Est. January 20, 2017         LawStudents

ORDER "ToPOTUS" - $24.95 Jan. 21, 2017 tax criminal complaint to POTUS.
ORDER "ToPOTUS Vol.II" - $24.95 Dec. 1, 2020 clemency petition to POTUS for pardon of certain tax convicts.

Obama's been accused of conspiracy and racketeering, along with Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, and IRS Commissioner John Koskinen. Although aware of the IRS' unbridled misenforcement of very specific Tax Code provisions, the accused continued to commit unlawful takings (extortion) and to send innocent Americans to prison.

The natural thing to do, of course, is to file a criminal complaint with the new administration to make the accusations of criminal misconduct official. Mailed overnight Jan. 19, 2017 to the White House, this criminal complaint to the Office of the President of the United States includes a briefing of two very specific aspects of the Tax Code which conflict in enormous ways with what the IRS claims is its authority.

Over the course of the presidential campaign and through today we've often heard the phrases - drain the swamp - and - rule of law - and it is this invitation from the federal government, along with our determination to get the IRS under control, that inspired this correspondence to Mr. Trump. The analysis of the Tax Code and treatise were completed in 1994, a criminal complaint to eighty members of Congress was filed in January of 2006, and in January of 2009 the White House and DOJ received criminal complaints about the 1994 findings. In summer of 2009 J.A.G. (Navy), Senate Confirmation Committee on Sotomayor (Dem. P. Leahy, Rep. J. Sessions) received a criminal complaint, as did each of nine SCOTUS Justices. With full knowledge that the status quo now has no friend in the White House, we sense that the time is right to confront the righteous claims about the rule of law with stark proof that the IRS is stealing on a scale proven only by this particular analysis and treatise.

If all you learn from this is the easily illustrated truth about Social Security, you'll know enough to recognize thereafter how true those rule of law and drain-the-swamp promises were. If there's no move to stop the theft, would the White House consider pardons for those the IRS cannot even prove ever owed a "tax" in the first place? That's precious little to ask, isn't it?

ORDER "ToPOTUS" - $24.95 Jan. 21, 2017 tax criminal complaint to POTUS.
ORDER "ToPOTUS II" - $24.95 Dec. 1, 2020 clemency petition to POTUS for pardon of certain tax convicts.

*PHOTO IN MASTHEAD - origin unknown, no discernable copyright; please notify if its use here is an infringement of any kind.

FEBRUARY 2, 2018 - MEMO on FISA Warrant / FBI Russian Dossier

Clemency petition for tax convictions -

December 1, 2020: What business does the US gov't have sending people to prison for alleged tax crimes when the IRS and the DOJ are wholly unable to prove that the law imposes an income tax on compensation for services? This petition for a pardon applies to every current tax criminal case and every conviction for any tax crime involving someone who has only sold their personal services, as an employee, self-employed individual, or sole proprietor. If the government can't even prove the law imposes a tax, how can it claim that a crime's been committed when somebody doesn't pay or doesn't file a tax return? Consider this:

          "An offense created by [an unconstitutional law]," the Court has held, "is not a crime." Ex parte Seibold, 100 US 371, 376, 25 L.Ed. 717 (1880). "A conviction under [such a law] is not merely erroneous, but it is illegal and void, and cannot be a legal cause of imprisonment." Id., at 376-77. If a law is invalid as applied to the criminal defendant's conduct, the defendant is entitled to go free.
          For this reason, a court has no "prudential" license to decline to consider whether the statute under which the defendant has been charged lacks constitutional application to her conduct. And that is so even where the constitutional provision that would render the conviction void is directed at protecting a party not before the Court. Our decisions concerning criminal laws infected with discrimination are illustrative. The Court must entertain the objection - and reverse the conviction - even if the right to equal treatment resides in someone other than the defendant. See Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 US 438, 452-455 (1972) (reversing conviction for distributing contraceptives because the law banning distribution violated the recipient's right to equal protection); cf. Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190, 192, 210, and n.24 (1976) (law penalizing sale of beer to males but not females aged 18 to 20 could not be enforced against vendor). See also Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 107, n.2 (1972); Welsh v. United States, 398 U.S. 333, 361-362 (1970) (Harlan, J., concurring in result) (reversal required even if, going forward, Congress would cure the unequal treatment by extending rather than invalidating the criminal proscription).
          In short, a law "beyond the power of Congress," for any reason, is "no law at all." Nigro v. United States, 276 U.S. 332, 341 (1928). The validity of Bond's conviction depends upon whether the Constitution permits Congress to enact § 229. Her claim that it does not must be considered and decided on the merits."

See Bond v. United States, 564 US 211, 131 S.Ct. 2355, 2367, 180 L.Ed.2d 269 (June 16, 2011) (Ginsburg, J., separate concurring opinion, joined by Beyer, J.); see also Fay v. Noia, 372 US 391, 408, 9 L.Ed.2d 837, 83 S.Ct. 822 (1963) (citing Seibold, id.).

This petition for a pardon contains proof that every such conviction or criminal action now under way fits nicely into the above definition of innocence, in Bond v. US. The IRS and DOJ have had their way against the average American in a shameful and decades-long parade of oppression and intimidation, but nobody's been able to articulate or formulate an approach to remedy, until now. When the law that "explains how property received in exchange for services is taxed" is a secret, when the courts will penalize somebody thousands of dollars whenever they dare to demand an interpretation of 26 USC 83, what business does a public servant have even mentioning an income tax to any individual? When that is fact, how can a conviction for failure to file or for tax evasion possibly be valid? See for a full description of this attempt to obtain clemency for all such tax "offenders."

PPACA - Purchase health insurance out-of-state?

March 13, 2017: We've heard the President and members of Congress remark about removing the PPACA's insurance boundaries around states to boost competition for health coverage business and to drive costs down. In Allgeyer v. Louisiana, 165 US 578 (1897), the Supreme Court held that a Louisiana law prohibiting the purchase of out-of-state insurance was unconstitutional, that it offended rights to contract and to interstate commerce.

"Has not a citizen of a state, under the provisions of the federal Constitution above mentioned, a right to contract outside [165 U.S. 591] of the state for insurance on his property -- a right of which state legislation cannot deprive him? We are not alluding to acts done within the state by an insurance company or its agents doing business therein, which are in violation of the state statutes. Such acts come within the principle of the Hooper case, supra, and would be controlled by it. When we speak of the liberty to contract for insurance or to do an act to effectuate such a contract already existing, we refer to and have in mind the facts of this case, where the contract was made outside the state, and as such was a valid and proper contract. The act done within the limits of the state, under the circumstances of this case and for the purpose therein mentioned, we hold a proper act -- one which the defendants were at liberty to perform and which the state legislature had no right to prevent at least with reference to the federal Constitution. To deprive the citizen of such a right as herein described without due process of law is illegal. Such a statute as this in question is not due process of law, because it prohibits an act which under the federal Constitution the defendants had a right to perform. This does not interfere in any way with the acknowledged right of the state to enact such legislation in the legitimate exercise of its police or other powers as to it may seem proper. In the exercise of such right, however, care must be taken not to infringe upon those other rights of the citizen which are protected by the federal Constitution."

See Allgeyer, id., at 590-591. And -

"The latest utterance of this court upon this subject is contained in the case of Allgeyer v. Louisiana, 165 U.S. 578, 591, 17 S.Ct. 427, in which it was held that an act of Louisiana which prohibited individuals within the state from making contracts of insurance with corporations doing business in New York was a violation of the fourteenth amendment. In delivering the opinion of the court, Mr. Justice Peckham remarked: 'In the privilege of pursuing an ordinary calling or trade, and of acquiring, holding, and selling property, must be embraced the right to make all proper contracts in relation thereto; and, although it may be conceded that this right to contract in relation to persons or property, or to do business within the jurisdiction of the state, may be regulated, and sometimes prohibited, when the contracts or business conflict with the policy of the state as contained in its statutes, yet the power does not and cannot extend to prohibiting a citizen from making contracts of the nature involved in this case, outside of the limits and jurisdiction of the state, and which are also to be performed outside of such jurisdiction.' "

See Holden v. Hardy, 169 US 366, 391 (1898).

Where does the in-state restriction in place since 2010 stand under the decisions above? If it appears to you that the in-state restriction was impermissible, consider now all the premium increases caused by limited competition, the millions of Americans forced to abandon existing plans and familiar doctors, and the disruption to the health care market place caused by this clumsy move against an entire sixth of the economy. Beyond clumsy, the PPACA was drafted by big business with the intent to deceive and to fleece a nation of gun owners at any cost. This defect in the PPACA is a no-brainer, but apparently it eclipses the legal profession's understanding, in America.


March 20, 2017: Employee/Self employed status - When used in the law, do the terms "any property" or "any" mean everything? Is the term "any" all inclusive and expansive? Yes.

