Traffic Trip IRS Issues

Addressing the IRS and tax liability.

Aaron Russo's Freedom to Fascism referenced.

Many will not like what I have to say in this video. Listen, learn, question. I am not "pro" nor "anti" taxes.

I *am* however PRO-LAW.

Ed Brown's situation.

Money and debt covered very briefly.

Fraudulent Summons.

Subscribe to my channel.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Aaron
• Russo
• Freedom
• to
• Fascism
• Ron
• Paul
• Alex
• Jones
• Liberty
• Free
• Info
• Taxes
• IRS
• Ed
• Elaine
• Brown
• 911
• Conspiracy

[IRSFRAUDEXPOSED]

your closer to understanding than you might think. what im speaking of is not some theory like the so called tax honest people who stand on A issue like the 16th or 861 , will post more audio of explinations. thanks

[TrafficTicketWinner]

The Cracking the Code material misses absolutely vital points, and takes a person into realms of argument they should NEVER be taken into. It doesn't touch on jurisdictional challenge, and much worse, it leads people to believe they are not liable for something that they've already declared (in writing) a liability to a long time ago. The IRS is also NOT committing "fraud." If they were, it'd have been adjudicated over 50 years ago. Read/listen to the material, absolutely do NOT implement it.

[passyourdrugtest]

i myself first cancelled my w2 agreement in writting and produced w-2E and the company abliged and ended the w2 ,ending witholdings and admitting that they were not a federal employeer,ect. i then corrected my incorrect w2 and corrected the return . many people dont understand the importance of the problem starts at the job with the agreement and hendrickson doesnt talk of this enough.

[TrafficTicketWinner]

If you're in the system, it requires an understanding employer. It's a catch-22, because if the IRS comes after the employer, they'll likely give you up to protect themselves. There is remedy for you in these cases regarding breach of contract, but it gets ugly fast, and most just don't want to go there. A strong, committed employer willing to go the length is the only option, or else one needs to opt-out of the system in one way or another. And many people do just that.

[IRSFRAUDEXPOSED]

as it is the irs sets its fine low for employeers who wrongfully file information on w2's so that they keep going along with the game however the civel penalties i can bring to the employeer are not so low ranging from what ever monitary amount wronged to 5000 plush each wrongfull reporting and the irs wont and cant help them, they did it to themselves . thats how the scheme works with the employeer as a third party fall guy.

[TrafficTicketWinner]

On this we agree, I'm just saying that any of us in this freedom search should always keep positive relationships forged with our employers and even the government whenever we possibly can. What you're describing is a lot of negative energy that none of us wants to have to indulge in...so let's try to avoid it if we can.

[TrafficTicketWinner]

While I appreciate your support, we are not in agreement on several issues. Filing in any form presents an automatic form of self-incrimination, and if you take it far and deep enough, you are also committing a form of perjury. Please do not expect that you can fill out their paperwork in some form that makes you untouchable by them. It is THEIR paperwork. They're desperate for your signature on ANY of it. The w2 requires an understanding employer to cooperate & take risk. A tough find.

[IRSFRAUDEXPOSED]

the whole key is to file so you can correct the error not fileing is foolish . its not about law it about liability. im glade to FINALLY hear some who gets it. we must educate people to learn about there power and how to apply it. its not about the 16th , its not about show me the law, its not a matter of the constitution. its a simple scheme that requires you to file and correct the incorrect w2. the federal income tax is federal.

[TrafficTicketWinner]

Yes, easy to be confused: You need to address *what is happening procedurally* but you do NOT address *what they are making an issue out of*. See the difference? The former enables you to attack defective procedure (it's defective over 90% of the time) the latter accidently puts you into their arena by saying "YES, you have an issue there but I disagree with the issue, so I guess we have to have a third party (judge/jury) settle it for us." Does that clerify? Sorry for the confusion. Ask more.

[thedudeabides76]

So you say don't address the issue, but you also say if you dont address it you are in agreement with the issue. I dont understand. I thought that if you refused to respond to an issue within 30 or 60 days, you are considered to be in agreement with the claim.