Categorized | Call of Shame, Video

IRS – Making Claims They’re Not Qualified to Make

Posted on October 6th, 2016 by Marc Stevens

If the IRS was not a criminal organization destroying people’s lives, I probably would not post calls like this.  And this is not isolated, this kind of nonsense is very common, I had another call to a bureaucrat in New Hampshire who pulled the same thing soon after this call.

The tactic is to make claims as if they are irrefutably true.  If we question them about it, they claim they’re not qualified and will refer you to someone who is qualified.  I’ve always referred to this as the “state dept. two step.”  Avoid any responsibility for your claims.

If we point out the contradiction:

Why are you making claims you just admitted you aren’t qualified to make?

They will just keep telling you they will transfer you to someone else.  I tried to get this agent to answer, but since she’s on the phone it’s too easy to refuse and then transfer me to another department.

Honest people will stop making claims they are admittedly not qualified to make.  Those called “government” are criminals, so since they force us to pay them, they don’t need to act in good faith.  Forcing people to pay you means never having to have evidence to support your claims and never having to be logically and morally consistent.

This call is more evidence of just how immoral those called “government” are.  This agent wasn’t fazed by her lack of qualifications to make claims that hurt real people.  The next agent claimed she was also not qualified and transferred us again, this time we got disconnected before the next department could pick up.

She claims the income proves the constitution and code apply, but when I ask her to explain how and why, she cut me off saying:

I can’t explain.

Then you need to stop making such claims as they cause damage to peaceful people.  But that didn’t stop the next agent I spoke with.

Melissa Delorey is a hearing officer for the Labor Department in New Hampshire.  Despite the fact she was intending, as part of her job, to make numerous legal determinations against a friend, she admitted she was not “the most qualified” to do so.  I was asking her about proof the constitution applied to a friend just because he was in New Hampshire.  She actually claimed the statutes (“RSA“) were proof the constitution applied.

When I asked how the RSA proves the constitution applied, instead of answering, being honest the RSA is not evidence the constitution applies, she double downed claiming:

I’m not the person to do that.

If she’s not the one qualified to provide proof their “supreme law” applied, then how could she make decision on that same law?  All she could do was insist she, as hearing officer, was the wrong one, we had to speak to someone else and she hung up on us.

Logic dictates that since the constitution is ostensibly the authority for the RSA, then the RSA is irrelevant until the constitution is proven to apply.  Ms. Delorey, admits she is not qualified to prove the constitution applies, while insisting the RSA does.  That is not just logically wrong, but morally also as this directly affects a peaceful man.

If there was evidence proving a written instrument from 1784 applied to us today, for no other reason than we’re physically present in New Hampshire, then they would provide it.  But there isn’t evidence.  All they have are appeals to tradition, authority, consequences (their force continuum and prison system) and circular logic, the rules apply because the rules say so.

thecode

I’m not saying my position is true because agents cannot explain how/why the code applies.  My position is true because “government” is just men and women forcing us to pay them.  Because of that there is no proof there are citizens as you need reciprocal obligations of allegiance and protection.  Forcing people to pay proves such obligations do not exist.  Without citizens there is no state, without a state there is no government.

All you have are men and women forcing us to pay them.  So if you are being attacked and you challenge their claims, you’ll recognize their tactic and be able to show their claims have no merit.

 

 

 

              

18 Comments For This Post

  1. desertspeaks Says:

    When a man who is honestly mistaken learns the truth, he will either cease to be mistaken or cease to be honest.

  2. Paul Says:

    Read Dave Champions book “Income Tax, Shattering the Myths” as it covers all aspects of the income tax in vivid detail. These agents at the IRS just do as they are told and have absolutely no understanding of the law.

  3. Marc Stevens Says:

    IRS agents have no understanding of ethics and logic.

  4. Habenae Est Dominatus Says:

    As a former Tax Honesty Advocate I am well aware of what the written words of tax law address. However, Marc’s focus is much simpler.

    Can anybody delegate an authority they don’t have?
    Was anybody born with innate authority over anybody else?
    Then how did authority nobody had get delegated to those who call themselves government?

    Show me my personally signed contract wherein I consented to be governed.

  5. NonEntity Says:

    Tax Honesty… really? REALLY??? (ROLFMAO!!!)

  6. Habenae Est Dominatus Says:

    http://www.taxhonestyprimer.com/

    The tax law doesn’t apply to who the IRS claims it applies to.

