WARNING:
You are indicating your consent to abide perpetually and unconditionally
with the terms of our Member Agreement,
Form #01.001 by:
|
Litigation has in the past been instituted against one or more of our Members relating to information that was available on this website. See, for instance:
It is in the best interests of all of our Members to be informed about any affects this litigation might have upon SEDM, and the extent of SEDM's involvement or responsibility for any the matters controverted in that litigation. This article shall summarize the official position of SEDM towards the above litigation so that Members know where we stand.
The above link tells as much detail about the litigation as you could possibly want to know. You can also read most of the pleadings and subsequent amended orders at:
SEDM's official view of the proceeding described above is as follows:
- The Complaint initially indicated that it related to a "Citizenship Administrative Repudiation Program" alleged to have been offered by this ministry. This offering hasn't been available since the approximate time the Complaint was filed on about May 2005.
- There was in fact a Citizenship Administrative Repudiation process listed
on SEDM:
2.1 That process was not offered directly by SEDM but by a third party. SEDM never received any donations directly or indirectly connected with that offering. It was offered as a favor to help a third party.
2.2 The SEDM Member Bookstore Catalog never listed a suggested donation for the defunct Citizenship Administrative Repudiation process. The process was also very deliberately never listed in the
SEDM Member Bookstore Catalog.
The
SEDM Articles of Mission, Form
#01.004 section 3 indicates the following about this situation:"Any items not listed in the subsequent subsections shall be provided by an independent third party who provides no support of any kind to the ministry. The purpose for listing items on the ministry website that are not identified in this chapter is to refer individuals to other providers, but no donations, commissions, or other financial considerations may be generated by such referrals, as this would compromise the integrity of our message."
[
SEDM
Articles of Mission, Form #01.004, Chapter 3, p. 83, version 1.34]2.3 At least one officer of SEDM repeatedly advised the person offering that service that the suggested donation connected with the service was improper, that the service would not accomplish the goals that it had, and that it ought to be discontinued. Those remarks were disregarded by the person offering that service, which is why SEDM refused to be connected directly or financially to it and why the SEDM Articles of Mission, Form #01.004, Section 3 had the disclaimer indicated above.
2.4 We are not aware of anyone who ever obtained the defunct Citizenship Administrative Repudiation by virtue of seeing the referral page on this website. Our readers, apparently, are far too sophisticated to fall for something like that, and so no harm was ever done as far as we are aware. Bravo to our Members!!
2.5 No one at SEDM had ever been contacted by anyone associated with the government about discontinuing the defunct Citizenship Administrative Repudiation process prior to the filing of the injunction complaint in May 2005. This fact alone is reason enough to believe that the government had no standing to ask for an injunction, because the Supreme Court has said repeatedly that injunctions may only be granted when the party seeking them has exhausted his administrative remedies. See Myers v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp., 303 U.S. 41 (1938)]. In this case, the administrative remedy would be for the government to contact us and ask us to remove the offending materials, which was never done. If they had contacted us officially but not through litigation, we would have gladly removed the offending materials without the need to litigate.
- We currently offer a FREE document which accomplishes similar results of the defunct Citizenship Administrative Repudiation process but does not have any commercial or tax nexus. That document is identified below, and using it is now a mandatory requirement of our Member Agreement, Form #01.001, in fact:
- Some of the officers of SEDM have always believed that the Legal Notice above always should have been free, and we are now thrilled that we can offer it to you for free and make it a mandatory condition of membership in our ministry.
- We have done everything within our power at every stage of the above
litigation, WITHOUT being a party to it, to correct anything the government
alleged was illegal. You may have noticed several changes to this
website over the span of the litigation, which lasted from May 2005 to December
2006. The government's comments and suggestions to the party to that
litigation have been relayed to us via email and we have taken great pains
to ensure that this website is completely consistent with the law, and not
harmful or deceptive to anyone. This is the only way that we can honor
the Lord, which is the goal that this website was created to satisfy.
Among the improvements we made to this website over the life of the litigation
include the following:
5.1 Modified all links on this website so that those which point to third party providers now say "(OFFSITE LINK)" after them. This prevents people from attributing statements to us that we did not make and which we are not responsible for.
