Joe Bannister - Ron Paul Rally - Mountain View
Uploader Comments (SendARope)
Top Comments
-
Heard this all before...one way to fix it though
RON PAUL 2008
All Comments (11)
-
Joe Banister figured out that he could make a lot more money selling de-tax books than he could working for the IRS.
Banister's attorney admitted that Banister pays his federal income taxes.
Banister's case did not even involve the question of the liability for federal income taxes.
A jury acquitted Joe Banister of multiple counts of assisting Al Thompson file a fraudulent tax return.
Al Thompson was sentenced in a separate trial to six years in a federal penitentiary.
-
Ron Paul should appoint Joe Bannister as the IRS commissioner.
-jcr
-
Joe Bannister is a real stand up guy, he couldn't have been any cool. Thank you Mr Bannister for your compliments, and your fight for truth! RON PAUL for President NOW!!! -=Rob Widit
-
awesome, when i went i got there late and missed joe speak, thanks for uploading this.
google:
Idiot Legal Arguments: A Casebook for Dealing with Extremist Legal Arguments
By Bernard J. Sussman, JD, MLS, CP
This is a Treasure trove of cases debunking "Patriot for Profit" and Phony de-taxer idiot legal arguments.
Quatloos has a "Hall of Shame" on which Banister and Devvy Kidd are listed.
Al Thompson must have followed Banister's advice. He got Six years in a cell with Big Bubba.
Tubeusercomm 1 year ago
@Tubeusercomm I find it amusing that the "debunkers" attack EVERY 'de taxer' argument out there. They can't all be wrong. not 100% at least. Certainly the requirement that I file a tax form and SIGN it is a violation of my 5th amendment rights.
SendARope 1 year ago
@SendARope argues 5th amendment rights
The amount of income itself contains no incriminating information, _ _ it does not protect him from disclosing the amount of his income as the Supreme Court has explained. Aune v. United States "A taxpayer cannot assert a Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-incrimination to justify the failure to file any return at ail."); Schoffner v. United States, 627 F. Supp. 167, 168-69 (S.D. Ohio 1985) (same); Vaughn v. United States, 1984)
Tubeusercomm 1 year ago 3
@Tubeusercomm no but they CAN use anything that you put on your form to incriminate you for some supposed crime. You are REQUIRED to sign it. It CAN and WILL be used against you in a court of law.
But hey don't let that stop Charlie Rangel from committing 17 years of felony tax fraud. I doubt they will be going after him. Just an "innocent mistake" I'm sure.
OH, Nice shilling for the IRS. You must be one of their stooges as you've so far posted twice with typical boiler plate "rebuttals"
SendARope 1 year ago