Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8984 total)
42 online now:
nwr, PaulK, Phat (AdminPhat) (3 members, 39 visitors)
Newest Member: Jerry Johnson
Post Volume: Total: 877,697 Year: 9,445/23,288 Month: 460/1,544 Week: 174/561 Day: 0/14 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Hovind busted, finally
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16111
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 256 of 308 (378294)
01-20-2007 4:42 AM
Reply to: Message 248 by johnfolton
01-19-2007 11:32 PM


Re: Well ...
1. Wages are not taxable income, as the term is defined by several key decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court that remain in force today.

This is of course not true, which is why you can't cite any of these mythical rulings of the Supreme Court.

Here's an actual legal ruling:

"Irrefutably, wages earned in compensation for services are "income" pursuant to the federal tax laws." (Boubel v. United States)

2. The U.S. Constitution authorizes Congress to levy "direct taxes" on private property, but only if those taxes are apportioned across the 50 States.

This is, of course, not true. The Sixteenth Amendment supercedes the rule on apportionment.

3. The IRS now enforces the collection of "income taxes" as direct taxes without apportionment, and cites the 16th Amendment for its authority to do so.

This is true. The Sixteenth Amendment, plus the specific tax laws, are indeed their authority to collect the income tax.

4. The 16th Amendment, the "income tax" amendment, was never lawfully ratified by the required 36 States, but was declared ratified by the U.S. Secretary of State.

This is, of course, not true, and you have been given a list of the states which ratified it.

5. The 16th Amendment could never have done away with the apportionment rule for any direct taxes if it never became a law in the first place.

But since it did "become a law", this is a rather pointless statement.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by johnfolton, posted 01-19-2007 11:32 PM johnfolton has not yet responded

Lithodid-Man
Member (Idle past 1482 days)
Posts: 504
From: Juneau, Alaska, USA
Joined: 03-22-2004


Message 257 of 308 (378298)
01-20-2007 5:14 AM
Reply to: Message 248 by johnfolton
01-19-2007 11:32 PM


Re: Well ...
Well..whatever (pun intended)

Let me guess, you also think the gold trim on court flags is from a maritime property seizure executive order created by Eisenhower and therefore all US courts are therefore nullified.

You also think that Dept. of Treasury cabinet holders must relinquish their US citizenship and swear allegiance to the UN.

You see, I have a relative that is a 'gold bug'. He makes all of your claims as well as the ones I mentioned above. That is why I always laugh when watching a certain TV show with a character who owns "Dale's Dead Bugs"

"Valentines Day is a conspiracy from the military-florist complex"
"Dentistry is a plot by the UN to hide our nation's silver in our teeth"
"Sex education is a UN plot to insure zero population growth"
"Peanut allergies are peanuts fighting back, they are sick of being eaten"

Fun stuff, please keep it comming!

And to be on topic, I have been celebrating Hovind's 10 year sentence. And rolling at his blog. Making lemonade, it would appear :laugh:


Doctor Bashir: "Of all the stories you told me, which were true and which weren't?"
Elim Garak: "My dear Doctor, they're all true"
Doctor Bashir: "Even the lies?"
Elim Garak: "Especially the lies"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by johnfolton, posted 01-19-2007 11:32 PM johnfolton has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 259 by johnfolton, posted 01-20-2007 12:06 PM Lithodid-Man has not yet responded

Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16111
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 258 of 308 (378319)
01-20-2007 9:09 AM
Reply to: Message 248 by johnfolton
01-19-2007 11:32 PM


Wages Are Income
Wages are not taxable income...

"[T]he earnings of the human brain and hand when unaided by capital ... are commonly dealt with as income in legislation." Stratton's Independence, Ltd. v. Howbert, 231 U.S. 399, 415 (1913).

"Every court which has ever considered the issue has unequivocally rejected the argument that wages are not income." United States v. Connor, 898 F.2d 942, 943-944 (3rd Cir. 1990).

