Challenge For AndyK

[AndyK]

Originally Posted by FreeFromContract

Do you have a reference to the court case where Kuglin was found guilty and the court told her the IRS doesn't need to show her the law? I know of the case where she was found not guilty of willful failure to file, but not of any other.

What is the case number to which you're referring?

It didn't go to court. Vernice conceded that she owed the money and is now paying it off.

[RickA]

I am very happy for you that you have justified your position in your own mind.

If you earned enough and had a large enough tax deficiency to make it worthwhile, the IRS would have followed up.

If your unpaid taxes are sufficient to be of interest, remember two things:

First, there is a very long statute of limitations on fraudulent underpayment.

Second, there is a ten-year limitation on collection, which can be easily extended.

Keep on playing your stupid word games. They don't matter. When push comes to shove, your arguments will topple like a house of cards in a tornado.

As for the non-bolded part, if you are truely concerned for those who would try and skirt the income tax, using, as you say, word games, as you appear to me to be then, what is keeping you from showing us the undeniable words? words that would ring so loud, and so true as to prick the conscience into submission? Where are these words?

I ask because the words that I have bolded lead me to believe that you know this to be a fact.

[AndyK]

Originally Posted by RickA

As for the non-bolded part, if you are truely concerned for those who would try and skirt the income tax, using, as you say, word games, as you appear to me to be then, what is keeping you from showing us the undeniable words? words that would ring so loud, and so true as to prick the conscience into submission? Where are these words?

I ask because the words that I have bolded lead me to believe that you know this to be a fact.

Correct. I know it to be a fact that the stupid word games will be totally useless when they are challenged in a venue of any significance.

Take a few minutes and visit http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/ . Review the decisions they post almost every day. See who wins and who loses and what the arguments are. Also, pay close attention to the sanctions. To date, only a few people have rung the bell at $25,000 sanctions, but the court is becoming much less patient with stupid, time-wasting cses.

[RickA]

Correct. I know it to be a fact that the stupid word games will be totally useless when they are challenged in a venue of any significance.

Take a few minutes and visit http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/ . Review the decisions they post almost every day. See who wins and who loses and what the arguments are. Also, pay close attention to the sanctions. To date, only a few people have rung the bell at $25,000 sanctions, but the court is becoming much less patient with stupid, time-wasting cses.

I know this too AndyK. Regarding the link you provided. I know the information on the other side does have value, but the information provided by that link is not the answer to the question I asked.

[AndyK]

Originally Posted by RickA

I know this too AndyK. Regarding the link you provided. I know the information on the other side does have value, but the information provided by that link is not the answer to the question I asked.

I just reviewed every post since this thread started.

You never asked a question.

[freeindeed]

Correct. I know it to be a fact that the stupid word games will be totally useless when they are challenged in a venue of any significance.

Take a few minutes and visit http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/ . Review the decisions they post almost every day. See who wins and who loses and what the arguments are. Also, pay close attention to the sanctions. To date, only a few people have rung the bell at $25,000 sanctions, but the court is becoming much less patient with stupid, time-wasting cses.

Originally Posted by RickA

I know this too AndyK. Regarding the link you provided. I know the information on the other side does have value, but the information provided by that link is not the answer to the question I asked

I believe the first quote may be AndyK's judging by RickA's response. Only a fool would go into a kagaroo "court" like the "tax court," which is not court at all. You go there and you are stating you are a slave "US citizen." That in itself is an automatic loss. Give me a freaking break!!!

FreeFromContract has it right. AndyK is nothing but an IRS stooge a parrot. Andy want a cracker?

[BOBT12]

Originally Posted by AndyK

You are absolutely correct. The IRS can not show you a law that says "BOBT12 and mnchicago are subject to the income tax."

As a matter of fact, the IRS could not produce a law that said "Vernice Kuglin and Lloyd Long are subject to the income tax." which was their exact arguments.

However, both Long and Kuglin ended up paying the taxes, interest, and penalties because the courts determined that the IRS does not have to "show you the law."

Emphasis added.

Thanks AndyK.

There is no law. This is why mrg made the comments linking the IRS (and the supporting governmental structure) to Nazi Germany.

Originally Posted by mrg

It is not "law" at all.

It is BS.

You apparently have no idea what "law" is.

Here is a picture of your "law."



FDR (and Churchill) was singing his praises and busily adopting his political and economic solutions to the world wide depression (Germany was first to recover from the "bankster's holidays) until the maritime commerce started to be hampered.

Thank you sir, I will have no more.

Emphasis added.

http://www.suijuris.net/forum/taxati...essful-10.html

[RickA]

I just reviewed every post since this thread started.

You never asked a question.

As for the non-bolded part, if you are truely concerned for those who would try and skirt the income tax, using, as you say, word games, as you appear to me to be then, what is keeping you from showing us the undeniable words? words that would ring so loud, and so true as to prick the conscience into submission? Where are these words?

I ask because the words that I have bolded lead me to believe that you know this to be a fact.

Yes I did. It's the one in red bold

[AndyK]

Originally Posted by freeindeed

I believe the first quote may be AndyK's judging by RickA's response. Only a fool would go into a kagaroo "court" like the "tax court," which is not court at all. You go there and you are stating you are a slave "US citizen." That in itself is an automatic loss. Give me a freaking break!!!

FreeFromContract has it right. AndyK is nothing but an IRS stooge a parrot. Andy want a cracker?

As I said earlier, given that INCORRECT attitude, why should I bother trying to answer.

Freeindeed: If you would bother to read Tax Court cases, you would see that pro se petitioners win on a regular basis -- WHEN THEY ARE RIGHT AND NOT SPOUTING CRAP. People beat the IRS in Tax Court every week. Why don't you follow it for a week and see.

[AndyK]

Originally Posted by BOBT12

Thanks AndyK.

There is no law. This is why mrg made the comments linking the IRS (and the supporting governmental structure) to Nazi Germany.

Try reading the post again. I'm sorry it went over your head the first time.