« February 2007 | Main | April 2007 »

MP3 FILE OF CONFERENCE CALL NEEDS WIDE FORWARDING! WAR & RUMORS OF WAR... CALL CONGRESS NOW!!!

John in the IAHF Office         Sunset Here in Point Roberts

IAHF List:

If you missed the Conference Call I did recently via Freedom Force International which connects the dots between Codex,The North American Union, The FDA's Trilateral Coopertion Charter, the NAFTA Superhighway, the CIA's MKULTRA Mind Control Program and related info please listen to the MP3 file here:
http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/audio/Hammell_Codex.mp3

It encourages me greatly that I've had such enthusiastic feedback on this conference call! The MP3 file from it has been very widely forwarded, and I've been getting a lot of email and phone calls from new people who want to help IAHF in all kinds of ways, and this inspires me and helps me sleep better- so THANKS to those of you who've been forwarding the info!

We've had a surge of recent signatures on the Petition calling for congressional oversight on FDA's Trilateral Cooperation Charter:and we've passed the 9,200 mark- so please help keep the pressure on by forwarding this widely! http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/373269232#body

A SOBERING PRE EASTER MESSAGE: THE RUSSIANS HAVE SCOOPED THE PENTAGON'S PLAN TO ATTACK IRAN ON APRIL 6th

Friends- I've told you all many times that I'm neither a Republican nor a Democrat, the truth is, I just don't trust either Party, but having said that, I believe deeply in this place called America, and I don't want to see it be wiped off the face of the earth, either by the planned North American Union, or via a Nuclear Holocaust and right now..... either or both things are all too possible. Eisenhower's warning about the Military Industrial Complex Running Amok is sounding in my memory banks like a GONG right now: http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html


Operation Bite: April 6 sneak attack by US forces against Iran planned, Russian military sources warn
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_1888.shtml                                                                                       

 

It wouldn't surprise me at all if the ruling elite had another 911 type event planned to grease the skids for an attack on IRAN, so go HERE to TAKE ACTION AGAINST THE WAR ON IRAN THAT OUR LATTER DAY HITLER IS TRYING TO GET US INTO  http://www.millionphonemarch.com/webb_iran_amendment.php 


MY TWO CENTS WORTH ON WHATS GOIN' DOWN... 

I'll never forget First Grade at Washington Elementary School in Summit, New Jersey. Our teacher had us do drills that scared the hell out of us all in which we had to go underneath our desks in case nuclear missiles started raining down on us. The year was 1963, and the Cold War with the Russians was in full swing. The Cuban Missile Crisis had just occurred, and we still had a Civil Defense system in those days complete with Air Raid Sirens that were tested regularly. The newspapers were full of chatter about the arms race with the Russians.

Our family had a bomb shelter in the basement of our house because my dad was the world's foremost expert on the internal guidance systems of Inter Continental Ballistic Missiles as a defense contractor at Bell Telephone Labs and as a Captain in Naval Intelligence, a position we never knew he held til after he flipped out, landed in a loonie bin, and was stripped of his top security clearance upon getting out. He told us he'd had a wrestling match with his conscience and that it was preying on his mind that he'd been involved with the development of weapons of mass destruction. He felt relieved about being stripped of his top security clearance and about being removed from Naval Intelligence. I wish everyone who is a cog inside the Military Industrial Complex could have the sort of highly developed conscience that my father had and would just flip the BIRD to these people!

He hated and distrusted the CIA. Never liked interracting with them. He used to tell me they weren't part of our government, that they take their marching orders from the Royal Institute of International Affairs, aka Chatham House, the same folks who give British Intelligence their marching orders. Dad's instincts were solid. He realized on some deep internal level that he was being used by the pondscum who are trying to turn this into a prison planet, and if he were alive today, he'd want to personally destroy traitors Bush & Cheney who he would accurately see are collectivists posing as purveyers of "freedom".

IAHF TO SPEAK IN TORONTO CANADA IN APRIL

I'll be speaking on a panel on Health Freedom issues alongside allies Rob Verkerk and Scott Tips at the Total Health Show in Toronto, Ontario Canada April 13-15 http://www.consumerhealth.org/tothealth/

DIALOGUE REGARDING A MARCH ON WASHINGTON PLANNED FOR MID JUNE

IAHF is engaged in a dialogue with "Let Freedom Ring America", an anti immigration group that has organized a march on Washington to occur in June: http://www.lframerica.com/march2.html Although I appreciate what this group is trying to do, I have been expressing some concerns about the way they're going about things. We're going to be holding a conference call to discuss this sometime in the coming week, so stay tuned! My concern is that they're not making an effort to build a BROAD BASED- BIPARTISAN COALITION, and their sole means of challenging the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America is via the immigration issue.

My concern is that they're out of touch with our political reality which is that the Democrats on the Oversight & Investigations Subcommittee have received failing grades from Americans for Better Immigration, (an anti open borders group), so I'm concerned that they could totally alienate the oversight subcommittee, which would then make it much harder for us to get oversight on FDA's Trilateral Cooperation Charter....

I've been trying hard to explain to this group that the threat of the North American Union must be seen from many different angles in order to strategically dismantle it, but this group is unfortunately not seeing the whole chessboard and thus far feels far too comfortable about DISENFRANCHISING the huge number of Americans who pushed DSHEA through congress in '94 in what was the largest flood of letters ever sent to Congress on a single issue in the HISTORY of congress. If any of you would like to assist me in communicating with "Let Freedom Ring America" please let me know!

Thus far, they've been drivin' me right up a wall with the worst form of arrogance I've ever encountered, so I'm callin' on ya'll as reinforcements! Want to help? Send an email at jham@iahf.com and in the subject line put: "I'm a Communicator and I Want to Help With the March on Washington"  If you can believe it, these people have threatened to have me arrested by the Washington Capital Police if I come anywhere near their march..... Thats not a smart way for anyone to talk to me- I've got the biggest bullhorn money can buy and lotsa batteries......

If you appreciate this work I'm doin' here- and want to help me get to Toronto for the Total Health Show and to DC to Interface with these people's March since they clearly need settin' straight- kindly slide a few simolians in this direction, eh?

IAHF 556 Boundary Bay Rd.

Point Roberts WA 98281 USA

or via Paypal at http://www.iahf.com/index1.html and let me know if you want a book + DVD- to those who've sent donations and are waitin' on books, they're coming up, I'm putting a bunch into tomorrow's mail, so please hang in there with me I'm tryin' to do the work of about 10 people here and am busier than a one armed paperhanger whose just had a beeehive be smashed over his head!

For Health Freedom, John C. Hammell, President International Advocates for Health Freedom 556 Boundary Bay Road Point Roberts, WA 98281-8702 USA http://www.iahf.com jham@iahf.com 800-333-2553 N.America 360-945-0352 World

___

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              

Teknosis Join us at EENG - Free Blogs,.

March 29, 2007 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

RIP: The Federal Income Tax Officially DIED yesterday (3/27/2007) at 13:53:58 PDT

Response to http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2007/03/legal_estoppel_.html#comments

Dear Sir:

 

DOJ's appellate attorney, Gretchen M. Wolfinger, was served with a

Tenth Circuit "order" to reply to the United States' NOTICE OF INTERVENTION.

Her "opposition" is here:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/INTERVENOR_OPP.pdf

 

The United States' ex rel. reply to her "opposition" is here:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/reply.to.opposition.htm

 

The Appellants also replied favorably to the NOTICE OF INTERVENTION.

 

The United States has a statutory right to intervene, and

it has exercised that right to intervene, regardless of what some

Circuit Clerks might think or not think about the applicable

federal statutes invoked by the United States.

 

FYI:  all of Bruce D. Black's alleged "orders" issued from the USDC

have violated 28 USC 1691 for lacking the seal of the court and

the signature of the clerk:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/informal.opening.brief.htm

 

And, Bruce D. Black, Matthew J. Dykman, and W. Daniel Schneider

have now fallen silent in reply to these INFORMAL INTERROGATORIES:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/informal.interrogatory.black.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/informal.interrogatory.black.supp.1.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/informal.interrogatory.dykman.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/informal.interrogatory.dykman.supp.1.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/informal.interrogatory.schneider.htm

 

Unfortunately, all Tenth Circuit "process" to date has also violated 28 USC 1691,

e.g. alleged "order denying" Appellants' MOTION FOR STAY OF EXECUTION.

 

Bruce D. Black's alleged "order of sale" conspicuously violates 28 USC 1691.

 

You should have questioned both sides, before jumping to conclusions.

 

You would never make a very good juror:  good jurors hear both sides

before coming to any conclusions.

 

Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and
Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice


Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.forward.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.perjury.jurats.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/psta.analysis.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/lien.or.levy.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/notice.of.deficiency.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.cclists.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm

 

In reply to:

   
 

 
 

 
 
                                                  
   

Name:

   
   

Bill E. Branscum, Investigator

   
   

Email:

   
   

oracleintl@aol.com

   
   

URL:

   
   

http://www.fraudsandscams.com/    

   
   
 
 

 

+++

 

More:

 

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/order.2007-02-13.2/order01.gif (does have a clerk's signature, however)

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/order.2007-02-13.2/order02.gif

 

 

See 28 USC 1691:

 

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1691.html

 

 

All of the following are now IN DEFAULT:

 

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/informal.interrogatory.black.htm

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/informal.interrogatory.black.supp.1.htm

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/informal.interrogatory.dykman.htm

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/informal.interrogatory.dykman.supp.1.htm

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/informal.interrogatory.schneider.htm



For the formal NOTICES OF DEFAULT, BY AFFIDAVIT, see:

 

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/nad06.htm

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/nad07.htm

 

 

A word to the wise is sufficient;

the idiots of this world won't get it,

no matter how many times it's repeated.

-- Anonymous

 

--
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and
Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

 

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Supreme Law Firm <paulandrewmitchell2004@yahoo.com >
Date: Mar 28, 2007 10:46 AM
Subject: Fwd: Tenth Circuit's "order" filed February 13, 2007 also lacks the required seal of the court: 28 USC 1691
To: stujones2001@yahoo.com
Cc: supremelaw@googlegroups.com

I am not one of the many people who need a black "robe"

to tell me what's right and what's wrong, particularly

if that "robe" lacks one or more of the 4 required credentials:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/

 

 

"Oh, great criminal impostors, pray tell us

how to lead our lives, and do teach us by

your extraordinary examples of lies,

extortion, fraud and racketeering."

 

 

See more details below ...

 

 

Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and
Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)

 

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice


Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.forward.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.perjury.jurats.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/psta.analysis.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/lien.or.levy.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/notice.of.deficiency.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.cclists.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm



Paul Andrew Mitchell <supremelawfirm@gmail.com> wrote:

Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 10:38:18 -0700
From: "Paul Andrew Mitchell" < supremelawfirm@gmail.com>
To: pc93 <pc9323@gmail.com>
Subject: Tenth Circuit's "order" filed February 13, 2007 also lacks the required seal of the court: 28 USC 1691
CC: "john s Williamson" <thewellguy@juno.com>, SupremeLaw < supremelaw@googlegroups.com>

- Show quoted text -

 

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/order.2007-02-13.2/order01.gif   (does have a clerk's signature, however)

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/order.2007-02-13.2/order02.gif

 

 

See 28 USC 1691:

 

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1691.html

 

 

All of the following are now IN DEFAULT:

 

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/informal.interrogatory.black.htm

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/informal.interrogatory.black.supp.1.htm

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/informal.interrogatory.dykman.htm

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/informal.interrogatory.dykman.supp.1.htm

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/informal.interrogatory.schneider.htm



For the formal NOTICES OF DEFAULT, BY AFFIDAVIT, see:

 

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/nad06.htm

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/nad07.htm

 

 

A word to the wise is sufficient;

the idiots of this world won't get it,

no matter how many times it's repeated.

-- Anonymous

 

--
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and
Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

 

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~

5/10/2007

Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 11:35:54 -0700
From: "Paul Andrew Mitchell" <supremelawfirm@gmail.com>
To: "john s Williamson" <thewellguy@juno.com>
Subject:

 

United States intervenes ex rel. in another Tenth Circuit civil appeal:

 

NOTICE OF INTERVENTION, Tenth Circuit #06-2103

 

 

 

 

 

.htm  = HTML

 

.doc  =  MS WORD (Office Suite)

 

 

 

 

 

On the merits, please take NOTE how the United States now requires

 

mandatory judicial notice of IRC subtitle A as "foreign law," to be treated

 

as FACTS to be proven, before they can be received by a constitutional

 

federal court situated inside any of the 50 States of the Union.

 

 

 

 

We will add more hyperlinks, as soon as time and resources permit.

 

 

 

Many thanks to the Williamson Appellants, for their courage and tenacity
in the face of an ugly, relentless and premeditated protection racket.

 

 

 

 

 

 
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and
Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)
 
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
 
Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:
 
http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/nutshell.htm <-- START HERE
http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.estopped.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.forward.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.perjury.jurats.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/psta.analysis.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/lien.or.levy.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/notice.of.deficiency.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.cclists.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell <supremelawfirm@gmail.com>
Date: May 10, 2007 7:23 AM
Subject: FINAL is in the mail: NOTICE OF INTERVENTION, Tenth Circuit appeal #06-2103
To: john s Williamson <thewellguy@juno.com>



see .doc file attached (MS WORD / Office Suite)

--
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and
Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

 

Refs:

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2007/03/rip_the_federal.html

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2007/03/doa_the_federal.html

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2007/03/todays_death_of.html

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2007/03/legal_estoppel_.html

____

Subject:

Estoppel Activated against IRS and U.S. Department of the Treasury –

there is no liability statute for taxes imposed by IRC subtitle A

 

Date:  March 27, 2007 A.D.

 

 

INTERVENOR'S NOTICE OF DEFAULT, BY AFFIDAVIT;  AND,

SIXTH NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE

(Tenth Circuit #07-2017):

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/nad06.htm

 

See item (7).

 

This pleading was mailed yesterday (see PROOF OF SERVICE).

 

A second such NOTICE OF DEFAULT, BY AFFIDAVIT

was mailed today (3/27/2007):

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/nad07.htm

 

 

PASS IT ON, PLEASE!

 

 

Sincerely yours,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and

Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)

 

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

 

Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.forward.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.perjury.jurats.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/psta.analysis.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/lien.or.levy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/notice.of.deficiency.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.cclists.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm

 

 

 

 

Subject:

RIP: The Federal Income Tax Officially DIED today (3/27/2007)

at 13:53:58 PDT

 

 

My Fellow Americans:

 

We bring you tidings of great joy.

