Added
10/13/07
Answer to Order to Show Cause and motion to Vacate and Dismiss said Order
Download the
BANNED
For FREE!
Irwin Schiff's 2004
"ZERO" Tax Return
New:
Irwin Schiff
Interviews
Irwin Schiff Railroaded by IRS by JIM DAVIES of SimplySchiff e-groups Click Here
Criminal Character of Judge Dawson Exposed plus Exhibit
Shocking
Trial Blogs
Link 1
Link 2
Irwin's Letter to
Lou Dobbs
The government opposed on
May 24
Schiff replied on
May 27, 2005.
This motion and the reply, expose the entire
fraudulent character of the federal income tax and it's
criminal enforcement by the federal government.
Feature Article:
Las Vegas Tribune April 1, 2005
|
Irwin Schiff
|
Irwin's Counselor, Shelly Waxman has 5 books available at
Amazon
Click Here
The Government gets a lawless $2.6 million, civil judgment
You will not have to read any further then the following 20 page pleading to be totally convinced that the Federal come tax is a total scam from A to Z.
My following Reply (and its Supplement, which is posted immediately below this Reply) shows the total illegality of the some $1,000,000 in fraud and contingent interest penalties contained in the Government’s claim and in the court’s order. Therefore, Judge Pro has to know that at the very least, $1 million dollars as contained in his summary judgment I can’t possibly owe as a matter of law. Therefore, if he doesn’t reverse his order, just on this ground alone, his ordering me to pay this amount would be no different then if he did so by putting a gun to my head and saying, “You’ll pay the million or I’ll blow your head off.” However, his order was illegal on a number of other grounds as well. Plus my other motion to dismiss shows that he didn’t have the jurisdiction to even hear the case. However, for a variety of reasons, I wasn’t able to put it all together until after he issued his Order. However I had raised enough issues before that so he shouldn’t have issued his order in the first place.
Read with Acrobat Format
Click here to read the Motion
Click Here to read the Supplement to the rule 59 motion above
