Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Rodney King

Wrong. I have heard Mr. Cryer speak on a nationwide conference call just last Thursday and in his own words he stated the jury found him innocent because the IRS could not substantiate a counterargument to his case which rested on absence of a law.

That you are now trying to speak for the jury tells me you are a liar. You are hoping this case is trivial, it is not. People affiliated in some way with the IRS always hope these cases are viewed as trivial. When the IRS places their bet on a court win and they lose, they always say it was a trivial ‘ruling’ even when it is a precedent setting jury ‘verdict’ as this case is.

Go to his website and read. You can even contact him yourself.

And tell your IRS buds that the revolt is just around the corner and Americans are now beginning to take names in preparation for a major ass-kicking.


49 posted on 07/15/2007 9:53:50 AM PDT by Hostage (Fred Thompson will be President.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]


To: Hostage
Wrong. I have heard Mr. Cryer speak on a nationwide conference call just last Thursday and in his own words he stated the jury found him innocent because the IRS could not substantiate a counterargument to his case which rested on absence of a law.

And he's wrong. He was charged with willfully failing to file. That is what he was acquitted of.

That you are now trying to speak for the jury tells me you are a liar.

It tells me that I understand basic logic, and that I know some basics about the law. That I keep asking you to cite the cases that you claim exist, yet you refuse to do so, tells me that you can't do it.

You are hoping this case is trivial, it is not.

I'm not hoping it is one thing or another. Funny you claim to speak for me when you just called me a liar for claiming to speak to the jury. Put up or shut up. Cite the cases that you cliam exist.

People affiliated in some way with the IRS always hope these cases are viewed as trivial.

Probably true. So what? My only affiliation with them is that they steal my money every year.

When the IRS places their bet on a court win and they lose, they always say it was a trivial ‘ruling’ even when it is a precedent setting jury ‘verdict’ as this case is.

How is this precedent setting? The court ruled that he did not willfully fail to file. There have been cases similar to this before. He did not believe he had to file, so he was aquitted of willful failure to file.

Go to his website and read. You can even contact him yourself.

I went to his website. In case you didn't know this, the defendents post trial remarks are not exactly an unbiased view of the ruling.

And tell your IRS buds that the revolt is just around the corner and Americans are now beginning to take names in preparation for a major ass-kicking.

I don't have any IRS buds. I hope everyone who works for the IRS rots in hell. I hope that a major ass kicking is coming.

But back to the point... put up or shut up. You claim their are cases where the judege and or jury has ruled that the income tax is unconstitutional. Cite one.

53 posted on 07/15/2007 9:59:55 AM PDT by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson