Latest Shouts In The Shoutbox -- View The Shoutbox
The shoutbox is currently offline!

[ Smilies | BBCodes ]

     
 
Click Here and visit PuPPs FREE StuFF

This website contains controversial information that may be disturbing to some viewers.
The theories, conclusions and commentaries are presented in an attempt to reveal the hidden truths.
It is up to the viewer to determine what they choose to believe after evaluating all available sources of information.

 
     

NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION
Does your government represent your best interests?


     
 
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter."
~ Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.



POLITICAL ART GALLERY



IMPORTANT TOPICS

1. U.S. NEWS MEDIA CAN LEGALLY LIE TO YOU
There is no law preventing the U.S. news media from intentionally lying to the public. Whistle blowers and honest reporters are fired for telling the truth.

2. FLUORIDE IS A TOXIN/POISON
Read the Poison Warning label on your toothpaste, then call the 800# and ask;
"Why do you put poison in my toothpaste?"

3. NEW FLU VACCINE IS LOADED WITH MERCURY
by Dr. Joseph Mercola

4. PEDOPHILES IN HIGH PLACES
Also: Conspiracy of Silence Video

5. ASPARTAME IS HARMFUL
Equal, Nutra-Sweet and over 6000 food and beverage products contain Aspartame

6. On September 10, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld held a press conference to disclose that over $2,000,000,000,000 (2 Trillion) in Pentagon funds could not be accounted for.
Such a disclosure normally would have sparked a huge scandal. However, the commencement of the [9/11] attack on the World Trade Center and The Pentagon the following morning would assure that the story remained buried.


http://drinkingwaterlosangeles.com
Serving the greater Los Angeles area,
Los Angeles Drinking Water is proud to offer Reverse Osmosis filtration systems
that remove trace elements such as arsenic, mercury, lead and fluoride
which are known to be in Los Angeles tap water according to
the 2013 DWP Water Quality report.
POLITICAL ART GALLERY









"If our nation is ever taken over, it will be taken over from within."
~ James Madison, President of the United States

  Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> Attorney acquitted on federal income tax charges, stopped filing income taxes 10 years ago


Master Of His Domain
******
Group: Admin
Posts: 12736
Member No.: 8
Mood: 



Posted: Aug 3 2007, 07:30 AM
Quote Post
QUOTE
"The court could not find a law that makes me liable or makes my revenues taxable," Cryer said. "The Supreme Court has ruled that the government cannot impose an income tax on anything but the profits and gains. When you work for someone you give your service and labor in exchange for money, so everything you make is not profit or gain. You put something into it."


Did you know....?

Approximately 60% of the corporations in USA do not pay income taxes?

QUOTE
Local attorney acquitted on federal income tax charges
Cryer stopped filing income taxes more than 10 years ago
July 13, 2007
By Loresha Wilson
ljwilson@gannett.com
QUOTE
A Shreveport attorney who has challenged the government for years on the legality of filing federal income taxes has been acquitted on charges he failed to file returns.

A federal jury unanimously found Tommy Cryer not guilty this week on two misdemeanor counts of failure to file.

And according to Cryer, the prosecution dismissed two felony charges of tax evasion prior to trial.

Attempts by The Times on Thursday to reach U.S. Attorney Donald Washington or Bill Flanagan, first assistant U.S. attorney, were not successful. Calls made to the two were not immediately returned.

"The court could not find a law that makes me liable or makes my revenues taxable," Cryer said. "The Supreme Court has ruled that the government cannot impose an income tax on anything but the profits and gains. When you work for someone you give your service and labor in exchange for money, so everything you make is not profit or gain. You put something into it."

Cryer was indicted last year on two counts of tax evasion. The indictment alleged he evaded payment of $73,000 in income tax to the Internal Revenue Service during 2000 and 2001.

Cryer created a trust listing himself as the trustee, and received payments of dividends, interest and stock income to that trust, according to the indictment. He also was accused of concealing his receipt of the sources of income from the IRS by failing to file a tax return on behalf of that trust.

"I determined that my personal earnings were not 100 percent profits, some were income," Cryer said. "I refuse to file, I refuse to pay unless they can show me I have a lawful reason to pay."

"What I earned was my own personal labor. I am giving something in exchange. I'm giving my property and I don't belong to anyone else."

Cryer says he stopped filing returns more than 10 years ago after he investigated claims that income tax was a sham. He contends the law doesn't actually tax personal earning.

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/apps/pbcs.d...D=2007707130321




--------------------
QUOTE
"Ye shall know them by their fruits"
~ Matthew 7:16

"Believe nothing. No matter where you read it, or who said it, even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense."
~ Buddha
PMEmail PosterUsers WebsiteAOL
Top


Master Of His Domain
******
Group: Admin
Posts: 12736
Member No.: 8
Mood: 



Posted: Sep 14 2007, 10:42 AM
Quote Post
QUOTE
READER: I just finished reading the trial transcripts of the case of Tommy Cryer, the Louisiana lawyer recently ACQUITTED of "willful failure to file." I only have a few comments about it:

1) First, the judge at his trial was both extremely obnoxious and an idiot. (Well, maybe he was intentionally lying instead, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he was merely an idiot.) Aside from being excessively rude and condescending towards Larry Becraft, Mr. Cryer's attorney, as Mr. Cryer was testifying about his beliefs, the judge kept completely mischaracterizing them as beliefs that the tax laws are invalid or unconstitutional, which anyone paying attention could see that Mr. Cryer was NOT at all saying.

2) The prosecutor, though at first he came across (just from the transcripts) as less of a @#$@$% than the ones in my case, either tried to confuse the jury about the difference between "disagreeing" with the law and believing you don't owe--or he actually didn't understand the difference himself. Under the concept of "willfulness," if you believe that the law doesn't tax your income, you CAN'T be guilty of "willfulness," even if you're dead wrong (i.e., even if your conclusions conflict with, or "disagree" with the law itself). However, if you believe you DO owe the tax, but you think the law is unconstitutional, unfair, etc.-- in other words, if you "disagree" with the tax ON PRINCIPLE--then that is NOT a defense to "willfulness." Mr. Cryer was obviously doing the former, but the prosecutor kept trying to paint that as a "disagreement" with the law, which is NOT what the Supreme Court meant by that when they said it in the Cheek decision.

3) When I finished reading the government's case (having not yet read the defense case), I was completely stunned. Their entire case consisted of proving that Mr. Cryer had made money, and hadn't filed--which weren't even in question. The only thing that was even remotely relevant to the essential element of "willfulness" was one CID goon saying that Mr. Cryer's arguments were "frivolous"--which is a little odd, because Mr. Cryer hadn't ARGUED anything at that point. The fact that the government can be so horribly sloppy, resorting only to envy and demonization, instead of even bothering to try to prove that a crime was actually committed, not only reflects badly on the "government" drones, but also on the American people. Have we become so stupid that, in order to get a jury to convict, all you have to do is say, "He's a meanie poopoohead, who didn't do what he was told!"? Unfortunately, yes: most of "us" are that stupid, as demonstrated by my trial, Dr. Tom's trial, and Tessa's trial (among others). Thankfully, by some stroke of luck, someone with a brain must have ended up on Mr. Cryer's jury, and ended that particular witch-hunt.

4) To me, the funniest moment was when Mr. Cryer's secretary, testifying as a witness for the government, blurted out something like, "After Mr. Cryer learned that we are not liable for this tax..." Of course, the government objected. But then the prosecutor used the secretary's decision to continue to file herself as if it proved that she didn't believe Mr. Cryer's conclusions, after having STOPPED the defense from pointing out that maybe she kept filing because she didn't want to be terrorized and prosecuted by the feds. But what kind of goofy logic would that be anyway??: "You, as a very accomplished, experienced, well-respected lawyer, CAN'T have thought your conclusions were correct, because your SECRETARY didn't agree with them (allegedly)." Huh? Anyway, the government's non-existent case failed to dupe the jury, and that's all that matters.

Sincerely,




--------------------
QUOTE
"Ye shall know them by their fruits"
~ Matthew 7:16

"Believe nothing. No matter where you read it, or who said it, even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense."
~ Buddha
PMEmail PosterUsers WebsiteAOL
Top

Topic Options Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

 



[ Script Execution time: 0.0443 ]   [ 16 queries used ]   [ GZIP Enabled ]

"Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce."
~ James A. Garfield, President of the United States


MORE POLITICAL ART

"Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws."
~ Amschel Mayer Rothschild