Youngevity BTT 2.0 + Healthy Start Paks 2.0

Youngevity BTT 2.0 + Healthy Start Paks 2.0

Coffees from Youngevity

Coffees from Youngevity

Youngevity Be The Change

Youngevity Healthy Chocolate

GOFoods Youngevity

Join or Create a Ron Paul Meetup,.

Join or Create a Ron Paul Meetup,.

Ron Paul Forums

Ron Paul Forums

APFN Message Board

APFN Message Board

Leo Emil Wanta / Wantagate Links

++++++++++++++++++ EBAY ITEMS 4 SALE ++++++++++++++++++

« More RE: Presidential Debate Games | Main | Freedom Watch »

Re: 07-2017 clarification

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 3:58 PM
Subject: Re: 07-2017 clarification

The controlling case is Commissioner v. Acker:

... 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 .

Paul H. O'Neill was served with a proper SUBPOENA
when he was the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury:

He fell totally silent -- by failing to answer that SUBPOENA;
and, George W. Bush fired him about 6 weeks after
that SUBPOENA was served:

His silence activated estoppel.  Carmine v. Bowen

The United States certified DEFAULT by
the U.S. Department of the Treasury here:  (see Item (7) )

It is extremely easy to modify the liability statute
for subtitle C, so that it applies to subtitle A:


The recipient of income shall be liable for the payment of the tax
imposed by subtitle A of this title.

Now, that wasn't so hard, was it?

But, there is no such statute
for subtitle A of the IRC.

If you're referring to the Tenth Circuit,
you'll need to show me every robe's
4 required credentials

HOWEVER, we already checked!!

The Federal Judiciary is extensively infiltrated
with known impostors:

... particularly the Tenth Circuit:

Before Tacha, Murphy and Holmes???

Implications of missing and/or defective credentials
are explained by these standing authorities:


Without taking the oath prescribed by law,
one cannot become a judge either de jure or de facto, and
such an individual is without authority to act and
his acts as such are void until he has taken the prescribed oath.

 [French v. State, 572 S.W.2d 934]
[Brown v. State, 238 S.W.2d 787]

OPM never requested nor obtained OMB's review and approval
of three (3) changes that are now obvious on the counterfeit SF-61
which OPM published at their Internet website.

We already checked!!

Yes, please send your donation per the instructions here:

Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964 (Home Page) (Support Policy) (Client Guidelines) (Policy + Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Jon Steele <> wrote:
I saw the doc on your site that states that the irs is dead, subtitle A, with your default Notice.
But in reading the opinion of the court, it looks like they ruled that the statute does exist.
What is the truth? Thanks, Jon
I will gladly pay for your time, just let me know how much, If I can quote a case that shows
there is no statute, or use your default somehow in my situation. Thanks for all you do

September 20, 2012 in Current Affairs | Permalink