Posted on 03/23/2016 12:27:38 PM PDT by GraceG
Yes it is Trisham. The Establishment even backed off of Reagan
when they realized the people wanted him. THIS Establishment is 100% corrupt.
Also, things that scare this or that Establishment may actually be ... scary.
There’s too much money in politics. “Public service”? What a joke.
Yep....98% of them are for sale.
Of course Big Money even determines WHO will be allowed run. Total corruption.
The 16th Amendment ‘income’ taxes are Article 1, Section 8 ‘excise’ taxes. They are not A1,S9,C4 ‘direct’ taxes, therefore, Congress has not overstepped its bounds in regards to taxation. It is not the government's job to teach the people about the laws the representatives of the people pass. It is the responsibility of ‘we the people’ to know & understand the nature of the laws that the representatives of ‘we the people’ pass. The SCOTUS has ruled over and over again since 1913 that the 16th Amendment is an “income ‘excise’ tax” placed on certain privileged activities.
The Treasury Department's legislative draftsman as well as the Attorney for the Library of Congress both have testified, as recently as the Clinton administration, that indeed, the 16th is not a direct tax on all that comes in, it is a tax on certain privileged activity and the amount of tax owed is determined by the dollars that privileged activity produces.
And so if you want to go after an area that was usurped, go after the dept of uneducation that with every generation, dumbs down the public at large by their going along with the people's ignorance of the constitutional tax laws. 70 years ago less than 8% of the working population paid federal income taxes, not because they didn't make enough money, but because they knew that the activity they were involved in that produced the money they then deposited into their bank accounts was not associated with A1,S8 & the 16th privileged activities.
Now if you want to talk unconstitutional taxes, well, that would be all these proposed tax plans by so called conservative experts who proclaim that ‘everyone must have some skin in the game’ and so they think a direct flat tax is the answer. That my dear freeper friend is one of the foundational pillars of communism from which tyranny transforms into outright despotism and total enslavement of the population at large.
Oh yes, tens of hundreds of supposed constitutional scholars all espousing despotism & enslavement because of the ignorance of the truth of the tax laws that is in them, Constitution be damned!
I like Trump BECAUSE he is a threat to civil discourse! I sick and tired of the GOP being so civil in their discourse with the Democrats when those jerks get to say or do whatever they want to Republicans!
I want someone who will kick their teeth down their throats when they act like jerks, I don’t want someone who will apologize for have principles and values and offending the followers of Moloch with them!
This was for the taking, easy election against a corrupt woman and yet the establishment wants it all thrown away to save their gravy train.
Always us what gets screwed over, the average voter of America.
Exactly right.
I’ll see your Alex and raise you a Beck. Go with the white horse idiocy, such a winning argument that one is!
Spreading it far and wide, and you might step out of your bubble, the average person (I know, Teddy is so superior so this doesn’t apply, or something twisted like that) has NO interest in anything the says BUSH BUSH BUSH, white horse, death to gays and GS is innocent.
same.
Trump is not my ideal candidate, nor is anyone else and never has been, but if he upsets the establishment on both sides, calls out the media for their lies, agrees with me on over half the stuff I would like to see then he has my vote.
LOL- Jeb’s backing Cruz... that’s got to be the kiss of death..
And I hope ALL Cruz supporters will read this and think about how Cruz welcomed Carly (btw, where is she?)Beck, Haley, Neil Bush, Graham, Romney and now Jeb.
“There are 5 people left in the race for president. Four of them live off the government!”......
Says all you need to know. That in particular gives Trump a big edge over the rest.
What happened yesterday — a “breakdown”? (I missed a lot of the goings-on yesterday.)
With all due respect patlin, who cares what kind of taxes they are?
Again, state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that Congress is prohibited from appropriating taxes in the name of state power issues.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
In fact, regarding 16th Amendment income taxes, regardless what FDR’s state sovereignty-ignoring justices wanted everybody to think about the scope of Congress’s Commerce Clause powers (1.8.3), the Gibbons opinion also clarifies that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate INTRAstate commerce which personal income is based on.
”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added].” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
Note that some dictionary definitions of the word capitation used in 1.9.4 use doctor fees as an example. But regardless what lawless Obama’s state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices want everybody to think about the constitutionality of Obamacare, these institutionally indoctrinated justices wrongly ignored that previous generations of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate, tax and spend for INTRAstate healthcare regardless of 1.9.4. This is evidenced by the following excerpts from Supreme Court case opinions.
In fact, note that the fifth item in the list, an excerpt from Linder v. United States, was written after the 16th Amendment was ratified.
”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress. [emphases added]” - Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” - Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”Inspection laws, quarantine laws, health laws of every description [emphasis added], as well as laws for regulating the internal commerce of a state and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c., are component parts of this mass.” -Justice Barbour, New York v. Miln., 1837.
” 4. The issuing of a policy of insurance is not a transaction of commerce within the meaning of the latter of the two clauses, even though the parties be domiciled in different States, but is a simple contract [emphasis added] of indemnity against loss.” - Paul v. Virginia, 1869. (The corrupt feds have no Commerce Clause (1.8.3) power to regulate insurance.)
”Direct control of medical practice in the states is obviously [emphases added] beyond the power of Congress.” - Linder v. United States, 1925.
"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]. ...” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
The bottom line regarding a national healthcare program is there is nothing stopping the states from amending the Constitution to give the feds the express power to establish a national healthcare program. But since the states have never done so, Obamacare is unconstituitonal regardless what activist justices want everybody to think about it.
What does that mean?
Gibbons opinion also clarifies that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate INTRAstate commerce which personal income is based on
Sorry, but there are many forms of INTERstate commerce that are also outside the reach of Article 1, Section 8.
The “National” healthcare program, if read with an educated perspective, that is, one who is educated in the tax code, the term ‘national’ itself is limited in scope, therefore, since the ‘national’ healthcare law is associated with 16th Amendment privileged activity, it only applies to those engaged in 16th Amendment activities. The entire healthcare law & those t whom it applies are wholly connected to the definitions within 26 U.S.C. as noted in that section of 26 U.S.C..
So again, A1,S8 of the US Constitution gives Congress the authority to tax that which belongs to it, even when the activity does not cross a state line as the US Govt does have property it owns in each and every state of the union, therefore, it can tax that Intrastate activity. United States v County of Allegheny 322 US 174 (1944), see also Bailey v Drexel Furniture Co., 259 US 20 (1922)
Megga-bump!! That says a lot. More than a pipeful to smoke :)
Given 1.8.3 expressly gives Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce, do you mind rewording your statement for clarification?
”… one who is educated in the tax code, ..."
Regarding federal tax code, and everything else the feds do for that matter, patriots need to get into the habbit of checking everything that the feds do against Section 8. And if none of the clauses in Section 8 reasonably apply to a federal law, action or tax code, then the feds owe the states and their citizens a reasonable explanation.
As mentioned in a previous post, a previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that powers not delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constution, are prohibited to the feds.
"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]. ...” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
Congress can regulate the activity, however, that does not give them the authority to tax all “that is deposited into ones bank account” from that interstate activity. There may be duties & tolls placed upon the use of the ‘interstate’ roadways, however, those duties and tolls do not extend to the entirety of the revenue generated from the use of those interstate roads.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.