Speculation Mounts That Browns Were Infiltrated, Tricked — Remember those two tax protesters whom the government wanted to shoot if they could get a bead on them? They grabbed them finally. Nobody knows how. I think they gassed them.
Speculation is rife that the Browns were infiltrated and tricked before being violently subdued as authorities refuse to provide any details behind their arrest beside the fact that they did not peacefully surrender.
Observers were both saddened and confused about the announcement of the arrest of tax protesters Ed and Elaine Brown last night. Though none of us wanted to witness another Waco, we were all well aware of the fact that the Browns have stated on numerous occasions that they would not be arrested without a fight and would rather die than go to jail.
This prompted many to question how U.S. Marshals were able to seize the Browns with apparently little response, leading some to conclude that Ed and Elaine were tricked by one or more supporters whom they had taken into their confidence.
Posts on messageboards overnight feared that the Browns had been taken by surprise, violently subdued and probably shocked numerous times with Taser weapons before they even had a chance to resist.
found by Mark McCullough
Mr. Fusion,
I think Stars & Bars is doing a better job than I could ever hope too. I defer to his legal counsel.
BTW, what is your legal expertise, Mr. Fusion? What makes you a tax scholar?
For the record, I pay my taxes like a good citizen. More out of societal programming and utter fear than anything else.
#29, Traitor,
Please refer once again to my # 26. You still haven’t provided ANY refutation that the Federal Government has the authority, right, or power to impose an Income Tax. Using pretzel logic will not win the point.
I have established that the income tax does not meet either criteria of Constitutionally legal taxation in America, that is direct apportioned tax or indirect uniform tax.
No you didn’t. There is no Constitutional requirement that taxes must be direct apportioned tax or indirect uniform tax .
Try the Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1,
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
You continue to believe that the 16th Amendment allowed for a third form of taxation
No, the 16th Amendment allows the Federal Government to impose an income tax without regard to the apportionment (where it is spent)
The 16th Amendment did not allow the Federal Government to levy a new tax, thus there is no Constitutional basis for the income tax.
As I pointed out already, the 16th Amendment allows the Federal Government to impose an Income Tax.
Here, read it yourself.
XVI
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
Sounds pretty self explanatory to me.
Hey, if you would really, really, really like to read the actual Constitution of the United States of America, try the Emory Law School, they have a copy posted.
http://tinyurl.com/2fszs6
Further to #322 in the sense of clarity, there should be a break between my quotation of
“the Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1, … throughout the United States”
and Traitor’s quoted comment
“You continue to believe …”
That is paragraphs #4 & #5
Sorry for any confusion.
Star & Bars,
You can’t see the forest for the trees. Until you become a Supreme Court judge, you interpretation of the law is irrelevant.
The final interpretation of the law is made be the Supreme Court, you may not like the opinions, you may think they’re all commie pigs, but the fact is they do. So, since we’re all still getting taxed and the courts have not yet stopped it, it is the law of the land.
Deal with it.