The federal government has won several times in the Supreme Court with this interpretation, but it insists upon an exception to "any" and "any property" in matters that mean the entire difference between keeping ALL of your paycheck or paying payroll and income taxes; there has to be a law! This exception enforced by the IRS and DOJ is arbitrary, borne of thin air and imposed through coercion and false imprisonment. However, to do so without lawful permission constitutes extortion, racketeering, mail fraud, and other felony violations of federal law. In the more than twenty-four years the Fed's been challenged with this . . . § 83 is officially off limits, if you can believe it. As recently as October 2016, in US Tax Court, the Fed doubled down on this invalid approach. This is one of the issues fully briefed in this Inauguration Day criminal complaint against the previous president (2009-2016) and his AGs.

ORDER "ToPOTUS" - $24.95 Jan. 21, 2017 tax criminal complaint to POTUS.
ORDER "ToPOTUS II" - $24.95 Dec. 1, 2020 clemency petition to POTUS for pardon of certain tax convicts.


April 28, 2017: The PPACA (Health Care Bill) has always had several substantial constitutional and statutory flaws that none of its challengers realized or understood. Issues hiding in plain sight . . .


IRS levy, IRS audit. IRS problems, IRS wage garnishment, IRS help, IRS relief, IRS lien, IRS garnishment, IRS audits, IRS liens, IRS wage levy, IRS problem, IRS representation, IRS payment plans, owe IRS, IRS trouble, IRS audit help, IRS questions, former IRS agent, IRS levy relief, IRS garnishments, IRS solutionsa4v, accepted for value, adele weiss, afv, adele weiss, al, albert barcroft, alfred adask, angela stark, angelo trotter, anne batte, bank fraud, bank scam, banking cartel, bankruptcy, banksters, bart rippl, ben lowrey, bernard von nothaus, big al, bill of exchange, bill hicks, bill thornton, birth certificate, bluelotustraveler, bob conlon, bobby lowman, BOE, bond, bondage, bonded, boris, brandon adams, brian t collins, CAFR, carl miller, C.A.T., cece, chappy, charles sprinkle, charles stewart, charlie miller, chris (chappy) chapman, christian walters, cindy cantrell, cindy neun, clint richardson, colin derek, commerce, common law, conditional acceptance, conspiracy, constitution, contract, corey eib, corporate fiction, court, ticket, dan benham, dan gough, darren michaels, dave deriemer, dave mack, dave myrland, david clarence, david merrill, dean clifford, debt, debtor, dick simkanin, donna lee, doug riddle, doug's AFV, douglas riddle a4v, druanna, ed rivera, ed wahler, eddie kahn, ernest solivan, eugene kernan, eugene pringle, federal reserve, fiction, foreclosure fraud, frank o'collins, freedom, freeman on the land, freemanitoba, gary ray, gary smart, gene kernan, george carlin, george trag glenn ambort, gordon hall, greek, greg slaughter, harold beale, hartford vandyke, illuminati, illusion, irene gravenhorst, irs, irwin schiff, income tax, jj macnab, jack bauer, jack and margy flynn, jack smith, james madison, janet majhor, jean keating, jerry kane, jesse tacoronte , jim shaver, joe kane, jose olive, john benson, john harris, john henry doe, john stuart, john f worrell, john benson, jordan maxwell, jose olive, joyce rosenwald, karen tappert, karl lentz, kate of gaia, keith livingway, ken nicholson, ken w., kevin hines, kurt kallenbach, ladiebug, lewis hughes, liar liar, liberty dollar, lise dupont mclain, lise from maine,loma wharton, lynn schmaltz, magic, marc stevens, marcus, mary elizabeth croft, MERS, mike golden, michael grady, michael james anthony, michael joseph, mickey paoletta, montana freemen, mortgage fraud, mortgage scam, moving violation, my private audio, news, no tax man, nontaxpayer, norfed, notary complaint, notary fraud, pandora's box, paranoid patriot, patriot, paul andrew mitchell, paul john hansen, paula gloria, paycheck piracy, PN, postal union, preditory lender, private attorney general, private audio, promissory note, proof of claim, quiet title, ralph fisher, ralph winterowd, reality, redemption, redress right, remedy, rich iverson, richard fry, rights violations, robb ryder, robert fox, robert menard, robert arthur menard, robo signors, rod class, roger elvick, roger sayles, rothschilds, RPOA, sam davis, santos bonacci, secured party creditor, shane buczek, shane buzcek, slave, slavery, sovereign, sovereignty, SPC, SPLC, southern poverty law, stellios, steven hance, straw man, strawman, subject to, surety, talkshoe guide, tami pepperman, taxable income, taxpayer, taxes, the greek, the informer, the no tax man, ticket slayer, tim turner, traffic court, traffic ticket, truth, trvth, UCC, uniform commercial code, universal postal union, UPU, vic beck, videos, violated rights, wahler case, walter burien, warberg, we are change, wesley snipes, william clark, william diehl, winston shrout, wisdom, wizard of oz , zeke layman