Mr.
John S. Williamson, B.S., MGWC
Mrs.
Nancy L. Williamson, B.S. RN, NCSN
Mr.
John G. Williamson, B.S. M.E. CWD/PI
Mr.
David A. Williamson, A.S. DE, CWD/PI
Mr.
Garrett J. Williamson, A.S. EET CWD/PI
Ms.
Deborah Kruhm, B.S., M.S. H.E. ED.
c/o 1277 Historic Rte. 66E.
Tijeras
[87059]
NEW
MEXICO, USA
In Propriae
Personae
All
Rights Reserved
Without
Prejudice
UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA [sic], ) Appeal
Docket No. 07-2017
)
Plaintiff/Appellee, ) Civil No. 04-CV-0885 BB/WDS
v. )
)
John
S. Williamson et al., )
)
Defendants/Appellants. )
------------------------------------------------)
) NOTICE OF MOTION AND
) APPELLANTS' MOTION FOR
United
States ) PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION:
ex relatione )
Paul
Andrew Mitchell, ) Article I, Section 8, Clause 1;
) Article I, Section 9, Clause 7;
Intervenor. ) Internal Revenue Code § 7809;
) 31 U.S.C. 301(f)(2); and
------------------------------------------------) FRAP Rules 8(a)(1)(C) and 8(a)(2)
) in pari materia with
Internal Revenue Service, ) FRCP
Rules 64 and 65.
)
Respondent. )
____________________________________)
COME NOW the Appellants, Sovereign New Mexico Citizens John S. Williamson,
Nancy L. Williamson, John G. Williamson, David A. Williamson, Garrett J.
Williamson and Deborah Kruhm in the above entitled
case, timely to file this MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION in view of attempts
by Tenth Circuit staff to obstruct the NOTICE OF INTERVENTION by the United
States ex rel.
Paul Andrew Mitchell, Private Attorney General; and, to move this
honorable Court, pursuant to: Rules
8(a)(1)(C) and 8(a)(2) of Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (“FRAP”),
section (“§”) 7809 of the Internal Revenue Code, and Article I, Section 8,
Clause 1, and Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7 in the Constitution for the United
States of America, as lawfully amended (hereinafter “U.S. Constitution”), for a
preliminary ORDER freezing all of Respondent’s assets and enjoining Respondent
from depositing any tax collections into any account(s) other than the Treasury
of the United States.
In view of the documentary evidence which has now accumulated in the
instant appeal, Appellants also petition this honorable Court to expand the
remedy requested by also enjoining all "United States" officers,
employees, agents, assigns and instrumentalities without exception,
specifically including but not limited to Respondent Internal Revenue Service
and all of its officers and employees, from any further violations of section
3707 of the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 (“RRA98”), 112 Stat. 778
(July 22, 1998), to wit:
Section 3707. Illegal Tax Protester Designation
(a)
Prohibition. -- The officers and employees of the
Internal Revenue Service --
(1)
shall not
designate taxpayers as illegal tax protesters (or any similar
designation); ....
[emphases
added]
Mounting
evidence recently confirmed by Intervenor appears to
indicate that Respondent Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) has been
systematically violating section 7809 of the Internal Revenue Code
(“IRC”). Said section clearly mandates
that:
... collections of whatever
nature received or collected by authority of any internal revenue law, shall be paid daily into the Treasury of
the United States under instructions of the Secretary as internal revenue
collections, by the officer or employee receiving or collecting the same,
without any abatement or deduction on account of salary, compensation, fees,
costs, charges, expenses, or claims of any description.
[IRC § 7809(a),
bold emphasis added]
Statements
verified under 28 U.S.C. 1746(1), and filed in the federal district court in
San Jose, California, Clerk’s Docket #CR-00-20227-JF, suggest that
monies collected by IRS personnel have been deposited into a “quad zero”
account and left there for at least one (1) full year, without proper accounting. See, for example, Treasury Order 91 (Rev. 1),
May 12, 1986.
