Time: Fri Nov 22 19:29:26 1996
To: Jan Farmer <jfarmer@startext.net>
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: Dan Meador/IRS
Cc:
Bcc:
Please note that the reference
to Rule 301 FRCP should be Rule 301,
Federal Rules of Evidence.
/s/ Paul Mitchell
At 07:39 PM 11/22/96 -0800, you wrote:
>Message-ID: <3295F242.49A@yosemite.net>
>Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 10:34:42 -0800
>From: "Wayne Rulon, Bevan" <maggie@ims.mariposa.ca.us>
>Organization: Mariposa Aggregates
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: caji@pobox.com
>Subject: CAJI! Dan Meador/IRS
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>To:
> caji@pobox.com
>
>
>From: Wayne Rulon Bevan, 20 November 1996
> President, Mariposa Aggregates
> Major (USAFR Ret.)
> PO Box 942
> Mariposa, California 95338
> (209) 966-2211
>
> This article explains some possible strategies to be used
>with the Public Notice concerning the IRS that I put on CAJI a
>couple of weeks ago. I have decided to bite the bullet here in
>little Mariposa, California. I published the notice in our local
>paper last week (Mariposa Gazette, Thursday, November 14,
>1996, Issue No 38, page 8 and 11).
> I was prepared, mentally, to sign the affidavit under
>penalty of purjury, as I had already done the research on my
>own. I don't recommend of you following my example,
>especially if you can't defend yourself.
> The Maripoza Gazette has the distinction of being
>California's oldest weekly newspaper in continuous publication,
>i.e. since 1854. Mariposa County is at the entrance to Yosemite
>National Park (Biosphere?). It has about 16,000 people in the
>county proper, with about 1500 in the township. Supposedly the
>county is not incorporated, nor are there any incorporated areas
>within the county borders. Yosemite Park takes up a lot of
>space and gets about 2 million visitors passing through Mariposa
>annually.
> I mention this only to point out that in our community,
>everyone knows every one elses business. We see our elected
>officials on a daily basis and we let them know what is on our
>collective minds.
> There are several interesting laws regarding presumtive
>rules of evidence. I don't have any great hope that the truth
>will have a lot of influence on our local politics, but I think if
>enough people ask the hard questions, sometime, somewhere we
>will be able to bring a renegade IRS revenue officer, acting
>outside of the law, to justice.
> I agree with Dan Meador's analysis that when that day
>comes the floodgates will open up across the county.
> I have tried twice, unsuccessfully, to meet with our local
>District Attorney, Carolyn Johnson. I know she is buried in
>work prosecuting the local miscreants. (My wife was on the
>school board for a number of years, and from the statistics I saw
>concerning school lunches, etc. I would estimate about half of
>our county is on welfare, and another twenty five to thirty
>percent work for government or pseudo-government agencies).
> I can only guess what Ms. Johnson's response will be at
>our eventual meeting. I intend on presenting my case thusly:
>Your option is to either rebut the facts concerning the IRS, or
>when I present a criminal complaint against a Revenue Officer,
>you are obligated to take action, or you can explain your refusal
>to the Grand Jury.
> Again, I have no illusions that any thing will change
>immediately, but I thought I would try to give you a blow by
>blow account as to what is happening in this little mini-saga.
> We have had more than our share of allegations of
>corruption (We had a sheriff's deputy several years ago end up at
>the bottom of a local reservoir chained to an outboard motor,
>only to be found during our last period of drought. To my
>knowledge there have been no convictions), but I think that our
>current elected officials are honest, hard working individuals.
> As a side note our county budget approaches 40,000,000
>per year which amounts to about $2500.00 per man, woman, and
>child, in county expenditures, about 30,000,000 comes from the
>Federal Government, it appears that Archibald Roberts may be
>on to something. Regionalism is going to be tough to beat.
>Between 1980 and 1990 our county increased by 50%, that is
>from 10,000 people to 15,000 people, in the same time frame the
>county budget increased 800%.
> I will keep you informed as best I can as this is a test
>situation.
> If you want a copy of the above mentioned Gazette I
>have talked my 14 year old son into taking care of mailing
>copies after school. If anyone is interested, a letter with $5.00
>cash will get you a copy of the referenced issue. I paid $800.00
>for the Public Notice to be published, but I don't plan on ever
>seeing anything back on that "investment", at least in cash.
>Alternatively you could write to the Mariposa Gazette directly at
>PO Box 38, Mariposa, California 95338. I will find out what
>they would charge.
>
> Wayne Rulon, Bevan
>
>
>
>WITH ACCOUNTABILITY AND
>INCARCERATION FOR ALL
>BY Dan Meador
>
>This article is taken from Anti-Shyster Vol. 6, Number 4 (Nov
>96) pages 44-45
>
>Introduction by Al Adask (editor)
>
> What can be done about government abuse and terrorism?
>Well, Dan Meador's prepared a "Public Notice" strategy for not
>only challenging--but actually incarcerating--abusive agents of
>the IRS.
