Stop It!! - An Open Letter to Speaker John Boehner From Judge Andrew P. Napolitano

[Ares]

Dear Mr. Speaker,

When the Founders at the Constitution Conventional in 1787 created the House of Representatives, it was fashioned to act as the voice of the people within the institutional checks and balances of the Federal Government. That's why the entire House faces reelection every 2 years. That's why Constitutionally, you don't have to even be a member of Congress to serve as speaker. And that's why the Constitution allows for thousands of members of the House for our current population. It is the people's house, and the people spoke last November. They cried out against a government completely out of control. After President Bush grew the U.S. debt by $7 trillion dollars in 8 years in office, and President Obama added $4 Trillion in just 2 years in office, the people cried out against big-government policies that are sabotaging the economy and taking over our lives. And because they cried out, you are no longer just John Boehner from Ohio. You are now the second in line to succeed to the presidency. You are the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Mr. Speaker, the House of Representatives has just 8 working days left before the August 2nd debt ceiling deadline, and by wide margins in whatever way the question is asked, Americans do not want to see the debt ceiling raised. They're sick and tired of paying interest on borrowed money; money borrowed in their name. The Federal Government borrows so much money from so many sources, Mr. Speaker, that no-one knows for sure just how much it owes to its lenders. It already appears that it has exceeded the legal limit set by the congress at $14.294 trillion, and they actually at this moment in time are closer to $14.5 trillion. The White House is putting intense pressure on you and on Congress to raise that limit. The President's apologists have even suggested invoking the 14th amendment to bypass the will of Congress and borrow money without legal authority. Given the way the White House has run roughshod over your House in the matter of the "not-war" in Libya that our military is still "not" engaged in, the word of the President's lawyers that there is no presidential power in the 14th amendment to borrow money on his own can hardly be trusted. This is a president who does not regard the Constitution as a limit on the exercise of governmental power. But the President can only get away with violating the Constitution, Mr. Speaker, if you let him do so.

If you stand up for the will of the people, you will restrain him. This is the moment of truth for the Congress, Mr. Speaker. The scare-mongers and the chicken-littles in DC will tell you that the sky will come tumbling down if the debt ceiling isn't raised, even though your colleagues, Senator Pat Toomey and Rep. Tom McClintock, have introduced legislation that would prevent the United States from defaulting on its debt obligations.

I have two words for you, Mr. Speaker. Stop it. That's right, just stop it. For too long our government has spent beyond its means and in our names, sinking us and generations as yet unborn into deeper and deeper debt. And you, Mr. Speaker, can stop it. The President stands with the big-business, big-banks, big-government complex, and against the American people. He's even prepared to defy the laws of economics. But the American people are not ignorant as he thinks they are, and you know that.

Mr. Speaker, you have the opportunity to do something that no standard bearer of small government has ever been able to do in our modern era; get the government to live within its means. You can do it by standing firm with your colleagues in the Congress who are leading the call for change. You can stop it. You can force the Federal Government to make the difficult decisions to bring itself within its means and begin to loosen the chains of debt that have been foisted on our country by a centuries worth of progressive big-government architects. End it this summer, Mr. Speaker. Stop it. Tell the President, "not a penny more." Stand up for the American people, bring government within its means, and begin the restoration of our republic.

If you do this Mr. Speaker, if you restrain the federal beast, you will become one of history's great champions and heroes of freedom. If you don't, we'll all go through this again the next time a president wants to spend beyond the government's means and chain us all down to more debt.

Mr. Speaker, don't let us down.

-Judge Andrew P. Napolitano

http://www.lewrockwell.com/politicaltheatre/2011/07/stop-it/

[Book]

http://www.mediaite.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Picture-116.png

Fox News paid shill for the wealthy.

:D don't raise taxes on us millionaires and billionaires Mr. Boehner!

[Dogman]

http://www.mediaite.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Picture-116.png

Fox News paid shill for the wealthy.

:D don't raise taxes on us millionaires and billionaires Mr. Boehner!

If you do raise them you will cause us unnessary hardship. And deny me from buying my Poopy's next need to have toy!

http://stylecrave.frsucrave.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/pelorus-yacht.jpg

::)

[Libertytree]

There was no mention of raising taxes on anyone in Naps letter, he was purely talking about the debt ceiling.

[undgrd]

http://www.mediaite.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Picture-116.png

Fox News paid shill for the wealthy.