5.2 Added a section to our Liberty University, Section 7 entitled "Resources to Rebut Government, Legal, and Tax Profession Lies and False Propaganda" and added a pamphlet entitled
Flawed Tax Arguments
to Avoid, Form #08.004 in order to prevent our members from being mislead
or hurt by the misinterpretations of law of those in these professions.5.3 Went over all our free materials carefully to ensure that nothing in any of them might contain anything in conflict with the
Flawed Tax Arguments
to Avoid, Form #08.004 pamphlet.5.4 Modified our Bookstore Checkout screens to add emphasis to the requirement that only Members who consent to the Member Agreement, Form #01.001 can make a donation to our store.
5.5 Expanded and improved the Disclaimer Page to emphasize that everything on this website is religious beliefs and speech that are not factual or actionable and not admissible as evidence in any judicial proceeding pursuant to Fed.Rul.Ev. 610. Also added to the page an Intended Audience section that very precisely defines who are authorized to use this website, and mentioned within the Intended Audience section the requirement to abide by the
Flawed Tax Arguments
to Avoid, Form #08.004 pamphlet.5.6 Expanded and improved the Member Agreement, Form #01.001 to add Section 8 and considerably expand section 9. Added a definition at the beginning of the Member Agreement, Form #01.001 the exact methods by which people manifest their consent to the agreement.
5.7 Expanded and improved our
SEDM Articles of Mission, Form
#01.004. Added two new appendices to the
SEDM Articles of Mission, Form
#01.004: Appendices D and E. This helps to more clearly document
our nature as a ministry and to prevent any part of the Articles from being
quoted or misused out of context in a legal proceeding.5.8 Considerably improved our About Us page. Added an Intended Audience section to that page and considerably expanded our Mission Statement, Section 2 to more clearly describe our goals as a ministry.
5.9 Improved our Federal Response Letter Index, Form #07.301 page.
5.10 Improved our State Response Letter Index, Form #07.201 page.
5.11 Created a Forms Page. This page includes over 30 Memorandums of Law that you can now attach to your court pleadings to document your position on several important issues.
5.12 Created a Litigation Tools Page and populated it with many new new and powerful tools provided by the the target of the suit and many others.
5.13 Modified many of our bookstore item descriptions to emphasize that the tools are provided for law enforcement and protection, and are not intended as a "tax shelter" (OFFSITE LINK) or a way to reduce the liability of a "taxpayer". We emphasize that our Member Agreement, Form #01.001 has ALWAYS forbidden "taxpayers" to read or especially use any of our materials because we don't ever want to be accused of interfering with the lawful administration of Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code against their proper subject, who are federal officials, workers, and instrumentalities and not private parties. Notice also that we didn't say the "internal revenue laws" or the "Internal Revenue Code" either, but narrowed it specifically and only to Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code, because there are other lawful taxes in other subtitles that are not limited to federal instrumentalities, officers, and workers. Anyone who signs a W-4 or 1040 form with a nonzero liability, or SS-5 form, by the way, consents to become a federal instrumentality and "public officer" engaged in an excise taxable activity called a "trade or business" as we define and intend it here.
5.14 Modified our opening screen to clearly define our mission.
5.15 The defunct Tax Freedom Solutions Manual was discontinued and replaced by a new manual the Tax Fraud Prevention Manual, Form #06.008. Procedures in the original manual have been moved to the Sovereignty Forms and Instructions Manual, Form #10.005.
5.16 The defunct Tax Audit Defense Manual was discontinued and replaced by a new manual called Nontaxpayers' Audit Defense Manual, Form #06.011. The chapter on "God's Laws that Christians Must Observe" has been removed and its goals are now filled by an entirely new document entitled
Delegation
of Authority Order from God to Christians, Form #13.007.5.17 The Preface section of every one of the books that we offer which addresses tax subjects now has an expanded Disclaimer which states that everything in the book constitutes religious beliefs and speech that is not factual and not actionable and not admissible as evidence in any judicial proceeding pursuant to Fed.Rul.Ev. 610.
5.18 Modified all of our electronic books so that the table of contents in the Adobe Reader Bookmarks pane on the left contains the section numbers for each section. This makes the books easier to navigate and use as legal evidence in a court setting in front of juries.
5.19 Mention of the phrase "tax freedom" has been completely removed from this website and all materials available in the bookstore. The goal of this website has always been law enforcement, sovereignty, and completely disassociating with the government.
5.20 Modified some Ministry Bookstore descriptions to emphasize that the items are not intended or authorized to be used as a "tax shelter", but instead are a law enforcement and self-defense tool.
