1 vote

Frothingham v. Mellon and other cases denying taxpayer standing are unconstitutional



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

as I understand you volunteered

through signing up for Social Security, filing a W4, submitting a 1040 showing them how much you think you owe them, etc.

Do you believe if you didn't do those things, that the IRS would

not tax your income?

Even the Amish pay income taxes.

Frothingham?

Is that what we're calling Santorum these days?

Judge Bartley, the current 13th amendment states:

"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude [compulsory service], except as punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the united States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." From acknowledging this amendment, wouldn't it be known that taxation = involuntary servitude [compulsory service]? They take 1/3 out of our pay without letting us deny them the theft. If someone took the IRS to court and used the 13th amendment as unconstitutional grounds, do you think it would hold up? And do you think this is a valid point?

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James

Check It Out

Irwin Schiff, father of investment advisor Peter Schiff, is IN JAIL for making similar if not the same arguments.

An 80+ y.o. man...he's a martyr, IMHO.

Are taxes involuntary servitude?

Dear FreedomIsAbsolute:

I like the way you are thinking.

To your question, "If someone took the IRS to court and used the 13th amendment as unconstitutional grounds, do you think it would hold up?"

Answer, it should, but it won’t, for the courts are too far gone. You might even incur a frivolous claim penalty of up to $25,000!

To your question, “And do you think this is a valid point?”

Yes, at least to the extent that the tax revenues are used for spending not authorized in the Constitution, which amounts to about 70% of the federal budget, as we argued in the case I cited in the article.

Also involuntary servitude rears its ugly head in employer tax withholding cases where employers are forced into being collection agents for the government. Please see http://douglassbartley.wordpress.com/2012/03/20/as-to-employ...

May I post your question and my answer on my blog?

Thank you for your quick reply.

I figure that if one were to take the IRS to court and use the 13th Amendment against the IRS, the courts would have none of it, for they would know a precedent would be established against the compulsive collection of income taxes. Also, thanks for the link, and surely you can use my comment with your answer, as long as you include m handle FreedomIsAbsolute.
Once again thanks.

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James

You're welcome.

It's excellent!

I have another question if you don't mind, and was wondering if you had any clue as to whether this is a falsehood or not. Upon researching, I came across multiple sources regarding the 13th original Amendment (nothing to do with the abolition of slavery.) Upon looking at these sources, it appears that the original 13th Amendment has been buried and is no longer recognized. It was supposedly ratified by the original 13 states between 1812-1819. The supposed Original 13th Amendment reads as follows: "If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them." My question is this: is this true? And if so, what are the ramifications of hiding such an Amendment, and is a process/will a process be in place (if not when will it be) of bringing this to light and re-established by any duly elected/appointed officials such as people belonging to the Judicial Branch, or legislative branch, and if this Amendment really does exist and is buried but not being brought to light, why? A few of the sources that I have come across to this matter is:
1.) http://www.amendment-13.org/
2.) http://www.thirdamendment.com/missing.html
3.) http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/07/27/why-some-re...
4.) http://www.greatamericanhistory.net/amendment.htm
5.) http://www.barefootsworld.net/13essay.html

Also, I was wondering if you knew what the acronym B.A.R. stands for as in "A lawyer cannot recieve his/her license untill he/she passes the BAR."

Thanks for your input and expertise

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James

The original 13th Amendment

In answer to your question on whether the original 13th was ratified and became effective, I assume that the table at http://www.barefootsworld.net/13table.html is accurate. And I also presume that the image of Roane’s and Coalter’s 1819 compilation of Virginia laws, including the original 13th (http://www.barefootsworld.net/images/va19-13a.jpg), is also accurate. Roane was an exacting judge who wouldn’t publish the original 13th as law unless he were sure that it had been ratified.

Therefore, on the original 13th Amendment (as opposed to the subsequent 13th), I answer that it appears that by sometime in 1819, the amendment had been ratified by 13 of the first 17 states(ending with Ohio--or 76% more than the necessary 3/4.

I will probably today publish a short article on the anomaly of two thirteenth amendments.

"Bar"

On the easy question: bar
Samuel Johnson’s Dictionary (in wide use in America at the time)
• BAR

• 6. The place where causes of law are tried, or where criminals are judged; so called from the bar placed to hinder crouds from incommoding the court.

• The great duke
• Came to the bar, where, to his accusations,
• He pleaded still not guilty.
• Shakesp. Henry VIII.

• Some at the bar with subtlety defend,
• Or on the bench the knotty laws untye.
• Dryd. Juvenal.