:D don't raise taxes on us millionaires and billionaires Mr. Boehner!

If you call everyone a shill you're bound to catch ALL the shills!

The message in the letter is the important part. It's a good message.

[Book]

There was no mention of raising taxes on anyone in Naps letter, he was purely talking about the debt ceiling.



How convenient. GE paid no federal taxes in the USA in the past two years. Hedge Fund managers currently enjoy a 15% tax rate while ours is at least 30%. Let's not talk about the billions in tax credits that corn farmers currently still get for ethanol either...lol.

[Libertytree]

How convenient. GE paid no federal taxes in the USA in the past two years. Hedge Fund managers currently enjoy a 15% tax rate while ours is at least 30%. Let's not talk about the billions in tax credits that corn farmers currently still get for ethanol either...lol.

I agree whole heartedly with your premise! Just not within the confines of Naps letter. What you're saying is a thread unto itself and deservedly so.

[undgrd]

How convenient. GE paid no federal taxes in the USA in the past two years. Hedge Fund managers currently enjoy a 15% tax rate while ours is at least 30%. Let's not talk about the billions in tax credits that corn farmers currently still get for ethanol either...lol.

And if the debt ceiling isn't raised, most of that should stop.

PS: Any company that increases the price of their products to offset the increase in taxes will never pay any taxes.

[Glass]

Mr. Speaker, don't let chain us down.

I wonder if anyone is going to pay attention?

[Shami-Amourae]

Why should ANYONE pay taxes in the first place? You actually want to fund these criminals (the government)?

[mamboni]

How convenient. GE paid no federal taxes in the USA in the past two years. Hedge Fund managers currently enjoy a 15% tax rate while ours is at least 30%. Let's not talk about the billions in tax credits that corn farmers currently still get for ethanol either...lol.

How much federal income tax do you pay as percent of gross income?;D

[palani]

I applaud Judge Andrew P. Napolitano's words to the Speaker of the House and yet he does so as part of the system he is attempting to regulate. For myself, I would require registration under FARA with the Attorney General of the United States to attempt to communicate my thoughts to any congressman.

http://www.fara.gov/

http://www.justice.gov/images/logo.jpg

[Joe King]

And if the debt ceiling isn't raised, most of that should stop.

PS: Any company that increases the price of their products to offset the increase in taxes will never pay any taxes.

News Flash: NO company "pays" its own taxes. The customers of ALL companies pay those taxes for them.

[Joe King]

Why should ANYONE pay taxes in the first place? You actually want to fund these criminals (the government)?

IMO, we should all pay an equal dollar amount in taxes.
ie add up the govs bills and divide by the number of people and then send every man woman and child a bill for it.

[slvrbugjim]

How much federal income tax do you pay as percent of gross income?;D

uhmmm errrr ummm that would be zero. So raise them taxes on the super wealthy house holds that make over 250k and the small businesses like mine with 3 employees that do the same to solve the very problem that the bankers started and got a bail out with our money and we must pay for................ not me but others??

??

Ok support that in your face GD it......

[slvrbugjim]

IMO, we should all pay an equal dollar amount in taxes.
ie add up the govs bills and divide by the number of people and then send every man woman and child a bill for it.

You really need to do your homework. There is no need to pay taxes in any way per the founding of this country. To pay 30% of your income means that you work for the federal government and support everything that they do for the first 5 month of every year that you work. Good luck tooooo Ya...

[Joe King]

So why was it written into the Constitution about apportioning direct taxes in order to pay gov expenses?

If taxes are needed, each person paying the same dollar amount is only fair, and keeps the gov from getting too big for its britches. As it has out grown them today.

The reason I put that idea forward is because gov should be looked at as any other product.
You know, like a gallon of milk at the store.

[slvrbugjim]

So why was it written into the Constitution about apportioning direct taxes in order to pay gov expenses?

If taxes are needed, each person paying the same dollar amount is only fair, and keeps the gov from getting too big for its britches. As it has out grown them today.

The reason I put that idea forward is because gov should be looked at as any other product.
You know, like a gallon of milk at the store.

apportioning direct taxes is a flat tax given to all businesses or people, get your facts straight and come back. A graduated income tax on individuals was explicitly forbidden for their labor as this would be "slavery" and this it is.

If the FED can create 15 trillion out of no where to be paid back to them that created the fantom "cash" then these persons do own us and why the hell do they need your $26,000 for your first 5 months service to the federal government every year then if it is in fact created out of thin air for 98.99% of all $ in circulation??. If you think that paying your personal income taxes are needed to pay the national debt or towards the treasury, do some homework, it does neither and in fact inpowers the very persons that have done us harm for 99 years under the Federal Reverse system ......

[Joe King]

I never said a graduated tax. Try reading my post again.

You say that..."apportioning direct taxes is a flat tax given to all businesses or people. So who do you think I was talking about? Martians? lol
...and a flat tax is percentage based. I'm saying dollar for dollar the same. ie you and Bill Gates both pay the same amount, not percentage.


You are the one confusing income taxes as you know them today and the method I proposed. They are not the same.

[slvrbugjim]

I never said a graduated tax. Try reading my post again.

You say that..."apportioning direct taxes is a flat tax given to all businesses or people. So who do you think I was talking about? Martians? lol
...and a flat tax is percentage based. I'm saying dollar for dollar the same. ie you and Bill Gates both pay the same amount, not percentage.


You are the one confusing income taxes as you know them today and the method I proposed. They are not the same.

Ok give me the quote and the context within the US Constitiution for this supposed flat tax on individuals, can you find it prior to 1913??? and by the way what we have now and have always had is a graduated tax, for the emergency of war, starting in the 1800's thru now and only when the tax is enforced was before, for emergencies.

The Sixteenth Amendment (Amendment XVI) to the United States Constitution allows the Congress to levy an income tax without apportioning it among the states or basing it on Census results. This amendment exempted income taxes from the constitutional requirements regarding direct taxes, after income taxes on rents, dividends, and interest were ruled to be direct taxes in Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. (1895). It was ratified on February 3, 1913.

[Joe King]

Have you even read the Constitution? Even once?

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3.

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, (http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A1Sec2)


If you're going to argue about the Constitution, I'd suggest reading it first.

[Twisted Titan]

Mr. Speaker, don't let us down.

How can they let us down when they NEVER held us up in the first place?

[slvrbugjim]

Have you even read the Constitution? Even once?

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3.

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, (http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendments_11-27.html#14)


If you're going to argue about the Constitution, I'd suggest reading it first.

Read it many times. The amendment actually exempted income taxes from the constitutional requirements regarding direct taxes, read it. But now we are given the drivel that you support and other central bankers support that we must pay homage to the very persons that enslave us and have killed our country that we can see starting in 2008. As you support central global banking and the Federal Reserve I would suggest that you get an education, otherwise you will not find many here on this site that espouse your "wonderful convictions" about your beloved Federal Reserve.


The real problem here is whether or not the 16th amendment was ratified under duress. It in fact was with less than a Quorum as everyone was gone for Christmas.

The Sixteenth Amendment (Amendment XVI) to the United States Constitution allows the Congress to levy an income tax without apportioning it among the states or basing it on Census results. This amendment exempted income taxes from the constitutional requirements regarding direct taxes, after income taxes on rents, dividends, and interest were ruled to be direct taxes in Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. (1895). It was ratified on February 3, 1913.

[Joe King]

You don't understand the difference between direct taxes and indirect taxes, do you?

Taxes based upon apportionment are not income taxes. Get it straight, man.

[slvrbugjim]

You don't understand the difference between direct taxes and indirect taxes, do you?

Taxes based upon apportionment are not income taxes. Get it straight, man.

Did you read my reply Mr IRS Agent?? Give up on this as you are a Federal Tax agent that is bound to destroy everyones lives.

Give it up little boy,

Read it many times. The amendment actually exempted income taxes from the constitutional requirements regarding direct taxes, read it. But now we are given the drivel that you support and other central bankers support that we must pay homage to the very persons that enslave us and have killed our country that we can see starting in 2008. As you support central global banking and the Federal Reserve I would suggest that you get an education, otherwise you will not find many here on this site that espouse your "wonderful convictions" about your beloved Federal Reserve.


The real problem here is whether or not the 16th amendment was ratified under duress. It in fact was with less than a Quorum as everyone was gone for Christmas.

The Sixteenth Amendment (Amendment XVI) to the United States Constitution allows the Congress to levy an income tax without apportioning it among the states or basing it on Census results. This amendment exempted income taxes from the constitutional requirements regarding direct taxes, after income taxes on rents, dividends, and interest were ruled to be direct taxes in Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. (1895). It was ratified on February 3, 1913.