5.21 Added "Exhibit Number:________" to the bottom of all of our Memorandums of Law on the Forms Page and added a section to the end called "Questions that Readers, Grand Jurors, and Petit Jurors Should Be Asking the Government" so that juries will know what to do with these memorandums if they see them attached to IRS correspondence that gets admitted into evidence in a judicial proceeding.
5.22 Added to our Bookstore a new item entitled What Happened To Justice, Form #06.012. This is a book written in part by the Alleged Defendant of the injunction suit as a way to combat the extensive corruption of the federal courts that he witnessed first hand during the proceeding.
5.23 Added to all of our Order Notification Emails sent out by our Ministry Bookstore a message thanking the person for becoming a Member of the ministry.
5.24 Removed most references to "IRS" on this website and replaced them with "Tax" or "Federal".
5.25 Added an extensive new "Intended Audience" section to the new Tax Fraud Prevention Manual, Form #06.008 and Nontaxpayer's Audit Defense Manual, Form #06.011 to make it consistent with the Member Agreement, Form #01.001 and Disclaimer so as to prevent "taxpayers" from obtaining or using these materials and thereby needlessly burdening the government.
5.26 Added an "IMPORTANT NOTE" box to the bottom of the website opening page in blue, emphasizing that only those who consent unconditionally to the Member Agreement, Form #01.001 may read or use the strictly educational materials available on our website.
- The DOJ Press releases surrounding this issue accuse the subject of
the litigation, and indirectly SEDM, of involving themselves in activities
that in fact have never and will never happen and are specifically
prohibited from us engaging in by:
6.1 The SEDM Member Agreement, Form #01.001, Section 5.
6.2 The SEDM About Us page, section 8.
The government engaged in fraud, deception, and "
false commercial speech" by alleging that either the subject of the
suit, SEDM, or any of its officers or Members ever engaged in any of the
alleged activities they claimed, such as preparing returns, advertising,
promoting, or targeting the "United
States" as a forum. The persons who deserve the injunction against
them are the de facto thieves and liars who have made our government effectively
into a "sham trust" and who brought the lawsuit, and not anyone associated
with this ministry. Once again, we desire to bring nothing but honor
and glory to the God we serve at this ministry, and we have very strict
rules and
SEDM Articles of Mission, Form
#01.004 that would prohibit us from engaging in any activities that
would accomplish the opposite result. If you as a
Member have ever seen any evidence of
illegal or injurious behavior by SEDM or any of its agents, we encourage
you to
contact us about it so that it can be immediately remedied. So
far, we have had no such reports from any of our Members. - We remind our readers that their feedback, submitted to our
Contact Us page, has always been most welcome and invited if it relates
to:
7.1 Removing any content that might suggest illegal activities.
7.2 Correcting anything that is not consistent with prevailing law.
7.3 Providing new materials, curricula, and research that might improve the usefulness of anything available on this website.
- We also continue to remind our readers that they may NOT "use" the materials available on this website to interact with members of the legal profession, the govenrment, or the courts unless they consent unconditionally and perpetually to our Member Agreement, Form #01.001 and satisfy all the requirements contained therein. The purpose for this statement is not to encourage anyone to become a Member, but to ensure that those who do become Members do so lawfully, responsibly, and in a way that does not unnecessarily burden or interfere with the lawful administration of any government function.
- The litigation in no way affects anything that SEDM is involved in.
The proceeding was premised on the existence of allegedly "false" information
contained on this website. Our Disclaimer
makes it clear that nothing on this website is "factual" or legally "actionable"
and that everything is religious speech and beliefs that are
not admissible as evidence in any legal proceeding pursuant to
Fed.Rul.Ev. 610. Therefore, the Court's order is moot and irrelevant
and the judge committed perjury by claiming that anything on this website
is "factual" or "actionable". For that, the party to the litigation
has appropriately submitted a
criminal complaint (see Exhibit 1 at the link) against the judge.
- There is nothing we need to do to comply with the order because:
10.1 The injunction proceeded against a member and not directly against SEDM or its officers.
10.2 The real defendant in the suit are the IRS agents and government employees who acted as witnesses, because the information they submitted as evidence derived from privileged and licensed materials that they could only have obtained by becoming Members and consenting unconditionally to the Member Agreement, Form #01.001. The Member Agreement, Form #01.001 requires that if they use any of the information available on this website to disrupt or jeopardize this ministry, then THEY and not the party to that suit, become the substitute Defendants. Therefore, the order pertains to them and not to the original alleged defendant.
