Home -- Site Map -- Search


About The Endless Mendacity Of Those Who Want To Suppress The Liberating Truth About The "Income" Tax


Efforts by the law-defying community to capitalize on the tag-team assault on me still playing out at the district court level concerning a trial in which the jury was told not to sweat the details too much, was denied access to the actual words of the law, and then was given prosecution-written "interpretations" of key aspects of the relevant law instead of the real words of the law-- see here for what was given to the jury and what the law really says-- because to let the jury know what Congress really says might result in its coming to an unwanted conclusion...


The outcome procured by these contortions is is being used by enemies of the truth (and advocates for your continued enslavement) to shout, "HAH! Hendrickson is ruled against by the court!!  That proves he must be wrong!!!"  Actually, of course, the fact that this sort of gimmickry was needed to get to this point is proof that I am RIGHT, and that the law-defiers don't dare actually argue against what I have revealed about the law, having to resort instead to corrupt efforts to keep the words of the law out of sight.


So, a vigorous effort is being made to seize the moment by those desperate to take the steam out of the CtC community itself, and to discourage others from becoming part of that educated, stand-up community of real Americans.  I've posted the comments below in response to some of these efforts.  Please read them through carefully, and PLEASE spread them around.



The following facts, evidence and observations were assembled in response to a pack of scurrilous lies circulated throughout parts of the "tax honesty" community in the Spring of 2010.  This effort is of the same character as those that have gone before, and those that doubtless will take their place in the future.  Each has its own details, but each is similarly mendacious. So, while what follows below will not necessarily address everything any of you may see that attempts to steer you away from the liberating truth, the debunkings presented here will serve as worthwhile guides to the custom debunking of lies that you may need to handle on your own.


A writer calling himself “Patrick” [from California] has recently appeared within the "tax honesty" community spreading lies intended to frighten Americans away from the liberating truth about the "income" tax presented in 'Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America' (CtC).  For instance, "Patrick" represents that CtC filers are being prosecuted.  Here, however, is the sworn testimony of Shauna Henline, Senior Technical Advisor in just one office of the IRS:


While Henline “has no idea”, the DoJ does, and in response to a direct challenge to identify even one CtC-educated filer prosecuted for his or her educated filing, the best it could do was this (from its response to my motion to dismiss on grounds of “selective/vindictive” prosecution:


Roger Menner’s prosecution was the only thing the DoJ could venture, and even that doesn’t make it.  As was pointed out in my reply: 

See the Menner indictment-- which really only tells half the tale, as quirks not identified in the indictment, such as filing rebuttals to non-existent 1099s, were involved in Roger's confused filings-- here.


Get it?  "Patrick" is lying.


Regarding the six individuals “civilly sued” as part of the nationwide April 12, 2006 “scare-people-away-from-CtC” effort, not only have none of them ever been charged, but no one else has ever been similarly sued since.  The two who stood their ground as my wife and I did got similarly treated to no-trial-no-appearances summary judgment and subsequent “not-for-publication” appellate court rubber-stamp mugging (but in our case, at least, our filings still stand-- see www.losthorizons.com/PostAssessCerts.pdf).


Three others surrendered to government harassment and declared that they had perjured themselves on their original filings, which the DOJ and IRS touts as "victories", but the reality is that the government gratefully accepted new filings from these folks and then quickly slunk away without a backward glance.  There have been no charges or other proceedings in connection with the repudiated original filings.  In fact, the "righteous and victorious" feds formally agreed to take a hike in exchange for the new filings.


In the fourth case, the refund secured by the original filing was handed back as the government’s price for having the suit dismissed, but the warrior refused to file an amended return.  The DOJ issued a self-congratulatory press release claiming “victory” in this case too, but later the IRS quietly credited the returned money in full as a positive balance on the warrior’s “account”...


Get it? "Patrick" is lying.


Regarding “Patrick’s” allegations of “collections activities” to recover victories won, first of all it is patently absurd on its face to suggest that the government is just returning property to these claimants, under a program of going back to try to reclaim it later, and in fact, this is nonsense.  The IRS operates at least three separate programs in a gauntlet through which CtC-educated returns pass before the “overpayments” are returned to the filer.


As I have noted previously in the Lost Horizons newsletter:


Cracking the Lies

One of the pernicious fictions persistently promoted by the "ignorance tax" crowd is that CtC-educated victories are the result of some kind of glitch in the tax-agency's systems-- that they have all "slipped through the cracks", and are just a series of remarkably widespread and sustained mistakes that'll get straightened-out in due course.


