the verbal tapdance and shuffle begins anew.
It's time to press the collective "No Comment" button on this guy. Until and unless he summons up the guts to provide proof of his assertions, his scribbles aren't worth a second of our collective time.
It's time to press the collective "No Comment" button on this guy. Until and unless he summons up the guts to provide proof of his assertions, his scribbles aren't worth a second of our collective time.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
-
- Quatloosian Federal Witness
- Posts: 7618
- Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 6:39 pm
Re: LB Bork
Because amongst the pissing is a clear case that "LB Bork" is a scammer, something which merits a better fate than auto-pruning. It merits search-engine indexing, in fact. I do agree with Pottapaug that "Jurist" should be mooted out, but I also intend to look further into Bork.Judge Roy Bean wrote:Someone please tell me why this shouldn't go into the pissing contest trashbin.
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume
- David Hume
Re: LB Bork
Look it up... You are the one's that have to prove your claim.wserra wrote:All 150 volumes?The Jurist wrote:Am Jur,Dr. Caligari wrote:To cite court cases is to violate due process? Where did you get that idea from?
All 700 pages?and Black's Law Sixth.
Q. Where'd you get that crazy idea of Coulomb's Law, Jurist?
A. Physics.
Understanding that many men know many things, and no one knows everything...
Just as I noted above, you people do not know law... You better PRACTICE some more.
-
- Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
- Posts: 6134
- Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:26 pm
- Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.
Re: Biggest sovereign leaders/names/gurus
Your cowardice and slipperiness is truly breathtaking. You respond to my post without addressing ANYTHING of what I said. You quote from the Erie case -- which is irrelevant here; you make an assertion about citing court cases which is so colossally ignorant and wrong I have to consider it as possibly the stupidest thing I've ever seen on Quatloos; and you end with a bunch of gibberish.The Jurist wrote:Strictly speaking, there is no federal common law... To use court cases in support is a violation of Due Process. But of course, you people are into violating the rights of people just like not answering questions and advancing ad hominem attacks, right?Pottapaug1938 wrote: Actually, the good doctor does know quite a bit about both constitutional and international law, as a quick perusal of his previous posts will show. It is YOU, "Jurist", who knows nothing about either. Of course, you can prove me wrong; and a quick citation of appellate court cases buttressing your points will accomplish that quite nicely.
You can also directly answer his questions, instead of ducking them like you did.
You really ought to stop using the computer when there are no grownups around.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools