Red Beckman and Bill Benson proved that in their Seminal two volume set of books.
Learn the 'big secret' of how this huge scam is too big to fail, (like the banks). How to dislodge this blood sucker from the people.
From Bill's site: TheLawThatNeverWas.com:
January 10, 2008, the Federal District Court in Chicago issued a permanent injunction against Bill Benson on
the grounds that by offering information demonstrating that the 16th Amendment was
not legally ratified, he was promoting an abusive tax shelter. The Court then refused
to look at the government-certified documentary evidence, deciding instead that
the facts necessary to prove his statements true were "irrelevant."
What has America come to when the government we created to protect our rights can
accuse us of lying and then prohibit us from presenting a defense in a court of
The federal government rests its authority to collect income tax on the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution—the federal income tax amendment—which was allegedly ratified in 1913.
"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
—The 16th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.
After an extensive year-long nationwide research project, William J. Benson discovered that the 16th Amendment was not ratified by the requisite three-fourths of the states and that nevertheless Secretary of State Philander Knox had fraudulently declared ratification.
It was a shocking revelation; it reached deep to the core of our American system of governance.
Article V of the U.S. Constitution defines the ratification process and requires three-fourths of the states to ratify any amendment proposed by Congress. There were fourty-eight states in the American Union in 1913, meaning that affirmative action of thirty-six was necessary for ratification. In February 1913, Secretary of State Philander Knox proclaimed that thirty-eight had ratified the Amendment.
In 1984 Bill Benson began a research project, never before performed, to investigate the process of ratification of the 16th Amendment. After traveling to the capitols of the New England states and reviewing the journals of the state legislative bodies, he saw that many states had not ratified. He continued his research at the National Archives in Washington, D.C.; it was here that Bill found his Golden Key.
This damning piece of evidence is a sixteen-page memorandum from the Solicitor of the Department of State, among whose duties is the provision of legal opinions for the Secretary of State. In this memorandum, the Solicitor lists the many errors he found in the ratification process.
These four states are among the thirty-eight from which Philander Knox claimed ratification:
When his project was finished at the end of 1984, Bill had visited the capitol of every state from 1913 and knew that not a single one had actually and legally ratified the proposal to amend the U.S. Constitution. Thirty-three states engaged in the unauthorized activity of altering the language of an amendment proposed by Congress, a power that the states do not possess.
Since thirty-six states were needed for ratification, the failure of thirteen to ratify was fatal to the Amendment. This occurs within the major (first three) defects tabulated in Defects in Ratification of the 16th Amendment. Even if we were to ignore defects of spelling, capitalization and punctuation, we would still have only two states which successfully ratified.
my career was cut short when I encountered, investigated, and confronted IRS management with evidence indicating that the agency was illegally administering the federal income tax system and thereby violating the rights of ordinary Americans.
Over a two year period from early 1997 until the early 1999, I conducted a thorough investigation, off-duty and at my own expense, into claims made by various researchers and activists that the IRS was administering and enforcing the federal income tax beyond what was authorized by law and that most Americans were not liable to pay the federal income tax but were deceived and intimidated into paying it. Such claims would seem to be preposterous and unbelievable and I initially thought so too. My expectation was that the falsity of such claims would be manifested quickly because false claims rarely withstand close scrutiny. However, I was as surprised as anyone that I ended up encountering and accumulating significant amounts of evidence indicating that what at first appeared to be preposterous and unbelievable claims was, instead, able to withstand my detailed investigative scrutiny.
When I had gathered enough evidence to convince myself that the IRS could indeed be administering and enforcing much of the federal income tax under "color of law" rather than proper legal authority, resulting in the wholesale violation of people's rights and fraudulent confiscation of their money and property, I met with my San Jose IRS supervisors to voice my concerns and share some of the evidence I had acquired. I made it very clear to my supervisors that I had taken an oath to God to support and defend the U.S. Constitution and because of that oath, the 9th Commandment prohibition against bearing false witness against my neighbor, not to mention my general moral and ethical standards, I believed I had a duty to speak up about what I had learned through my investigation (Exhibit 5).
I had hoped that my direct IRS supervisors and their supervisors above them would, at a minimum, show me the error of my analysis and conclusions and address my concerns about the wholesale violation of people's rights (Exhibit 6). The Chief of the San Jose IRS Criminal Investigation Division instead responded to me by providing me with a very brief memorandum indicating that the IRS would not address my concerns. The memorandum also encouraged my resignation and immediately placed me on administrative leave (Exhibit 7). I thought that my exemplary performance in the agency would have merited a more congenial and meaningful response than the one I received but I was wrong. My duty firearm was taken from me and I was sent home for 7 days to consider whether I had a future as a criminal investigator for the Internal Revenue Service.Given the suspicious refusal of IRS officials to discuss the concerns of one of their own investigators, I realized that the only way I could retain my integrity, abide by my morals, and comply with my oath to support and defend the U.S. Constitution was to resign. I prepared and submitted my resignation letter to IRS Commissioner Charles Rossotti and resigned from the IRS on February 25, 1999
Jury Nullification - Your supposed to just 'say no' to tyranny of bad government and laws. THEY...don't want you to know that you can deregulate your own lives! You can throw out bad laws. Case in point: confiscation laws.
Copyright Joe LaValley 2019-2022