DOJ Lawsuit Against Bill Benson Backfires

[iamfreeru2]

Check this out all. I love it!!

http://www.GiveMeLiberty.org/RTPLaws...2005-09-30.htm

[BOBT12]

I love it too. I hope Bill Benson kicks the government (behind) right out of the court.

[wisper]

I ,like the majority, enjoy seeing the *state* in its place! But, in this case, since the SC has already stated that the 16th amendment gave no new taxing authority!

[iamfreeru2]

Originally Posted by wisper

I ,like the majority, enjoy seeing the *state* in its place! But, in this case, since the SC has already stated that the 16th amendment gave no new taxing authority!

I agree Wisper, but if there were no 16th Amendment the IRS would have no claimed authority now would they. This is what they use as their authority and the IRS claims the "income tax" is an excise or indirect tax and not a direct tax. The reason they do this is because using FRNs is a benefit or privilege for "US citizens." Remove the 16th Amendment and you take their so-called authority away and they will have to find some other way to extort from the people and the IRS would be history. I'm not holding my breath, but I still gotta love Bill Bensen.

Originally Posted by iamfreeru2

I agree Wisper, but if there were no 16th Amendment the IRS would have no claimed authority now would they. This is what they use as their authority and the IRS claims the "income tax" is an excise or indirect tax and not a direct tax. The reason they do this is because using FRNs is a benefit or privilege for "US citizens." Remove the 16th Amendment and you take their so-called authority away and they will have to find some other way to extort from the people and the IRS would be history. I'm not holding my breath, but I still gotta love Bill Bensen.

The IRS has the power to tax the entities created by the government- corporations and they also have our tacit agreement that we are US citizens. We are, as has been presented so many times in this forum, considered corporations thru the application for birth certificate, the birth certificate, the social security number, etc. My IRS master file shows me to be a 10,000,000 a year "business". So they have every right to tax me according to their lie. The 16 th amendment is somewhat of red herring.

[iamfreeru2]

Originally Posted by francis

The IRS has the power to tax the entities created by the government- corporations and they also have our tacit agreement that we are US citizens. We are, as has been presented so many times in this forum, considered corporations thru the application for birth certificate, the birth certificate, the social security number, etc. My IRS master file shows me to be a 10,000,000 a year "business". So they have every right to tax me according to their lie. The 16 th amendment is somewhat of red herring.

The fact that they have the right to tax is what I was saying by my post. We all know it is a lie. We are engaged in privileged activity as US citizens (coporate franchises) and are receiving the benefit of using FRNs. Anyone claiming to be a US citizen is subject to the tax. People that think the "income tax" is a direct tax on labor are mistaken. It is an excise or inderect tax on the corporate franchise known as the US citizen. The 16th Amendment may be a red herring, but I would still like to see it gone. I do not believe this will happen so it is a moot point.

[Ecclesiastes]

From the on-line court docket, in an order dated 6/30/2005:

"The Court further notes that the issue of whether the Sixteenth Amendment was properly ratified or not will NOT be the subject of the hearing, but rather that Mr. Benson will be given an opportunity to explain why he did not have the requisite illicit state of mind concerning the alleged statements, as explained further during the last status."

In other words, the court will NOT be hearing evidence on whether or not the 16th Amendment was ratified, but Benson will be given an opportunity to show whether or not he "knew or should have known" that his claims are false or fraudulent.

Given his previous encounters with the courts, Benson will have difficultly proving he didn't know or have reason to know he is wrong. From the government's motion for summary judgment:

Moreover, Benson – as a result of his criminal convictions for failure to file tax returns and tax evasion – has actual knowledge that the representations contained in the “Reliance Defense Package” that he sold were false or fraudulent. In the appeal taken from his first conviction, the Seventh Circuit squarely rejected his argument concerning the validity of the Sixteenth Amendment, holding that the issue was “beyond review.”<3> United States v. Benson, 941 F.2d 598, 607 (7th Cir. 1991); see United States v. Benson, 67 F.3d 641 (7th Cir. 1995) (affirming Benson’s subsequent convictions for tax crimes). Benson’s criminal convictions not only belie his claim that the Sixteenth Amendment was not properly ratified, but also belie his representations that purchasers of his materials can reasonably rely on them to stop filing returns or paying taxes while escaping criminal punishment.

<Footnote 3>Benson has actual knowledge of the Seventh Circuit’s opinion in United States v. Benson, 941 F.2d 590 (7th Cir. 1991), because a copy of that opinion is included in the “16th Amendment Reliance Defense Package” that he sells. See Ponzo Decl., Exhibit K at pp. 131-133.

Originally Posted by Ecclesiastes

From the on-line court docket, in an order dated 6/30/2005:

"The Court further notes that the issue of whether the Sixteenth Amendment was properly ratified or not will NOT be the subject of the hearing, but rather that Mr. Benson will be given an opportunity to explain why he did not have the requisite illicit state of mind concerning the alleged statements, as explained further during the last status."

In other words, the court will NOT be hearing evidence on whether or not the 16th Amendment was ratified, but Benson will be given an opportunity to show whether or not he "knew or should have known" that his claims are false or fraudulent.

Given his previous encounters with the courts, Benson will have difficultly proving he didn't know or have reason to know he is wrong. From the government's motion for summary judgment:

What is also disturbing is that I read a while back, no more than a year ago, that no one had ever lost a tax case based on the 16th amendment not being ratified.

[Freedomless]

If one scans and posts all of the docs on the internet, then the truth will be exposed and the government can not hide the truth.

LET THE PEOPLE KNOW!

Originally Posted by Freedomless

If one scans and posts all of the docs on the internet, then the truth will be exposed and the government can not hide the truth.

LET THE PEOPLE KNOW!

That would be a chore as I believe it includes several thousand pages. Benson needs to find a different horse (defense) to ride.