LIBERTY TREE UNIVERSITY

Stop Paying Income Taxes Legally

https://youtu.be/hNzRBV43skY

https://youtu.be/SLqOswomVig

5 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Morton Thomson Jr. on April 20, 2015 at 10:03am

Well said Bill,

But Mark I must differ slightly. The Law isn't the Law unless, by eternal vigilance it is upheld by the people, as the courts are completely compromised. Stare decisis is what you are referring to when you say "upheld by the courts". When the courts decide Law, they are in error. WE decide Law. Not even the Constitution decides law.

Remember there is the doctrine of "Emergency" which can and HAS suspended the rule book since March 4th, 1933. So where is this precious "Law of the Land"? Its remedy is most certainly not found in the courts and never can be. Why? Because only the President can undo the War Powers Act of 1933, not the courts. To whit:

"Whereas, under the Act of March 9, 1933, all Proclamations heretofore or hereafter issued by the President pursuant to the authority conferred by section 5 (b) of the Act of October 6, 1917, as amended, are approved and confirmed;..."

Meaning only the President can undo it.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bill May on April 20, 2015 at 10:19am

Thank you Mark. Due to health, old age and getting my teeth kicked in by the system a long time ago and simply no longer having the desire to take on such fights, I decided that I want to do a couple of things with what years I have left. I want to live as peacefully as possible in the future and try to share some wisdom that I wish someone long ago had shared with me and hope I can save other honest, well meaning people some of the grief that is all too often dumped on those who are as naive as I was.

With that said, for those who have no option but to fight, there might be one way to win in these statutory [ legislative ] courts, but it means winning on a separate issue. Not on the law or the facts of the case, but by a collateral attack based on the fact that the judgement is void on its face because the judge and prosecutor intentionally denied you due process when the judge knowingly proceeded to hear and make a decision based on the facts of the case absent any constitutional authority to even view the facts.

I once saw a 9th Ckt. case that addressed this and stated that such an attack must be done with a writ of error instead of an appeal. The reason given was that an appeal is based on the claim that the facts of the case were not properly addressed or did not support a conviction, etc. That you cannot appeal a judgement that is already void on its face but instead it must attacked head on as a constitutionally void judgement.

In such a case, where the plaintiff [ prosecutor ] fails to prove to the fact finder that the gov't does have standing to bring the claim, the court lacks jurisdiction, thus depriving the judge of the power to even view the facts, much less impose any punishment on behalf of the plaintiff [ gov't ] based on the alleged facts.