[mick silver]

i am signing up for all the fre stuff like food water . home , some land , what else can i get the tax payer for

[Joe King]

Also, the 16th Amendment did not allow the collecting of any taxes that the gov didn't already have power to levy.


Your income taxes are based upon Article 1 Section 8

[slvrbugjim]

Your income taxes are based upon Article 1 Section 8
unquote

Well little boy this becomes more interesting does it not?

notice that Joe King does nothing to dispel the idea that he is part of the FED...... Does not disagree with this at any time



The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

[Joe King]

Your income taxes are based upon Article 1 Section 8
unquote

Well little boy this becomes more interesting does it not?




Where is that you or me? this is not there.

Hello! Income tax is an excise tax. The 16th only removed limitations on the source.


My whole point of using apportionment would be to starve the fed gov of it's huge revenue stream that is currently provided by a graduated income tax. Thereby eliminating the ability of the gov to get as big as it's gotten.

It was only able to get as big as it is today because they figured out a way to have a revenue stream that allowed it to grow outside its proper Constitutional boundries. ie what we have today.

If they could charge everyone in taxes only what a poor person could afford, you'd get to keep virtually all your money and it would force the gov to limit itself to purely Constitutional affairs.

Don't you think that'd be a good thing? Or do you like all-powerful gov?

[slvrbugjim]

Hello! Income tax is an excise tax. The 16th only removed limitations on the source.


My whole point of using apportionment would be to starve the fed gov of it's huge revenue stream that is currently provided by a graduated income tax. Thereby eliminating the ability of the gov to get as big as it's gotten.

It was only able to get as big as it is today because they figured out a way to have a revenue stream that allowed it to grow outside its proper Constitutional boundries. ie what we have today.

If they could charge everyone in taxes only what a poor person could afford, you'd get to keep virtually all your money and it would force the gov to limit itself to purely Constitutional affairs.

Don't you think that'd be a good thing? Or do you like all-powerful gov?

Well lets us see

[Joe King]

How we going to see, if we don't try it?

The reason they abandoned it is because collecting taxes in a wholly Constitutional manner was too limiting upon our gov. So it found a way to do an "end-run" around those Constitutional limitations.

Same as it has with every other Constitutional limit on power.

[osoab]

How convenient. GE paid no federal taxes in the USA in the past two years. Hedge Fund managers currently enjoy a 15% tax rate while ours is at least 30%. Let's not talk about the billions in tax credits that corn farmers currently still get for ethanol either...lol.


Ok, if you want to talk about corn add in the ethanol producers and you might as well talk about cotton farmers too.

And I wouldn't just pick on GE also.
Caterpillar paid only 5000 in taxes for FY2003. :o


Cat employee alleges he was unfairly demoted (http://www.pjstar.com/business/x401783733/Cat-employee-alleges-he-was-unfairly-demoted)



A manager at Caterpillar Inc. has charged that the company used offshore subsidiaries in Switzerland and Bermuda to avoid about $2 billion in U.S. taxes from 2000 to 2009.

Caterpillar denies any wrongdoing in the case, a civil suit brought by the manager who claims he was demoted for speaking out.

According to a report Friday in Bloomberg News, employee Daniel Schlicksup alleges the company sold and shipped spare parts globally from its Morton warehouse while improperly attributing at least $5.6 billion of profits from those sales to a unit in Geneva.

The alleged scheme, which Schlicksup raised in his 2009 lawsuit against the company, could come up again when the case comes to a bench trial on Jan. 12, 2012, before Senior U.S. District Judge Michael Mihm.

Once a high-level manager in Caterpillar's tax division, Schlicksup claims the earth-moving giant would shift U.S. profits to offshore shell companies in Switzerland to avoid paying U.S. income taxes.

According to Schlicksup, it worked like this: Caterpillar would claim that parts from a warehouse in Morton or wherever were actually sold in Switzerland because that is where the point of sale was routed through. Schlicksup claimed, however, that those were "many shell companies with no business operations."

"In our case we contend that a sale of a part out of a bin in Morton is not a sale in Switzerland," Dan O'Day, Schlicksup's attorney, told the Journal Star on Friday. "I think Caterpillar was trying to avoid U.S. tax to pay a lesser tax in Switzerland."