> Dan believes that if his "Public Notice" is published in a
>county legal newspaper (or submitted directly to the IRS as a
>"Memorandum" in an administrative procedure), IRS personnel
>may be criminally liable in that county if they continue to
>employ administrative (non-judicial) procedures against the
>American People. But Dan believes his Public Notice of
>Memorandum is virtually impossible to rebut, and should
>therefore scare abusive government agents into abandoning their
>persecution/persecution of specific individuals.
> Does Mr. Meador's Notice/Memorandum work?
> Wrong question. No legal strategy works every time, nor
>does any legal strategy (no matter how lame) fail every time.
> Somewhere, sometime, somebody explained to a judge
>that the reason he ran a red light was because he mistook it for a
>blazing meteorite about to crash into the roof of his car.
>Stranger yet, some judge just shook his head, dismissed the
>traffic case, and told the would-be astronomer to "get out of my
>court'. That kind of unpredictable, irrational ruling sometimes
>happens. But based on this single ruling, some folks might
>argue that "red traffic light/meteorite" strategy will work every
>time in court. And that's just not so.
> As with all legal strategies, the question is not "does it
>work" but "how often does it work". Nine times out of ten? Or
>one time in a thousand? And more importantly, am I competent
>to use this strategy?
> In the case of this Public Notice, it has reportedly
>worked, but so far, there's not enough of a track record to
>determine whether it works almost always or almost never.
>Whatever the final probability of success in using this Notice,
>reading and understanding it offers a fascinating insight into the
>true nature of IRS and another attempt to compel government to
>act as public servants rather than licensed terrorists.
> In the last few years, Congress started considering
>alternatives to the income tax--a flat tax, national sales tax. etc.
>Many Congressmen have boldly condemned the IRS, some going
>so far as to label it a "terrorist organization". Perhaps the
>primary motivation to eliminate the IRS is that, for the last few
>years, it's been obvious that dedicated researchers would soon
>break (understand) the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) and when it
>was broken (fully understood), Congress would be indicted for
>one of the grandest frauds ever perpetrated against a developed
>nation.
> Unfortunately for government, before they could end the
>IRS, there were several nearly insurmountable problems. The
>current IRC is an instrument which has been in a nearly
>continuous state of evolution and expansion ever since the Civil
>War. As a result, the IRC now includes everything from
>income, Social Security, unemployment, and inheritance taxes, to
>excise taxes and import duties primarily under administration of
>the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) and
>Customs and other monolithic agencies. The IRC is tied in with
>the Federal Reserve, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and
>the World Bank--it even involves the United Nations and shadow
>powers behind the New World Order.
> Therefore, Congress was faced with a problem on the
>order of a wood block puzzle where the IRS--because its direct
>involvement with the entire population--is like the key that holds
>the whole thing together. The task of overhauling an
>interlocking system of this magnitude, without abandoning the
>agenda of entrenched powers, simply could not be accomplished
>fast enough to avoid risking the inevitable--that the Internal
>Revenue Code (IRC) would be broken and the fraud publicly
>exposed.
> Currently, there are mixed signals. On the one hand, IRS
>began downsizing and consolidating in the last couple of years,
>but earlier this year, field operations turned aggressive as notice
>letters, etc., included greater emphasis on the potential for
>criminal prosecution. Apparently, those behind the scenes see
>the writing on the wall--Americans are fed up with government
>tyranny and they're letting both the bureaucrats and politicians
>know about it. However, government is in the awkward position
>of having to defend ground while making the retreat, so the
>recent surge in IRS aggression may be like Germany's 1944
>winter offensive--a final act of desperation.
>
>Who y' gonna call? Codebusters!
>Just as government feared, significant research breakthroughs
>have been made in the last decade.:
> * In 1985, Red Beckman of Montana and Bill Benson of
>Illinois demonstrated that the Sixteenth Amendment (the so-
>called "income tax amendment") was never properly ratified by
>the several States.
> * In 1990, an attorney for the Federal Register revealed
>that the Parallel Table of Rules and Authorities in the Index
>volume of the Code of Federal Regulations is the authority for
>verifying that regulations pertaining to particular statutes have
>been published in the Federal Register. In the case of tax laws,
>once the regulations are published in the Federal Register, those
>laws can be implemented and enforced in the several States and
>against the American people. However if the regulations are
>not published in the Federal Register, they have no lawful
>application on the people at large. This Parallel Table of Rules
>and Authorities became a key index and an important research
>tool. People such as Mitch Modeleski of California wrote
>analytical works which explored legal precepts, and Frank Calix
>of Florida tracked the history of the federal tax system.
> * June 1994. Dan Meador of Oklahoma unraveled a key
>statute in the Code which preserves due process rights,
>effectively condemning IRS administrative seizures and the like.