    Tax Honesty people wanted legitimate answers to legitimate questions about the income tax law.
    http://www.givemeliberty.org/features/taxes/symposium/invitation.htm

    Of course, Marc’s questions expose the reality that they have no authority at all. My questions are just my different vantage point to see the same reality.

  7. Maria Says:

    Hi Marc, perhaps you have been already made aware of the mailing-list not being active. I enjoy your approach/style very much, and would like to be in that list to receive your newsletter. Thank you for sharing your discoveries with everyone ready to stand their ground.

  8. Marc Stevens Says:

    I’m working on it, you can subscribe to my youtube channel til I get this one fixed.

  9. Hardy Says:

    “An insane mind can not produce sanity”. This is nothing more than self imposed insanity that most people will not rationally confront. Hence the clear obfuscation of any relevant response.

  10. Thomas Says:

    i thank a good question to ask the IRS AGENT would be can you define INCOME !!INCOME IS PROFITS MADE ON STOCKS AND BONDS !When we trade our labor for FRN’s; There is NO PROFIT MADE ! NOT TAXABLE !

  11. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Thomas, using definitions is a losing argument.

  12. NonEntity Says:

    I thank a good question,too. Do you have a witness with first hand evidence that a paper written over two hundred years ago, which no one even signed, proves anyone has the right to control my life? Thank you! 🙂

  13. AL LECOU Says:

    Marc: Would you have any objection to me saying that I am a Media Rep for NSP?
    I would like to do a Freedom of Information request to the local Humane Society.

  14. Marc Stevens Says:

    I don’t, just always be professional.

  15. Dick Says:

    RE: IRS comment about definitions not good argument…can you clarify? Do you ONLY take the jurisdiction approach with IRS? Thanks

  16. Marc Stevens Says:

    I take a position challenging the IRS on the evidence their claims are made, I raise issue of fact, not legal interpretation.

  17. NonEntity Says:

    Unless jurisdiction can be proven everything else is irrelevant. Why would you discuss anything until jurisdiction has been proven? If someone came to your door and demanded that you make child support payments to them wouldn’t you first want to know if there was a child involved, and second, if that child was yours?

  18. Dick Says:

    Some of these IRS and California FTB/BOE people claim they are acting according to the law (Internal Revenue Code, IRC). The IRC clearly defines who is subject to the revenue tax (excise) known as the “income” tax. The Supreme Court, when the subject of the income tax is brought before it, has consistently clarified and supported this. When shown the sections of the code,and the Supreme Court decisions, it is no longer a matter of debate. HOWEVER, when confronted (exposed as ignorant and criminal) agents of state and federal government just 1) ignore and/or refuse to address your evidence (the IRC), and/or 2) bog you down in computer generated letters, sham “due process” hearings, and/or file criminal complaints, unlawful liens, and unlawful asset forfeiture.It’s who has the bigger guns and is willing to use it. SAD.

Leave a Reply

Advertise Here

Upcoming Events

Saturday, 4-7pm EST: Tune-in to the LIVE No STATE Project broadcast as we report on the weekly happenings in legal-land and current events. You may call-in to the show at (218) 632-9399 passcode is 2020#, or Skype-in, with your thoughts on tickets, tyrants, assessments, activism, anarchy, agorism, or, of course; any and all criticisms. If you are being attacked by those with arbitrary titles and shiny badges, or if you have an interesting observation or criticism; then feel free to call-in to the LIVE show at (218) 632-9399, or you'll need to contact Marc on Skype by searching for username: frankrizzo3, and we can also add you to the NSP skype group chat where you can engage in some courtroom role-play exercises to refine your litigation skills and boost your confidence if you have a court hearing coming up. Also, here is a comprehensive list of the many ways you can interact with the No STATE Project broadcast and community.

Wednesday, 6-7pm EST: Tune-in to the new No STATE Project midweek commercial-free video-stream broadcast via Ustream.tv. You can join Marc live, or contact Marc to ask a question if you cannot make it on live. You can find archives of the Wednesday broadcast here on the website and on YouTube.

If you want to join the forum, you must email me a username so I can create the account. This is to stop the flood of spambots.





Contact update: If you email me a wall of text, then I probably will not read it. If you email me telling me to call you right away I won't. You'll have to set up a phone consult so we can set an appointment.

Mailing address has changed as of 1 October 2016. The new mailing address is: G.M. or Occupant 1496 N. Higley Rd., Suite 102-37 Gilbert, Arizona 85234.






Join Marc Stevens' Newsletter


Advertise Here