Income Tax Truth Tom Cryer 2/3

Cryer is an idiot - the Supreme Court did define constitutional income but Cryer refuses to learn what the SCOTUS defined because that would destroy his argument.
The SCOTUS defined income as ascessions to wealth in 1955, which of course includes wages and salaries, which the SCOTUS declared the income tax on wages and salaries as constitutional in Pollock 1895.

The SCOTUS also said that 'Constitutional arguments' are not defenses in tax cases in the Cheek case 1991.

Can you reference that?

A tax revolt would shut this country down! And end this govt's control on its citizens

IRS reported revenues from last year are down 34% hmmm there could be a tax revolt!

im going to need this guy to help me with my case

canadian tax lawer

what if someone wins the lottery? would that be income?

yeah, . . . in the 80s, just before his IRS trial in US District Court, in Portland Oregon, Don Pallet--a big mason--told an audience that, he had "a brother" on his jury, telling us that, there wasn't really anything to worry about--he'd be all right. And sure enough, . . . "not guilty", . . . so, . . . But I did want to say, don't get mixed up in groups, 'cause, when martial law is declared, just like the raided NCBA, those membership lists, e-mail lists, will be most useful--it warn't pretty.