It’s Been a Good Month…And It Gets Better
1. Amnesty Fails- TWICE- in the Senate. Our Senators (and notably, former Texas sell-outs on this issue Hutchinson and Cornyn) are finally afraid of their constituents despite their wishes to do the bidding of the Corporate-Globalist Elite.
2. The Supreme Court reverses radical desegregation and returns the nation to neighborhood schools.
3. Ron Paul, the most conservative anti-Establishment candidate, has more net money on-hand in the Presidential race than the Establishment candidate John McCain, and is in a healthy third place with money early enough to make a difference.
4. And finally, the IRS and its income tax gets jury nullified in Shreveport Louisiana:
The Internal Revenue Service has lost a lawyer’s challenge in front of a jury to prove a constitutional foundation for the nation’s income tax, and the victorious attorney now is setting his sights higher.
“I think now people are beginning to realize that this has got to be the largest fraud, backed up by intimidation and extortion and by the sheer force of taking peoples property and hard-earned money without any lawful authorization whatsoever,” lawyer Tom Cryer told WND just days after a jury in Louisiana acquitted him of two criminal tax counts.
The jury in U.S. District Court in Louisiana voted 12-0 to find Cryer, of Shreveport, not guilty of failure to file income taxes for two years. He had been indicted in 2006 on charges of failing to pay $73,000 to the IRS in 2000 and 2001. The next step in his personal case will be up to the IRS and prosecutors, if they choose to continue the issue, he said.
Spokesman Robert Marvin in Washington’s IRS office told WND the Internal Revenue Code provides for taxation on salaries or wages, but when pressed for a specific citation, or constitutional provision, he said, “I can’t comment.”
Beautiful! The government thug just says “No comment”.
You can see a video of the lawyer explaining his position here:
My opinion of these arguments is somewhat agnostic. I see the government as just another thug with a gun, and you have to pay protection money according to their extortion scheme, our rights as freemen largely lost after the Second War for Independence was wrapped up offshore of Galveston in the spring of 1865. The Old Republic, where men actually owned their labor and their person, died with Jefferson Davis. Instead of just some people being slaves, we were all made slaves.
However, the government must maintain some level of consent, and part of this remnant is the jury trial. The most effective and radical way to force change, if it were practical, is simple jury nullifcation. It’s simple, and you can help.
Make a promise to yourself: “If I’m ever on a federal jury involving the income tax, I’ll vote NOT GUILTY, no matter what”.
There’s nothing wrong with this, as part of a juror’s power is to judge the justice of a law, not just the facts, despite what judges would have us believe.
So join the party. If one in ten people bought this man’s argument, the whole system would come crashing down. Or at least they’d have to get rid of jury trials and thereby reveal the game for what it is.
Apparently 100% of this sample of 12 in Shreveport, Louisiana told the gummint where to put it. A proud act for a city with a proud heritage, never captured in the War Between the States despite two massive armies sent to capture it in 1864. Both federal armies were whipped (helped significantly by Texans, if we want to get technical about it) and had to turn tail and run to avoid destruction. The feds apparently didn’t learn their lesson the first two times, so our dear Northern Louisianans had to remind them again last week.
September 17th, 2007 at 9:15 pm
“Make a promise to yourself: “If I’m ever on a federal jury involving the income tax, I’ll vote NOT GUILTY, no matter what”.”
Make another promise to yourself: Lie on VoirDire (jury selection) because you’re going to be asked by the judge or prosecutor, “if a violation of the law, as written, is found, can you convict the defendant?” If you plan to nulify you must lie in response to this question or you will never make the panel. So there is a moral dilemma for most people. Do you change the laws? Or “render unto Ceaser”?
One other point, thank God there are strong, smart, financially independent lawyers willing to stand up in the face of unjust prosecutions and other tyranny. The jury system is a great inconvenience to the government, it’s agencies and big business.
September 18th, 2007 at 9:09 am
Jury nullification is a right derived from the common law of free Englishmen, a heritage we share as Americans. It is the court of last resort for unjust laws.
I can think of no better example than the income tax, a law that every single American is violating at any given time since the code is so complex and contradictory. Americans have no choice other than submitting to unconstitutional tyranny through the capricious edicts of the IRS. I certainly submit, because I’m not going to risk my liberty and property at a time when I have young children and little is likely to be gained anyway.
But if another brave soul stands on principle and defies the unconstitutional acts of the government, and I’m on a jury, I will nullify those laws to the extent of my common law rights.
Any question that a lawyer or judge asks that attempts to prevent the exercise of the right of jury nullification is basically illegitimate. And I think someone could honestly answer “yes”, since the “the law as written” would be superseded by the higher law of common law and the Constitution. Wise as serpents, innocent as doves…
The question here is “Who is Caesar?” Thanks to our forefathers’ spilled blood, “Caesar” in our country is the Constitution, not government bureaucrats or even the President. We are not Jewish or Christian peasants living under a Roman dictatorship, we are free Anglo-Saxons and should deal with illegitimate “law” in a manner worthy of our heritage.
Of course, it is a case of “use it or lose it”. I do fear we are rapidly approaching a day where we have more-or-less accepted an unconstitutional plebiscite dictatorship, which would imply submission and the death of our Constitutional and common law freedoms.
September 18th, 2007 at 4:26 pm
Well said. I could not agree more. But there are a number of express(ed)constitutional “remedies” short of jury nullification that would solve many of our problems. Unfortunatly the majority of our fellow citizens and our elected “leaders” don’t seem to have the fortitude or moral clarity necessary to institute those remedies.
The problem with jury nullification is that it tends to concentrate power in a small group of people. This is tolerable (even laudable) when nulification involves the frustration of a broadly unpopular governmental enforcement/prosecution, but less so when it involves nulification inspired by individual traits such as race or class. In those instances “Anglo Saxons” are likely to be the victims of jury nulification.
September 18th, 2007 at 4:46 pm
Yes, I had forgot about the “OJ” side of jury nullification.
September 24th, 2007 at 9:18 pm
[...] I’m pleased the prosecutor seems to be standing firm, mostly. I’ve complemented the culture of North Louisiana before, and hopefully they won’t bow to politically correct pressure. Jackson and Sharpton have played their card with the marches and what-not but the mainstream of the country isn’t buying the sob story this time around. Steve Sailer says all that needs to be said about the subject. [...]