Just watched this and apparently federal taxes are bullshit and Americans are simply strong armed into paying them by the feds. Seems relevant with the new expansion of the IRS. Interesting video.
rumble.com
Are you going to be a rebel and refuse to file your 1040's next year?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtu.be
law.cornell.edu
twitter.com
he was the guy that first said they're going to try and get us to eat bugs. and he said it like 15 years ago on Alex Jones
Yeah that's what made me interested in him. Read about it in another thread earlier.
Excise taxes: Sales tax> Apportioned
Direct taxes: Property tax> Apportioned
Capataion taxes: Income tax> Not apportioned
The income tax does not meet the apportionment requirement
He said it way before jones. He is the one who first blew the whistle on microchips being implanted. Back when he first stated that it was science fiction. I'm talking late 90s is when he said it.
Is that mickey rourke?
The problem is it does not matter how good his technical case is. Anyone who follows his advice is going to end up like those sovereign citizens nutjobs shouting "Am I being detained" while sheriff deputies put him in a headlock and drag him to the squad car..
There are a few cases where people get off. He interviews a juror in one of those cases in the documentary.
there's literally no statutory law and if there were it wouldn't even be constitutional lamo
That documentary turned everybody I knew into big Ron Paul supporters in the late 00's. Half of us became shitlibs, the rest are full blown nahztees
Yeah I thought it was likely to be garbage but was surprised. Didn't know it was going to be about the IRS either just saw that his documentary was hard to come by so I snooped it out.
rip my guy. This doc woke me up back in the day. Still holds up today
16th ammendment says it doesn't have to
Rumble is gay af , why is that site so unusable.
who cares can't find this shit on youtube just watch the video
That amendment was illegally passed and thus null and void.
Welcome to your education, child.
First lesson;
Article I, Section 9, Clause 4:
No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.
>can't find this shit on youtube
Took 2 minutes
Fuck off tax jew.
I havent filed in over a decade lmao.
Labor is expended capital, theres no capital gains. Check out the us v cryer case memo. He was acquitted 12-0.
lel
Yes and amendments change the constitution
When 2 things in the Constitution and ammendments are at odds, the latter takes precedence
The US Constitution was completely discarded as a pretext to the Civil War.
FUCK TAXES
FUCK DEBT
FUCK TRANNIES
FUCK JANNIES
Those site never allow casting, how am I to Redpill normies in public places?
How do you do fellow sovereign citizen
I was being a lazy boomer and regret not using the youtube link for my OP
No, a separate foreign nation south of the United States got conquered lmao the US constitution doesn’t apply to other countries (until they get raped and burned to the ground and permanently submit to the US)
Notice how the pronunciation of *unalienable* has changed.
"Un-alien-able" is how we think of it, but it was written to be understood as "un-a-lien-able*, meaning no "liens" were to be put upon you or your rights.
Only applies to corporations due to federal domain of interstate and international commerce
>The plaintiff is a domestic corporation chiefly engaged in buying goods in the several states, shipping them to foreign countries and there selling them. In 1914 its net income from this business was $30,173.66, and from other sources $12,436.24. An income tax for that year, computed on the aggregate of these sums, was assessed against it and paid under compulsion. It is conceded that so much of the tax as was based on the income from other sources was valid, and the controversy is over so much of it as was attributable to the income from shipping goods to foreign countries and there selling them.
>The Sixteenth Amendment, although referred to in argument, has no real bearing and may be put out of view. As pointed out in recent decisions, it does not extend the taxing power to new or excepted subjects, but merely removes all occasion, which otherwise might exist, for an apportionment among the states of taxes laid on income, whether it be derived from one source or another.
>does not extend the taxing power to new or excepted subjects
law.cornell.edu