"In our view, petitioner's wages are taxable as gross income..." Beard v. Commissioner, 793 F.2d 139, 140 (6th Cir. 1986), aff'g 82 T.C. 766 (1984);

"Wages are taxable income." Perkins v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 746 F. 2d 1187, 1188 (6th Cir. 1984); Beerbower v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 787 F.2d 588 (6th Cir. 1986).

"Wages are income, and the tax on wages is constitutional." Coleman v. Commissioner, 791 F.2d 68 (7th Cir. 1986), citing United States v. Thomas, 788 F.2d 1250 (7th Cir. 1986); Lovell v. United States, 755 F.2d 517 (7th Cir. 1984); Granzow v. Commissioner, 739 F.2d 265, 267 (7th Cir. 1984);

"Although not raised in his brief on appeal, the defendant's entire case at trial rested on his claim that he in good faith believed that wages are not income for taxation purposes. Whatever his mental state, he, of course, was wrong, as all of us are already aware. Nontheless, the defendant still insists that no case holds that wages are income. Let us now put that to rest: WAGES ARE INCOME. Any reading of tax cases by would-be tax protesters now should preclude a claim of good-faith belief that wages--or salaries--are not taxable." United States v. Koliboski, 732 F.2d 1328, 1329 n.1 (7th Cir. 1984), (emphasis in original; convictions for criminal failures to file affirmed).

"[W]e have [repeatedly] held that wages are within the definition of income under the Internal Revenue Code and the Sixteenth Amendment, and are subject to taxation. Denison v. Commissioner, 751 F.2d 241, 242 (8th Cir.1984) (per curiam), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1069, 105 S.Ct. 2149, 85 L.Ed.2d 505 (1985)." United States v. Gerads, 999 F.2d 1255 (8th Cir. 1993), cert. den. 510 U.S. 1193 (1994).

"Section 61 of the Internal Revenue Code imposes a tax on income, and under the Tax Code, wages are income." Grimes v. Commissioner, 806 F.2d 1451, 1453 (9th Cir. 1986).

"Compensation for labor or services, paid in the form of wages or salary, has been universally held by the courts of this republic to be income, subject to the income tax laws currently applicable." United States v. Romero, 640 F.2d 1014, 1016 (9th Cir. 1981).

"Irrefutably, wages earned in compensation for services are "income" pursuant to the federal tax laws." Boubel v. United States, 86 AFTR2d ¸2000-5123, No. 1:99-cv-380 (U.S.D.C. E.D.Tenn. 6/22/2000).

"[I]f anything in our tax law is clear, it is that: 'WAGES ARE INCOME.' ... [A]ny contention to the contrary is patently frivolous...."" Hill v. United States, 599 F. Supp. 118, 120-22 (M.D. Tenn. 1984), (emphasis in original), (quoting United States v. Koliboski, 732 F.2d 1328, 1329 n.1 (7th Cir. 1984)).

"As the cited cases, as well as many others, have made abundantly clear, the following arguments alluded to by the Lonsdales are completely lacking in legal merit and patently frivolous: ... (5) wages are not income...." Lonsdale v. United States, 919 F.2d 1440, 1448 (10th Cir. 1990).

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by johnfolton, posted 01-19-2007 11:32 PM johnfolton has not yet responded

johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4142 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 259 of 308 (378352)
01-20-2007 12:06 PM
Reply to: Message 257 by Lithodid-Man
01-20-2007 5:14 AM


Re: Well ...
You see, I have a relative that is a 'gold bug'.

I'm not sure if this is the right way to go or commodities perhaps a bit of both. The feds monetary policy is don't cut interest rates or their dollar indeed moves toward nothing, or raise interest rates which means they have to give more interest to those not in the market.

We're probably in a recession so the Feds say there worried about inflation. The Feds are walking the tight rope because of the sweet scam they have going and gold and silver dollars might well be a hedge.

