“It’s a big club ….and you ain’t in it!” ~ George Carlin, comedian
I have been involved in the “Tax Honesty Movement” for twenty-two (22) years. Of course, there are people who have been involved for much longer, many of whom have served as my mentors. In the early years, I attended seminars where I met many of the “leaders” personally, watched videos, and purchased books, documents and CDs that eventually set me on my own path to pull back the curtain on America’s complicated, corrupt and criminal income tax system.
In July 2005, when the IRS first engaged with me by requesting my 2002 income tax return, I made it my policy to always respond in a civil, but firm, manner… and challenge them with evidence. From everything I had learned about dealing with the IRS, I also knew I would have to overcome my fear of the consequences of pushing back. So, I created this website in 2007 to document my journey by posting online all the letters, forms, court pleadings, judgments and other forms of communication along the way. Currently, that documentation consists of 344 items spanning the period from July 2005 thru October 2021.
In 2014, God introduced me to Michael Ellis to combine our talents and expertise to file, and assist others to file, seventy-nine (79) lawsuits [District Court (28), Appeals Court (31) and the Supreme Court (20)] for the purpose of enjoining the IRS from falsifying its Individual Master File (IMF) records relating to Americans it labels “non-filers”. Specifically, these records are falsified to show that a “Substitute for Return” (SFR) had been CREATED by the IRS on a certain date, supposedly in accordance with 26 U.S.C. §6020(b), when, in fact, no SFR is EVER created by the IRS and 26 U.S.C. §6020(b) does not apply to the income tax.
In addition, these lawsuits were filed to enjoin the Department of Justice (DoJ) from USING the falsified IRS records to confiscate property, indict, prosecute, convict and imprison innocent Americans to satisfy fictitious tax liabilities.
Despite the fact that the evidence of this fraud is indisputable (because it comes directly from the IRS’ own records), not one judge has ruled in our favor, calling our lawsuits “frivolous”. On April 3, 2018, D.C. District Court Judge Christopher R. Cooper even went so far as to issue a nationwide, permanent injunction against me and Michael stopping us from:
• Filing, or assisting in the filing of, any civil action in any United States District Court, without first obtaining leave of that court, asserting, or purporting to assert a claim under the United States Constitution or the Administrative Procedure Act challenging actions taken by the Internal Revenue Service in preparing to assess and assessing income tax liabilities pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6020;
• Filing, or assisting in the filing of, any civil action in any United States District Court, without first obtaining leave of that court, asserting or purporting to assert a claim under the United States Constitution or the Administrative Procedure Act challenging actions taken by the Department of Justice to defend against the suits referenced in paragraph 1(a) and/or suits to collect income tax liabilities;
• Filing, or assisting in the filing of, any civil action in any United States District Court, without first obtaining leave of that court, asserting or purporting to assert claims against judicial officers, whether in their official or personal capacities, challenging the merit, the substance, and/or the process of those judicial officers’ decisions with respect to the Internal Revenue Service’s program for preparing to assess and assessing income tax liabilities pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6020(b).
By their actions, the judges in all 79 cases mentioned above have convinced us that the entire judicial system in America is corrupt to the core. This was confirmed in an email I recently received introducing me to the work of Dr. Richard Cordero, the Founder of Judicial Discipline Reform in New York City.
In that email, Dr. Cordero introduced official government reports and statistics on complaints against judges. The following are excerpts from his email:
********************
Those reports and statistics are submitted by the 13 U.S. courts of appeals, including CADCC, and 2 national courts to Congress as a public document in the Annual Report of the Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. The director is appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court under Title 28 of the U.S. Code [of federal law only] section 601(28 U.S.C. §601).
Complaints against judges of a circuit can be filed by any person, including a judge, under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980(the Act; id. §§351-364). The complaint statistics have appeared for most of those years in Table S-22 of the Annual Report. I have compiled and tabulated them for ease of presentation and analysis. Those statistics show that for decades, federal judges have dismissed 100% of complaints against their peers and denied 100% of petitions to review those dismissals.
Indeed, the introduction to Table S-22 for 2021 states the following concerning complaints filed in the 15 reporting courts:
"The number of complaints filed in 2021 was 1,282, an increase of 29 complaints (up 2 percent) from the number filed in 2020.
Fifty-nine percent of the complaints were made against district judges, 25 percent were against circuit judges,
Chief judges dismissed 1,402 complaints in whole or in part. This total includes complaints that later were terminated with finality by circuit judicial council orders on petitions for review, as well as complaints for which additional review was still possible.
Chief judges terminated 948 complaints with no further review. Circuit judicial councils terminated 480 complaints, including 2 terminated after reports by special committees were issued."
Table S-22 shows the outcome of those complaints:
Complaints with Corrective Action Taken
or Intervening Events 0
Censure or Reprimand 0
Suspension of Assignments 0
Action Against Magistrate Judge 0
Removal of Bankruptcy Judge 0
Requesting of Voluntary Retirement 0
Certifying Disability of Circuit or District Court 0
It follows indisputably that the outcome of processing complaints against federal judges is predetermined: The chief circuit judge, who by law examines them in the first instance, will dismiss them systematically. The circuit judicial council, composed of district and circuit judges, will deny all petitions for dismissal review out of hand on a 5¢ form bearing the rubberstamped signature of the clerk of court. No reason whatsoever is given. There is no discussion of facts or law. The denial is a fiat.
The processing occurs in complete secrecy. It guarantees that the complained-against judges will not be disturbed by any complaint, for they need not have to be notified of it...after all, it will be dumped no matter its nature, frequency, and gravity. But if a judge replies, he can make up any story in his defense and to the detriment of the complainant, who will not be able to check it in rebuttal because she will not be given a copy of the reply without the judge's consent.
The implication of such peremptory dumping of complaints is inescapable: Judges take care of their own to ensure that "Judges are Untouchable".
It is statistically impossible for thousands of complaints over decades involving hundreds of judges to have led to the same outcome but for the implicit or explicit complicit agreement among judges to exonerate each other by abusing the power to self-discipline granted by Congress: 'Today I exonerate you and tomorrow, when I am or my friends are complained against, you and your friends exonerate us'.
It is possible for that complicit agreement to exist and operate only because of the connivance between, on the one hand, the politicians that adopted the Act and ignore the Annual Report on complaints and, on the other hand, the judicial candidates that they recommend, endorse, nominate, and confirm to a judgeship or justiceship, whom must be provided with unequal protection from the law and spared any investigation by law enforcement authorities or congressional committees, lest the judges wield against the politicians their devastating power of retaliation
When judges cover up their abuse of power underlying the complaints, they leave complainants uncompensated and exposed to the retaliation of all other judges. As Then-Judge, Now-Judge Neil Gorsuch put it when visiting with senators before his confirmation hearings: "An attack on one of our brothers and sisters of the robe is an attack on all of us”. That was the expression of judges' gang mentality. They do no process complaints impartially in light only of the law and what is right and just. What matters is gang belongingness and self-interest.
What is more, judges have left all parties and the rest of the public at the mercy of judges emboldened by the assurance that no matter what they do, their "brothers and sisters of the robe" will cover for them. They reciprocally ensure that they are Judges Above Congress by in effect abrogating its Judicial Conduct and Disability Act. Yet, they give the false impression to the public that a complaint under that Act will be processed fairly and impartially. By misleading the public to its detriment for their own gain and convenience, the judges have committed fraud on the public.
********************
As I observe the corruption and greed exhibited by members of the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of our government, I am reminded of these inspiring words written by our Founders in the Declaration of Independence:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
I believe American history is on the cusp of repeating itself here in the 21st century.