If so, it would be a pretty big and long-lasting "crack"...


This lie is cleverly used in an effort to defuse the impact of the six-years-and-counting river of never-before-seen-in-history accomplishments of the CtC community, and to plant anxieties in the minds of those unfortunate few in the community who are subjected to special discouragement efforts either before or after securing their victories.


However, the fact is that nearly every one of the hundreds and hundreds of posted federal victories, at least, underwent specific, special scrutiny by the IRS before the checks and notices were issued to the warrior involved (the 33 states obeying the law and issuing refunds to educated Americans may have similar vetting to that described below, but I can't say that authoritatively).  This is manifest in the documentation itself in many cases, of course, such as in the scores of special victories posted at www.losthorizons.com/tax/Highlights.htm and in the 'Every Which Way But Loose' series.  But even those involving no more than the initial filing and the issuance of the check or credit notice have gone through the same pre-issuance vetting by the 'service', which actually testified to this effect in affidavits filed by the government in its PR "lawsuit" against my wife and me. Here is how I summarized this testimony in a brief I filed in that case (with a few [bracketed] updates here and there):

[IRS specialist] Henline’s “declaration” merits a few further observations beyond the points already made, however, particularly insofar as her “declaration” is to be imagined as supporting Plaintiff’s depraved prayer to this honorable Court to assist it in suppressing Defendant Peter Hendrickson’s speech.

After her tedious ruminations about how the world would be if only IRS-approved testimony were allowed to have standing in legal contests, Henline proceeds to describe an IRS program called the “Frivolous Return Program”, which she says operates out of the “Ogden Compliance Services Campus”. She states (in paragraph 21 of her “declaration”) that “Near the end of 2004” she and her colleagues began to observe “a particular pattern or trend” of filings with characteristics which Henline means to be taken as reflecting the knowledge communicated in ‘Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America’. She obviously hopes that this honorable Court will presume that the filings described qualify as “frivolous”, simply by associating them with her discussion of this program.

However, throughout Henline’s “declaration” in its entirety, she never once actually declares the returns she describes to be improper or frivolous. Indeed, she doesn’t even declare OUR returns to be improper or “frivolous”. The closest she comes is to suggest that it was “erroneous” for us to include in our claim for refund the amounts withheld in connection with the possibility of Social Security and Medicare “wages” having been received. She doesn’t trouble herself to explain how, in light of the fact that we DID NOT receive such “wages”, the government has any proper right to keep that money...

Henline is really just trying to play a semantic game involving the fact that on certain tax-related forms, some amounts withheld are designated as “Federal income tax withheld”, some as “Social security tax withheld” and some as “Medicare tax withheld”, while the line on a 1040 for reporting the total amount withheld uses the expression “Federal income tax withheld”. The fact is, the distinction of “federal income tax withheld”, “Social security tax withheld” and “Medicare tax withheld” on certain forms is purely nominal, without any legal meaning-- the law explicitly declares “Social security” and “Medicare” taxes to be “income” taxes like any others.

Henline plays other semantic games in this portion of her “declaration” as well. She deploys the term “taxpayer” throughout her descriptions of the filings noted by her “Frivolous Return Program”, in the apparent hope that the inference will be drawn that some filers are making claims unsuited to their status (although again, without actually saying so explicitly). However, when Henline specifically refers to those who have received refunds, she carefully uses the word “individuals”, instead. Yet another of the endless examples of the bad faith underlying the “complaints” in this action.


Further on in the “Frivolous Return Program” portion of her “declaration”, in paragraph 24, Henline contradicts her earlier statement regarding timing. Now she says that the “pattern or trend” of filings to which she refers first caught the attention of her and her colleagues shortly after the publication of ‘Cracking the Code-...’ in July, 2003, rather than “near the end of 2004”. There is about a year-and-a-half of spread between these two points on the calendar, suggesting that Henline is making this up as she goes along and lost track of her earlier fabrication by the time she got around to the later one. Another possibility is that she made the first assertion in deliberate service to her purposes in this carefully-crafted “declaration”, and then had a failure of cunning and told the truth inadvertently with the second date.

We favor the latter of these two possibilities, as we suspect that Henline would prefer it to be imagined that it was only in late 2004 that the IRS began to take an interest in what Peter Hendrickson reveals about the law, and would prefer that the preceding 18 months to be forgotten. But it was not late 2004 before the IRS focused on this subject.

The truth is, the very week ‘Cracking the Code-...’ became available (which was actually late August of 2003), the IRS downloaded the content of Peter Hendrickson’s website, losthorizons.com, as part of its immediate preparations for efforts to suppress his book and other speech-- in part by means of injunctions of the same sort being sought in the instant action. The IRS and Department of Justice formally launched those efforts in February of 2004, commencing three different legal actions over the course of the following 7 months-- two of them in this very Court-- and including in its evidence packages the downloaded website content mentioned above. Each of these three actions was eventually dismissed on the government’s own motions, raising a bar to its further pursuit of such efforts under the doctrine of res judicata.

The more significant aspect of this timing reality is the fact that the IRS has been intensely conscious of Peter Hendrickson and his speech for fully three years now [make that seven years now]. The agency has also been intensely conscious of the many, many filings made by Americans across this great country who have read ‘Cracking the Code-...’ and acted based upon what they have learned-- and really wishes it could stop them. But, its gross obfuscations in the instant action notwithstanding, even the IRS recognizes the truth about these filings, and what the law requires. Thus, the agency has been routinely delivering complete refunds of every penny withheld from the (often) considerable earnings of these upstanding Americans-- including nominal “Social Security” and “Medicare” taxes-- during that entire period, without interruption.

Well over a million dollars worth of such refunds [now many millions more], respectfully issued by the federal and 22 [now 38] state and local governments so far, are displayed at losthorizons.com, and many more have been reported as received but not made available for display. These refunds, the displayed host of which range from a largest single check of $75,150.00 to a smallest of $1.00, continue to this very day. The most recently dated federal refund check posted issued on August 11th, 2006-- every penny withheld from this upstanding American during 2003, plus interest. It shares page space with another issued July 17th, 2006, by the very Ogden “campus” at which Shauna Henline’s “Frivolous Return Program” operates. Obviously, these filings are not in any way false, fraudulent, or “frivolous”, or anything but lawful, proper, and correct in every way. [The most recently posted now is dated March 26, 2010]

Many of these refunds have involved considerable personal contact between the Americans claiming them and IRS workers. Many filing readers, having no withheld property to reclaim, have instead secured transcripts of $0 balances as posted in the IRS database. Others have had “Notices of Deficiencies” and levies withdrawn, or received reimbursement of money previously taken from them by garnishment. Obviously, these filings are not in any way false, fraudulent, or “frivolous”, or anything but lawful, proper, and correct in every way.

Indeed, just last week the Washington Post reported that throughout 2005, a year during which nearly $1,000,000.00 worth of (merely the posted) refunds were issued, the IRS had a sophisticated “fraud detection” computer program in use, which specifically scrutinized every return on which a refund was claimed. Another administrative program in use since 1977 [the "Questionable Refund Program"] was also deployed during the same period, under which more than 120,000 refund claims WERE frozen last year. But not those claimed by these ‘Cracking the Code-...’ readers. Obviously, this near million dollars worth of refunds claimed by readers of ‘Cracking the Code-...’ (and the many more received during 2005 but not available for display, and the others of the same character claimed before and since) DID NOT AND DO NOT QUALIFY AS FALSE OR FRAUDULENT. Needless to say, the same is true of the returns by which these claims were made.


To see the relevant excerpt of IRS employee Shauna Henline, click here.


As is made clear through Henline's testimony (and the special victories on the Highlights and EWWBL pages in which the refunds were pulled from the very jaws of recalcitrant tax agencies), refunds issued by the feds happen only after considerable vetting.  They are not "slips through the cracks"-- they have been poked at, prodded, studied, sometimes strenuously-resisted, and then sent out.


The IRS is not some uniquely naive entity that just sends out checks because someone asks for them!  What a ridiculous thing to suggest!  By the way, in testimony in trial recently, Henline herself admitted that her office alone has seen at least ten thousand CtC-educated filings over the last few years, estimating, as she put it, "conservatively".


Indeed, the exact opposite is true, and everyone knows it.  Unfortunately, some folks let themselves get flustered by hearing about scary "threat letters and notices" (without looking closely enough to notice that these "notices" never actually use the word "assessed"), or absurd after-the-refund "collection efforts" (as in "We changed your account" notices, and the like) in which the ridiculous implication it is hoped that everyone will take away is, "We're just such nice guys that we send out checks on request, and rely on being able to go back later and fix any mistakes..."  These folks stop thinking clearly, and/or become prey to tax-agency shills within the "tax honesty" and "tax professional [read: beneficiary]" communities who point to these pretenses in an effort to frighten and discourage.


Remember, people, "fear is the mind-killer".  Keep your mind alive, and your thinking cap on.


The lies spread by “Patrick” and his colleagues are just the kind of vicious, destructive aids to the status quo I wrote about in this piece, originally posted last autumn-- and a real tragedy.


UNDERSTAND, AND I MEAN REALLY UNDERSTAND, that the CtC-educated community is the stake poised over the chest of the vampire, and the vampire knows it.  A whole lot of energy and effort are being expended right now to try to blunt that stake, and dissipate the force behind it back into the "way things are" fog.  We all need to be piling on the weight, but “Patrick” and friends are doing what they can to take the weight off and keep the monster safe.



P. S. The actual facts about the government's behavior are important for revealing lies and the agendas of liars, but are irrelevant to the real issue-- which is the truth about the law.  The truth about the law is not something that varies with the attitude of the "authorities"; and anyone who doubts that the "authorities" would behave corruptly in order to suppress an inconvenient truth from spreading need look no further than the series of "legal" assaults to which I have been subjected for six years now-- particularly the latest one...


Read CtC.  You'll finish without any doubt that you just learned the complete truth about the "income" tax, as at least several tens of thousands-- maybe hundreds of thousands-- have before you.  At that point, you'll no longer be prey to idiot, liberty-eroding arguments like "Patrick's", which basically says that one should be steered in one's behavior by what the "authorities" are happy with, and are willing to let you do without resistance, just like your average North Korean.


"A free people claim their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate"

-Thomas Jefferson




"Patrick" has also borrowed material from an IRS-friendly webpage (which laughably purports to be there just to protect the poor American public from people like me).  This scurrilous collection of lies and misrepresentations appears to be periodically updated with more layers of falsity and slime, so my observations may lag behind by the time you read this, but you'll get the idea...


The object of this poster's efforts is to frighten folks away from the liberating truth revealed in CtC by suggesting to them that CtC has been tested and found wanting in courts across the land.  The reality is that no court has yet dared to actually address what is actually revealed in CtC.  In the very few instances so far in which CtC-educated Americans have been in court, the DoJ has striven mightily to avoid and evade facing what CtC teaches about the law.  This smear-poster nonetheless refers to a number of cases involving folks with CtC-educated victories, hoping that the superficial reader will not realize that even though these folks did become CtC-educated, the cases he cites in which they were involved either concerned matters pre-dating that education, had nothing to do with CtC, involved lawsuits brought pro se by the CtC-educated American but were flawed due to technical mistakes, and so forth.


The bottom line is that not a single one of these cases actually stands for what the smear-poster (and "Patrick") would like you to imagine.


The post is a sustained lie, as you will see, and the reason for it is that folks like "Patrick" and the poster of this smear-page have no real mud to throw (because CtC is completely correct).


For instance, the poster of this smear-page cites Eugene Warner's charges concerning his filings for 1991, and 2001 (years in regard to which Warner has victories posted).  But the charges Warner faced for those years concerned filings actually for 1999 and 2001, and in both cases involved filings done before Warner had ever heard of CtC (the indictment charges him with making his false filings on August 29, 2003-- which was only 6 days after the first printing of the book came back to me from the printer--see the indictment here), but not his CtC-educated filings, which were nearly two years old at the time of this indictment.  The victories posted (which DO include 1991, not 1999) are from several of the 15 educated filings made in early 2006, after Eugene had finally read the book and knew what he was doing (see his victories at http://losthorizons.com/tax/MoreVictories12.htm).


In April or May of 2009, a superseding indictment was issued in which 11 counts of "fraudulent refund claims" under a Title 18 statute were added (several of which appear to have concerned his educated filings, but at least one for which his victory is posted was NOT on the list...), but the feds promptly abandoned them all and negotiated for a plea of only one conspiracy countto which none of those gratuitous add-on charges (nor anything else not pre-dating Warner's reading CtC) was related.


Get it?  This smear-poster is lying.


This fellow also cites several tax-preparers as being enjoined.  The only one of these I actually know is Don Gray, so I have no idea what the others were doing, or thought they were doing.  But as regards Don's case, see http://losthorizons.com/thedenierspage.htm#Gray for the accurate story.


Get it?  He's lying.