Monies
collected by IRS have also been used in recent years to make cash awards, under color of the Internal
Revenue Manual (“IRM”) and of a now defunct federal program formerly called the
Performance Management and Recognition System (“PMRS”).
PMRS
abuses reportedly became so severe, Congress repealed this incentive system in
1993, but serious abuses continued e.g.
expired PMRS authorities remained in the IRM after
1993, evidently to prolong colorable authority in those repealed provisions.
A
FOIA request for records of all PMRS awards was met with a written
admission -- by an IRS Tax Law Specialist -- that few records existed because
the awards were paid in cash! See
5 U.S.C. 552; and
the Anti-Kickback Act of 1986, 41 U.S.C. 51 et
seq. This admission also raised the
specter of widespread federal income tax evasion (a felony) by every recipient
of these cash awards, e.g. $25,000.00
per indictment of each “TC-148” aka “illegal tax protester” [sic].
Other
mounting evidence, recently confirmed in the U.S. Supreme Court case of Chrysler
Corp. v. Brown, 441 U.S. 281 (1979), at footnote 23, makes it clear that IRS
was never created by any organic Act
of Congress. See 31 U.S.C. in toto, for further confirmation. After tracing IRS genealogy all the way back
to 1862 A.D., the high Court still
failed to find any organic Act for
the IRS. Compare the statute at 1 Stat.
65.
In 1994,
the General Accounting Office (“GAO”) reported it was unable to audit $4.3
billion of the $6.7 billion -- a staggering sixty-four percent -- of its
operating funds that IRS reported spending in FY 1992, because IRS could not account for all the money. See “Financial Management: IRS Does Not
Adequately Manage Its Operating Funds,” Report to the Commissioner, Internal
Revenue Service, February 1994 (Chapter Report, 02/09/94, Report Number
GAO/AIMD-94-33).
The
situation has not improved since then.
In March of 1999, GAO found that pervasive weaknesses in the design and
operation of Respondent’s financial management systems, accounting procedures,
documentation, record-keeping, and internal controls prevented GAO from
rendering an unqualified opinion on five of IRS’ six principal financial
statements. Put simply, they flunked. See “Internal Revenue Service: Results of
Fiscal Year 1998 Financial Statement Audit,” March 1, 1999 (Report Number
T-AIMD-99-103).
The worst
shock of the last century was a startling admission in the final report of the
President’s Private Sector Survey on Cost Control, commonly known as the Grace
Commission (named after Chairman J. Peter Grace). The
Grace Commission concluded that none
of the federal income taxes collected by the IRS were being used to pay for any government services!
Instead,
those collections are, evidently, being used to service the massive federal
debt owed to banks, many of which are foreign banks, and to make income
transfer payments to beneficiaries of entitlement programs, e.g. federal pension plans.
See “War on Waste: President’s
Private Sector Survey on Cost Control,” New York, MacMillan
Publishing Company, January 12, 1984 (ISBN 0-02-074660-1).
It is extremely doubtful, if not impossible, that so
much money would show up missing, if IRS were not also violating IRC § 7809, daily and as a matter of
institutional policy. Can it be
trillions? Appellants answer: YES!
Further
proof of IRC § 7809 violations can
be found on the cancelled checks which untold numbers of taxpayers have
submitted to pay federal income taxes since 1913 A.D., along with their completed Forms 1040 -- the U.S. Individual Income Tax Return (not
Individual Income [sic]).
The term “U.S. Individual” includes only federal citizens and
resident aliens. See IRC 7701(a)(1) and (a)(30); 26
CFR 1.1-1(b); and, 5 U.S.C. 552a(a)(2)
(“individual”).