O'Day was referring to the difference in tax rates, which is largely what appears to have driven the alleged scheme. In Switzerland, Caterpillar would still have paid taxes to the federal and local government but at a much lower rate than if it had conducted the sale here in Illinois.

According to the lawsuit, Caterpillar pays about a third of what an Illinois sale would be. Multiply that by thousands of transactions and the savings can quickly add up.


The Bloomberg report noted that Caterpillar's 2003 federal income tax return, filed as an exhibit in the Schlicksup case, shows that the company paid only $4,667 in tax on taxable income of $18 million and revenue of $22.8 billion.


Caterpillar declined comment on the 2003 return but denied any wrongdoing with its parts plan, saying in court filings that it was legitimate "establishment of a financing center to facilitate efficient financing of Caterpillar's future growth throughout the world."
Schlicksup, 49, said he decided to file his lawsuit in 2009 after he felt he had been demoted.


Named as defendants are David Burritt, a former chief financial officer who's now retired; Alice Barbour, an HR manager at the time of the case; Robin Beran, then Caterpillar's director of global tax and trade; James Buda, executive vice president, legal; Edward Rapp, chief financial officer; and Doug Oberhelman, Caterpillar's chairman and CEO.


Oberhelman made headlines earlier this year with the release of a letter to Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn, calling for state regulations to be more conducive to business. The Caterpillar chairman revealed the company had been courted by other states seeking to see the firm's headquarters relocate from Illinois. Later, Oberhelman said that Caterpillar had no plans to move.


O'Day declined to tell a Bloomberg reporter whether the matter had been forwarded to the Internal Revenue Service. On Friday, Caterpillar spokesman Jim Dugan told the Journal Star he had no comment on IRS involvement.


Much of the court filings in the Schlicksup case treat the allegations of the income tax scheme as a side note. The central issues are possible violations of the federal Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which protects whistle-blowers from employer retaliation.
Caterpillar contends that Schlicksup was moved to a different department because there was a structural change and he was being transferred from taxes to information technology. Schlicksup, a Caterpillar employee since 1992, said he was banished from an area that he had nearly 20 years of experience in and transferred to a field where he had little experience.


Schlicksup's salary went down, he received fewer stock options and now he has fewer ways to advance within the company, said O'Day on Friday.
"We think that moving a person who is a tax lawyer and CPA to a computer area of the company does not allow him to use his education and training," O'Day told the Journal Star.


 Dugan said the company has engaged in no wrongdoing. Caterpillar maintains that Schlicksup's transfer was not a demotion, according to Bloomberg.


In a statement released Friday, the company said, "Caterpillar complies with applicable tax laws and regulations in the countries where we have operations and conduct business. The company has a robust and well-defined process for examining questions and concerns raised by employees, and that process has been followed as it relates to the allegations made in this case."


"As for questions about this specific case, we are electing not to directly respond to the question, because we do not typically comment on pending litigation," noted Caterpillar, referring reporters to review Caterpillar's motion for summary judgment filed Nov. 4, 2009, that provides a summary of the company's position in the case.

In that court filing, Caterpillar contends that rather than losing money, Schlicksup's salary went up and he was actually making more money as a result of the transfer.

[osoab]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oM8l3X_7Hkg

[slvrbugjim]

How we going to see, if we don't try it?

The reason they abandoned it is because collecting taxes in a wholly Constitutional manner was too limiting upon our gov. So it found a way to do an "end-run" around those Constitutional limitations.

Same as it has with every other Constitutional limit on power.

very funny, you are a comedian. Admit it with absolution that you love the Federal Reserve..........................

[slvrbugjim]

I Rest my case...

[Joe King]

very funny, you are a comedian. Admit it with absolution that you love the Federal Reserve..........................The Federal Reserve is why you have the income tax as you know it.

Doing what I said would get rid of the Fed and shrink the gov to about 5% of it's current size.
You don't think that'd be a good thing?



Open question:
Does anyone else here agree with me that it would be a good thing to shrink the federal gov by 95% of what currently is today?
Or do you guys like big bloated in-your-face gov?

[Book]

Does anyone else here agree with me that it would be a good thing to shrink the federal gov by 95% of what currently is today?



http://commieblaster.com/images/nwo/new-world-order.jpg

Did they provide you with a pre-printed petition form for us to sign Mr. King?