10.3 The judge committed perjury and violated due process of law repeatedly, thereby rendering a void judgment.
10.4 Nothing on this website is "factual", and therefore there is no way that it could be "false" and therefore enjoinable. See our Disclaimer and section 9 of our Member Agreement, Form #01.001.
10.5 This is a religious ministry and not a business or a "
trade or business" subject
to government regulation.10.6 We have no "customers". The order related to "customers", and the only thing the court could be referring to or have jurisdiction over in the context of a proceeding involving "tax shelters" are "taxpayers" as defined in 26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(14) and 26 U.S.C. §1313.
Tax shelter. A device used by a taxpayer to reduce or defer payment of taxes. Common forms of tax shelters include: limited partnership interests, real estate investments which have deductions such as depreciation, interest, taxes, etc. The Tax Reform Act of 1986 limited the benefits of tax shelters significantly by classifying losses from such shelters as passive and ruling that passive losses can only offset passive income in arriving at taxable income (with a few exceptions). Any excess losses are suspended and may be deducted in the year the investment is sold or otherwise disposed of.
[Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1462-1463]
No one may "use" the information published by this ministry to interact administratively with third parties in the government or the courts as a "taxpayer", and therefore it is impossible for them to be "customers". Those who are NOT "taxpayers" CANNOT lawfully be the subject of any order relating to "taxpayers", because the government cannot invoke "private law" to protect those who are NOT subject to it because "nontaxpayers".
“Revenue Laws relate to taxpayers and not to non-taxpayers . The latter are without their scope. No procedures are prescribed for non-taxpayers and no attempt is made to annul any of their Rights or Remedies in due course of law. With them [non-taxpayers] Congress does not assume to deal and they are neither of the subject nor of the object of federal revenue laws.”
[Economy Plumbing & Heating v. U.S., 470 F2d. 585 (1972)]It is also a violation of the First Amendment to reclassify members of a religious fellowship or church and make them into "customers" so as to bring them within the jurisdiction of the court. This, in fact, amounts to the DISESTABLISHMENT OF A RELIGION, which has always been a violation of the Constitution.
10.7 The only thing the court could possibly issue a lawful order about must relate to unlawful, harmful, or injurious actions. Our Member Agreement, Form #01.001 has always prohibited the use of our strictly educational ministry materials for any unlawful purpose or for any commercial purpose, and education cannot be classified as "harmful or injurious". What people do with these educational materials is entirely their choice and complete and exclusive responsibility. It would be completely unjust to hold us accountable for unauthorized uses or abuses of our materials.
- Even if we were the proper party to this suit, we could not disclose
member information as the order requests because:
11.1 Our About Us page section 3 says that we have a contract with you to protect your privacy and the information and that we do NOT maintain any records about our members. Since that contract protects LAWFUL religious practices and no unlawful practices, then it is enforceable as against the government and the government has NO JURISDICTION to impair the obligation of any such contract.
11.2 Whatever information we do have about Members belong exclusively to YOU the Members, and NOT to us because we are your fiduciary, as a charitable entity. The Fourth Amendment says that you have a right to the security of YOUR papers and effects and we therefore don't have or control any papers or records, YOU DO.
- We remind the government that if it has a beef with how the materials are being used by our Members, that beef is with the Members and not with us. It is not a crime and cannot be classified as an injury to educate people about what the law says and expect them, or even help them, to follow it.
- We also remind the reader that our Member
Agreement, Form #01.001 says the ONLY basis for reasonable
belief about an obligation is what the law actually says, and NOT what anyone
in this ministry might say or write. This is further clarified
in the following free memorandum of Law:
- If the government is being injured because people are reading and obeying the law and using it as their sole source of authority, which is what our Member Agreement, Form #01.001 requires, then may we suggest that that the problem lies in the Law Revision Counsel of the House of Representatives, who has sole responsibility for codifying and publishing the U.S. Code. If people are misapplying that, the blame lies with the authors of the law, and not with us.
- SEDM will continue to regard the REAL target of the injunction as the
government's witnesses and not the person who was the subject of the suit.