All too
frequently in the recent past, IRS endorsed these checks payable to “Any F.R.B
... in Payment of U.S. Oblig.”, and not to the
Treasury of the United States. See 27
CFR 70.11: definitions of “Commercial
bank” and “Treasury Account”; also Lewis
v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (9th Cir. 1982), holding that
Federal Reserve Banks are privately owned
entities and not federal agencies;
27 CFR 26.11 (formerly 27 CFR 250.11): “Revenue Agent”, “Secretary” etc.
defined; §§ 3(c), 6, 10 of the Bretton Woods
Agreements Act, 59 Stat. 512, P.L. 171, July 31, 1945, in “A Decade of American
Foreign Policy: Basic Documents,
1941-49,” prepared at the request of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
by the Staff of the Committee and the Department of State, Washington, D.C.,
U.S. GPO (1950); 22 U.S.C. 286a; 31 U.S.C. 5341: national strategy.
Thus,
Appellants argue that all IRS collections without exception
should be paid daily into the Treasury of the United States, as required by Law. See 31 U.S.C. 302, in chief.
If this
is not the case, no matter how large or small the sums of money may be, this
Court has the power, authority, and legal obligation to issue a preliminary ORDER, with all deliberate
speed, enjoining Respondent IRS from depositing collections of whatever nature into any account(s) other than the Treasury of the
United States. See IRC §§ 7809(a),
(b), and (d) in pari
materia with FRCP Rule 65.
For
the purpose of securing satisfaction of the judgment ultimately to be entered in
this action, Appellants hereby also seek an
immediate ORDER freezing all assets of Respondent IRS, in pari materia with FRCP Rule 64 and executed by other
appropriate ORDER(s).
FORMAL OFFER OF PROOF
Appellants
hereby formally offer to prove that Respondent IRS is an alias for Trust #62,
domiciled in Puerto Rico under color of the Federal Alcohol
Administration. See 31 U.S.C. 1321(a)(62); and, “BATF/IRS
-- Criminal Fraud,” by William Cooper (copy attached).
Appellants
also offer to prove that the links between the Internal Revenue Code, the Code
of Federal Regulations (“CFR”) for Title 26, and Title 27 of the United States
Code (“U.S.C.”), have their historical roots in Prohibition (the Volstead Act), which permitted the petroleum cartel to
establish a monopoly in automotive fuels, and permitted the United States to
field a federal police force inside the several States of the Union.
Once the
monopoly was in place, Prohibition was lifted, leaving alcohol high and dry as
the preferred fuel for automobiles, and leaving the federal police force in
place -- to extort money from the American People. See, e.g.
Pogue Carburetor patent (an efficient fuel vaporizer utilized in Allied tanks
fighting field marshal Erwin Rommel in the North
Africa campaign during World War II).
Appellants
formally object, in advance, to any and all attempts by duly appointed officers
of the U.S. Department of Justice or of the Office of the United States
Attorney to appear on behalf of IRS or on behalf of the UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA, to answer the instant MOTION.
See 5 U.S.C. 551(1)(C); 28 U.S.C. 547 in pari materia
with 28 CFR 0.70(b): “except the
following: Proceedings pertaining to misconduct of Internal Revenue Service
personnel”.
The
only mention of the IRS anywhere in
31 U.S.C. §§ 301-313 is an authorization for the President to appoint an
Assistant General Counsel in the U.S. Department of the Treasury to be the
Chief Counsel for the IRS. Cf. 31 U.S.C.
333(a)(1) re:
“Department of the Treasury”.
Pursuant
to 31 U.S.C. 301(f)(2), only said duly appointed IRS
Chief Counsel has lawful power(s) of attorney to appear on behalf of Respondent
IRS e.g. compare routine appearances
in the U.S. Tax Court.
Title
31, U.S.C., has been enacted into positive law; Title 26, U.S.C. has not,
however. In this context, see IRC 7851(a)(6)(A): “The provisions of
subtitle F shall take effect on the day after the date of enactment of this
title ....” Throughout
most federal laws, the consistent legislative practice by the Congress is to
use the term “this title” to refer to a Title of the United States Code. 28 U.S.C.
Similarly,
the United States Solicitor General also appears to lack any lawful power(s) of
attorney to appear on behalf of Respondent IRS or on behalf of Appellee UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA.
The
evidence already before this honorable Court proves that the UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA incorporated twice in the State of Delaware. One of those foreign corporations was
expressly chartered as a RELIGIOUS NONPROFIT organization, in blatant violation
of the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment.