 

That was the date and time stamp on our Sales Receipt

from the U.S. Postal Service at downtown San Diego,

California, USA, at the very moment we posted this

NOTICE OF DEFAULT:

 

INTERVENOR'S NOTICE OF DEFAULT, BY AFFIDAVIT;  AND,

SIXTH NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE

(Tenth Circuit #07-2017) here:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/nad06.htm

 

 

FINALLY, the federal income tax is officially dead.

 

 

Not only is the U.S. Department of the Treasury legally estopped.

 

U.S. DOJ attempted to appear on behalf of a Delaware corporation

which has been revoked.  Therefore, the U.S. Department

of Justice is also legally estopped from enforcing IRC subtitle A

and from attempting to rebut the AFFIDAVIT above, because

the Relator in that appeal preempted DOJ the moment Relator

appeared on behalf of the United States ex rel:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/intervention.htm

 

It is now the official position of the United States (federal government)

that there is no federal Statute at Large which creates a specific liability

for income taxes imposed by subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code.

 

For standing high Court authority, see Commissioner v. Acker:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/2amjur2d.htm  (see Am Jur abstract!)

 

Moreover, U.S. DOJ cannot now attempt to appear on behalf

of the United States (federal government), because

the United States is already legally represented in that appeal:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm

 

 

IT'S OVER, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN -- FINALLY!

 

 

PLEASE TELL EVERYONE YOU KNOW THIS GOOD NEWS:

THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX OFFICIALLY DIED TODAY (3/27/2007)

AT 1:53 P.M. PACIFIC DAYLIGHT TIME.

 

 

Praise God for all of His many blessings during the past 17 years.

 

 

Sincerely yours,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and

Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)

 

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

 

Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.forward.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.perjury.jurats.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/psta.analysis.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/lien.or.levy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/notice.of.deficiency.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.cclists.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm

 

 

 

 

>  What is the significance of all of this in regards to the IRS???

 

>  I'm not sure what is going on, but it sounds pretty big

>  what is happening in regards to these people not answering you.

 

>  I have some other communication about a Chuck Conces

>  who is having some troubles and wonder if this might be of import

>  to what is happening to him.

 

 

Yes:  this news is significant for all 300 million Americans,

particularly as the annual April 15 tax deadline approaches.

 

There is no liability STATUTE for taxes imposed by subtitle A

of the Internal Revenue Code:  IRS tried to create that liability

with regulations instead, but it's not legal for IRS to do that:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/nutshell.htm

 

An administrative regulation is NOT an "Act of Congress":

 

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/1/101.html  (defines "Act of Congress")

 

Regulations are written and promulgated by Executive Branch agencies,

NOT by the Congress of the United States i.e. the Legislative Branch.

Only the Congress can "make federal laws":

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/ref/whuscons/whuscons.htm#1

 

EVEN IF IRS were a de jure service or bureau within

the U.S. Department of the Treasury (which they are not),

they would STILL not have any authority to create a tax liability

by means of regulations published in the Federal Register.

 

So, in point of fact, IRS has been impersonating the Congress

and impersonating the U.S. Department of the Treasury.

These are violations of 18 USC 912 and 31 USC 333,

respectively:

 

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/912.html  (felony federal offense)

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/31/333.html  (civil and criminal penalties)

 

And, since Treasury fell silent in response to a proper and lawful

SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE, they were legally estopped

the moment we filed a NOTICE OF DEFAULT, BY AFFIDAVIT

at the Tenth Circuit today.  Service of LEGAL MAIL is effected

on the day it's posted.

 

"Estoppel" basically means that they cannot come

forward any longer, because they had their chance,

for several years, and they couldn't produce a STATUTE.

 

So, now it's O-V-E-R for them.

 

EVEN IF they produced a liability STATUTE tomorrow,

that STATUTE (which doesn't exist, by the way)

can be stricken from evidence at the Tenth Circuit

on the basis of legal estoppel.  In simple language,

they cannot change their minds to the detriment

of their opposing party(s):

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/informal.opening.brief.htm

 

 

For the rest of the story, study up on the topic

of "estoppel" in any good law dictionary

e.g. "equitable estoppel" and "collateral estoppel".

 

 

Sincerely yours,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and

Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)

 

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

 

Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.forward.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.perjury.jurats.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/psta.analysis.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/lien.or.levy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/notice.of.deficiency.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.cclists.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm

 

 

 

 

>  Mr. Mitchell are you telling me that there is no more income tax?

 

 

Yes:  pursuant to this NOTICE OF DEFAULT, BY AFFIDAVIT,

the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the IRS are now

legally estopped, because they fell silent in response to a lawful

SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE for a proper liability statute:

 

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/nad06.htm

http://supremelaw.org/press/rels/subpoena.htm  (PAST DUE & IN DEFAULT)

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/eddings/subpoena.liability.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/informal.opening.brief.htm

 

 

There is no LIABILITY STATUTE for taxes imposed by IRC subtitle A.

 

 

For high Court authority on this point, see Commissioner v. Acker,

cited in this Am Jur abstract:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/2amjur2d.htm

 

 

"In a nutshell" here's a very brief summary:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/nutshell.htm

 

 

The communists who have infiltrated our State and federal governments

are coming unglued by the NOTICE OF DEFAULT, BY AFFIDAVIT above.

 

Too bad for them!  They're trying to enforce a Plank in the

Communist Manifesto, contrary to the Law in America.

 

They went to sea in a sieve, and now it's sinking fast.

 

We are a Republic by Law, not a communist country.

 

 

Thank you for contacting the Supreme Law Firm.

 

 

Bcc:  The Internet

 

 

Sincerely yours,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and

Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)

 

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

 

Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.forward.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.perjury.jurats.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/psta.analysis.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/lien.or.levy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/notice.of.deficiency.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.cclists.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm

 

 

 

 

Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 17:13:02 -0700 (PDT)

From: Supreme Law Firm < paulandrewmitchell2004@yahoo.com>

Subject:  Help w/ Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Acker

 

 

>  I am studying closely your APPELLANTS' INFORMAL OPENING BRIEF

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/informal.opening.brief.htm

>  in the Williamson case and trying to understand the language referenced i.e.

>  "[A]n administrative agency may not create a criminal offense or

>  any liability not sanctioned by the lawmaking authority,

>  especially a liability for a tax or inspection fee."

 

>  but I am not able to see this

>  when reading Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Acker:

 

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=361&invol=87

 

>  What am I missing here?  Will you help me understand this?

 

 

Hi Tharon,

 

Good question!

 

Start here:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/2amjur2d.htm

 

And derive three (3) key points from that Am Jur citation

("3" is my lucky number, remember? :)

 

(1)  the power of an administrative agency to make rules

does not extend to the power to make legislation;

 

(2)  a regulation which is beyond the power of the agency to make is invalid;  and,

 

(3)  an administrative agency may not create a criminal offense or any liability

not sanctioned by the lawmaking authority, and specifically a liability for a tax

or inspection fee.

 

 

Now, click on the link to Commissioner v. Acker, and study this paragraph:

 

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=361&invol=87

 

[begin excerpt]

 

The fact that the section contains no basis or means for the computation

of any addition to the tax in a case where no declaration has been filed

would seem to settle the point beyond all controversy.

 

If the section had in any appropriate words conveyed the thought expressed

by the regulation it would thereby have clearly authorized the Commissioner

to treat the taxpayer's failure to file a declaration as the equivalent of a declaration

estimating his tax at zero and, hence, as constituting a "substantial underestimate" of his tax.

 

But the section contains nothing to that effect, and, therefore,

to uphold this addition to the tax would be to hold

that it may be imposed by regulation,

which, of course, the law does not permit.

United States v. Calamaro, 354 U.S. 351, 359;

Koshland v. Helvering, 298 U.S. 441, 446 -447;

Manhattan Co. v. Commissioner, 297 U.S. 129, 134.

...

The questioned regulation must therefore be regarded "as no more than

an attempted addition to the statute of something which is not there."

United States v. Calamaro, supra, 354 U.S., at 359.

 

[end excerpt]

 

 

Now, apply what you just learned about such "over-reaching" regulations

to the specific regulation at 26 CFR 1.1-1(b):

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cfr/26/26cfr1.1-1.htm#b

 

That regulation attempted to create a specific liability

for federal citizens and resident aliens to pay income

taxes imposed by IRC subtitle A.

 

To paraphrase Commissioner v. Acker now:

"IRC section 1 contains nothing like the specific liability

provision which Congress enacted for subtitle C

at IRC section 3403."

 

In other words, there is no corresponding Act of Congress

which created a specific liability for taxes imposed by subtitle A.

The PROOF is in the silence which the former Secretary of the

Treasury exhibited in reply to this lawful SUBPOENA:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/press/rels/subpoena.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/eddings/subpoena.liability.htm

 

"Silence activates estoppel."  Carmine v. Bowen

"Silence can be equated with fraud."  U.S. v. Tweel

 

Therefore, the regulation at 26 CFR 1.1-1 is void

for attempting to create a specific liability

without a corresponding Act of Congress:

 

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/1/101.html

 

 

Sincerely yours,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and

Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)

 

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

 

Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.forward.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.perjury.jurats.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/psta.analysis.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/lien.or.levy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/notice.of.deficiency.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.cclists.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm

 

 

 

 

>  Paul, this involves civil, not criminal;

>  how does that differ as far as the income tax goes?

>  Thanks Gene

 

 

No difference, really.  The USDC has no criminal jurisdiction

whatsoever, in point of law;  this is explained further here:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/31answers.htm

(e.g. the federal Jury Selection and Service Act is unconstitutional,

thus invalidating all federal grand jury INDICTMENTS and

all federal trial jury VERDICTS against State Citizens;

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is a defunct

Delaware Corporation;  etc. ad nauseam)

 

Statutes conferring original jurisdiction upon federal district courts

must be STRICTLY construed.  In this context, see 18 USC 3231:

 

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/3231.html

 

More importantly, the constitutionality of IRC subtitles A and F

has now been formally challenged at the Tenth Circuit

by the United States appearing ex rel.:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/

(the United States agrees with the Williamson Appellants!)

 

Subtitle F contains ALL the enforcement provisions, e.g.

criminal penalties for tax evasion, etc.

 

See further discussion of 18 USC 3231 here, in the

Williamson Appellants' INFORMAL OPENING BRIEF:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/informal.opening.brief.htm

 

3231 supra confers original criminal jurisdiction upon the

Article III District Courts of the United States ("DCUS"),

NOT upon the Article IV United States District Courts ("USDC").

 

 

Summarizing:  It's now O-V-E-R for the IRS!  The End

 

 

Bcc:  The Internet (widely)

 

 

Sincerely yours,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and

Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)

 

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

 

Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.forward.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.perjury.jurats.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/psta.analysis.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/lien.or.levy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/notice.of.deficiency.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.cclists.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm

 

 

 

 

>  You demanded the U.S. Government to show by Judicial Process

>  that there is a Law demanding the people to pay income tax.

 I believe the Grace period you gave the U.S. Government to respond was 60 days.

 

 

Greetings Patrick:

 

Not exactly.  Here's a somewhat detailed history:

 

A blank SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE was issued

by the Clerk of the Article III District Court of the United States

in Santa Ana, California, on behalf of a client of the

Supreme Law Firm.  That was the District Clerks' practice back then,

if a plaintiff or defendant requested such a blank civil SUBPOENA.

 

Because our client had no immediate use for that blank

SUBPOENA, she gave it to me and, much later,

I completed that SUBPOENA on 9/14/2002 and served it

on Paul H. O'Neill, who was the Secretary of the Treasury

at that time.  The deadline for his answer, as stated

on that SUBPOENA, was November 1, 2002:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/eddings/subpoena.liability.htm

 

About 2 months after it was served, Paul H. O'Neill was fired

by George W. Bush and, ever since then, we have been

looking and hoping for the best opportunity to introduce

that SUBPOENA into evidence, with the requisite

NOTICE OF DEFAULT, BY AFFIDAVIT.

 

You will note, on the list of recipients of that original SUBPOENA,

that a significant diversity of different litigants was to receive

certified copies of the requested Statute at Large:

that diversity was intended to create qualified federal witnesses

out of all those litigants, in the event that O'Neill either fell silent,

or complied with the SUBPOENA.

 

For example, we can now use formal discovery to confirm

whether or not those itemized dockets show any record

of a written reply to that SUBPOENA from O'Neill's office.

 

The Williamson appeal provided my office with a unique

opportunity for the United States to intervene "ex rel." --

which I have now done as the "Relator" legally representing

the United States (federal government).  Having legally

perfected that intervention, we followed with several

supporting documents, the most recent of which included this

INTERVENOR'S NOTICE OF DEFAULT, BY AFFIDAVIT;  AND,

SIXTH NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/nad06.htm

 

The SUBPOENA in question, PROOF OF SERVICE and

related documents were attached to the latter

NOTICE OF DEFAULT, BY AFFIDAVIT.  See item (7)

and this Press Release:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/press/rels/subpoena.htm

 

Therefore the amount of time which the Department of the Treasury

has now allowed to pass, withOUT producing the required liability STATUTE,

extends from September 14, 2002 to March 27, 2007 -- a period spanning

approximately 4 1/2 YEARS.

 

We are quite confident, then, to argue that estoppel has now been activated,

pursuant to the holding in Carmine v. Bowen (silence activates estoppel).

 

I hope this helps.

 

Sincerely yours,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and

Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)

 

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

 

Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.forward.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.perjury.jurats.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/psta.analysis.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/lien.or.levy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/notice.of.deficiency.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.cclists.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm

 

 

 

 

Subject:  PASS IT ON:  POWERS OF 10 x CONFIRMATION

 

>  Paul,

>  Thank You for your reply.  Ray

 

 

You're very welcome, Ray.

 

We were asked how we intend to broadcast this good news.

 

Because the major media have given us the deaf ear

-- for at least 17 years now, having started in 1990 --

and because the Most High has gifted us with this

marvelous Internet, we merely ask that you forward

this good news to ten (10) other contacts of yours,

via email, and ask them to do likewise.

 

It only takes six (6) powers of ten to reach a million,

and only eight (8) powers of ten to reach 100 million!

 

So, DO PASS IT ON, PLEASE:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.estopped.htm

 

 

And, the legal eagles out there will SURELY enjoy this

INFORMAL OPENING BRIEF, just filed by the Williamson

Appellants at the Tenth Circuit in Denver, Colorado:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/informal.opening.brief.htm

(HTML version is now hyperlinked:  please report any link errors to the Supreme Law Firm)

 

John and Nancy Williamson are shipping autographed copies

of this astounding document for only $20.00 prepaid in cash.

 

These purchases will no doubt help them a LOT

with their ongoing legal expenses.

 

Their mailing location is:

 

Mr. and Mrs. John S. Williamson

1277 Historic Route 66 East

Tijeras 87059

NEW MEXICO, USA

 

 

Priority U.S. Mail with Delivery Confirmation

is recommended, to permit tracking via the

USPS tracking database on the Internet

at http://www.usps.com .

 

 

Thanks very much!

 

 

Sincerely yours,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and

Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)

 

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

 

Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.forward.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.perjury.jurats.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/psta.analysis.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/lien.or.levy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/notice.of.deficiency.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.cclists.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm

 

 

 

 

>  How do you intend to make this public so millions of Americans know?

>  Most of the people reading this probably knew about this being illegal.

>  How would you get this info to millions of Americans who have no idea?

>  There are entities which have beaten the system in the past

>  but were not made common public knowledge

>  so the system goes on and

>  whether this is legal or not is irrelevant if the masses do not know.

 

 

Thank you for contacting the Supreme Law Firm:

 

Our clients did not retain me to develop a Public Relations program

or an advertising campaign.

 

This is LITIGATION, ok?

 

If you want to conduct an advertising campaign, GO FOR IT!!!

 

I think that's an excellent idea, but I don't have control of the

funds it will require to do a serious and professional job.

 

 

Sincerely yours,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and

Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)

 

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

 

Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.forward.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.perjury.jurats.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/psta.analysis.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/lien.or.levy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/notice.of.deficiency.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.cclists.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm

 

 

 

 

>  Has anyone represented to you that he has ever accomplished anything

>  in any case other than to see those who believed in him be mercilessly crucified -

>  over, and over, and over again?  [written by Mr. Branscum]

 

 

Well, this is arguably one of his MOST SERIOUS errors, among others

that I can show to you.

 

Perhaps this is as good a time, as any other, to itemize some of the

wins in which I have been involved, here goes:

 

 

(1)  In People v. Boxer, we petitioned the California Supreme Court

for a WRIT OF MANDAMUS to compel Senator-Elect Barbara Boxer

to witness the evidence impugning the ratification of the so-called

16th Amendment;  at that time, my procedural knowledge was

minimal.  When the California Supreme Court referred that case

to the California Court of Appeals, the latter summarily "denied"

our PETITION, but I failed to appeal back up to the California

Supreme Court in time.  So, the clerks closed that case.

Barbara Boxer, however, never responded, so her silence

Rendered our AFFIDAVITS the "truth of that case".

 

Summary:  a Mexican Standoff (if you will):

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/boxer/

 

Note that we also petitioned the Superior Court first,

but that judge ruled that his court did not have jurisdiction.

 

 

(2)  In USA v. Vroman, I offered my research abilities to Vroman,

and he took me under his wing, and shared several dinners

with me at his ranch north of Santa Rosa, California.

He also game me a few firearms lessons, in exchange for my labor.

To summarize, together we developed a defense strategy

which acquitted him of the felony tax evasion charge,

but he was convicted of misdemeanor failure to file:

he asked the jurors why they convicted him, and they

replied that he had admitted on the witness stand

that "he did not file."  Vroman is now the duly elected

District Attorney for the County of Mendocino, California.

I personally prepared the Visual Aides which can be

found here:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/vroman/

 

 

(3)  It wasn't until I migrated to Tucson, Arizona, that

I had more opportunities to litigate:  a trust there

invited me to help them prepare a defense against

a federal grand jury SUBPOENA for the trust's

books and records.  When that trust's manager

appointed me to the office of Vice President

for Legal Affairs, federal judge John M. Roll recognized

that appointment and authorized me to represent

the trust, and to litigate its defense.  The net result

was that we routed 1 federal judge, 2 U.S. Attorneys,

and 1 IRS agent, who were all charged with a very

large number of felony federal offenses.  Perhaps I should

add that the trust's manager confessed to me that

he was guilty;  nevertheless, my work did succeed

in defeating a federal grand jury INDICTMENT of him,

despite his private confession to me and 3 others:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/nlhc/

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/roll/

 

 

(4)  In my own 2 IRS "summons" enforcement cases,

I prevailed BOTH TIMES, once before U.S. District Judge

Vaughn Walker in downtown San Francisco, and once

before a "pro tem" appointment whose name I have forgotten.

The winning brief that we filed in Walker's court is here,

with names changed to protect the privacy of families

involved:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/jetruman/oppososc.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/jetruman/  (case quietly DISMISSED by Walker)

 

In the second such case, I didn't file anything, because

I had become disgusted with federal "judges";  instead,

I argued with that pro tem for 40 minutes, and during that

hearing I formally moved that USDC four (4) different times

for an ORDER to the Assistant U.S. Attorney to disclose

the statute which created a specific liability for taxes

imposed by subtitle A.  That pro tem would not rule on

any of my 4 motions, and the AUSA sat down and put his

head in hands, saying nothing.  I have memorialized

that amazing hearing in the latest Preface to

"The Federal Zone" here:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/

 

See Preface to the Eighth Edition here:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/htm/preface.htm#preface8

 

 

(5)  In USA v. Gilbertson, this OPENING BRIEF

incorporated at least 7 YEARS of research up to that time:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/gilberts/opening.htm

 

Even though the Eighth Circuit knew who wrote that BRIEF,

they never served me with their erroneous "summary ruling"

that the IRC is "not vague".  That summary ruling was also

UNPUBLISHED.  Then, 3 years later, a 3-judge panel on

that same Eighth Circuit ruled that UNPUBLISHED

Circuit Court decisions are unconstitutional:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/anastasoff/  (CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS??  I DO!!)

 

You may recall that we have introduced the decision in Anastasoff

in pleadings now filed in your appeal to the Tenth Circuit,

because it contains a beautiful history of "judicial precedent".

 

To keep Gilbertson's appeal alive, I applied for

intervention on behalf of the People of the USA:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/gilberts/

because I had later confirmed two (2) Acts of

Congress which expressly extended the

U.S. Constitution into D.C. and into

all federal Territories, even future Territories.

However, that Eighth Circuit never ruled on the

People's APPLICATION FOR INTERVENTION,

not even a summary "denial".  Nothing ever since then!

 

 

(6)  I have been retained by numerous other clients

who have experienced very similar abominations

issuing from the federal judiciary.  In Spokane,

Washington State, I helped defeat another

act of outright aggression against a chiropractor

and his wife here:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/macdonald/

http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/evidence.folders.2004-03-16.htm#DWA

http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/vansickle.fred/nad.missing.credentials.2.htm

 

Feel free to telephone Dr. Russell MacDonald, because he has been

a silent subscriber to the SupremeLaw discussion list and message archive

for several YEARS now, and I regard him as a personal friend and

trusted colleague:  by that I mean that I would trust him with my life.

 

 

I could go on and on, John and Nancy, but what's the point?

 

You can easily confirm all of these cases, either by reviewing

the documentation which we have painstakingly assembled & uploaded

to the Internet, and/or contacting the parties and government

personnel involved.  Vaugh Walker is still a U.S. District Judge

in San Francisco, and he has all 4 credentials:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/walker.vaughn/

 

And, yes I did change my name, when I went under cover

in Tucson to locate 2,500 children who disappeared

into Child Protective Services there:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/press/rels/kidnaps.htm

 

I have to laugh when anyone tries to make a BIG DEAL

about my name change.  You should know that I was

in the same UCLA graduating class as Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

 

Of course, when we were fellow students at UCLA, his

name then was Lew Alcindor.  Everybody who knew him

liked him: he gave the entire campus an extraordinary set

of unforgettable basketball memories, which I too

witnessed after we would rush to finish dinner at Dykstra Hall

and find mid-court seats in Pauley Pavilion, for one amazing

experience after another.

 

WHAT A THRILL!  Kareem is one of my long-standing heroes.

And, look at what he did after graduating from UCLA!

He has to be one of America's most famous athletes,

no contest.

 

I think Mr. Brain Scum should also telephone Kareem

and excoriate Kareem also for changing his name to

a Muslim-sounding name.  You know what Kareem

will probably say to that jerk, if I know Kareem?

He'll either hang up on him, or tell him to go

stick his f**king head in a toilet and flush it.

 

 

I apologize for my outburst, but enough is enough.

 

 

P.S.  If you want to know details about more of our "wins" here,

just ask.  I'll be happy to share the details with you, privately.

 

 

Have a nice evening, John and Nancy.

 

 

Cc:    Dr. Russell MacDonald, D.C., Spokane, Washington State

Bcc:  The Internet (widely)

 

 

Sincerely yours,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and

Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)

 

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

 

Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.forward.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.perjury.jurats.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/psta.analysis.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/lien.or.levy.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/notice.of.deficiency.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.cclists.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm

___

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              

Teknosis Join us at EENG - Free Blogs,.

March 28, 2007 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

DOA: The Federal Income Tax Officially DIED today (3/27/2007) at 13:53:58 PDT

It won't be reported but The Federal Income Tax Officially DIED today (3/27/2007) at 13:53:58 PDT

Supreme Law Firm <paulandrewmitchell2004@...> wrote:

Subject: RIP: The Federal Income Tax Officially DIED today (3/27/2007) at 13:53:58 PDT

My Fellow Americans:

We bring you tidings of great joy.

That was the date and time stamp on our Sales Receipt from the U.S. Postal Service at downtown San Diego, California, USA, at the very moment we posted this NOTICE OF DEFAULT:

INTERVENOR'S NOTICE OF DEFAULT, BY AFFIDAVIT; AND, SIXTH NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE (Tenth Circuit #07-2017) here:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/nad06.htm

FINALLY, the federal income tax is officially dead.
=============================================

HERE IT IS FURTHER EXPLAINED IN LAYMAN'S TERMS

What is the significance of all of this in regards to the IRS???
I'm not sure what is going on, but it sounds pretty big what is happening in regards to these people not answering you.I have some other communication about a Chuck Conces who is having some troubles and wonder if this might be of import to what is happening to him.

Yes: this news is significant for all 300 million Americans, particularly as the annual April 15 tax deadline approaches.

There is no liability STATUTE for taxes imposed by subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code: IRS tried to create that liability with regulations instead, but it's not legal for IRS to do that:

http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/nutshell.htm

An administrative regulation is NOT an "Act of Congress":

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/1/101.html (defines "Act of Congress")

Regulations are written and promulgated by Executive Branch agencies, NOT by the Congress of the United States i.e. the Legislative Branch. Only the Congress can "make federal laws":

http://www.supremelaw.org/ref/whuscons/whuscons.htm#1

EVEN IF IRS were a de jure service or bureau within the U.S. Department of the Treasury (which they are not), they would STILL not have any authority to create a tax liability by means of regulations published in the Federal Register.

So, in point of fact, IRS has been impersonating the Congress and impersonating the U.S. Department of the Treasury. These are violations of 18 USC 912 and 31 USC 333, respectively:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/912.html (felony federal offense)
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/31/333.html (civil and criminal penalties)

And, since Treasury fell silent in response to a proper SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE, they were legally estopped the moment we filed a NOTICE OF DEFAULT, BY AFFIDAVIT at the Tenth Circuit today. Service of LEGAL MAIL is effected on the day it's posted.

"Estoppel" basically means that they cannot come forward any longer, because they had their chance, for several years, and they couldn't produce a STATUTE.

So, now it's O-V-E-R for them.

EVEN IF they produced a liability STATUTE tomorrow, that STATUTE (which doesn't exist, by the way) can be stricken from evidence at the Tenth Circuit on the basis of legal estoppel. In simple language, they cannot change their minds to the detriment of their opposing party(s):

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/informal.opening.brief.htm

For the rest of the story, study up on the topic of "estoppel" in any good law dictionary e.g. "equitable estoppel" and "collateral estoppel". Not only is the U.S. Department of the Treasury legally estopped.

U.S. DOJ attempted to appear on behalf of a Delaware corporation which has been revoked. Therefore, the U.S. Department of Justice is also legally estopped from enforcing IRC subtitle A and from attempting to rebut the AFFIDAVIT above, because the Relator in that appeal preempted DOJ the moment Relator appeared on behalf of the United States ex rel:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/intervention.htm

It is now the official position of the United States (federal government) that there is no federal Statute at Large which creates a specific liability for income taxes imposed by subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code. For standing high Court authority, see Commissioner v. Acker:

http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/2amjur2d.htm (see Am Jur abstract!)

Moreover, U.S. DOJ cannot now attempt to appear on behalf of the United States (federal government), because the United States is already legally represented in that appeal:

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm

IT'S OVER, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN -- FINALLY!

PLEASE TELL EVERYONE YOU KNOW THIS GOOD NEWS:

THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX OFFICIALLY DIED TODAY AT 1:53 P.M. PACIFIC DAYLIGHT TIME.

Praise God for all of His many blessings during the past 17 years.
=========================================================

Refs:

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2007/03/rip_the_federal.html

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2007/03/doa_the_federal.html

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2007/03/todays_death_of.html

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2007/03/legal_estoppel_.html

___

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              

 

March 27, 2007 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Today's Death of the Federal Income Tax explained further

Today's Death of the Federal Income Tax explained further

 

> What is the significance of all of this in

> regards to the IRS??? I'm not sure what

> is going on, but it sounds pretty big what

> is happening in regards to these people

> not answering you. I have some other

> communication about a Chuck Conces

> who is having some troubles and wonder

> if this might be of import to what is

> happening to him. 

 

 

Yes:  this news is significant for all 300 million Americans, particularly as the annual April 15 tax deadline approaches.

 

There is no liability STATUTE for taxes imposed by subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code: IRS tried to create that liability with regulations instead, but it's not legal for IRS to do that:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/nutshell.htm

 

An administrative regulation is NOT an "Act of Congress":

 

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/1/101.html (defines "Act of Congress")

 

Regulations are written and promulgated by Executive Branch agencies, NOT by the Congress of the United States i.e. the Legislative Branch.

Only the Congress can "make federal laws":

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/ref/whuscons/whuscons.htm#1

 

EVEN IF IRS were a de jure service or bureau within the U.S. Department of the Treasury (which they are not), they would STILL not have any authority to create a tax liability by means of regulations published in the Federal Register.

 

So, in point of fact, IRS has been impersonating the Congress and impersonating the U.S. Department of the Treasury.

These are violations of 18 USC 912 and 31 USC 333, respectively:

 

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/912.html (felony federal offense)

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/31/333.html  (civil and criminal penalties)

 

And, since Treasury fell silent in response to a proper SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE, they were legally estopped the moment we filed a NOTICE OF DEFAULT, BY AFFIDAVIT at the Tenth Circuit today. Service of LEGAL MAIL is effected on the day it's posted.

 

"Estoppel" basically means that they cannot come forward any longer, because they had their chance, for several years, and they couldn't produce a STATUTE.

 

So, now it's O-V-E-R for them.

 

EVEN IF they produced a liability STATUTE tomorrow, that STATUTE (which doesn't exist, by the way) can be stricken from evidence at the Tenth Circuit on the basis of legal estoppel. In simple language, they cannot change their minds to the detriment of their opposing party(s):

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/informal.opening.brief.htm

 

 

For the rest of the story, study up on the topic of "estoppel" in any good law dictionary e.g. "equitable estoppel" and "collateral estoppel".


Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and
Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice


Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:

http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.forward.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.perjury.jurats.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/psta.analysis.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/lien.or.levy.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/notice.of.deficiency.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.cclists.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm

Refs:

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2007/03/rip_the_federal.html

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2007/03/doa_the_federal.html

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2007/03/todays_death_of.html

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2007/03/legal_estoppel_.html

 

___

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              

Teknosis Join us at EENG - Free Blogs,.

March 27, 2007 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Legal estoppel is now activated against U.S. Department of the Treasury

INTERVENOR'S NOTICE OF DEFAULT, BY AFFIDAVIT; AND,

SIXTH NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE
(Tenth Circuit #07-2017):

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/nad06.htm

See item (7).

This pleading was mailed yesterday (see PROOF OF SERVICE).

A second such NOTICE OF DEFAULT, BY AFFIDAVIT
was mailed today:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/nad07.htm

PASS IT ON, PLEASE!

Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and
Federal Witness: 18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:
http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.forward.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.perjury.jurats.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/psta.analysis.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/lien.or.levy.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/notice.of.deficiency.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.cclists.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm

 

Refs:

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2007/03/rip_the_federal.html

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2007/03/doa_the_federal.html

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2007/03/todays_death_of.html

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2007/03/legal_estoppel_.html

___

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              

Teknosis Join us at EENG - Free Blogs,.

March 27, 2007 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

LEO WANTA AND THE WISCONSIN STATE TAX GESTAPO

ANATOMY OF OFFICIAL TAX FRAUD AGAINST A POLITICAL PRISONER

Tuesday 20 March 2007 02:36

By Christopher Story FRSA, Editor and Publisher, International Currency Review, World Reports Limited, London and New York: www.worldreports.org. Press NEWS and the ARCHIVE Button on the www.worldreports.org Home Page for Wanta Crisis reports since April 2006. [Note: The CLICK HERE panel is now: NEWS. A new panel, giving details of our latest publications, has been added].

‘The masses must… be brought to accept such a thing as Income Tax, a Marxist principle smoothly slid into [the] capitalist framework in 1909 in the United States. This, even though the Basic Law [i.e., the Constitution – Ed.] of the United States forbade it and even though Communism had at that time been active only for a few years in America’.

‘The Communist agent skilled in economics has as his task the suborning of tax agencies and their personnel to create the maximum disturbance and chaos’.

From: 'The Communist Manual of Instructions on Psychopolitical Warfare’ exposed by Kenneth Goff, a.k.a. John Keats, a former active and dues-paying Wisconsin (CPUSA) Communist; Volume 9 of the Congressional Record, 1939. Note: Nazism (National Socialism) and Communism (International Socialism) are dialectical ‘opposites’ with a documented common origin that are manipulated for World Revolution and global hegemony purposes. For backgound, see: Soviet Analyst, Volume 30, 1-3 and other intelligence sources published recently by World Reports Limited.

WANTA BETRAYED BY ENVIOUS, JEALOUS AND CORRUPT COLLEAGUES
One of the most unpleasant characteristics of intelligence communities is their ingrained habit of treating their own operatives worse than the agent enemies with which they often cooperate.

At any stage of his career, an intelligence operative may find himself betrayed by his own supposed colleagues, for one of two reasons: either because he has ‘messed up’, or else because he has been too successful, and professional jealousy and rivalry have taken over.

That, in a nutshell, is what happened to the United States’ greatest living Financial Warfare genius and patriot, Leo Emil Wanta. Following the spectacular Financial Warfare operation, which he masterminded, to destabilise the Soviet Union, in cooperation with Mikhail Gorbachev, Boris Yeltsin, Prime Minister Yegor Gaidar and Vladimir Vladimirovoch Putin – all of whom (with others) accepted what are politely known in the trade as ‘facilitation payments’, ensuring the ‘success’ of the ‘takedown’ – Leo Wanta, in his turn, became the victim of a vicious ‘takedown’, or the ‘switch’ component of a ‘bait and switch’ operation, himself.

U.S. INTELLIGENCE HELPED WITH SOVIET ‘COLLAPSIBLE COMMUNISM’
Before we examine how this was achieved, and what followed, two crucial observations are inserted here. First, the Soviets had formulated and perfected a complex scheme which the Editor calls ‘collapsible Communism’, and which was precisely outlined and predicted by Anatoliy Golitsyn in his two classic exposures of Soviet deception strategy, ‘New Lies for Old’ and ‘The Perestroika Deception’ (edited by this Editor: see the Edward Harle (books) section of this website). Either knowingly or otherwise, US intelligence actually assisted the Soviets with the implementation of this long-range strategic deception operation.

THE ‘BAIT AND SWITCH’ TECHNIQUE
Secondly, the most basic (and odious) of all standard intelligence techniques is known as the ‘bait and switch’ technique, which is self-explanatory. You gain the confidence of your target, entrap him, through greed, blackmail or the application of any of the ‘Black Arts’, and when he is well and truly cooked, you turn on him, strip him of his assets, and destroy him. Prime examples: Saddam Hussein and Slobodan Milosevic. It stinks, but that’s what many of these people do.

Leo Wanta duly became the victim of the ‘switch’ end of this standard intelligence operating technique. And just as Gorbachev, Putin et al had cooperated with him to facilitate (for their own strategic reasons) their ‘collapsible Communism’ ruse, the fake ‘post’-Soviets now collaborated with high-level US operatives to ‘take down’ Ambassador Leo Wanta.

The primary characters involved in this ‘switch’ operation against Wanta were Marc Rich/Reich (the fugitive from US justice resident in Switzerland subsequently exposed by the Editor as the DVD operative Hans Brand (1)), Boris Yeltsin, William Jefferson and Hillary Clinton, George Bush Sr., and Tommy Thompson, the former Governor of Wisconsin.

DARK MOTIVES FOR THE ‘SWITCH’ AGAINST LEO WANTA
Each of these operatives had their own dark motives for collaborating in this cynical venture, the primary outcome of which was to facilitate unlawful access to global monetary funds aggregating $27.5 trillion (2) of which Leo Wanta was and remains the sole Principal and Trustor.

These funds were and remain lodged with numerous bank accounts held by USG Title 18, Section 6 corporations of which Leo Wanta is the sole owner. Under President Reagan’s Executive Order 12333 (January 1981), US intelligence operatives were given freedom to establish corporations, which they could own, for the purposes of conducting secret intelligence and counterintelligence business on behalf of Uncle Sam under contract. The way such corporations are organised means that the operative who sets them up OWNS the assets that they hold in the associated bank accounts. Leo Emil Wanta reported annually on the assets of his Title 18, Section 6 corporations to the General Accounting (now ‘Accountability’) Office in Washington DC, and stood ready at all times to pay the necessary tax on those assets when repatriated, in conformity with US tax legislation.

This is not the place to debate the wisdom of such an arrangement. However the Editor permits himself the observation that to allow one’s intelligence agents such freedom is asking for trouble: and trouble, in spades, is what the United States has got as a longer-term consequence of this device – which, by the way, was copied by the Gorbachev-era Politburo in 1990, when it passed a resolution authorising (under Soviet ‘socialist legality’) the rapid setting up of similar intelligence corporations clearly modelled on the US precedent (although the Soviets had in fact been using intelligence corporations, disguised as trading organisations, ever since the establishment of Amtorg in New York back in the 1920s).

NO USE IF INTELLIGENCE OPERATIVES CAN’T BE TRUSTED
Executive Order 12333 was all very well if the President of the United States could ever trust his operatives. But President Reagan trusted none of them, with one exception: Leo Emil Wanta, whom he called his ‘junkyard dog’. And Reagan trusted Leo Emil Wanta for the impeccable reason that he could indeed be trusted: in fact, as it has turned out, he was and almost certainly remains the ONLY high-level US intelligence officer who could and can be trusted, as current events reconfirm.

Which is precisely why he was ‘taken out’. He stood squarely in the way of the greed of certain ‘Big Intelligence Barons’, led by George Bush Sr. and the Clintons (collectively referred to, with their multifarious associates, as ‘the Box Gang’). For these operatives lusted after the $27.5 trillion that Leo personally controlled and of which he remains, to this day, the sole Principal and Trustor (in case anyone has still missed this point). Furthermore, following his operation against the Soviet Empire, he was awarded control of United Nations contract #4 worth $5.0 trillion. In a telephone conversation with the Editor last year, Leo Wanta confirmed that this was stolen/diverted from him by the Clintons, a fact that appeared in International Currency Review, Volume 31, 3/4 (3).

AMBASSADOR OF SOMALIA + CHAIRMAN-DESIGNATE OF ITS CENTRAL BANK
On 11th April 1993, Sir Leo Emil Wanta was appointed by the President of Somalia to serve as Ambassador of the Somali Republic to Canada. On 19 June 1993, he was further appointed Ambassador of the Somali Republic to Switzerland.

While en route to Switzerland in July 1993, Leo Emil Wanta was confirmed at a ceremony in Paris, presided over inter alia by the French Foreign Minister of the day, Alain Juppe, as Ambassador of Somalia to Switzerland and Canada, on the instructions of the President of Somalia. Under this arrangement, sanctioned of course by the White House, Leo Wanta, who had also been appointed Chairman-designate of the Somali Central Bank, was to mastermind and direct the transformation of Somalia by the United States into a modern economy, equipped with new ports, airports, military bases and other infrastructure, and using the US dollar instead of the decayed Somali dinar.

07 JULY 1993: WANTA UNLAWFULLY SEIZED BY SWISS AUTHORITIES
On 7th July 1993, despite having full diplomatic immunity from arrest, Leo Wanta was seized illegally in Lausanne by Swiss authorities claiming that they were acting in response to a ‘delinquent State tax request’ (via telephone) originated by the US State of Wisconsin, which of course has no international jurisdiction.

The Swiss admitted that they had no paperwork but advised that it would be forthcoming.

Leo Wanta subsequently received papers asserting that he had been charged with a Federal violation and that the Wisconsin United States District Court had issued a warrant for his arrest, even though, as an accredited diplomat, he possessed diplomatic immunity from arrest. He was not arrested by the Swiss authorities for any violation of Swiss law and nor was he at any time charged with committing fraud under Swiss law. On being detained, his diplomatic briefcase, diplomatic pouch/satchel and luggage were illegally confiscated, contrary to international law governing the treatment of diplomats, and also contrary to the Swiss/USA Treaty on Tax Evasion.

18 HIGH-VALUE U.S TREASURY INSTRUMENTS IN DIPLOMATIC BRIEFCASE
Given his intended highest-level work on behalf of the Somali and US Governments, Ambassador Leo Wanta (as he has remained designated, and as he is universally acknowledged at the US State, Federal and intergovernmental levels) carried in his sealed diplomatic briefcase 18 high-value US Treasury instruments, for a total face value of $18.0 billion. Please retain this information in mind for future reference.

Another purpose of the Lausanne visit had been to arrest Marc Rich (Reich), a fugitive from US justice, on the instructions of the then Director of the FBI, William Sessions. This covert operation failed as a direct consequence of obstruction of justice perpetrated ‘by others’, and Sessions was abruptly dismissed by Clinton with no explanation. It is the Editor’s view that Marc Rich (Hans Brand) was ‘activated’ by Clinton to procure Wanta’s arrest by the Swiss authorities, explaining Clinton’s controversial ‘pardon’ of this long-term DVD (4) operative. However Rich/Brand remains unable to enter the United States, since he would be arrested on arrival, as such a pardon can only be validated by the Court, which may have other charges to consider.

SWISS ATTEMPTED TO MURDER LEO IN THEIR FILTHY DUNGEON
The Ambassador was thrown into a stinking Swiss dungeon, where the plumbing did not function, and where he languished for 134 days and where an attempt was made by the Swiss authorities to have him poisoned. Leo was offered some cheese, but as he does not eat cheese, he gave it to a fellow prisoner, who unfortunately died because the cheese contained an inserted poisonous substance that reacts in the body with the fat in the cheese. Subsequently a contract doctor servicing the ‘facility’ advised him which food was safe to eat, adding that the Swiss authorities were in the habit of murdering prisoners in that establishment. While in the Swiss dungeon, he learned that his friend and associate Vince Foster had been ‘suicided’ in the Washington DC area.

Following an intervention by Israeli Prime Minister Yizhak Rabin (who was subsequently himself murdered), Leo Wanta was removed in shackles on 17th November 1993 to Geneva airport, flown to New York and arraigned before US Judge Allyce Ross in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. In May 2005, the Ambassador’s eyes filled with tears as he described to the Editor his humiliation and shame at being marched through Kennedy in shackles and treated like a felon when (see below) he had of course committed no offence whatsoever.

U.S. JUDGE ALLYCE ROSS DISMISSES ALL CHARGES, SETS WANTA FREE
At the immediate hearing, several items that were in his diplomatic briefcase when it was unlawfully removed from him in Switzerland, were brought to the attention of the US Court presided over by Judge Allyce Ross. The Judge, who held the Ambassador’s two Somali diplomatic passports, made reference to a US Treasury financial instrument with a face value of $1.0 billion, one of the 18 instruments aggregating $18 billion, which were to have been used by Ambassador Wanta as Chairman-designate of the Somali Central Bank to help refinance the Somali Republic and its intended dollarised financial system.

These financial instruments and the original documents pertaining to Leo’s official investiture and appointment as Somali Ambassador were present inside his diplomatic briefcase at all times up to his unlawful ‘Wisconsin Tax’ arrest in Switzerland, remaining always under his control, and were last seen by him when taken from him illegally by Swiss authorities.

When the Judge asked Leo Wanta why he had been carrying one particular high-value US Treasury instrument in his diplomatic briefcase, which had been opened by FBI agents upon his arrival at Kennedy Airport, the Assistant US Attorney (prosecuting) jumped up and asked that Her Honor immediately dismiss all the ‘charges’ against the Ambassador.

Accordingly, the Judge dismissed all the ‘charges’ and told Leo that he was ‘free to leave’. However none of the items that had been removed from him in Switzerland, including the diplomatic briefcase and satchel, were returned to him by the Court.

UNLAWFULLY REARRESTED ON COURTHOUSE STEPS WITHOUT A WARRANT
On leaving the Brooklyn Courthouse, Leo was unlawfully detained without a warrant by New York policemen who apologetically explained that they were ‘doing Wisconsin a favour’ and were acting on the basis of a warrant for his arrest for alleged failure to pay State tax and vague tax evasion charges imposed by the State of Wisconsin. However the policemen had no warrant and Leo was never shown any warrant or provided with a copy of any charges filed by the State of Wisconsin at that time. He then remained illegally incarcerated without a warrant in the State of New York until 13th December 1993, when law enforcement officers from Wisconsin finally extradited him unlawfully to that State, where he had not resided for many years.

Moreover, since 1985, he had been working abroad on high-level US Government Presidential business, while in June 1988 he had obtained formal authorisation from the Vienna Court to reside in Austria (permanent Austrian residency can only be provided by legal process in Court).

The pretext for Ambassador Leo Emil Wanta’s unlawful detention turned out to be that he owed Wisconsin State tax of $14,129 dating from 1982 and 1988. However he had already paid (in 1992) this unlawfully demanded State tax assessment not once, but twice: and as will be seen below, the Editor has proof of payment in both cases.

The Editor further has in his possession a copy of a State of Wisconsin INCOME TAX REFUND addressed to Leo E. Wanta, dated 11 May 1984 for the WI State tax year 1983, in the amount of $2,053.00 (Form 1099-G, issued by the Wisconsin Department of Revenue, PO Box 8903, WI 53708), citing Leo’s Social Security Number correctly. Manifestly, therefore, Leo could not have had any State tax outstanding from 1982, otherwise he would not have received this refund.

Moreover he had not been resident in Wisconsin after 1985 and had since June 1988 been a resident of Vienna, Austria, where he operated inter alia as Director-General of New Republic/USA Financial Group, GES.m.b.H., one of his USG Title 18, Section 6 intelligence corporations, from Karntnerstrasse 28/15, A-1010 Wien. The State tax levied against him was and remains fraudulent (even though the same tax was paid multiple times: see below). Furthermore, no foreigner can be owner and Chairman of an Austrian corporation without being a permanent resident of the Republic of Austria.

U.S. TREASURY INSTRUMENTS MISSING FROM BRIEFCASE INVENTORY
On 11th March 1994, Dennis M. Mangelt, Special Agent, Division of Criminal Investigation, Wisconsin, produced and signed a STALE ‘Return of Search Warrant’, detailing the results of his illegal search of Ambassador Leo Wanta’s previously sealed combination lock diplomatic briefcase in which he stated as follows: ‘I hereby certify that by virtue of the Search Warrant signed on March 10, 1994 by the Honorable Stuart A. Schwartz, Dane County Circuit Court Branch 15, I searched the within named black combination lock-type briefcase, and found the following: 3 envelopes containing correspondence from CitiBank, Singapore; 1 envelope containing correspondence reference Citibank N.A. from Yeo Leong and Fah, Advocates and Solicitors, Commissioner for Oaths; 1 envelope containing correspondence from Bank of America, Newport Beach, California; 1 brown unbound checkbook from Zentralsparkasse und Kommerzialbank, Wien, containing 6 unsigned checks (eurocheque), Tel 34 45 20; 1 box of business cards of MiApollo Productions, Ltd; 2 envelopes containing correspondence from East Asia Tax Management Services Limited; 2 envelopes containing correspondence from Morgan Stanley & Company, Brooklyn, New York; Numerous airline tickets and itineraries; Several paperback religious books; Several softcover pocket calendars and address books; 1 envelope containing 5 black and white 8 x 10 photographs of unidentified female; 1 envelope containing personal and business papers; Numerous business and personal correspondence; Numerous bank documents; 1 letterhead stationery, blank – Ministry of Foreign Affairs; 1 photocopy of Wanta’s passport; 1 Intertronic calculator; 1 Hewlett Packard calculator; 1 pair dark glasses; 1 money clip; 1 key ring with four keys; 1 envelope with small photos; 1 envelope marked 12 passport photos; 3 softcover books/magazines; Numerous pages of miscellaneous notes and writings; and have the same now in my possession subject to the disposition of the Court. Dated this 11th day of March 1994, at Madison, Wisconsin: [Signed] Dennis M. Mengelt, Special Agent, Division of Criminal Investigation’.

Conspicuously absent from this list was any reference to either the $1.0 billion face value US Treasury instrument that had been drawn to the attention of Judge Allyce Ross in the US Court in New York, or to the 17 other high-value US Treasury instruments, for an aggregate face value of $18 billion, contained in his diplomatic briefcase and intended for the furtherance of the legitimate business of the Presidents of the United States and Somalia.

Neither the diplomatic briefcase nor the other items illegally seized from the Ambassador in Switzerland have been returned to him. The reason that they have not been returned to him, obviously, is that if the diplomatic briefcase were given back to him, it would need to contain the 18 high-value US Treasury instruments of which he was and remains the sole custodian in his official capacity working for both the US and the Somali Governments.

The only possible conclusion that can be drawn from this is that the 18 high-value US Treasury instruments have been stolen, and used by corrupt US parties at corrupt banks as collateral, for illegal untaxed hypothecation and fiat money creation purposes.

FAMILY HOME SOLD BEHIND HIS BACK, PROCEEDS STOLEN
To add to Leo’s injuries, as soon as he was “imprisoned” inside the GULAG, the ruthless Wisconsin authorities sold his former Wisconsin family home, behind his back and without his permission, for a knock-down price of around $60,000, and kept the proceeds. All attempts to procure a proper accounting of this theft have failed (so far).

The property is now lived in by a State of Wisconsin Attorney.

By March 2004, Leo Wanta had already languished for nine months in jails in Switzerland and the US GULAG, which distinguished itself at the outset by forcing him to be subjected to a strip-search in the snow – behaviour indistinguishable from what happens in the Soviet GULAG, about which the US State Department affected such outrage for decades.

Moreover the suffering inflicted on Leo was not even ‘justified’ on the fraudulent grounds that he owed $14,129, because:

1. In order to dispose of this illegal ‘nuisance’ State tax assessment demand, a remittance of $14,129 had been conveyed by Leo Wanta from Singapore, where he was working at the time on USG business, on 15th May 1992. Specifically, a Telegraphic Transfer of $14,129 was effected by Malaysian Banking Berhad on behalf of Leo Wanta in favour of Wanta’s Wisconsin Attorney, Thomas Wilson, to his Attorney Trust Account with Bank One, Appleton, Wisconsin 54911, account #414780, being the proceeds from Singapore dollars 23,281.33, on which the bank charged its commission of S$29.17 plus the cable cost of a further S$20.40. The falsely demanded $14,129 was duly paid over by Attorney Wilson under protest to the Wisconsin Department of Revenue.

2. Notwithstanding this payment, a further State civil tax assessment demand for the same $14,129 was received by Leo Wanta almost immediately. This second illegal and fraudulent State civil tax assessment was likewise pragmatically settled – again, in order to dispose of this nuisance – by means of Trust Account check number 6992 drawn by Bachman, Cummings, McKenzie, Hebbe, McIntyre & Wilson, S.C., Attorneys at Law, 211 E. Franklin Street, P.O. Box 1155, Appleton, WI 54912. This second Attorney Client Trust Account check, marked FUNDS OFFERED IN COMPROMISE FOR LEO E. WANTA and citing his correct Social Security, was banked by the State Treasurer of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, on 6th June 1992, as shown on the reverse of the cleared check per clearing reference 075000 022, a copy of which, along with other documents cited here, is in the Editor’s possession.

Hence, over a year before Leo Wanta was unlawfully arrested in Switzerland on trumped-up tax charges, he had already paid the fraudulently raised Wisconsin State civil tax assessment demand of $14,129 not once, but TWICE. Far from being tax delinquent, he had paid the State’s illegal extortion demands TWICE, even though he actually owed NOTHING.

Already, therefore, a gross uncorrected miscarriage of justice had taken place, while the Wisconsin Department of Revenue had fraudulently received and banked the same tax assessment payment TWICE. Subsequent research has established that since this corrupt Department appears to keep two sets of books – one in Madison, and the other in Milwaukee – the duplication of the fraudulent tax demand may have been nothing out of the ordinary.

But it soon got much worse.

WANTA SHIFTED ENDLESSLY AROUND THE U.S. AND WISCONSIN GULAG
Leo Wanta was moved around the US GULAG, spending many months, for instance, at a GULAG maximum facility in the State of Oklahoma. During that period, he was regularly removed from his cell, his cell was searched, items were taken from his cell and they were not returned. The papers taken from his cell included legal documents, files, and papers from Attorneys. Institution authorities from the State of Oklahoma informed him that they lacked certain background information on him, and requested his cooperation in obtaining the information.

So Leo provided the requested cooperation and learned from institution personnel that they had queried the Wisconsin State Department of Corrections, which had confirmed that no criminal background report was available on him.

DEPUTY SHERIFF TRIES TO MURDER WANTA IN PRISON WASHROOM
A routine was now established whereby Leo was deliberately moved around the Wisconsin/US GULAG, so that his mail always lagged behind his latest movements, and/or failed to catch up with him. At least four attempts were made to murder him inside the US GULAG. Of these, the most outrageous was the criminal behaviour of a Deputy Sheriff, who drove up to the Kettle Moraine Corrections Facility in Wisconsin, changed into prisoner’s clothing, established proximity to Leo and attempted to murder him in the washroom. On that occasion, his life was saved by Duty Sergeant Randy Miller who dragged the deputised murderer out of the washroom and the prisoners’ quarters.

The intruder then fled back to the administration area, took off his false prisoner’s clothing, dressed back in his Deputy Sheriff’s uniform, and made off in his County car.

When these successive Soviet-style liquidation attempts failed, the Soviet technique of trying to have Leo certified insane, was attempted. At the seventh attempt, his fate was sealed when a doctor, Dr Connie Lee, Chief Psychiatrist for the State of Wisconsin, mindful of such abuses, and fully satisfied that Leo was mentally stable and proficient, refused to go along with the State’s conspiracy and certified Leo to be of sound mind.

After that episode, attempts to delete him from history ceased.

CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY LIED THAT HE WAS DEAD
Meanwhile the Central Intelligence Agency had put the word about that Leo Emil Wanta was dead. This false information was disseminated among strictly compartmentalised agents and cadres, with poor knowledge of the broader picture, and throughout the relevant sectors of the international financial community. Given this ‘tabula rasa’ situation, the coast was clear (or so the criminalists assumed) to ransack, steal, misappropriate, misuse, divert, claim, usurp, collateralise, hypothecate and otherwise unlawfully exploit the $27.5 trillion of which Leo Emil Wanta was and remains the sole Principal and Trustor. All concerned were happy with this illegal state of affairs – which has been continued without ceasing using also the Ambassador’s $4.5 trillion compromise funds Settlement agreed in May 2006. Specifically:

The international banks holding Wanta’s Title 18, Section 6 bank accounts were delighted that they held vast sums with no apparent impediment to the banks using the funds for their own collateralisation, hypothecation and manipulation purposes, without any prospect (so they assumed) of having to account for the funds, or ever being called upon to release them. Some of these criminal banks may shortly face their overdue day of reckoning.

US criminal intelligence operatives and their highest-level ‘Barons’ looked upon this cornucopia of ‘free funds’ as an unprecedented opportunity (a) for untaxed offshore self-enrichment and (b) for the financing of their mad New World Order operations, which, as the whole world has seen, are leading the world not towards a new earthly utopia, but at high speed towards a new hell on earth.

WANTA BANK ASSETS PLACED IN PERSONAL NAME OF JAN MORTON HEGER
The Editor is aware of one case, concerning assets owned by Ambassador Leo Wanta that are located in the United Kingdom, and which have been lodged with a British bank branch in the personal name of a US Attorney who was at one time employed by Leo Wanta and the CIA. His name is Jan Morton Heger. The account in question has been held at Lloyds Bank PLC, Market Square Aylesbury Branch, 1 Market Square, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire HP20 1TD (5).

MOVEMENTS OF THE $27.5 TRILLION AND THE $4.5 TRILLION RECORDED
What the corrupt manipulators and exploiters of Ambassador Wanta’s funds appear to have overlooked throughout is the pertinent fact that, for the past several years, every single movement of the funds of which Leo Emil Wanta is the sole Principal and Trustor have been monitored and recorded by secret electronic means, using enhancements of PROMIS software. Hence, all who have been making hay while they thought the sun shone are liable to be deprived, as they wake up to the situation, of a good night’s sleep for the rest of their lives. Indeed, the more they manipulate and engage in corrupt financial transactions based on Leo Wanta’s funds, the tighter is the noose with which they are hanging themselves, being tied. At a given stage of this crisis, all of a sudden large numbers of these people will find themselves at the receiving end of legal processes – as a result of which many will be liable to become familiar with the atrocious US GULAG conditions suffered by Ambassador Leo Wanta without a cause.

CARELESS CIA LIE FACTORY TRIPS OVER ITS OLD LIES
While the CIA was lying that Leo Wanta was dead, it was inconsistently maintaining the opposite as late as 5 November 2003, the date of a letter from the CIA’s John T Martinez, Attorney Adviser, to Thomas E Henry, a lawyer appointed to serve Leo Wanta from time to time. In this letter, the CIA apparatchik referred to Leo Wanta not as someone who was long since dead, as the CIA itself was separately insisting, but rather in the present tense, as a living person. Mr Martinez lied in his second paragraph that ‘CIA has no information that Mr Wanta ever has had any relationship with the CIA’. The letter concluded with the following typical CIA apparatchik cop-out, which is included here in passing: ‘Lastly, the Director of Central Intelligence is charged with protecting intelligence sources and methods from unauthorised disclosure. The discharge of this responsibility often requires that the CIA decline to confirm or deny the existence or non-existence of CIA information on the subject matter of a particular request’.

Given this opaque language, it was hardly necessary for the apparatchik to lie that the CIA ‘has no information that Mr Wanta never has had any relationship or affiliation with the CIA’. But since lies are what the CIA does, Mr Martinez evidently considered it necessary to include the gratuitous lie identified here. His letter would have been incomplete without it.

FBI FABRICATIONS USED AS PERJURED EVIDENCE IN KANGAROO COURT
The CIA’s lies were complemented by a completely separate batch of lies perpetrated and fed to the Court ostensibly by the FBI – specifically by a John A. Hartingh, Section Chief, Information Resources Section, Information Resources Division. In a letter dated 8th September 1995 to Douglas Haag, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Justice, State of Wisconsin, 123 Washington Avenue, P.O. Box 7857, Madison, WI 53707-7857, this apparatchik retailed a concoction of lies, half-truths and diversionary claptrap which was then used by Mr Haag to mislead Judge Michael B. Torphy, Circuit Judge, at the Wisconsin Department of Justice, Branch 2, Circuit County Building, Room 214, 210 Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, Madison, WI 53709-0001. This was done via a hand-delivered letter from Mr Haag to Judge Torphy dated 12th September 1995.

In the ensuing kangaroo court hearing, the Judge was lied to on the basis of this purported FBI document, and false witness was borne against Leo Wanta by Douglas Haag and Wisconsin Attorney General (now Governor) James Doyle in flagrant disregard of the truth, which was turned upside down by the FBI letter signed by John A. Hartingh. When Thomas Henry, Attorney for Leo Emil Wanta, later enquired of the FBI whether this letter was genuine, he received a strange, equivocal and meandering response, implying that suspicions that the letter is a forgery and/or a rogue document, may be accurate. This is likely for a number of reasons.

First, several different typewriters or word processors appear to have been used, with different spacing and typeface variations. Secondly, the letter diverges conspicuously from the FBI’s own rigorously enforced standards for such correspondence, which are laid down in regulations from which agents may not depart under any circumstances. And thirdly the letter from Mr Hartingh to Assistant Attorney General Douglas Haag concluded with the following language:

‘The information in this document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency. It and its contents ARE NOT TO BE RELASED TO WANTA nor is it to be released under the Wisconsin Open Records Act’ [Editor’s emphasis]. Hence Leo Wanta was precluded from seeing the document that was used in order to provide the Judge with perjured evidence and to perpetrate fraud upon the Court and the Ambassador.

DENIAL OF STANDARD OF JUDICIAL PRACTICE OF ‘OPEN DISCOVERY’
This extraordinary demand also flew in the face of the system of mandatory legal open discovery which requires that under due process and disclosure rules, all documents pertinent to a court case are accessible, so that the Judge and jury, and both sides of the case, are fully informed in order for the judicial system to function properly. The deliberate suppression of a document from the defendant was itself a felony and a grave fraud against the Court, since it was used specifically to misinform the Judge and to bear false witness against Leo Wanta to the Court, which accordingly reverberated with perjury and lies: hence our use of the term ‘kangaroo court’.

When asked, as noted above, whether this letter was genuine, or whether it represented a rogue, fraudulent document (fabricated to implicate Leo Wanta and to mislead the Court), the FBI refused to give a direct answer, implying that it is indeed a fabrication.

But since the FBI has neither confirmed nor denied that it is a rogue document, and indeed ceased to communicate with Mr Henry when he pressed them on the matter, the Ambassador is entitled to continue to assume that the FBI was responsible for perpetrating the lies and misinformation contained in Mr Hartingh’s letter to the Assistant Attorney General of Wisconsin.

COMPETING, INCONSISTENT CIA/FBI LIES MAKE A MOCKERY OF U.S. ‘JUSTICE’
The purported FBI apparatchik’s deceitful and now supposedly fabricated rogue letter took no account of the parallel lies being perpetrated by the CIA, including the MASTER LIE that Leo Wanta was dead. In other words, the CIA and FBI lie factories are so permanently at loggerheads with each other that they cannot even be bothered to coordinate their lies, to avoid the kind of ridicule and odium that is now being heaped upon them because of the crude injustices that have been cynically perpetrated against Ambassador Leo Wanta, thanks to their amoral behaviour.

The FBI’s unwillingness to authenticate the letter signed by Hartingh which formed the basis of the farrago of lies retailed to Judge Michael B. Torphy, resulting in Leo Wanta’s incarceration, house arrest and probation, further illuminates the high level source of the miscarriage of justice that is in the process of unravelling before our eyes. As this avalanche breaks loose, it will engulf many official co-conspirators who have spent years under the illusion that their merciless past crimes would remain buried forever. That is no longer even on the cards.

Citing the CIA ‘hatchet job’ ‘Thieves’ World’, a book by the late Claire Sterling, a CIA operative (6), which contained disinformation and lies about Leo Wanta, and adding gross new lies to the old ones, Hartingh’s ‘fabricated’ letter misinformed Haag and thus Judge Torphy that ‘Wanta was arrested by the Vaud Cantonal Police on July 7, 1993, in Lausanne, Switzerland, for attempted bank fraud in the amount of $1 million and for the use of false documents’. These statements were fabrications and wholly without any foundation in fact. The Swiss authorities cited no breach of Swiss law either when they falsely arrested Ambassador Wanta, in breach of his diplomatic status, or at any time thereafter.

The FBI’s letter then retailed (from ‘Thieves’ World’) that ‘Wanta was described as a well-known con artist’ – omitting to explain that the person who ‘described’ Wanta thus was the CIA disinformation agent Claire Sterling. She had her tragic come-uppance when she died suddenly and unexpectedly after a second interview with the FBI following her book’s appearance.

It later became known to the Editor, from two separate sources, that President Clinton had ordered all copies of ‘Thieves’ World’ to be seized. However, after the Editor obtained his own copy from the second-hand book market, an American intelligence operative with knowledge of this fact commented: ‘I thought we’d got them all’. No doubt one reason (but far from the only one) for the book being seized was to cover up the source of the disinformation that the FBI was now using in fulfilment of the Clinton White House’s incompetent and messy ongoing backfilling operation to discredit the Ambassador, to steal his assets, to perpetrate fraud against him and the Wisconsin Court and, if at all possible, to erase him from history.

John A. Hartingh’s deceitful letter elaborated that this ‘con artist’ ‘claimed to have high level connections in the US Government, including the White House, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the US Secret Service, the US Customs Service, as well as the FBI. Wanta also claimed to be a close friend of both Presidents Reagan and Bush Sr. and to be a CIA operative responsible for operations in Singapore. Each of the claims proved spurious’.

AMBASSADOR’S CLAIMS ALL TRUE, FBI’S CLAIMS WERE ALL FALSE
In reality, these claims were all true, every single one of them; and the unsupported, dogmatic statement that they were spurious was an egregious lie, designed to mislead and commit fraud against the Court and to ensure the completion of a conspiracy, coordinated by the White House, to procure the erasure of all traces of Leo Wanta from the record, for an originally intended period of 22 years. However Leo never ceased to resist this avalanche of lies, injustice and false witness, sustained by his remarkable faith – and certain that, in the end, he would be vindicated. It took 14 years for his steadfast faith to begin to be rewarded.

In the meantime, however, the Wisconsin Department of Revenue compounded its criminal errors, as will now be explained. Indeed, it is continuing to do so, not least because if it were belatedly to acknowledge its serially fraudulent and unlawful behaviour, the conviction of Ambassador Wanta would have to be formally reversed, with immense judicial and financial consequences for the State of Wisconsin, and for many well-known figures there and ‘inside the Beltway’. The irony, of course, is that the march of events is making this outcome inevitable anyway, as will come to be widely appreciated as this year progresses.

WHEN TAXMEN COMMIT FRAUD, THEY CREATE LONG-TERM PROBLEMS
If fraud is committed inside a tax department, it is liable to have to be perpetuated from year to year – so that internal measures have to be taken on a continuing and expanding basis, to cover up or to obfuscate the serial frauds, given extensive auditing and the ongoing possibility of exposure or whistleblowing by disaffected staff members at any time.

As will be recalled, the Wisconsin Department of Revenue had received and banked two amounts of $14,129 paid by Leo Wanta in 1992, over a year prior to his unlawful arrest in Lausanne for not having paid the illegally demanded $14,129. Hence, years before the same $14,129 was paid for the third time in 2005 (see below), the Wisconsin Department of Revenue therefore faced the problem of how to contrive to obfuscate this prospectively dangerous state of affairs (from their own twisted perspective).

One method adopted to obfuscate matters was predicated upon maintaining that Leo and Joanne Wanta filed their tax returns in Wisconsin jointly. However the two had been separated, and then divorced, years earlier. The Wisconsin Department of Revenue chose to disregard this reality, just as it chose to disregard the fact that Leo Wanta had not been resident in Wisconsin since 1985 and owed no tax from previous years, as confirmed by the refund of $2,053.00 dated 11th May 1984, to which reference has been made. But US State tax authorities are required to reflect the status of taxpayers as recognised by the Internal Revenue Service, which wrote from Kansas City on 23 April 1999 per LTR 2358C, signed by Dorothy G Smith, Collection Branch, to Leo E. & Joanne Wanta (jointly) with reference to Tax Period ending 31st December 1988:

‘Dear Taxpayer (in the singular): Based on our information, you are not liable for filing a tax return for this period’ [December 1988].

Now it follows that if no Federal Tax is payable (because no filing is required) for a given period, it has not been charged; and if Federal Tax is not chargeable, then State Tax cannot be chargeable either, since it is impossible to live in a State of the Union without simultaneously living in the Federation itself. Therefore, the IRS was maintaining that Leo and Joanne Wanta filed their taxes together, while also stating specifically that the ‘Taxpayer’ did not need to file a tax return for the period ending 31st December 1988. That applied of course to Leo Wanta, since, being officially resident in Vienna and having been operating for USG abroad since 1985, and since his personal expenses were paid by his foreign-based Title 18, Section 6 corporations, he had no State taxable income and was subject neither to Federal nor to State tax for any year after 1985. However Joanne Wanta, long since estranged from and out of contact with, Leo Wanta, was subject to both.

At all events, the first anomaly that the Wisconsin Department of Revenue now exploited for the purposes of obfuscation was the joint filing of tax returns by Joanne and Leo Wanta. Although the illegally raised State tax assessment demand had been paid TWICE under protest by Leo Wanta in 1992, as already reported, the State chased them jointly for both $14,129 AND interest of
$10,358.54, for a total of $25,082.54, as per a Wisconsin Department of Revenue ‘Worksheet’ dated 1st September 1996.

This overlooked the fact that the Wisconsin Department of Revenue had issued DELINQUENT TAX WARRANT #44-00162088 against Joanne E. Wanta on 1st June 1993, which was formally declared to be fully satisfied by the State of Wisconsin Outagamie County Circuit Court’s Satisfaction of Delinquent Tax Warrant filed on 4th June 1993 at Outagamie County by Ruth H. Janssen, Clerk of Courts. The text of this document reads:

‘This Warrant has been fully satisfied and the Clerk of said Court is authorised to satisfy and discharge said Tax Warrant pursuant to S. 71.91(5)(f) of the Wis. Stats’.

A Delinquent Tax Warrant can be ‘fully satisfied’ only ONCE. Or, to be even more precise, it is impossible, is it not, to satisfy a Delinquent Tax Warrant by more than 100%. At least, that is the universally recognised legal and mathematical state of affairs, not least given that satisfaction of a Delinquent Tax Warrant takes precedence in relevant law over all other claims.

TAX GESTAPO CREATES TWO TAX WARRANTS WITH THE SAME NUMBER
Everywhere, that is, other than in the State of Wisconsin, which prefers its Delinquent Tax Warrants to be satisfied by 200%.

Let us explain how they seek to achieve this, from the Wanta case record.

The Editor possesses a copy of Delinquent Tax Warrant #44-00162088 issued on 9th May 1991 by the Wisconsin Department of Revenue for $10,398.00 (representing a notional assessment which, a year later, had risen to $14,129). This Wisconsin Delinquent Tax Warrant #44-00162088 is addressed to Joanne ‘G’. Wanta, even though Joanne Wanta’s middle initial had always previously been ‘E’. On this Delinquent Tax Warrant, the name Leo E. Wanta has been “scratched out” by the tax authority.

The Editor further possesses a copy of Delinquent Tax Warrant #44-00162088 issued on 9th May 1991 by the Wisconsin Department of Revenue for $10,398.00 (representing a notional assessment which, a year later, had risen to $14,129). This Delinquent Tax Warrant #44-00162088 is addressed to Leo E. Wanta, while the name Joanne ‘G’ Wanta has been “scratched out” by the State tax authority. This Delinquent Tax Warrant carries the same Delinquent Tax Warrant number, #44-00162088, as the Delinquent Tax Warrant issued against Joanne ‘G’ Wanta (above).

(The Editor ALSO has in his possession a copy of Delinquent Tax Warrant #44-00162088 issued on 9th May 1991 by the Wisconsin Department of Revenue for $10,398.00 (representing a notional tax assessment which, a year later, had risen to $14,129). This Delinquent Tax Warrant #44-00162088 is addressed to Leo E. Wanta and Joanne ‘G’ Wanta, with neither name “scratched out”. In other words, this is the ORIGINAL Delinquent Tax Warrant raised in their joint names, from which the two Delinquent Tax Warrants listed above, both using the same Delinquent Tax Warrant #44-00162088 were derived, having split in two like the cells of an amoeba).

… THEREBY ‘JUSTIFYING’ COLLECTION OF THE SAME $14,129 TWICE
Net result: the single Delinquent Tax Warrant #44-00162088 became TWO Delinquent Tax Warrants, both carrying the same Delinquent Tax Warrant #44-00162088, and both demanding payment of notional tax assessments of $10,398.00, so that the total actually being demanded by the Wisconsin Department of Revenue had suddenly doubled, to $20,796.00.

While this fraud was being perpetrated, the Wisconsin State tax authorities were nevertheless dealing directly with Joanne ‘G’. Wanta, who allowed them to believe that one of the amounts of $14,129 ($10,398.00 plus a further notional tax assessment of $3,731 for 1989 when Leo Wanta was of course legally a permanent resident of Austria) which had resulted in Delinquent Tax Warrant #44-00162088 being ‘fully satisfied’ as of 4th June 1993, represented settlement of her tax liability – whereas in reality both remittances of $14,129 by Leo Wanta from Singapore were made under protest in respect of tax assessment on Leo Wanta personally, demanded and assessed unlawfully by the Wisconsin Department of Revenue against a diplomat who had no State tax obligations whatsoever, was not required to file a tax return to the IRS, was a legal resident of Vienna from June 1988 onwards, and had been resident outside the State of Wisconsin since 1985, when he owed the State nothing as confirmed by its earlier refund. Indeed, Leo Wanta had reported to the State of Wisconsin per Income Schedule I-890 dated 21 August 1990 that he had no State taxable income for the tax years 1986, 1987, 1988 and 1989, while also confirming that he had established his new legal residence in Vienna, Austria, with effect from 20th January 1989.

The Vienna Court had granted Leo Wanta legal residency in June 1988, effective six months later in accordance with Austrian practice. The Wisconsin Department of Revenue chose to focus on this date, and to disregard altogether the fact that Leo Wanta had been operating abroad since 1985, and had owed nothing to the State since then – as he certified on Income Schedule 1-890, and as further confirmed by the earlier tax refund.

