Here is the latest. Just received this in an email.
And then I got this.
Quote:
This was a follow-up comment on the message board……..
Conces was not in court cause he refused to participate in the sham procedings. He filed a brief on 3/20/06 listing his issues with the judge and the proceedings. He repeatedly asked How and what agent he interfered with. Of course no anwser. He also wanted to see the judges oath of office---which was never produced. He also claims the judge removed from the record somethings that would be extreamly damageing to the Gov. case.
Reminds me of the retired Navy officer who was convicted of interfering because he wrote a letter to his bank telling them they better be damn sure any liens given to them where done correctly and whith proper athority. Ive read some of the court docs. Conces uses the Supreme court cite where they say we the people have the responsibility to make sure the gov agents have the authority to do what they say they can do. Like file liens. So in legal land its "interfereing" when you point out to the county clerk the laws regarding fileing of liens.
I love this one “there need not be a showing that a party has violated a particular Internal Revenue Code section in order for an injunction to issue.” United States v. Ernst & Whinney, 735 F.2d 1296, 1300 (11th Cir. 1984).
|