Our Member Agreement, Form #01.001 clearly
says that anyone who downloads or uses any of the privileged information
available on this website, and especially obtains it through our Ministry
Bookstore, consents unconditionally to all of the terms of our Member Agreement,
Form #01.001. The Member Agreement,
Form #01.001 in turn says that if a Member submits anything as legal
evidence from our website or testifies against us in any legal proceeding,
that they become the Substitute Defendant. Since the government's
witnesses appeared as adverse witnesses, and since they admitted to
downloading and using licensed materials protected by the Member
Agreement and Disclaimer, then they become the Substitute
Defendant under the Member Agreement, Form
#01.001, thereby exonerating and excusing the subject of the unjust
lawsuit. Therefore, the government's witnesses are the REAL defendants
in that action and the Alleged Defendant was acting as their fiduciary,
as he indicated in his pleadings. It doesn't matter what the court
says about the defendant in that suit because:
15.1 Our Member Agreement, Form #01.001 acts as the equivalent of a binding arbitration agreement and a contract.
15.2 No state or federal government officer may lawfully interfere with such a private contract. See Article 1, Section 10 of the United States Constitution in the case of states of the Union and the Sinking Fund Cases, in the case of the Federal Government.
"Independent of these views, there are many considerations which lead to the conclusion that the power to impair contracts [either the Constitution or the Holy Bible or private contracts], by direct action to that end, does not exist with the general [federal] government. In the first place, one of the objects of the Constitution, expressed in its preamble, was the establishment of justice, and what that meant in its relations to contracts is not left, as was justly said by the late Chief Justice, in Hepburn v. Griswold, to inference or conjecture. As he observes, at the time the Constitution was undergoing discussion in the convention, the Congress of the Confederation was engaged in framing the ordinance for the government of the Northwestern Territory, in which certain articles of compact were established between the people of the original States and the people of the Territory, for the purpose, as expressed in the instrument, of extending the fundamental principles of civil and religious liberty, upon which the States, their laws and constitutions, were erected. By that ordinance it was declared, that, in the just preservation of rights and property, 'no law ought ever to be made, or have force in the said Territory, that shall, in any manner, interfere with or affect private contracts or engagements bona fide and without fraud previously formed.' The same provision, adds the Chief Justice, found more condensed expression in the prohibition upon the States [in Article 1, Section 10 of the Constitution] against impairing the obligation of contracts, which has ever been recognized as an efficient safeguard against injustice; and though the prohibition is not applied in terms to the government of the United States, he expressed the opinion, speaking for himself and the majority of the court at the time, that it was clear 'that those who framed and those who adopted the Constitution intended that the spirit of this prohibition should pervade the entire body of legislation, and that the justice which the Constitution was ordained to establish was not thought by them to be compatible with legislation [or judicial precedent] of an opposite tendency.' 8 Wall. 623. [99 U.S. 700, 765] Similar views are found expressed in the opinions of other judges of this court."
[Sinking Fund Cases, 99 U.S. 700 (1878)]15.3 The private contract made the witnesses and the U.S. Attorney as PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS into the Plaintiffs of the suit and excused the United States. You will note that the agreement is an agreement NOT with the government or the "United States", but with its agents AS PRIVATE PERSONS, and it makes itself SUPERIOR to the governmental employment duties of the parties and subordinates all the government's interests in the suit if they, who are Members, proceed against the ministry or any other Member using materials available on our website. The "United States" cannot assert sovereign immunity to the terms of the agreement or claim that it must consent, because the agreement ISN'T with the United States, but with its agents AS PRIVATE PARTIES.
- SEDM agrees entirely with the remarks the subject of that legal proceeding made on the page indicated at the beginning of this article, which is also available by clicking here. We are proud of the way our Member handled the litigation, and all of the feedback that he provided and continues to provide to us via email that has been most helpful in improving this website. We hope that all of our other members will follow his example and reuse as much of his litigation materials as they can if they find themselves in a similar situation. He has indicated to us that he is willing to share editable versions of those materials with anyone who finds themselves in a similar situation. The article also indicates that he intends eventually to provide to us a Anti-Injunction CD containing all the materials needed by a person facing such an injunction so that we can make it readily available at our cost. We intend to enthusiastically offer this tool to our Members if or when it becomes available.
- After the court issued its void order, SEDM issued the following announcement
to all those in the Member Mailing List on June 6, 2006:
Dear Beloved Fellowship Members,
This communication is intended only for Members of the Sovereignty Education and Defense Ministry (http://sedm.org). If you are not a Member, then you should not read this communication. Also, if you do not consent fully and completely to all the terms of the Member Agreement, Form #01.001 (http://www.sedm.org/Membership/MemberAgreement.htm), please notify us so that we don't send you any more privileged communications.
This short email is to clarify issues and recent developments relating to one of our Members, C. Hansen. We are passing along this information on to you because we have been inundated by questions about this situation. This is a privileged communication which you are NOT authorized to forward to any third party.
1. An injunction has been illegally issued by the Federal District Court, California Southern District, against "C. HANSEN". The injunction was issued on 6/1/2006.
2. We are told by insiders that the injunction contains many falsehoods, and is a product of conflict of interest, bias and prejudice on the part of the judge, etc. You will learn more about this over the next several weeks as additional materials are posted at the address below. We are not responsible for this page, but this is where we are told you can look:
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/CaseStudies/CHansen/CHansen.htm
3. The injunction prohibits activities that neither C. Hansen (we are told) nor us were doing or are doing. Therefore, it is moot. There never has been and never will be any "factual speech" on this website, which means it cannot be interpreted as true or false and therefore subject to an injunction against "false commercial speech". The injunction order contains LIES on this subject, based on a reading of the SEDM Disclaimer:
http://sedm.org/disclaimer.htm
4. The injunction doesn't affect us. We are not inside the United States nor do we even allow as Members anyone who the government might have jurisdiction over. "taxpayers" aren't even allowed to read or especially use our materials. We don't engage in "factual speech", that is therefore susceptible of being true or false precisely because we want to avoid injunctions of our protected First Amendment speech. We don't and never have made promises or assurances about the effectiveness of our purely religious materials precisely because we wanted to avoid any attempts at injunctions by the government. No one who is a Member is even allowed to believe anything we say, and instead may only rely upon the Constitution, the rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court and not lower Courts, and the Statutes at Large after January 2, 1939 as their sole basis for belief. If they acted upon these sources of belief and were injured, then the government must enjoin ITSELF for false commercial speech. If anything you have ever seen coming from our website or our agents or representatives disagrees with the above, please respond to this email with a link or reference to the information so that it can promptly be corrected. We desire to bring nothing but honor and glory to the Lord Jesus Christ for our efforts on this website.
5. We have not and will not disclose any information about any Members. We don't keep lists or databases of such things. This is clarified on our About Us page, Section 3:
http://sedm.org/Ministry/AboutUs.htm
6. The injunction order reveals that the government has investigated some of the persons who allegedly were clients of C. Hansen. This was done using information provided by Paypal. You will note that Paypal is not available as a payment option on this website. Our payment system provider does not maintain a presence in the United States, and for good reason. The government is clearly abusing its authority over commerce and violating stare decisis of the U.S. Supreme Court by attempting to compel disclosure of membership lists of those participating in protected, First Amendment religious activities. See the following, sections 3.3 through 3.3.2 for details:
http://sedm.org/Forms/MemLaw/Silence.pdf
[. . .]
Based on all the foregoing, there is no cause for alarm by our Members. We aren't going anywhere and will continue to be here to disseminate, improve, and develop the extensive evidence of violations of law and corruption by our public servants which is religious speech that is not factual or actionable in character. None of the purposes of this website are commercial, but rather exclusively religious, spiritual, legal, and political. The only reason the injunction order concluded otherwise is because every one of the judges, witnesses, and litigants are receiving the proceeds of extortion, theft, and plunder into their checking accounts. The most basic aspect of due process of law is an impartial decision maker and impartial witnesses, and the Hansen case had neither, we are told.
The injunction order against "false commercial speech" ironically is a form of "false commercial speech" itself. It is designed to:
- Maximize revenues from unlawful activity by the IRS directed against "nontaxpayers" who are not subject to the I.R.C.
- Unlawfully intimidate and terrorize law abiding Americans into bribing public officials with money that no law obligates them to pay.
- Unlawfully interfere with commerce outside the jurisdiction of the federal government, and therefore constitutes racketeering and extortion in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1951.
If you would like to learn more about why the injunction order is unlawful, read our memorandum of law on Commercial Speech:
http://sedm.org/Forms/MemLaw/CommercialSpeech.pdf
Since we cannot aid or abet unlawful activity, we certainly couldn't help anyone further the ends of an unlawful order that is the product of criminal activity on the part of federal employees.
Thanks for your dedication to the cause of liberty and taking the time to read this message.
His servant and fiduciary,
The SEDM Fellowship Team
- Subsequent to issuing the void order, the Alleged Defendant petitioned to the court on 6/10/2006 to correct obvious perjury by the judge in the order relating to the nature of the speech in question. That petition was denied, making the judge's perjury willful and malicious and involving the judge in obstruction of justice and witness tampering, where the alleged defendant was the witness being tampered with. Basically, there was almost nothing the judge would change in the order. This is covered in the link at the beginning of this article in section 7.
