The IRS is trying to "TRICK" us, as usual.
Excerpt for Dan Meador's writings....
Some time after 1908 and before 1918, nonconstitutional insular possessions of the
United States entered a political compact or alliance. The name of this alliance is the
"United States of America", i.e., "Guam, U.S.A." on letterheads of the government of
Guam. Cooper and Bentson tracked mutual assistance agreements among insular
possessions that might provide a basis for this second "United States of America"
confederation, but they didn't quite get to the meat of the matter.
When Timothy McCrory of Blackwell, Oklahoma and I first stumbled across evidence of
this second United States of America in January 1997, the research community was
plagued by myopia. States of the Union collectively are the United States of America. The
possibility of there being a second United States of America was rejected by most
The Articles of Confederation in 1777 formally established the original United States of
America, mentioned in the Preamble and Article II of the Constitution of the United
States. But the Constitution creates and empowers a governmental entity designated and
known as the United States. The only authority conferred to the United States of America,
as a continuing public entity, is to elect the President and Vice President. When he takes
his oath of office, the "President of the United States of America" becomes the "President
of the United States". Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution establishes "The judicial
Power of the United States," it doesn't vest authority in the United States of America, nor
does it acknowledge the United States of America as a principal of interest.
Yet since approximately 1937, virtually all Federal civil actions and criminal prosecutions
have been in the name and by authority of the "United States of America".
That isn't what law specifies. Section 3231 of title 18, the Criminal Code, section 1345 of
title 28, the Civil Code, and section 7402 of the Internal Revenue Code, all specify that the
"United States" is the proper principal of interest.
The only place we've found the "United States of America" as a principal of interest in the
current edition of the United States Code is section 1001 of the Criminal Code, formerly
18 U.S.C. § 80 in the 1940 edition. Under this section, presently titled "statements and
entries generally," the United States of America can be a principal of interest where there
is fraud against a corporation in which the United States of America is a stockholder.
Beginning with 1918 legislation, the "United States" and the "United States of America"
both appeared in the section, where the United States of America was not present in the
1908 statute. In Historical and Statutory notes following the current 18 U.S.C. § 1001,
the reviser's note says the following about deletion of phrasing: "Words 'or any
corporation in which the United States of America is a stockholder' in said § 80 [1940
edition] were omitted as unnecessary in view of definition of 'agency' in § 6 of this title."
By some quirk of tortured rationale, this come-lately United States of America is
construed or defined as an "agency" of United States Government even though the U.S.
Supreme Court judicially proclaimed that these constitutionally unincorporated insular
possessions are "foreign" to the United States.
In the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act, which most States of the Union have
adopted, the "United States of America" is defined as a "State". The definition is at
Article II(a), in Oklahoma Statutes, at section 1347 II(a) of title 22: "'State' shall mean a
state of the United States; the United States of America; a territory or possession of the
United States; the District of Columbia; the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico."
Where United States Government has subject matter jurisdiction by virtue of a
constitutionally enumerated power, Federal agencies and courts have territorial
jurisdiction, commonly known as venue, within States of the Union. In this context, then,
the "United States of America" is a unique and separate "State" within the framework of
the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act. The United States of America doesn't have any
more territorial jurisdiction in Oklahoma and Texas than Kansas does. If and when it has a
criminal cause of action against someone located in one of the several States, it must
apply for extradition just as one State must apply for extradition from another. Aside from
being a political alliance, it is a geographical alliance. It is this entity, that magically
appeared between 1908 and 1918, that is the primary vehicle used for Federal
encroachment. As we will shortly verify, the Internal Revenue Service is an agency of this
come-lately United States of America, it is not an agency of United States Government.
We've engaged this exercise to frame two conclusions: The Internal Revenue Service is
successor of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, Puerto Rico, and does not have lawful
authority in States of the Union; and the United States of America is a political and
geographical alliance foreign to the United States and States of the Union. We now have
the stage set for our attorneys.
Diversified Metal Products, Inc. of Idaho received an Internal Revenue Service notice of
levy for money the company allegedly owed to Steve Morgan. The notice was challenged,
so rather than get caught in the middle, Diversified Metal's attorney, John M. Ohman, filed
an impleader action in the District Court of the Seventh Judicial District of Idaho, in the
Booneville County Magistrate Court (Case #CV93-4117). The disputed money was
deposited with the court. Diversified Metal filed the impleader action to resolve the
dispute between T-Bow Company Trust, the Internal Revenue Service, and Steve
Morgan. The purpose of the litigation was to determine proper ownership of the money
without Diversified Metal having liability exposure to IRS or Morgan.
In the complaint, Ohman set out statements of what he believed to be fact. Averment #4 is
as follows: "Defendant Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is an agency of the United States
government which has presented to Plaintiff a lien [actually, a notice of levy] against
monies to which Steve Morgan, or presumably Defendant T-Bow Company Trust for
him, may be entitled."
The United States Attorney for the district, Betty H. Richardson, answered on behalf of
the Internal Revenue Service. In her response to Ohman's #4 averment, she made the
following corrections: "Denies that the Internal Revenue Service is an agency of the
United States Government but admits that the United States of America would be a
proper party to this action…"
The Internal Revenue Service is not an agency of United States Government, but the
United States of America would be a proper party to the action? Richardson was in a
corner where she had to confess what Cooper, Bentson, and numerous other people have
proven half a dozen different ways: Congress did not legislatively create a Bureau of
Internal Revenue and the Philippines gained independence in 1946. That leaves only the
Bureau of Internal Revenue, Puerto Rico as a legislatively created governmental entity.
The Internal Revenue Service is successor by name change to BIR, Puerto Rico.
If the Internal Revenue Service is not an agency of United States Government, the United
States obviously wouldn't be the principal of interest. Richardson glossed over her
presentation, but she told the truth. The Internal Revenue Service operates as an agent of
this come-lately geographical and political alliance known as the United States of America,
Puerto Rico being a party to the compact.
On December 18, 1998, attorney Michael Bufkin of Dundee, Illinois sent a Freedom of
Information Act request to the Internal Revenue Service asking for documentation of
authority for the Department of Justice to defend IRS personnel in civil litigation and/or
criminal prosecution. On August 2, 1999, Leslie Hayward, a Disclosure Program
Assistant in the IRS national office, answered Bufkin as follows: "A search was
performed with the Office of Tax Crimes (Criminal Investigation) and with the Assistant
Chief Counsel (Disclosure Litigation) and we have no documents responsive to your
request. However, you may forward a copy of your request to the U.S. Attorney
General's Office within the Department of Justice."
In September, Bufkin sent the request to the Department of Justice, then on January 11,
2000, Thomas J. McIntyre, Chief of the Department of Justice Freedom of
Information/Privacy Act Unit, made the following response: "We have conducted a
search of the appropriate indices to Criminal Division records and did not locate any
records responsive to your request."
In other words, Internal Revenue Service personnel constitute an endangered species. It
might be necessary to roll them in sand to reduce the slime factor, but once you get hold
well enough to usher them to jail or sue them in civil court, the Department of Justice and
U.S. Attorneys have to watch from a respectful distance. IRS personnel are agents of a
government foreign to the United States, and they do not have lawful access to
government-funded defense when the Federalism scheme finally comes down around their
ears. They are quite literally agents of a foreign government invading the several States of
--- one_second_delete <one_second_delete@...
I need locate information on whether the office of the U.S. Attorney General holds any
delegated authorty to represent the United States of America.