> * September 1995. Two major breakthroughs:
> (1) Veritas Magazine disclosed that IRS and
>BATF are agencies of the Department of the Treasury, Puerto
>Rico;
> (2) Dan and Gail Meador completed a cross index
>of U.S. revenue laws with implementing regulations (Code of
>Federal Regulations) to demonstrate that IRS and BATF have no
>legal standing in the several States and that federal taxing
>statutes in the IRC do not have general application in the several
>States or to the population at large.
> * October, 1995, Meador filed a criminal complaint
>against an IRS Officer via the Oklahoma Attorney General, and
>filed a similar complaint in November via the grand jury for the
>U.S. District Court, Tulsa. IRS principals and the Department of
>Justice failed to rebut allegations that IRS is an agency of the
>Department of the Treasury, Puerto Rico, and that principals of
>interest include the Agency for International Development ( the
>UN's military arm), the IMF, and the World Bank. The
>Oklahoma Attorney General failed to prosecute the complaint
>filed with his office, and material intended for the federal grand
>jury was ignored--but the underlying IRS initiatives were
>stalemated, so the two incidents remain in limbo.
> * Alabama attorney Larry Becraft has since added
>research confirming that Congress never created a Bureau of
>Internal Revenue, predecessor to IRS.
>
>Synthesis
>In early 1996, researchers across the nation began to quietly pool
>information to develop a memorandum of law, as an instrument
>to use in administrative and legal forums. The project moved
>forward significantly in March with the participation of
>researchers such as Ben Houck of Ohio, Dave Fuller of
>Pennsylvania, and Richard Standring of Right Way Law, Ohio.
>The resultant "memorandum" covers nine salient points which
>thoroughly condemn not only IRS, but also BATF activity in
>the several States. This memorandum is being distributed for
>publication as "Public Notice" in legal newspapers in the several
>States.
> The primary purpose for publishing in state legal
>newspapers is to establish presumed fact, thus providing a solid
>platform to secure rights and remedies in State and United States
>statutory courts. The secondary objective is political: To publish
>findings pertaining to IRS and the IRC in established legal
>forums so the American people have undisputed evidence to
>support their demands for Government accountability.
> The real motive for constructing the memorandum was
>based on the fact that Federal judges routinely ignore lawful
>pleadings.. Therefore, something was needed that completely
>defaults the IRS and application of the IRC. Information in this
>memorandum will hopefully choke the courts with evidence they
>simply can't digest.
>
>Criminal complaints
>However, history demonstrates that civil remedies have never
>ended tyranny. Consequently, I believe the tyranny will end
>abruptly but only when we start incarcerating IRS people and
>black-robed bandits. The goal, then, should be to file criminal
>complaints against IRS personnel.
> The memorandum/Public Notice demonstrates that the
>Internal Revenue Code (IRC) other titles of the United States
>Code, and the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) preserve due
>process rights. Therefore, if a revenue officer seizes some
>property without an authorizing court order, file a complaint. If
>he doesn't have a properly executed Form 23C authorizing
>assessment, file a criminal complaint. Stack them up. As we
>strengthen evidence that IRS is not an agency of the
>U.S.Department of the Treasury, start filing complaints with the
>county sheriff--prosecute under state law.
> This may be a slow process, but it's also a numbers
>game. There's a county sheriff somewhere who will make the
>arrest. The first time we successfully prosecute an IRS agent,
>the floodgates will open.
>
>Caveat
>There are four or five additional sections to be added to the
>memorandum, but the nine presently included are tough for IRS
>to handle. We've already received a favorable report where use
>of this memorandum supposedly helped cause a venue officer to
>return the keys to a couple's business and release cars that were
>seized. The memorandum is considerably stronger now than the
>one used in that particular instance.
> However, materials in the complete memorandum have
>been modified, expanded, etc., as recently as yesterday.
>Therefore, don't view this memorandum as a silver bullet. As
>we gain experience, it will be updated, so check back
>periodically to see what our experience has been and how we
>have changed things in response to the way IRS responds.
> You are welcome to use the complete memorandum,
>however, you do so at your own risk--we aren't attorneys so our
>involvement with law is somewhat like the guy who flies by the
>seat of his pants. If you decide to fly, do so at your own peril.
>We make every effort to be accurate with cites, interpretations,
>quotes, etc;., but are mere mortals with feet of clay, subject to
>error in every way.
>
> Regard,
> Dan Meador
>
>Editor's caveat: This article is only intended to introduce Mr.
>Meador's work. Due to space constraints I am only publishing
>about half of the complete Memorandum on the following pages.
>Therefore, do not implement the following Public Notice
>e/Memorandum as is. Information on how to secure a complete
>copy of this Public Notice/Memorandum is offered at end of this
>article.
>
>Wayne's caveat: While I believe the Public Notice attached to
>the past postings to be one of the lastest versions, I would recommend
>that you contact Jim Rumpf at Liberty Education Network
>(214)385-1085, fax (214)386-8774 for the latest.
>
>
>
>************************************************
>To subscribe or unsubscribe send mail to:
>caji-owner@pobox.com with:
>(un)subscribe caji youremail@yourprovider.com
>in the body of the message.
>
>
>
>
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail