Login
Main menu

Doing What The Law Says

(originally launched into cyberspace on 06/03/2004)
---

Dear Subscriber,

Below are the comments of Tom Clayton, M.D., who I mentioned in my
previous e-mail, and who funded the TaxableIncome.net web site, and later
funded the "Theft By Deception" video. We just passed the one year
anniversary of both of our homes being raided by the kinder, gentler IRS.
So here is what he has to say.

Larken Rose
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
http://www.861.info

---------------------------------------------------------------

One year ago CID special agents Jack Bell, Jacob Avery, Paul Howard, and
approximately ten other agents came (with firearms) to my private
residence in Texas (about 30 minutes after they showed up at Larken’s
house) after I had gone to work. My 11-year-old daughter was home alone
sick, while my wife was taking my youngest daughter to school. They
yelled, “THIS IS THE POLICE; WE HAVE A SEARCH WARRANT, OPEN THE DOOR!” My
daughter became hysterical, saying “You aren’t going to arrest my mommy
and daddy!”

This single event galvanized me into coming out from behind the scenes, where
I had been working with Larken for over five years for the sole purpose of
educating the public about the correct application of the federal income
tax law (i.e. those parts of the law that show that the only incomes that
are taxable are related to international commerce, which of course does
NOT include the incomes of most Americans).

I am sure my becoming more public was the exact OPPOSITE of what the DOJ
was hoping for. I'm sure they thought that they would be able to
INTIMIDATE me into shutting up. What were they threatening? To indict me
and to throw me in jail? Just like they threaten everyone else? What
for? Because I read the law and could PROVE that I did not owe federal
income taxes? Or because I dared to show others WHAT THE LAW SAID?

What was wrong with this picture? I had broken no laws. I had provided
financing so that the public would have FREE access to the evidence in the
law (via the taxableincome.net web site), and this type of activity is
protected by the First Amendment. I had worked with Larken for years for
the sole purpose of UNDOING what the government had done, which was to
write and arrange the law in such a manner that it was virtually
IMPOSSIBLE for the public to read the law and understand it. The truth is
in the law, but it is buried so deep and in
such convoluted regulations, that most of the public was being DECEIVED.

I became involved so that the law the public could read and understand what
the law said for THEMSELVES. Some crime, huh? But the DOJ will have a
hard time proving that I or Larken broke any laws. How about their tactic
of avoiding what the LAW SAYS in the courtroom by painting "tax
protestors" (sorry guys, we are "government LIE protestors") as dirtballs,
or as people who are engaged in get rich quick schemes? They have bitten
off a very unpleasant snozzcumber (remember Roald Dahl's, The Big Friendly
Giant, or BFG?) that is hard to eat and even harder to swallow. They have
come up against HONEST PEOPLE and the TRUTH in the written law.

I am at least $50,000 in the hole and I am giving more money all the time
in order to KEEP showing the evidence in the law to the public. I had
never given tax advice or done anything such as hiding income, and yet
here were armed Gestapo agents invading my home, STEALING hundreds of
videos (which as you all know is a GROSS violation of constitutional
rights) because they were "mad" at me for funding the video. Larken has
done a wonderful job of using the pile of 300 videos as an OBVIOUS proof
of their deliberate violations of the law and civil rights.

Do any of you think that this is a reason to break the law and violate
rights? When you get mad at your neighbor, do you go over and hold their
child at gunpoint? It was this episode that convinced me that the
federal government doesn't care what the law says; doesn't care about the
Constitutional limits on what they can and cannot do. THIS is a VERY
ominous situation indeed. This raid ORIGINATED by command of the top
lawyers at the DOJ in Washington, those charged with enforcing
the laws and PROTECTING the public. The fact that THEY are violating the
law for political ends will only backfire on them, and it already has.

These lawyers are supposed to be held to a "higher standard," yet here
they were using thugs to KNOWINGLY break the law (the term they like to
use when attacking the public). Which DOJ lawyers knowingly broke the
law to try and shut us up? What do they think, that the public will not
find out eventually?

My involvement in this educational mission has NEVER been “because Larken
says it,” it has been because this is what the law says. When I read an
earlier version of the “Taxable Income” report on the "Taxgate" website,
I realized from the written and published EVIDENCE in the law itself that
he quoted word for word that the law really was much more limited in scope
than the public has been led to believe.

Since the beginning, independent of Larken, I realized that the focus of
this battle MUST be on the written law, because the government has always
said that I am (just like any other citizen) REQUIRED to go to the law,
read it, and determine ON THAT BASIS ALONE what the law did or did not
require me to do.

Before the Internet, this was extremely difficult. The Internet and
computer search engines (that could search the entire law almost
instantly) made CERTAIN that nothing critical was “overlooked.” Once the
structure of the deception was understood, when it came to determining
“taxable income,” EVERY SINGLE reference (including the indexes of the
United States Code and Code of Federal Regulations) pointed to Subchapter
N, Section 861 and following. The evidence is nothing less than
overwhelming, but most of the public had never seen the law before the
Internet. This needed to be remedied.

I offered to finance Larken's own website (he did not ask me) so that
there would be NOTHING else to interfere with the educational process of
helping the public understand what the law says, where it says it, and
why it says what it does. He and I were as one when we agreed to have NO
theories or speculations; nothing BUT the written law itself from the
government’s own law books. In other words, nothing BUT what the
government has told every citizen that they must do.