However we have the euro competing with the dollar with the euro growing in value compared to the dollar what incentive is there to invest in the dollar when you get more purchasing power if you invest in the euro.

Because the dollar has no value other than purchasing power when the 10 horns burn the Great Whore. The beast will do away with your ability to purchase you will have to make a choice money for worship. However if you don't honor the worship clause your life will be terminated by the image of the beast.

It says all not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world will worship the beast but if you don't your life will be teminated(no mercy)by the image of the beast. Is this the beast that was and yet is not even he is the eight and is of the seven that goes to perdition. rev 17:11. Mandatory worship rev 13:15-16.

kjv rev 13:4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?

kjv rev 17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are chosen, and faithful.

P.S. I fully expect Kent Hovind will be with him because of my belief in the rapture being pre-trib in respect to the overcoming of the Lambs victory over the beast.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by Lithodid-Man, posted 01-20-2007 5:14 AM Lithodid-Man has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by CK, posted 01-20-2007 12:10 PM johnfolton has responded

CK
Member (Idle past 2679 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 260 of 308 (378354)
01-20-2007 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 259 by johnfolton
01-20-2007 12:06 PM


Re: Well ...
yeah but Odin tells me that's just lies he tells to you christians so I'm not worried.

quote:
Because the dollar has no value other than purchasing power when the 10 horns burn the Great Whore.

The dollars only good for internet porn?

Edited by CK, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by johnfolton, posted 01-20-2007 12:06 PM johnfolton has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 261 by johnfolton, posted 01-20-2007 12:18 PM CK has not yet responded

johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4142 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 261 of 308 (378355)
01-20-2007 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 260 by CK
01-20-2007 12:10 PM


Re: Well ...
yeah but Odin tells me that's just lies he tells to you christians so I'm not worried.

The devil is the liar, you should be worried.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by CK, posted 01-20-2007 12:10 PM CK has not yet responded

CK
Member (Idle past 2679 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 262 of 308 (378357)
01-20-2007 12:26 PM


Back to Dr. Dino
What was all this about:

quote:
In a recording of one of the telephone conversations played in court Friday, Hovind said the Internal Revenue Service, presiding judge and prosecutor broke the law by going after him, and there were things he could do "to make their lives miserable."

Wonder what he meant?

http://www.pensacolanewsjournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070120/NEWS01/701200319/1006


Percy
Member
Posts: 19844
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 263 of 308 (378743)
01-21-2007 4:30 PM


More News About Hovind
This was in today's Pensacola News Journal:

Earth to 'Dr. Dino': Please pay your taxes and start facing reality

Here's another article from yesterday, some old info, some new:

A decade for 'Dr. Dino'

Here's a link to a video of Hovind jail calls, well worth a listen. Hovind seems to be the biggest victim of his powers of persuasion:

Hovind Jail Calls Video (Starts with a commercial, it's audio after that)

Jo Hovind comes across, to me, as such a nice person of faith just caught up in Hovind's whole web of lies and deceptions simply because he's the guy she happens to love. Here's an incredibly painful exchange from the 1st jail tape video, I think from 12/4/2006:

Hovind: So cheer up, it's going to be fine. Can you do that?

Jo: I want, for me, it's even just having a hope, and I just don't have that right now. I don't have a hope, that it's going to be different in our marriage when you get out, 'cause I'm just hearing things that sound all the same, you know.

Hovind: Maybe I need to change. Or maybe you need to change and accept it. That's the way he is, that's the way God made him, so I'm going to love him that way. I mean, that's the other hope. Your hope is always that I will change. Maybe the hope ought to be that you will adapt.

Jo: I see.

Hovind: Other option, you know? Martha Washington had to adapt to her husband. This guy wants to go fight the British. Okay, I'll go to camp with him.

Jo: Well, sometimes I just can't, you know, get past the unrevolution...

Hovind: I'll call back, I'm running out of time.

Jo: Okay.

This tells me that Jo Hovind has real problems with the course her husband has chosen for them. He's an extremely powerful and manipulative personality. As much as these tapes are evidence that they should throw Hovind in jail and throw away the key, they are also evidence that Jo Hovind should only be sentenced to probation. I see divorce in the Hovind's future.

The sentencing description at the Pensacola News Journal says that after his prison sentence Hovind must spend three years on parole, and a couple people have wondered if they didn't really mean probation. I've now seen it reported in a couple places as parole, and if it really is parole and not probation I wonder if that is because it makes it easier to throw him back in prison for misbehavior once he gets out. Anyone know?

Here's another gem where Hovind is talking to his daughter Lindsay:

Hovind: The point that I'm making here, and that Lindsay is missing, is that the federal government is misapplying their authority, just like the IRS misapplies their authority. Scott Snyder has very legitimate authority to do things, according to the law. And that's what I sent him in all the letters. I says, Scott, I agree, you have authority, tobacco, alcohol, firearms, title 27 taxes, but I'm just asking you to please show me where is your authority for me. You know? I not questioning if he has authority. Like if a policeman from Pensacola is chasing you out of the city limits, he loses his authority. Or if he goes across the other end of the line, he loses his jurisdiction. It's a whole jurisdictional question, a very legitimate one.

Lindsay: Well, I'm sorry, that I don't get.

Nor the tax court, nor anyone else either. The only one that seems to agree with what Kent Hovind says is Kent Hovind, and the only one Kent Hovind is willing to listen to is Kent Hovind, and he's giving himself just horrible advice. It's almost as if he beliefs he can talk and bluster his way out of anything.

Here's another intriguing conversation between Hovind and is wife Jo:

Hovind: I'm trying to obey the law. If I'm breaking the law then please show me, which law? Do you know which law we've broken right now?

Jo: Well I know they claim we've broken <unintelligible> law, I don't see that. And they claim we're supposed to do withholding?

Hovind: Can you show me which law says that?

Jo: No.

Hovind: They didn't either. There is no such law. Now, the fact that this has been the custom for, you know, 30, 40, 50 years, I'm sorry.

Jo: Well, and there's the fact that we are never going to get along with the IRS unless somebody does withholding is also a fact.

Hovind: Well, there are other ways to get along with them, but that is certainly one option.

Jo: Well, I think you're very naive to even say that.

Hovind: Well, it's sort of like the mafia saying look, you're going to give us 500 bucks or your store's going to burn down. And somebody comes in a says, No, I'm not paying you 500 bucks. And, you know, if nobody ever stands up to the mafia then they just continue.

Jo: Yep.

Hovind: And a lot of people's stores do get burned down, and their arms broken and stuff like that, I know, but that doesn't mean it's right.

Jo: Yep. (sounds to be holding back tears)

I think it break's Jo Hovind's heart to have to witness her husband so hellbent on his self-destructive course.

--Percy


Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by arachnophilia, posted 01-21-2007 11:06 PM Percy has not yet responded
 Message 265 by subbie, posted 01-22-2007 12:17 AM Percy has not yet responded

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 529 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 264 of 308 (378821)
01-21-2007 11:06 PM
Reply to: Message 263 by Percy
01-21-2007 4:30 PM


Re: More News About Hovind
this is interesting and intruiging...

...but i'm not sure it's entirely in good taste?


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 263 by Percy, posted 01-21-2007 4:30 PM Percy has not yet responded

subbie
Member (Idle past 295 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 265 of 308 (378847)
01-22-2007 12:17 AM
Reply to: Message 263 by Percy
01-21-2007 4:30 PM


Re: More News About Hovind
The sentencing description at the Pensacola News Journal says that after his prison sentence Hovind must spend three years on parole, and a couple people have wondered if they didn't really mean probation. I've now seen it reported in a couple places as parole, and if it really is parole and not probation I wonder if that is because it makes it easier to throw him back in prison for misbehavior once he gets out. Anyone know?

There is no federal parole.

From this site:

Q: Is there federal parole? How many days of “good time served” credit can you get in federal prison?

A: With the enactment of the United States Federal Sentencing Guidelines in 1987, parole was discontinued for all federal offenses committed after November 1, 1987. Instead of parole, federal offenders receive “good time.” The maximum allowable good time is 54 days per year. This means that federal prisoners now serve 85 percent of their sentences.

Federal sentences are imposed in terms of months, not years. For sentences of 12 months or less, there is no good time and the entire term of the sentence must be served. For sentences of 12 months and one day or longer, the 54 days of good time kicks in after the offender has served a full year. For longer sentences, the sentence is reduced by another 54 days every time the prisoner serves another year.

Do you recall what the sources you saw were? In my experience, mass media does a terrible job of reporting legal matters except in those few circumstances where they have an actual lawyer doing the reporting.

As far as I know, generally there's no real substantive difference between how difficult it is to get someone back to jail depending on whether it's parole or probation. The big difference, as I understand it, is that probation is normally ordered by the judge as part of the sentencing, but parole is something that's handled by the department of corrections after a person has served some portion of their sentence. There may well be differences in how each is administered depending on the jurisdiction.

As things stand now, the only federal prisoners that can be paroled are those who are doing time for offenses committed before November, 1987.


Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat


This message is a reply to:
 Message 263 by Percy, posted 01-21-2007 4:30 PM Percy has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 721 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 266 of 308 (379378)
01-23-2007 10:48 PM
Reply to: Message 229 by johnfolton
01-19-2007 7:09 PM


quote:
If your against fraud don't look at Kent look at the Federal Reserve its the biggest scam on the planet.

The way I see it, you have a couple of options.

1) You can run for office and work to abolish the IRS, or

2) Renounce your American citizenship so you don't have to pay taxes anymore.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by johnfolton, posted 01-19-2007 7:09 PM johnfolton has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 267 by arachnophilia, posted 01-24-2007 12:56 AM nator has not yet responded
 Message 268 by kuresu, posted 01-24-2007 1:00 AM nator has not yet responded

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 529 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 267 of 308 (379420)
01-24-2007 12:56 AM
Reply to: Message 266 by nator
01-23-2007 10:48 PM


or start a religion and claim it all as tax-exempt.

oh.

wait.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 266 by nator, posted 01-23-2007 10:48 PM nator has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 269 by Omnivorous, posted 01-24-2007 6:54 PM arachnophilia has not yet responded

kuresu
Member (Idle past 1064 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 268 of 308 (379421)
01-24-2007 1:00 AM
Reply to: Message 266 by nator
01-23-2007 10:48 PM


my mom's not a citizen. she pays taxes.

he needs to move outside of US territory to avoid our taxes.

but no matter where he moves, he'll pay taxes. and probably more, too. just, not to the US.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 266 by nator, posted 01-23-2007 10:48 PM nator has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 270 by arachnophilia, posted 01-24-2007 7:03 PM kuresu has not yet responded

Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 160 days)
Posts: 3811
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


Message 269 of 308 (379581)
01-24-2007 6:54 PM
Reply to: Message 267 by arachnophilia
01-24-2007 12:56 AM


Or start a U.S. corporation, take advantage of tax law incentives to move corporate headquarters to the Bahamas, hire authoritarian government-disadvantaged labor in the third world, pollute their environment at will, and pay no U.S. taxes at all.

Then shrug and blame the shareholders.


Free Dr. Adequate!

Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------


This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by arachnophilia, posted 01-24-2007 12:56 AM arachnophilia has not yet responded

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 529 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 270 of 308 (379584)
01-24-2007 7:03 PM
Reply to: Message 268 by kuresu
01-24-2007 1:00 AM


he needs to move outside of US territory to avoid our taxes.

i think he considers his church outside of us territory. perhaps the feds should have gotten him on secession as well. you know, parked some tanks outside his house.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by kuresu, posted 01-24-2007 1:00 AM kuresu has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020