IN JULY 2005, THE SAME $14,129 (+ EXTRAS) IS PAID FOR THE THIRD TIME
Fast forward now to the first quarter of 2005. After several years of research, the Editor had managed to satisfy himself that Leo Wanta had been unlawfully ‘taken down’ because he stood in the way, as an ‘honourable counsellor’, of massive intergovernmental and US official level financial criminality perpetrated through the exploitation of Ambassador Wanta’s Title 18, Section 6 funds originally worth $27.5 trillion.

At the Ambassador’s suggestion, the Editor took the Amtrak train to Richmond, where he met Steven Goodwin, an Attorney for Leo Wanta. It transpired that Mr Goodwin had negotiated an agreement with the Wisconsin Department of Corrections, whereby if the sum of $30,626.97 were paid to that Department by 28th November 2005, the Department of Corrections would recommend to Judge Michael B. Torphy that Leo’s (illegal) probation – his incarceration had been followed by house arrest/probation in 2001 – should be terminated, and his complete freedom finally restored.

When the Editor asked what would happen if this further extortion amount, which still included the $14,129 paid twice already in 1992, was not paid over by 28th November 2005, he was told that Leo Wanta would be liable to be slammed back into jail. It had also become quite clear to the Editor that no-one was lifting a finger to generate the $30,626.97, so that the strong likelihood was that 28th November 2005 would come round and the situation facing the Ambassador would consequently take a violent turn for the worse.

After careful further consideration, therefore, the Editor decided that the right thing to do was to make the necessary funds available from scarce private (not corporate) resources, and so a bank draft for $35,000 was accordingly sent by courier from London to Steven Goodwin in July 2005. On 21st July 2005, Mr Goodwin, at the Editor’s request, attended at the relevant premises of the Wisconsin Department of Corrections, and duly obtained its Receipt #2270992 PP dated 7/21/05 signed by Department of Corrections Agent Michelle Riel confirming that the Wisconsin Department of Corrections had received Bank of America check number 1098 signed by Steven Goodwin for $30,626.97. This Attorney check was duly banked by the Wisconsin Department of Corrections and the Editor holds the front and back of the banked check by way of absolute proof of payment.

By means of this further ‘protest’ remittance, the original $14,129 that had been settled TWICE in 1992, was now settled FOR THE THIRD TIME, given that the computation incorporated that precise illegally charged amount of $14,129 plus unlawfully charged interest.

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS ACCEPTS THE THIRD $14,129++ PAYMENT
On 22nd July 2005, Agent Michelle Riel generated a computerised ‘Client Account Inquiry’ print-out, on which she annotated in her handwriting: ‘Paid in full on 7/21/05, Michelle Riel’. She furnished it to Attorney Steven Goodwin and Mr Goodwin forwarded it to the Editor of this service.

On 28th July 2005, Agent Michelle Riel wrote to Judge Michael B. Torphy Jr. in Madison, as follows:

RE: Early Discharge, Leo E. Wanta 92CF638B:

On 05/11/95, Lee E Wanta appeared in your Court and was [FALSELY, because of the false witness, lies and perjury at the kangaroo court trial – Ed.] convicted of counts 1-2 Penalties (Filing False Income Tax Return) and counts 3-6 Penalties (Tax Evasion). Mr Wanta was sentenced to eight years in prison on counts 3-6 and was placed on probation for counts 1-2, to be served consecutive to the prison term. He was ordered to pay $29,068.55 for restitution, $100.00 for a victim witness surcharge, and $1,458.42 for another surcharge.

On 06/28/01 [EIGHT YEARS AFTER HIS ILLEGAL ARREST AND ‘TAKEDOWN’ – Ed.] Mr Wanta was released from prison and on 11/28/04, Mr Wanta¹s parole case discharged and he began his consecutive probation case. Mr Wanta has not had any known violations. On 07/21/05, Mr Wanta’s court ordered financial obligations were paid in full.

At this time the Department of Corrections is asking if the Court has any objections to allowing Mr Wanta to discharge from probation early.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,
Agent Michelle Riel
Probation/Parole Agent 50901

SO JUDGE AUTHORISES END OF WANTA’S (UNLAWFUL) PROBATION
In response to this request, Judge Michael B. Torphy gave his consent and on 14th November 2005, Matthew J. Frank, Secretary, Wisconsin Department of Corrections, signed a DISCHARGE in the following terms:

‘To whom it may concern:

Leo E. Wanta 303787-A ‘B’ CASE

Was placed on probation,
The Department having determined that the above named has satisfied said probation,
It is ordered that effective November 14, 2005

LEO E.WANTA
IS DISCHARGED ABSOLUTELY.

This discharge does not forgive your current (tentative) balance of unpaid supervision fees in the amount of $0.00’.

30 OCTOBER 2006: TAX GESTAPO DEMANDS SAME $14,129 A FOURTH TIME
Notwithstanding all of the above, the Wisconsin Department of Revenue issued a further demand for the SAME $14,129 PLUS INTEREST, on 30th October 2006 (see below).

Given that the Editor had disbursed scarce private funds as detailed above, you can imagine the response to this news in our London office.

PROOF THAT DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS PAID THE TAX GESTAPO
The first task was to establish whether the Wisconsin Department of Corrections had actually paid the amount falsely ‘due’, to the Wisconsin Department of Revenue from the Editor’s own funds, or whether the WI Department of Corrections was corrupt as well as the Wisconsin Department of Revenue. That the Department of Corrections had behaved ‘correctly’ was finally confirmed, in response to urgent enquiries, in an email to the Editor dated 10 November 2006 timed at 16:36 from John A. Dipko, the Public Information Officer, Wisconsin Department of Corrections [email address: John.Dipko@DOC.state.wi.us], Subject: Leo Wanta, the text of which reads as follows:

‘Mr Story: Leo Wanta was under Wisconsin Department of Corrections supervision for Dane County criminal case 1992CF000683.

A restitution order is on file for this criminal case; it includes $24,900.91 for the Wisconsin Department of Revenue and $4,167.64 for the Wisconsin Public Defender’s Office.

This restitution order is dated 6-3-1996 and is a public record available at the Dane County Clerk of Courts Office.

Our records indicate that Mr Wanta made the $30,626.97 payment that you referenced. The Department of Corrections collected the money from Mr Wanta and then dispersed [sic] two separate checks dated Aug 4 2005 totalling $29,068.55: one in the amount of $24,900.91 payable to the Wisconsin Department of Revenue, and the other in the amount of $4,167.64 payable to the Wisconsin Public Defender’s Office. The remaining $1,558.42 accounts for fees and surcharges that had been assessed to Mr Wanta. Mr Wanta discharged from Department of Corrections supervision on Nov 14, 2005.

I would refer you to the Dane County Clerk of Courts, the Wisconsin Department of Revenue or the Wisconsin Public Defender’s Office for any additional enquiries.

Sincerely,

John Dipko
Public Information Director
Wisconsin Dept or Corrections
608-240-5060.

DEALING WITH THE FOURTH ASSESSMENT OF THE SAME $14,129+++
On 30th October 2006, Mr Gregg T. Frazier, of the Wisconsin Department of Revenue, issued a document marked ‘Amended’ to Leo Wanta displaying a ‘Total Amount Due’ of $43,304.42, consisting of the following components: ‘Regular Interest’, $29,175.42 plus ‘Penalty’ of $14,129.00.

Recognise this figure?

It is of course THE SAME $14,129 that was paid under protest TWICE in 1992, and a THIRD TIME by the Editor of this service via Attorney Steven Goodwin on 21st July 2005.

On this document is annotated in handwriting:

‘Per Wisconsin Supreme Court Order Dated December 30, 2005’.

SECRET COURT ORDER OF WHICH VICTIM HAD NO KNOWLEDGE
Ambassador Leo Wanta had no knowledge of any such Court Order, demanding payment of $14,129 that had already been settled under protest on three occasions, plus illegally charged interest on top of the thrice-settled amount of $14,129.

Accompanying this piece of paper was a letter addressed to Leo Wanta, which is the Ambassador’s intelligence name: he was baptised Leo Emil Wanta and his Social Security Number is in the name of Lee Emil Wanta. The Social Security number is assigned to Lee Emil Wanta (the name Leo has always required for his intelligence work); but to add to their ongoing obfuscation ruses, the Wisconsin Department of Revenue have exploited this intelligence-related circumstance for their own purposes (see below).

The letter, from Gregg T. Frazier, Chief, Central Audit Section [gfrazier@dor.state.wi.us) references GTF:K1P:A923REVC2B3460/A923 (R.8/96), reads as follows:

‘Dear Leo Wanta: In view of the Wisconsin Supreme Court decision on your appeal of the income tax assessment made by this Department dated January 29, 1996, I must ask you to send us your remittance now (as indicated on the Notice of Amount Due) with your remittance. Please return the Notice of Amount Due with your remittance. Sincerely, Gregg T. Frazier, Chief, Central Audit Section gfrazier@dor.state.wi.us’.

The Notice of Amount Due issued by the Wisconsin Department of Revenue on 30th October 2006, cited Lee Emil Wanta’s Social Security Number correctly, and had the following File Number: 000000000/0 and the following Worksheet ID: 000403423. It stated that the due date for payment of $43,304.42 was January 01, 2007, and that the check was to be made payable and mailed forthwith to: Wisconsin Department of Revenue, Box 93408, Milwaukee, WI 53293-0208.

The document referred to in Mr Frazier’s letter and dated 29 January 2006 is an Office Audit Worksheet addressed to Leo E. Wanta and Joanne E. Wanta jointly from the Wisconsin Department of Revenue, Post Office Box 2906, Madison, W 53708 itemising ‘Tax Due’ of $14,129.00 plus ‘Regular Interest’ of $10,953.94, for an illegally demanded assessment total of $25,082.54, referring to tax years 1988 and 1989. The ‘Auditor’ who generated that document in 1996 was R. N. Doornek. Note that ‘Tax Due’ of $14,129 as of 29 January 1996 had now metamorphosed into ‘Penalty’ of $14,129 in the fraudulent ‘Amended’ documentation issued by Gregg T. Frazier, Chief, Central Audit Section dated 30th October 2006. As reiterated, the $14,129 had been paid three times already.

Get this: an illegally raised civil tax assessment for $14,129 that has been ‘fully satisfied’ per a discharged Delinquent Tax Warrant as of 4th June 1993, even though it had been settled under protest TWICE over a year earlier, and which was settled for the third time under protest in July 2005, has now become a ‘Penalty’. Do the Wisconsin State Tax Gestapo crooks imagine that by suddenly relabelling an illegally assessed and thrice-paid amount, it assumes a ‘new legitimacy’ by some weird kind of Wisconsin organised criminal magick?

TAX GESTAPO APPARATCHIK GETS SHARP END OF EDITOR’S TONGUE
The Editor of this service telephoned this Mr Frazier twice in early November last year, and on the second occasion was actually able to speak with him. His extremely frigid demeanour changed marginally when it was sharply pointed out to him that we have documentary proof of banked payment of the $14,129, from which his latest illegal demand is derived, and not once, but three times, no less. On two occasions during the telephone conversation, Mr Frazier informed this Editor that ‘I’ll have to look into it’.

He appears to have reneged on this undertaking, as will now be reviewed.

GESTAPO TRIES TO COLLECT THE SAME $14,129+++ A FOURTH TIME
On 1st December 2006, the Wisconsin Department of Revenue, Madison, issued a ‘Statement of Account – Individual Income Tax’ for the filing period 12/31/1990 for $43,304.42 for ‘Tax Account Number’ 001-1025313 166-02 addressed to Leo E. Wanta. This demand was received by Lee Emil Wanta on 30th December 2006. On 18th January 2007, Lee Wanta received a further document from the Wisconsin Tax Gestapo dated 16 January 2007, entitled ‘NOTICE OF OVERDUE TAX’ for the increased sum of $46,119.21, without any accompanying computation.

This document contained the following rubric: ‘If you think you do not owe this amount or have any questions about this notice, please contact Lisa Potts, PO Box 8901, Madison WI 53703-8901; Phone: (608) 267 0833; Fax: (608) 267-1037; Email: delnqtax@dor.state.wi.us. Armed with this email address, the Editor of this service forwarded to Lisa Potts the email from John Dipko, Public Information Director, Wisconsin Department of Corrections, dated 10th November 2006, referenced above, in which the Department of Corrections confirmed that a cheque for $24,900.91 had been drawn in favour of the Wisconsin Department of Revenue on 4th August 2005.

Since the Editor sent that email, nothing further had, of this posting date, been heard of this component of the Wisconsin Tax Gestapo fraud sequence against Ambassador Leo Wanta.

STYMIED ON THAT ONE, THEY PULL ANOTHER UNLAWFUL DEMAND
Unable to proceed further with that dimension of their fraudulent activity, given the explicit confirmation in an email to a financial journalist and Editor that the Department of Corrections had paid the Department of Revenue $24,900.91 on 4th August 2005, the Wisconsin Tax Gestapo resorted to another despicable ruse.

THREAT TO POST SUBSTITUTE CIVIL ASSESSMENT ON THE INTERNET
On 12th February 2007, Lisa Potts, Wisconsin Department of Revenue, PO Box 8901, Madison WI 53708-8901 (same coordinates) issued a document [ref: ID#5QJLF7VS] addressed to Leo Wanta asserting that a tax balance of $897,375.07 was ‘due’. This document was entitled ‘NOTICE OF PENDING INTERNET POSTING’. It threatened Leo Wanta in the following terms:

‘Your account will be posted on the Internet unless you do one of the following within 30 days from the date of this Notice’ (‘Pay your debt in full’, ‘Provide proof of payment’, ‘Enter into a formal instalment agreement’, ‘Complete an offer of compromise’ or ‘Provide proof of bankruptcy’).

STATE TAX THUGS WARNED OF RICO, LBEL, SLANDER ACTIONS
Following the further tax demand last year, a lawyer for Leo Wanta informed the Wisconsin Department of Revenue that their illegal tax assessment demands represent actionable behaviour under Federal legislation against organised crime, including RICO. Following Lee’s receipt on 15th February 2007 of the Wisconsin State Tax Gestapo’s’ ‘Notice of Internet Posting’, the Attorney followed this up with a letter indicating that publication of the false ‘delinquent tax’ demand of $897,375.07 would constitute libel and slander against his client, and would accordingly compound the legal vulnerability of the Wisconsin Department of Revenue and its staff generally.

In addition, named officials of that tax Department, including Gregg T Frazier and Lisa Potts, are vulnerable to prosecution under RICO statutes, and for libel and slander against the Ambassador.

