What do the New York Times, the IRS and David Cay Johnston have in common?
Saturday, August 05, 2006
Are the New York Times, the IRS and David Cay Johnston involved in a ménage a trois of lies?
If the New York Times does not have an agenda regarding the legitimacy of
If the New York Times does not have an agenda regarding the legitimacy of
the income tax then why would it assign two of its reporters,
David Cay Johnston and Nathan Lee, to lambaste a film,
"America-From Freedom to Fascism"
which reveals there is no law requiring a citizen living in the United States to pay the income tax?
The further proof the Times has a dog in the fight is the fact there were over
"America-From Freedom to Fascism"
which reveals there is no law requiring a citizen living in the United States to pay the income tax?
The further proof the Times has a dog in the fight is the fact there were over
twenty other films which opened in the last two weeks that were ignored by
the Times and this film is currently being shown on only
ten screens nationwide.
Although it appears the New York Times reporter, David Cay
Johnston, is attempting to strangle Mr. Schiff, in reality he
is deceitfully pretending to console Mr. Schiff after the federal
court strippedMr. Schiff of his free speech right by banning
"The Federal Mafia"
"The Federal Mafia"
On July 5th, 1995, Mr. David Cay Johnston wrote his first article about Mr. Schiff entitled "The Anti-Tax Man Cometh." This article was a fair report of Mr. Schiff’s stance on the income tax. However, that was the last truthful column Mr. Johnson has written about Mr. Schiff or the people involved in the "Tax Honesty" movement! This fact begs the question, "WHY?" Did his superiors at the New York Times and/or agents from the Internal Revenue Service order him to tow the IRS line and dispel, with lies if necessary, every fact presented by Mr. Schiff? Or, perhaps, at that point in time, being a younger reporter he was idealistic and wanted to do the right thing. If neither of the above are true then we are left believing Mr. Johnson is just, by nature, a liar!
The above picture and the ones below were taken in Las Vegas, in 2003, during a hearing held by a federal court to ban Mr. Schiff’s book "The Federal Mafia" and incarcerate him for selling it. As the pictures below attest Mr. Johnson pretended he was a sympathetic supporter of Mr. Schiff and then immediately began an onslaught of written lies, half truths, misquotes and savage attacks against Mr. Schiff. In total, since that day, Mr. Johnson has written at least sixteen articles trashing Mr. Schiff and/or his followers. His latest effort to deceive and discredit those who know the truth about the income tax involved a friend of ours, Mr. Aaron Russo’s film "America-From Freedom to Fascism." If you would like to read MR. Johnston’s less than stellar effort and are in possession of a strong stomach for lies go to,
The following is an email we sent to Mr. Johnston in response to that article.
Dear Mr. Johnston,
For years we have followed the New York Times and your efforts to discredit the people in the "Tax Honesty" movement and in particular Mr. Schiff. If you had bothered to get your facts straight, as a reputable reporter is honor and morally bound to do, then we might not have such disdain for you.
In your article on 7-31-2006 you wrote, "Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution begins with the phrase "The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes."" Then you correctly wrote, "One limitation, however, was a requirement that taxes be "apportioned among the several states."" However, you either fail to understand what the apportionment clause means or you ignore it to make your failed argument. The apportionment clause requires the INDIVIDUAL STATES to decide who will pay what and then collect the tax and forward it to the federal government.
Then, you and the federal government try to get around this little problem by saying the 16th amendment removed the apportionment barrier therein allowing for a direct tax on citizens wages. Once again you either failed to do your research and discover that this is a lie or you intentionally failed to mention that The Supreme Court, on at least six occasions, ruled the 16th amendment gave the federal government "NO NEW TAXING POWER!" Those rulings have never been overturned!! Even if the 16th amendment did give the federal government a new taxing power the right to lay a direct tax on citizens could not be included in that power because it would be repugnant to the fundamental basic tax clauses of the Constitution’s sections 2, 8 and 9. As an example, do you believe the congress could pass an amendment to the Constitution to remove our fundamental basic right of freedom of speech or the New York Times right of freedom of the press?
As to Mr. Schiff, if you had attended his latest trial, even you would have walked out knowing it was a travesty of justice. However, we are confident you would not have reported that fact or *(see below) what the feds have done to Mr. Schiff in the interim.
And, even though you faked concern when you consoled Mr. Schiff (See the photo above of yourself with Mr. Schiff) we did not see you pitch a bitch when the federal courts banned his book "The Federal Mafia" even though there was not one word in it that was not true. (See the Seton Hall Law review http://seton-hall-law-review-article.blogspot.com/ )
In the final analysis, the overall tone of your article is typical of a republican politician's reaction to being exposed as being incompetent, that being, attack the messenger and ignore the message... Which is surprising because The Times has demonstrated it knows if the news media does not expose the transgressions on the American citizen’s rights such as the "Patriot Act," freedom of speech, freedom of the press (The New York Times?) and the illegal enforcement of non-existent laws, then Big Brother will prevail.
Didn’t your mommy tell you not to get in bed with the devil, Davy? In that regard, we hope you are saving the money you are paid to help spread the federal government’s lies, because you will need it to relocate to a desert island when the feds pass a law requiring all reporters to have a lobotomy and be castrated. However, if you don’t, as they start to drill and cut, rest assured we will inform one and all that even your stupidity does not warrant such drastic treatment.
As to the Federal Reserve and the fixing of elections by tampering with the computers...these are facts that a REAL reporter would expose. However, the government will not have to forcibly insert a computer tracking chip in you. All it needs to do is sprinkle a few such chips on Uncle Sam’s butt and eventually you will naturally ingest one.
Dear Mr. Johnston,
For years we have followed the New York Times and your efforts to discredit the people in the "Tax Honesty" movement and in particular Mr. Schiff. If you had bothered to get your facts straight, as a reputable reporter is honor and morally bound to do, then we might not have such disdain for you.
In your article on 7-31-2006 you wrote, "Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution begins with the phrase "The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes."" Then you correctly wrote, "One limitation, however, was a requirement that taxes be "apportioned among the several states."" However, you either fail to understand what the apportionment clause means or you ignore it to make your failed argument. The apportionment clause requires the INDIVIDUAL STATES to decide who will pay what and then collect the tax and forward it to the federal government.
Then, you and the federal government try to get around this little problem by saying the 16th amendment removed the apportionment barrier therein allowing for a direct tax on citizens wages. Once again you either failed to do your research and discover that this is a lie or you intentionally failed to mention that The Supreme Court, on at least six occasions, ruled the 16th amendment gave the federal government "NO NEW TAXING POWER!" Those rulings have never been overturned!! Even if the 16th amendment did give the federal government a new taxing power the right to lay a direct tax on citizens could not be included in that power because it would be repugnant to the fundamental basic tax clauses of the Constitution’s sections 2, 8 and 9. As an example, do you believe the congress could pass an amendment to the Constitution to remove our fundamental basic right of freedom of speech or the New York Times right of freedom of the press?
As to Mr. Schiff, if you had attended his latest trial, even you would have walked out knowing it was a travesty of justice. However, we are confident you would not have reported that fact or *(see below) what the feds have done to Mr. Schiff in the interim.
And, even though you faked concern when you consoled Mr. Schiff (See the photo above of yourself with Mr. Schiff) we did not see you pitch a bitch when the federal courts banned his book "The Federal Mafia" even though there was not one word in it that was not true. (See the Seton Hall Law review http://seton-hall-law-review-article.blogspot.com/ )
In the final analysis, the overall tone of your article is typical of a republican politician's reaction to being exposed as being incompetent, that being, attack the messenger and ignore the message... Which is surprising because The Times has demonstrated it knows if the news media does not expose the transgressions on the American citizen’s rights such as the "Patriot Act," freedom of speech, freedom of the press (The New York Times?) and the illegal enforcement of non-existent laws, then Big Brother will prevail.
Didn’t your mommy tell you not to get in bed with the devil, Davy? In that regard, we hope you are saving the money you are paid to help spread the federal government’s lies, because you will need it to relocate to a desert island when the feds pass a law requiring all reporters to have a lobotomy and be castrated. However, if you don’t, as they start to drill and cut, rest assured we will inform one and all that even your stupidity does not warrant such drastic treatment.
As to the Federal Reserve and the fixing of elections by tampering with the computers...these are facts that a REAL reporter would expose. However, the government will not have to forcibly insert a computer tracking chip in you. All it needs to do is sprinkle a few such chips on Uncle Sam’s butt and eventually you will naturally ingest one.
posted by The Law # 11:54 AM 
Archives