Patrick Mooney's Tax Court suit is made much of by the smear-poster.  What he doesn't mention is that the case involved Patrick's suit to challenge gratuitous "frivolous" penalties that had been withheld from an otherwise complete refund made to him (and one of which concerned another filing for which he had also gotten a complete refund-- see http://losthorizons.com/tax/MoreVictories.htm and http://losthorizons.com/tax/MoreVictories16.htm).  Nor does this dissembling poster admit that the court never ruled that anything Patrick argued was wrong, but simply dismissed his suit after a ten-minute "trial" on the unexplained basis that Patrick had "failed to prosecute his case".


Patrick has since (March 15, 2010) brought another case into the same court, but armed this time with a powerful new weapon for forcing the court to face the real issues of law involved.  This time the trial ran five times as long and as of the time of this posting, a month later, no ruling has yet issued.


Get it?  This smear-poster is lying.


Joe Fennell was not arguing a CtC issue in his Tax Court case-- he was attempting to challenge an old assessment concerning a year prior to CtC being published, and for which he had ignored a notice of deficiency when it was issued long before even hearing about the book.  He went into TC arguing that the ignored NOD was defective, and lost.


Get it?


I'm not intimately familiar with Rusty Ragan's case, but it was Rusty suing the IRS, not the other way around, and probably in the wrong court, since I don't believe any "deficiency" had been alleged against him.  I also believe it merely ended in a dismissal for "failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted", which would be appropriate if the action was brought in the wrong court.


Get it?


I'm not familiar with Andy Scott's Tax Court case, but imagine that it is being appealed.  I HAVE seen govt. filings from several suits Andy has brought in state courts, all of which share the characteristic of vigorous efforts to evade, rather than engage, Andy's arguments.


You get it...


Regarding the "civil lawsuit" against my wife and me and a handful of others, in addition to the comments on this found toward the top of this page, see www.losthorizons.com/lawsuit.htm.  Read it all, carefully, taking particular note of the current Treasury Department Certificates of Assessment for the years for which Doreen and I were "sued" on which it will be seen that even the feds don't pretend that we ever owed any tax for those years. 


Regarding the DOJ dismissals, the writer attempts to treat them as inconsequential.  See http://losthorizons.com/tax/TheDOJFolds.htm and see the dismissals themselves (and the background info), as well as the relevant law.


Those repeated dismissals of federal actions against me based on the proposition that anything in CtC is false or fraudulent are anything but inconsequential, and they did not happen because of a "change in plans", as this writer suggests.  (Indeed, the idea that the feds would back off like this from charges that they could make stick is ludicrous.  If they hadn't faced a recognized loss here, they would have followed through relentlessly, and then done the other stuff, too.  For more on this, see http://www.losthorizons.com/LastShotForTheLawDefiers.htm#Update.)


Read these linked pages.  You'll get it.  This smear-poster is lying.


Finally, see http://www.losthorizons.com/LastShotForTheLawDefiers.htm in its entirety for an accurate discussion of the current "criminal" assault on me, and the government's own certificates of assessment demonstrating that whatever huffing and puffing it does for the consumption of the those who read nothing but its press releases, where it counts the feds acknowledge the truth.


All in all, this is a scurrilous collection of BS, deliberately designed to drive folks away from a truth the writer and his client want YOU to never learn.  By the way, note that this smear-poster doesn't mention the hundreds and hundreds of victories posted, including those periodically accomplished only after vigorous tax-agency efforts to resist them...  The motive of this piece is obvious, and in harmony with its deliberate inaccuracies.


These sort of mendacious attacks on CtC have been going on for years, and will continue until enough Americans have learned the truth about the "income" tax that the slimeballs behind them just have to give up and try to find honest work.  Watch for them, and please help me fight them.


"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."

-Edmund Burke


P. S.


Though it really goes without saying, I'll nonetheless take a moment to point this out, since after reading through the volume above, even the obvious might get lost in the shuffle: The reason for all this lying is that the enemies of CtC have nothing true that serves their purpose.


If they did have something true that served their anti-CtC purpose, they'd be putting it up on billboards across the nation, just as the DoJ, if it could come up with a single court case holding that all earnings are "income" (within the meaning of the income tax laws) or a single case holding that all earnings of every worker are "wages" (within the meaning of the income tax laws) would tattoo the case citations across its attorney's foreheads.


Don't lose sight of this lesson, and don't be shy in sharing it with others.