Finally: Judiciary vs. Judiciary

[rushmc 23]

If all attorneys are officers of the courts that make up the judicial branch of the government, then the government now has one of its best and brightest members challenging the legality of the operation and enforcement of the federal income tax system on constitutional and statutory grounds.
Meet Thomas K. Cryer, Attorney at Law.

On February 20, 2007, the news about Thomas K. Cryer broke on the Internet with the publication of an article titled, "Attorney Challenges Income Tax Law, Constitutional History in the Making."

As part of WTP's due diligence we studied the documents on file in the United States District Court, Western District of Louisiana in USA v Cryer, CASE #: 5:06-cr-50164-SMH-MLH-ALL, and in Cryer v USA, CASE #: 5:02-mc-00019-DEW. In addition, we interviewed Cryer by telephone and we reviewed Cryer's biographic summary and the information on his website at www.gcstation.net/liefreezone.

Cryer, like IRS Special Agent Joe Banister before him, undertook a two-year study of the income tax system at his own expense. Like Banister, Cryer concluded that consistent with the tax clauses of the Constitution of the United States of America, there is no law that requires individuals to file tax returns and pay a direct un-apportioned tax on their labor, and no law that requires employers to withhold such a tax from the paychecks of their employees.

Cryer stopped filing tax returns, stopped withholding the tax from his employees and has now been indicted for tax evasion.

Cryer's strategy is to have the indictment dismissed on the merits of his constitutional and statutory arguments. He has filed an approximately 100-page motion that can be described in one word - "brilliant."



[/url]http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/MISC/Cryer/CRYER--MotiontoDismiss.pdf[url]

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[narcimund 0]

I've read as much of that petition as I can in one sitting. I'm not qualified to judge the quality of its reasoning but on the surface it seems to be written by someone who can sound lawyerly.

Just stipulating for a moment that his reasoning is rock-solid however, it's interesting to wonder what the effects might be. Even if a circuit judge were completely convinced of the perfection of every single point and the absolute failure of the government's arguments, would they be willing to rule in the defendant's favor? Like hell!

And of course if some renegade judge actually was convinced and ruled according to their conscience, appeals would by guaranteed to overturn him -- whether or not on actual grounds, the pressure would be incredible.

This guy could be completely right in every single point but he's still pounding his head against the wall. I admire his quixotic idealism and I'll mourn him when he's sent to prison or dies from an unexpected heart attack.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[carmenc 0]

Just supposing for a microsecond that he actually wins, how do you think the US government should pay for its overseas adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan?

[billvon 3,120]

This seems to me to be the ultimate realization of the entitlement generation. This guy wants to go to court so he doesn't have to pay taxes, said taxes (of course) supporting the very court he is appearing in.

To me it's akin to someone running up a huge credit card debt then saying "why, I shouldn't have to pay this, it's ridiculously large! I shall go to court and show them an obscure usury judgement in 1847 and get out of having to pay back what I borrowed."

If you have a big credit card debt, the answer is to stop spending so much and pay it off. Likewise, if you don't like your taxes, the answer is to stop spending so much money on, say, optional wars, or the space program, or the interstate system, or the latest Star Wars project. Spending decreases lead to lower taxes. You can't have all the wars you want and expect someone else to pay for them.

[narcimund 0]

Quote

Likewise, if you don't like your taxes, the answer is to stop spending so much money on, say, optional wars, or the space program, or the interstate system, or the latest Star Wars project. Spending decreases lead to lower taxes. You can't have all the wars you want and expect someone else to pay for them.

Think carefully about the different meanings of the word "you" that you're conflating.

First Class Citizen Twice Over