:D

[Joe King]

Are you actually arguing in favor of what we have today? lol You too silly Book.

[slvrbugjim]

What the F*ck are you talking about. You agree to git rid of the Fed. Sorry, do not buy it, you have supported the FED at every part. You are a stooge and an idiot and a dumb ass idiot.

The CIA has a name for this, do you know what that this? That is you idiot/ Do you know this


And I Told you idiot that you love the Federal Reserve.. you never countered me on this. Got chacha...

[Joe King]

What the F*ck are you talking about. You agree to git rid of the Fed. Sorry, do not buy it, you have supported the FED at every part. You are a stooge and an idiot and a dumb ass idiot.

The CIA has a name for this, do you know this? That is you idiot/ Do you know thisWhere have I stated support for the Federal Reserve?

The Federal Reserve exist only because we no longer have a truly limited power gov that operates wholly within the Constitution as written and intended.

Go back to Constitutional gov and the Fed goes away. Never to be seen again.
...and if you asking what the f*ck I am talking about, you're in over your head. Go re-read the Constitution....again.

[slvrbugjim]

Where have I stated support for the Federal Reserve?

The Federal Reserve exist only because we no longer have a truly limited power gov that operates wholly within the Constitution as written and intended.

Go back to Constitutional gov and the Fed goes away. Never to be seen again.

Very funny dumbass

[Joe King]

Very funny dumbassI didn't ask to be insulted, but rather I asked where I said that I support the Federal Reserve?

If you don't understand what Constitutionally limited government actually means, you are in waaaay over head in this discussion. Sorry, but that's a fact.

[slvrbugjim]

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,

[po boy]

Nope, not at all, you are a stooge and an idiot, sorry that I among others were to be able to see this. Go on and get away from persons such as us that think that you are the destruction of the fabric of the USA. Just go away.

Just go away to your special place, go away...

Cannot happen?, who are these people?

I think you got him on the run now lol.

[slvrbugjim]

Thanks for your intelligence as you seem to be an Einstein, you are just great. wow. Mr Po Bo

Hmmm

Joe King, the incredulous ignorant mother fu89er.

He loves the Federal Reserve.... and the destruction of the USA, he loves it..............


Great Stuff my man, very well done....

[slvrbugjim]

Joe King, = Federal Agent and ignorant dumbass 18 year old stupid ass.

He did very well..... erh ommm not. Well done idiot. and so forth but he is very stupid so we have nothing.

He does one thing, and that is follow orders and ki)), hmmm let us see about the videos of this

he will do well let us see what happens, shall we??

[po boy]

Do you really think the FED is going anywhere? If you don't like the FED why do you pay employees in FRN or checks? By using FED notes you are supporting it and the destruction you blame on Joe.

You do know what a dollar is right? You do know they still make them right?
Start vid @ 4:23

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OFsUYtsYE8&feature=related
The whole series is worth a listen if your so inclined.

Are you aware there are people called non-taxpayers?
Here's some interesting info on Titlle 31 USC sec.5112 http://library.georgegordon.com/node/1886 or if you have i-tunes go here http://library.georgegordon.com/audio skip to page #9 Tell them a story series 5112 and download and the meat starts around 30min.
also Property the Holy Grail The Subject of Property http://library.georgegordon.com/node/1581
You also could look for the Billions for bankers series on title 31 sec 5112

You can insult me later! lol

[Joe King]

He loves the Federal Reserve.... and the destruction of the USA, he loves it..............

Great Stuff my man, very well done....
Again, where did I say I even like the Federal Reserve? Please show me if you can.
For the life of me I cannot understand at all how you equate Constitutional government as intended in 1787 is in any way saying I support the Federal Reserve.
How exactly are you making that connection? :confused:???:confused:???:confused:???




Joe King, = Federal Agent and ignorant dumbass 18 year old stupid ass.

He did very well..... erh ommm not. Well done idiot. and so forth but he is very stupid so we have nothing.

He does one thing, and that is follow orders and ki)), hmmm let us see about the videos of this

he will do well let us see what happens, shall we??

Huh? I'm not sure how to respond to this as you're not really being too clear here, so I'll just ask you again to refer to my question above.
Thanks in advance. :)

[Joe King]

That's a great video po boy, thanks for posting.

From the video and quoted for truth; "...for if Americans do not govern themselves, others will govern them"


I hadn't watched the whole thing yet, but I will. Thanks again!

[Joe King]

Bumpity bump bump for slvrbugjim (http://gold-silver.us/forum/member.php?3344-slvrbugjim) {Edited to add: or anyone else who can answer the question}

How about an answer to the question above? If you're going to go out of your way to try to insult me, could you please at least explain how you come to the conclusion that supporting the Constitution as written and intended in 1787 is in any way compatible with the Federal Reserve?

I don't see how that is possible, but I'd really like to know what your line of thinking is on that.

Perhaps you understand it in a way I can only imagine.

Our freedom may very well hinge upon the proper understanding of this issue, so won't you please help us all to learn more about this subject that is so critically important to all of us and our freedom in this great nation?

[ximmy]

Bumpity bump bump for slvrbugjim (http://gold-silver.us/forum/member.php?3344-slvrbugjim) {Edited to add: or anyone else who can answer the question}

How about an answer to the question above? If you're going to go out of your way to try to insult me, could you please at least explain how you come to the conclusion that supporting the Constitution as written and intended in 1787 is in any way compatible with the Federal Reserve?

I don't see how that is possible, but I'd really like to know what your line of thinking is on that.

Perhaps you understand it in a way I can only imagine.

Our freedom may very well hinge upon the proper understanding of this issue, so won't you please help us all to learn more about this subject that is so critically important to all of us and our freedom in this great nation?

http://members.cox.net/phlegmmaster/Troll%20spray.jpg

[Joe King]

Ximmy, he viololated the letter of rule #1

Rule #1 - Be respectful to everyone on the board. No flaming, bashing or baiting or attacking each other. Keep conversation on an intelligent level. If you get very angry, please sign off for a little while and think about it.


But all is forgiven on my part if he would clearly explain how he thinks that Constitutionaly limited gov as intended in 1787 equates to being in favor of the federal Reserve.

[po boy]

Joe as I keep saying I don't think the fed is going anywhere so using SAE and GAE which is legal tender as per the code as a personal choice will be the only thing to stave the beast.

There are people who do this although there numbers are few they are not the one's feeling the of the FRN devaluation.
It may not be easy but nothing worth while is.

Some may even see the benefit but are unwilling to work towards it as they see it too hard.So they will bitch and whine about the FED until they are destroyed by the use of it's creation.

[ximmy]

Ximmy, he viololated the letter of rule #1

Rule #1 - Be respectful to everyone on the board. No flaming, bashing or baiting or attacking each other. Keep conversation on an intelligent level. If you get very angry, please sign off for a little while and think about it.

But all is forgiven on my part if he would clearly explain how he thinks that Constitutionaly limited gov as intended in 1787 equates to being in favor of the federal Reserve.

Your job here is to troll the threads and try to get members to break rules, so they will be banned... that is what a troll does...

http://images16.fotki.com/v316/photos/2/292835/5750312/TrollBGone-vi.jpg

[Joe King]

Po Boy, Of course it's not going anywhere....at least not as long as not enough people actually want Constitutional gov with limited power as originally intended.

[po boy]

Po Boy, Of course it's not going anywhere....at least not as long as not enough people actually want Constitutional gov with limited power as originally intended.

That doesn't stop those who do want to operate with real money.Build a network of like minded individuals and do you best to survive.

Let the naysayers live how they choose.

[Joe King]

Ximmy, how does me posting the following to someone else......



IMO, we should all pay an equal dollar amount in taxes.
ie add up the govs bills and divide by the number of people and then send every man woman and child a bill for it.

....cause me to be responsible for him posting this?


What the F*ck are you talking about. You agree to git rid of the Fed. Sorry, do not buy it, you have supported the FED at every part. You are a stooge and an idiot and a dumb ass idiot.

The CIA has a name for this, do you know what that this? That is you idiot/ Do you know this


And I Told you idiot that you love the Federal Reserve.. you never countered me on this. Got chacha...


All I was attempting to do was to be a part of the discussion and talk about the threads topic.

After he posted his "stuff", all I asked of him was to explain how he came to the conclusion that he did about Constitutional gov and the Fed.

I didn't insult him.

[Joe King]

That doesn't stop those who do want to operate with real money.Build a network of like minded individuals and do you best to survive.

Let the naysayers live how they choose.

I thought that when it came to the Fed that this forum had a lot of those like mined individuals. I keep reading words here to that effect.