Dear Subscriber,
(This isn't part of the tax law series of messages. It's another
interruption.)
When the IRS/CID decided to bug Peter McCandless (about my case), they
wanted to know what my "motives" are for what I do. (I don't think they
liked the answer.) When they went and pestered our babysitter's mom, they
wanted to know what my motivations are. (Again, the answer didn't make me
look bad enough.) The same happened when they harassed some other people.
In court documents, the government alleged that my actions are a "get rich
scheme," or a "tax fraud scheme," and that I'm only pretending to be a
believer in the original intent of the Constitution. And in front of the
grand jury, Floyd Miller (Assistant U.S. Attorney) "asked" (by asserting
it) whether my motivation was really just making money, not because I was
a "patriot" or anything.
Most of you have been on this list for quite a while, and I don't need to
tell you what motivates me. You already know. (If there is such a thing
as a "labor of love," can there be a "labor of annoyance"?) Instead,
let's turn it around, and consider the motivation of people like IRS
Special Agent Donald Pearlman (who requested and executed and armed
invasion of my home), and Assistant U.S. Attorney Floyd Miller (who was
the DOJ attorney who authorized that raid).
(All of this would also apply to the feds who harassed, vilified, and
finally imprisoned ***** Simkanin, the feds who silenced Thurston Bell,
etc.)
At first, good feds COULD have had somewhat noble (if somewhat misguided)
motives. If their bosses told them I was an evil scofflaw who wouldn't
pay my fair share, I could see them thinking it would be a good and
righteous thing to put me in my place, and enforce the law.
But how about now? Having stolen my e-mails, swiped all my boxes of
records, seen all my correspondence, accessed all my online articles,
etc., what must they think? For example, does Floyd Miller REALLY still
think I'm doing this mainly for the money?
No, he does not. He's lying about my motives, intentionally
misrepresenting who I am, what I am doing, and why. And he knows it. In
other words, Mr. Miller is trying to IMPRISON someone for a crime that he
KNOWS that person did NOT commit. (How slimy can you get?)
Let's suppose that after looking at all the web site articles, the Theft
By Deception video, the mini-CD, the countless letters I've sent to the
feds, etc., Mr. Pearlman and Mr. Miller still think my position is
"frivolous" and completely without basis. (Personally, I think only
someone illiterate could think that after all that, but let's pretend.)
Could they possibly not know that I really believe it, even if they think
it's wrong?
Once upon a time Joseph Banister was an IRS agent working for the CID
(Criminal Investigation Division). He thought going after people who were
trying to cheat was a noble job. But when confronted with evidence
showing that at least some of those nasty "tax protestors" were NOT
cheating or hiding (or protesting the law), but were completely open and
honest about what they were doing and why, trying to "take them down"
didn't seem to be a very noble thing to do anymore. (I confess to having
paraphrased the heck out of what Mr. Banister has said, but I think the
spirit of it is still accurate.)
You see, Mr. Banister is a good person. Mr. Pearlman and Mr. Miller are
not. (Care for a little judgment with your morning coffee?) Good people
don't try to imprison innocent people. It is only a crime to "willfully"
fail to file a required return or pay a tax owed (meaning the person knew
it was against the law), so even if the feds are still blind enough to
ignore all the evidence showing the truth about the tax, they can at least
see that I'm doing what I "believe" the law requires.
(I hate to talk much about "willfulness," because it always comes out
sounding like, "well, I really believe this theory... even if it's wrong."
I KNOW what the law is, not based on "belief," but based on logic and
evidence--a LOT of evidence--but right now I'm just talking about their
view of the situation, for which it doesn't even MATTER if I'm correct.)
Suppose you were a CID thug... I mean, "agent"... and came across a case
where a person didn't file, SAID they didn't file, and explained why,
arguing something you thought was legally flawed... but you thought he
really believed it. (For this example, let's say his argument WAS
incorrect.) How would a good person handle such a situation?
Well, being mistaken about the law is not a crime, and because of the
"willful" factor, people are only supposed to be prosecuted for
INTENTIONALLY violating the tax laws. So what do you (the CID guy) tell
your bosses, and what do you do?
"The guy believes this goofy thing, but since he really seems to believe
it, we don't really have a criminal case here. I guess we need to try to
politely show him he's wrong. Then I guess get collections after him.
But there's no sign that he's hiding, or doing anything other than what he
believes he's supposed to... even though his beliefs are goofy."
That would be one option. In fact, for people who care about the law,
that would be the ONLY option. How about doing this instead?:
"Whatever it takes, find some dirt on this guy. There must be something
somewhere we can use to make him look bad. Let's start with a search
warrant. I want every record in his house. We'll find something. Oh,
and start interviewing everyone he knows, and see if any of them have
anything bad to say about him. Try to find someone, maybe a former
employee, who will impugn the guy's motives. And we'll have to come up
with a good slant on this... let's start to portray him as some scam
artist out to make a quick buck. And be sure to keep calling him a tax
protestor. We ought to be able to put together enough of a smear campaign
to get an indictment. And to hell with the First Amendment; we have to do
whatever we can to get those damn videos out of circulation!"
Guess which one Mr. Pearlman and Mr. Miller did. And they are questioning
MY motives? (And to think they work for agencies with "Service" and
"Justice" in their names. How Orwellian.) I wonder how they sleep at
night, and--as I've wonder aloud before--I wonder if they can still fool
themselves into thinking that THEY are the "good guys" here.
Sincerely,
Larken Rose
larken@taxableincome.net
http://www.861.info
http://www.theft-by-deception.com
P.S. Past e-mails to this list can be found at:
http://www.3rdear.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum;f=16
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe, send a blank message to
.
|