The background to this latest abomination is as follows. In the course of his official duties working under cover for the FBI, Leo Wanta was engaged many years ago in an FBI ‘sting’ operation against Falls Vending Services, Inc., which was suspected of being used for unlawful activities. He never owned any shares in Falls Vending, began working there for the FBI on 26th June 1981, and at all times while working or associated with Falls Vending Services his purpose concerned undercover law enforcement activity, consistent with his parallel status at that time as a sworn Deputy Sheriff of Waukesha County Sheriff’s Department.

However the Wisconsin Department of Revenue contrived to leverage this ancient history into the format of a massive unlawful personal tax liability against Leo Wanta, which it has brought forward from time to time by way of harassment and intimidation so as to exacerbate Leo’s suffering in the GULAG and thereafter.

In an undated letter labelled ‘State of Wisconsin v, Leo E. Wanta: Dane County Circuit Court Case Number 92-CF-683’, to Judge Michael B Torphy, Mr James E. Doyle, then Attorney General of Wisconsin and now Governor of the State, wrote that ‘I have determined not to pursue having the Court include the amount that defendant owes on his delinquent tax account (7). The Department of Revenue will continue to avail itself of whatever civil remedies it may have in its collection efforts. For the Court’s information, the amount owed on defendant’s delinquent tax account as of November 20, 1995, was $646, 918.91’.

This statement was bogus as no such liability for Wisconsin State tax existed or exists on account for Leo Wanta, and/or Lee Emil Wanta.

GESTAPO CONFIRMS IN WRITING THAT WANTA IS A DIPLOMAT
On 18th February 1999, Angela Dunlap, Revenue Agent, State of the Wisconsin Department of Revenue, 718 West Clairemont Avenue, Eau Claire, WI 54701 [715-836 3879; Facsimile: 715-836 6891;email:adunlap@mail.state.wi.us], wrote as follows to Attorney Jan Morton Heger, PO Box 4815, Irvine, CA 92616-4815, then a lawyer acting for Leo Wanta (and the operative who placed Leo’s funds in his own name, at a bank in Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire: see above), as follows:

’Dear Attorney Heger: The Department of Revenue has no record of a delinquent tax account issued to Lee E. Wanta, Social Security Number [correct Social Security number for Lee Wanta cited], Federal Identification Number DPP#04362. Sincerely, [signed] Angela Dunlap, Revenue Agent’. Note that DPP stands for DIPLOMATIC PASSPORT, indicating that the Wisconsin Department of Revenue have been aware all along that Leo Wanta is a diplomat, and is recognised as such by US State and Federal authorities. This fact, of course, severely compounds Wisconsin’s multiple errors, given that diplomats are protected from arrest.

The fact alone that the reprobate Wisconsin Department of Revenue documents its knowledge of Ambassador Wanta’s diplomatic status, invalidates, from the outset, the entire unlawful operation to ‘take down’ Leo Wanta, as perpetrated by the Wisconsin State tax authorities who were and remain evident co-conspirators and accessories to the fact of the frauds committed against Leo/Lee Emil Wanta, his person, his assets and the Court.

08 MARCH 1999: A NEW DELINQUENT TAX ACCOUNT MATERIALISES
On 8th March 1999 – that is to say, just three weeks later, and while Leo was languishing in the GULAG – the Wisconsin Department of Revenue issued a ‘STATEMENT OF DELINQUENT TAX ACCOUNT’, reference 5QJLF7V5, for a total ‘amount due’ of $754,839.58, against Leo Wanta, addressed to the old private marital family residence that the Wisconsin criminal authorities had long since stolen. This document added that interest was accruing at the rate of $88.11 per day.

Please note that Leo’s Social Security Number (which of course we are precluded from publishing, for obvious security reasons) was correctly stated on both the letter from Angela Dunlap, of the WI Department of Revenue, to Attorney Jan Morton Heger, and on this 'Statement of Delinquent Account'. Therefore, of course, both the letter and the Statement referred to the same account: so that on 18th February 1999, no such Delinquent Tax Account existed, while three weeks later, a Delinquent Tax Account against “Lee Emil Wanta”, the owner (obviously) of the SAME Social Security Number, suddenly surfaced in the ‘amount owed’ of $754,839.58.

Therefore on Monday, a Wisconsin State Tax Gestapo official says one thing, and three weeks later, another Gestapo official says the opposite. This is what happens under arbitrary rule, which is the norm, it seems, in the State of Wisconsin, where the corrupt tax apparat is used to harass and intimidate its victims so as to ‘legitimise’ institutionalised criminal extortion.

As indicated above, after the Editor faxed John Dipko’s email to Lisa Potts, demands for the burgeoning civil tax assessment amount based upon the original fraudulent demand of $14,129, settled under protest three times, suddenly ceased – since Mr Dipko’s email had confirmed that the Wisconsin Department of Corrections had indeed forwarded to the Department of Revenue the sum of $24,900.91 that it was (fraudulently) still claiming, and which was financed by means of the check proffered to Michelle Riel on 21st July 2005 by Attorney Steven Goodwin, as described.

Of course, the brutally uncouth Wisconsin Department of Revenue have not had the courtesy to confirm to Leo Wanta or to his lawyer that they duly received the $24,900.91 sent to them by the Wisconsin Department of Corrections on 4th August 2005. However, manifestly they can proceed no further with this fraud, since the Editor, Lee Wanta and his lawyer possess the email from John Dipko confirming the Wisconsin Department of Corrections’ payment of $24,900.91 dated 4th August 2005. (It is up to the Department of Revenue to argue this out with the Department of Corrections).

This will of course be one of the documents that will be relied upon in a forthcoming RICO case against the Wisconsin Department of Revenue and against named and unnamed officials both in their official capacities and personally.

NO INTERNET POSTING ON THE LATEST UNLAWFUL TAX DEMAND
Having finally been thwarted (on the basis of information on this date of posting) with respect to the Wisconsin Tax Gestapo’s attempts to collect the civil tax assessment of $14,129 (plus extras) for a FOURTH time, the Wisconsin Tax Gestapo reverted to its much larger fraudulent civil tax assessment demand, which had now ballooned to $897,375.07 by 12th February [ID# 5QJLF7V5], threatening to post details of this so-called ‘Delinquent Tax Assessment Account’ on the Internet within 30 days. The full thirty days had passed by the time this report had been finalised, and this libellous and slanderous action had not been taken.

GROSS ABUSE OF POWERS LAYS OFFICIALS OPEN TO RICO SUITS
No doubt this reflects the fact that, all of a sudden, the Wisconsin Department of Revenue, and its unnamed and named officials, including Mr Gregg T. Frazier and Lisa Potts, may have become aware that the scandalous misapplication and abuse of their powers is liable in due course to result in them personally sampling the joys of the abominable US GULAG, to which their reprobate behaviour condemned Ambassador Leo Wanta for eight years, followed by effective house arrest and probation, without cause and in breach of his diplomatic and human rights.

That is what happens to high-level US intelligence operatives and diplomats who serve Uncle Sam with extreme distinction and whose ethical and moral code and upbringing precludes them from accommodating corrupt high-level US intelligence operatives and top officials intent on stealing, misdirecting, misusing, exploiting and otherwise abusing financial assets held (by Ambassador Leo Emil Wanta) as sole Principal and Trustor for the benefit exclusively of the United States and the American people. Leo Wanta compounded the anger of high-level operatives towards him when he refused to accommodate separate demands from both Clinton and George Bush Sr. to facilitate the diversion of funds in their favour, and after he had specifically annotated on one Federal Reserve computer print-out that a remittance of $1.0 billion from Banco Exterior de Espana, Malaga, Spain, to Banco de Panama, Panama City, Panama for crediting to 'Pilgrim Investments/Jorge Bush' represented a crime. Specifically, Leo had annotated this print-out as follows:

'Acceptance of value by former U.S. President of the United States, George (Jorge) Bush is direct violation of our USA Title 5, Section 7353, et seq: Jim Baker III told me to just "SHUT UP" as I am protected by Rogers-Houston Memorandum to "co-operate", but I kept receipts & notes'. An image of this key Leo Wanta-annotated Federal Reserve print-out has been extensively reproduced in International Currency Review, and may specifically be viewed in ICR, 31, 3/4, on page 33 [Figure 1].

YOU SERVED WITH EXTREME DISTINCTION? GO LANGUISH IN THE GULAG
There is no difference in principal between the fate unjustly suffered by Ambassador Leo Wanta for years in the abominable US GULAG without any cause, and that of the millions who suffered in the Soviet GULAG under Stalin and his successors.

The only variant this time round is that the tables have been decisively turned, since the whole informed world (minus the complacent and controlled ‘mainstream’, or rather ‘sidestream’, media) is aware that we are exposing elements of the biggest nexus of financial scandals in world history.

And, as one US intelligence operative ‘working for’ George Bush Sr. commented several years ago when these ongoing investigations were in their infancy, ‘that is never supposed to happen, you understand’. Too late now. The cat is out of the bag.

Notes and References:
(1) Marc Rich/Reich: Is he a DVD operative who is really ‘Hans Brand’?’, International Currency Review, Volume 31, 3/4, November 2006, pages 83-96.
(2) For background to our exposures of the biggest scorpions’ nest of financial scandal in world history, see postings on this website since April 2006, and the following issues of International Currency Review: Volume 28, #4 (March 2003); Volume 30, 2/3 (January 2005); and Volume 31, 3/4, November 2006. The scandal has also been covered in issues of Economic Intelligence Review. See serials information on this website for subscription and serials ordering details.
(3) See International Currency Review, Volume 31, ¾, op. cit., pages 477 et seq.
(4) DVD: Deutsche Verteidigungs Dienst, Dachau, locus of the Nazi long-range strategic deception continuum. DVD is a hidden (no longer!) Pan-German ‘Black’ Nazi Continuum intelligence agency which is masterminding much of the revolutionary instability in the world, having acknowledged no strategic discontinuity since the Second World (indeed since the days of Frederick the Great and Bismarck). Its primary mantras are: ‘Fur uns ist der Krieg niemals vorbei’ (‘For us the war never ended’); and ‘We shall build the Thousand-Year Reich on the Ruins of the United States’. Documented authority for this is found in the ‘Madrid Circular Letter’ intercepted by the Allies while en route from the Madrid-based German Geopolitical Centre in the early 1950s, as well as other captured Nazi documents. Due to extensive long-range Nazi penetration of the US structures, US intelligence cadres are themselves extensively involved in seeking treasonous implementation of these mad objectives. The good news is that these people, though coldly cynical and ruthless, are incompetent, at loggerheads with each other, and failing.
(5) Financial assets belonging to the sole Principal and Trustor, Ambassador Leo Emil Wanta, were being held in the personal name of a former Attorney for Leo Wanta, Jan Morton Heger, when the bank branch in Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, UK, was visited at the Ambassador’s request in 2006.
(6) ‘Thieves’ World’, Claire Sterling, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1994. See also International Currency Review, Volume 31, 3/4, November 2006, page 186. Mrs Sterling died very suddenly after a second interview with the FBI, following publication of ‘Thieves’ World’. High-level sources have told the Editor that she was murdered.
(7) Undated letter to The Honorable Michael B. Torphy from James E. Doyle, then Wisconsin Attorney General and now Governor of Wisconsin, cited on page 208 of International Currency Review, Volume 31, 3/4, Figure 16.

Ambassador Leo Emil Wanta: Diplomatic Passport Numbers 04362 & 12535 a.k.a. Frank B. Ingram [FBI] (Sector V) SA32NV; and a.k.a. Rick Reynolds, SA233MS. AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc: Federal EIN Number 20-3866855; Virginia State Corporation Identification Number: 0617454-4; Virginia State Department of Taxation Identification Number: 30203866855F001

___

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              

Teknosis Join us at EENG - Free Blogs,.

March 27, 2007 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Why the Libby "verdict" was a mistrial

"Why the Libby 'Verdict' was a Mistrial," by Paul Andrew Mitchell

Posted by: "Supreme Law Firm"      paulandrewmitchell2004@yahoo.com
   

Tue Mar 6, 2007 2:53 pm        (PST)   

Why the Libby "Verdict" was a Mistrial
   
by Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 USC 1964(a)
   
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
   
   
  (1)  a panel of federal citizens can not
legally issue a valid criminal INDICTMENT;
that panel was not a lawful federal grand jury
because the Jury Selection and Service Act
expressly discriminates against Citizens of
the 50 States of the Union:
  http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/gilberts/opening.htm#topic-a
   
  (2)  for the same reason, a panel of federal
citizens could not legally issue a valid
VERDICT in a federal criminal trial, because
the same Jury Selection and Service Act
is used to convene federal trial juries too;
   
  (3)  the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA have never
been granted any legal standing to sue or to be sued
in any federal courts:
  http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/us-v-usa.htm
   
  (4)  the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA did incorporate
twice in the State of Delaware, but the Delaware
Secretary of State has now revoked the charters
of both Delaware corporations:
  http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.inc/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.corp/
   
  (5)  Congress has never incorporated the
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA as such, nor
has the Congress ever incorporated the
"United States" (federal government) as such;
see U.S. v. Cooper Corporation:
  http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=312&invol=600
   
  (6)  in the U.S. Constitution and in Title 28 of the
U.S. Code, the term "United States of America"
means only the 50 States of the Union:
  http://www.supremelaw.org/ref/dict/bldu1.htm#union
  (Bouvier's L.D. governs the meaning of terms used in the Constitution)
  http://www.supremelaw.org/ref/whuscons/whuscons.htm
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1746.html
  (inside the "United States" = outside the "United States of America";
  inside the "United States of America" = outside the "United States")
   
  (7)  those 50 States are already legally represented
by their respective State Attorneys General;
   
  (8)  as such, the "United States of America"
cannot be legally represented by any U.S. Attorneys
employed either by the U.S. Department of Justice
  or by the Office of the U.S. Attorney:
  http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/547.html
   
  (9)  it is also willful misrepresentation for
any DOJ's officers or employees to attempt to appear
on behalf of the 50 States of the Union, or
on behalf of 2 revoked Delaware corporations;
such willful misrepresentation violates the
McDade Act at 28 U.S.C. 530B:
  http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/530B.html
   
  (10)  Reggie B. Walton is currently missing
2 necessary credentials which are required
of all federal district judges, by law:
the APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVIT and OATH OF OFFICE:
  http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/walton.reggie/nad.missing.credentials.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/evidence.folders.2004-03-16.htm#DDC
  http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/
   
 
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and
Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)
   
  All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
 
Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:
  http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.forward.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.perjury.jurats.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/psta.analysis.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/lien.or.levy.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/notice.of.deficiency.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.cclists.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm

___

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              

Teknosis Join us at EENG - Free Blogs,.

March 8, 2007 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack