4 > Discussions; Public Archive



Dale Eastman:

--- Quote from: Original Post ---A video with this title:
--- Quote ---Matt Walsh SILENCES Democrat Rep. With One Question
--- End quote ---

--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: KS @ 15 0959 ---Really? WE THE PEOPLE pay his salary. High time we get answers to ALL of our questions. 😡
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 15 @ 1552 ---Who the F is this "we"?
Stand up and be known as a unique single individual.
You and I are NOT "we".
You and I are NOT "We the people" long dead.
You and I are NOT "We the people" not dead.
If alive, the writers of the CONstitution could not prove they were actually authorized by the millions of individuals then alive with millions of notarized delegations of authority to speak for any of the millions then alive.
Nobody has been delegated any authority to presume to speak for this collection of individuals, dead or alive. Nobody.
I've just explained why assuming to speak for "we" anywhere at anytime is an irritation for me.

And as for who is paying... Somebody at the top knows the Federal Government and the IRS are deliberately doing a trillion dollar a year deceptive fraud.

204 words.

Dear IRS,

SCOTUS has said:
In the interpretation of statutes levying taxes it is the established rule not to extend their provisions, by implication, beyond the clear import of the language used, or to enlarge their operations so as to embrace matters not specifically pointed out. In case of doubt they are construed most strongly against the government, and in favor of the citizen." GOULD v. GOULD, 245 U.S. 151 (1917).

SCOTUS has said:
... [T]he well-settled rule ... the citizen is exempt from taxation unless the same is imposed by clear and unequivocal language, and that where the construction of a tax law is doubtful, the doubt is to be resolved in favor of those upon whom the tax is sought to be laid... SPRECKELS SUGAR REFINING CO. v. MCCLAIN, 192 U.S. 397 (1904)

SCOTUS has said:
If it is law, it will be found in our books; if it is not to be found there, it is not law.
Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616, 627 (1886)

What statute in the Internal Revenue Code, using clear and unequivocal language as required by the Supreme Court, makes a private Citizen liable for subtitle A - income taxes on his or her domestically earned compensation for labor?

More words and more detailed info.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: KS @ 15 1807 ---Dale Eastman are you done? WE are the American people and if YOU don’t like it move!
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 16 1154 ---Dear Ms. S,

After your reactive reply to my post, I am extremely curious about what you think and why you think what you think.

I strive to remember to identify my assumptions as my assumptions. I don't want my assumptions confused with my statements of reasoned, concluded facts. So please challenge any assumptions I've made that are in error.

Many folks think my statements of reasoned, concluded facts are wrong. Likewise, feel free to challenge my reasoned, concluded facts... With your own facts... And hence a dialog is started to find the truth.

You wrote:
➽ Dale Eastman are you done?

Snarky comment noted and ignored.

➽ WE are the American people

I will confirm your assumption that I live in the middle of the North American continent, somewhere south of Canada and north of Mexico, in one of the 50 𝐒tates 𝐮nited. I assume likewise for you by your posted words.

Your blanket claim does NOT actually identify who "𝒶𝓇𝑒 𝓉𝒽𝑒 𝒜𝓂𝑒𝓇𝒾𝒸𝒶𝓃 𝓅𝑒𝑜𝓅𝓁𝑒".
No matter. It's an answer of sorts to my question. Thank you.

➽ if YOU don’t like it move!

What, exactly, were you referring to when you used the word "𝒾𝓉"?

I should move if I don't like WHAT?

--- End quote ---


[0] Message Index


Go to full version