Since I strongly believe in following the law as written, whether or not I
“agreed” with what the law said was irrelevant, it was NOT a “choice”
that I could make. I could NOT file an incorrect return (reporting my
income as "taxable income") just to "keep out of trouble." If I did file
a federal income tax return stating that I had “taxable income” and
signed it under penalty of perjury when I knew and could PROVE that I did
not, I would be knowingly committing a crime, which I refuse to do.

But this was NOT a personal issue; it REALLY bothered me that most
Americans were being deceived. It REALLY bothered me that a person had
to have excellent reading comprehension to understand the law EVEN WITH
the regulations (which are supposed to explain the correct application of
the statutes so that the PUBLIC can understand what the law does or does
not require them to do). It REALLY bothered me that the Treasury
Department was KNOWINGLY stealing from the public, taking advantage of
their lack of knowledge about the law. How many "tax professionals" were
in on this, getting lots of income from turning over client
incomes with no basis in law to do so? More importantly, how many tax
professionals were honest and had been deceived as well?

I decided that no matter WHAT it cost, I felt that I had a social obligation
to help the public understand how to read and understand the law
correctly. No matter what the government tried to do to stop the public
from seeing the law, it would not work. The law does NOT lie and the
evidence will NOT go away. The more publicity that is brought to the
issue, the better it is.

When confronted with such a massive contradiction between what was being
done by the IRS and the Treasury Department and what the law actually
said, I did the only thing that seemed reasonable: I wrote DIRECTLY to the
regulation-writing lawyers in the Treasury Department to find out why
their own regulations said
something so very different than the public has been led to believe (see
below). I knew that my situation was exactly like that of most Americans.
I knew that the law required them to answer me truthfully; in fact,
government lawyers are supposed to be held to a HIGHER standard, according
to their own ethics publications. NOT IRS lower-level employees; the
government LAWYERS who WRITE the law and to whom even the Supreme Court
defers. How could THEY lie, with the published law to PROVE that they
lied?

How would they respond? I must confess, initially I felt reasonably sure
that when confronted with the irrefutable evidence, they would have NO
ETHICAL MORAL OR LEGAL CHOICE BUT to admit that the regulations DO mean
what they say
(which of course, they do whether a government bureaucrat says so or not).

As you have seen on the www.taxableincome.net website, I was the
(anonymous) person who first asked these "experts" the questions about the
regulations, written very clearly, using language from the regulations
themselves. They were asked in such a way that they could be answered
“yes” or “no.”

These "experts" answered me with everything BUT the law I asked about;
Answering questions that I DID NOT ask. It was obvious that I was NOT
asking about the “items” (types) of income in Subchapter B and elsewhere
that MAY be taxable, I was asking about the taxable SOURCES (types of
commerce which generate the income), as specified over and over again in
the regulations under Section 861 and following. After that, they REFUSED
to answer the questions.

The government lawyers have not only been stealing from the public, but
when faced with what the law itself said, refused to correct their error.
It made me
sick to my stomach. They try to distract and confuse you first, and when
that doesn't work, they STOP RESPONDING.

I am a doctor. I am a formally educated person (which is no guarantee of
being able to think objectively, by the way) who can read and write AND
who presented the evidence IN THE LAW to them in a very logical fashion
It was obvious that
I was NOT a tax protestor or fringe person. Here was the massive
administrative structure of the federal government with a “chain of
command,” where (you would think) that as one proceeded up this chain,
the people in those more RESPONSIBLE (higher paid) positions would
actually BE more responsible, honest, and, once notified of the fraud,
would do everything in their power to stop the robbery.

Instead, EVERY single person in power, including the Inspector Generals of
the DOJ and Treasury Department, charged with dealing with and preventing
employee misconduct and politicians such as Charles Grassley (Finance
Committee) did NOTHING. For over three years, I have documented letters
to Andrew Card, President Bush’s Chief of Staff, of the deception, asking
him to STOP it and stop the misconduct of the executive branch agencies
that are desperately trying to keep the EVIDENCE in the law from being
understood by the public.

In the summer of 2001 I think that I got through to Mark Weinberger,
Assistant Secretary of the Office of Tax Policy, the person in charge of
ALL the federal tax regulations, because he resigned after only one year
of his two year term, at the top of his game. Was this because he was
honest? But how is it that the honest people resign and the fraud
CONTINUES? But who is directing this THEFT? Does that mean that whoever
is left is determined to keep STEALING from the public? Are they "lifer"
bureaucrats?

This in and of itself reveals corruption of the federal government on a
scale that most of the public cannot even imagine. They will NOT police
themselves and will NOT follow the law as written; meanwhile they are
beating up the PRIVATE sector for fraud, and attacking people like Larken
and me for exercising our 1st Amendment rights to freedom of speech, for
simply SHOWING the public what the law says.

If we do not stop this corruption now, then it will only get worse. We ARE a
nation of the rule of written law, and, armed with the Internet, we will no
longer be IGNORED. I know that all of you see how serious that this is; we
MUST do what the founders of this country did; which is to confront
tyranny and stop it, no matter the cost. Like the Terminator, we will NOT
STOP until this fraud is ENDED.

Sincerely,

Tom Clayton, MD