More
recently, attempts by Relator Paul Andrew Mitchell to
serve both Delaware corporations resulted in a written notice from their
registered agent that both corporations have been revoked by the Delaware
Secretary of State’s office.
REMEDIES REQUESTED
All
premises having been duly considered, and in light of the demonstrable national
urgency which evidently exists for the above stated reasons, your Appellants
respectfully petition this honorable United States Court of Appeals for the
following preliminary relief:
(1)
an ORDER freezing all assets of Respondent IRS, with
all deliberate speed, for the purpose of securing satisfaction of the final
judgment ultimately to be entered in this matter, pursuant to FRAP Rules
8(a)(1)(C) and 8(a)(2), and in pari materia with FRCP Rule
64;
(2)
a preliminary ORDER enjoining Respondent IRS, with all
deliberate speed, from depositing monies, received or collected by authority of
any internal revenue law, into any
account other than the Treasury of
the United States, in pari
materia with FRCP Rule 65;
(3)
a preliminary ORDER enjoining Intervenor
United States and Respondent IRS from any
further violations of section 3707 of the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of
1998 by which both taxpayers and non-taxpayers have been and continue to be
designated as illegal tax protesters (or any similar designation such as “tax
protester”); and,
all other relief which this Court deems just and proper, under
the apparently urgent circumstances which have occasioned this MOTION.
See “Fiscal
Year 2006 Statutory Audit of Compliance With Legal Guidelines Prohibiting the
Use of Illegal Tax Protester and Similar Designations,” Treasury Inspector
General for Tax Administration, July 13, 2006, Ref. No. 2006-40-098 (copy
attached and incorporated here).
VERIFICATION
We, hereby verify, under penalty of perjury, under the laws
of the United States of America,
without the "United States" (federal
government), that the above statement of facts and laws is true and correct,
according to the best of My current information, knowledge, and belief, so help
us God, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746(1).
See Supremacy Clause (Constitution,
Laws and Treaties are all the supreme Law of the Land).
Dated: May 7, 2007 A.D.
[signatures on original]
All Rights Expressly Reserved without
Prejudice
I, John S.
Williamson, Sui Juris, hereby
certify, under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the United States of America, without the “United States” (federal government), that I am at least 18 years of
age, a Citizen of ONE OF the United
States of America, and that I personally served the following document(s):
Article I, Section 8, Clause
1; Article I,
Section 9, Clause 7;
Internal Revenue Code § 7809; 31 U.S.C. 301(f)(2); and
FRAP Rules 8(a)(1)(C) and 8(a)(2)
in pari materia with FRCP Rules 64 and 65
by
placing one true and correct copy of said document(s) in first class United
States Mail, with postage prepaid and properly addressed to the following:
Clerk of Court (5x)
U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Tenth Circuit
1823 Stout Street
Denver 80257
COLORADO, USA
Ms. Gretchen M. Wolfinger
U.S. Department of Justice
Appellate Section
P.O. Box 502
Washington 20044
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, USA
Office of Chief Counsel
Internal Revenue Service
c/o U.S. Department of
the Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania
Avenue, N.W.
Washington 20220
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
USA
Courtesy
copies:
Office of the U.S. Attorney
P.O.
Box 607
Albuquerque
87103
NEW
MEXICO, USA
U.S. Department of Justice
Tax
Division
717
North Harwood, Suite 400
Dallas
75201
TEXAS,
USA
Paul Andrew Mitchell
Private
Attorney General
c/o Forwarding Agent
501
West Broadway #A-332
San
Diego 92101
CALIFORNIA,
USA
Secretary of the Treasury
U.S. Department of the
Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Ave.,
N.W.
Washington 20220
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
USA
[See
USPS Publication #221 for addressing instructions.]
/s/
John S. Williamson
__________________________________________
John
S. Williamson, Citizen of New Mexico, Sui Juris
Dated: May 7, 2007 A.D.
All Rights Expressly Reserved without
Prejudice