Posts Tagged ‘U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia’

With God leading the way, I, Michael Ellis and all the courageous Co-Plaintiffs in our cases continue to fight back against the IRS’ record falsification scheme, the multiple Department of Justice attorneys who falsify the allegations and relief we seek in our lawsuits, and the Federal judges who dismiss our cases based on the DoJ’s falsified documents.

With each DoJ motion and pleading, and each Order issued by the judges, it becomes clearer that these government officials are willing to blatantly commit multiple felonies to ensure the scheme lives in perpetuity. It is also clear they believe they are above the law.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

13
Jul

“And, who are you?”, said the Magistrate

   Posted by: BobMcNeil    in 115-cv-01288, 16-5233 Appeal, IRS

Although I haven’t posted a blog in awhile, rest assured there has been a lot of activity going on behind the scenes: filing a Petition for Writ of Certiorari with the Supreme Court; moving six (6) consolidated cases through Appeals Court; filing a motion to alter or vacate the Order of permanent injunction against Michael Ellis and me; battling a rogue Magistrate Judge in cases 16-2313 & 17-00022; my trip from Texas to California to assist a Plaintiff in a court hearing; etc.

Instead of writing a lengthy post about all those events, I will address each of them in individual blogs at a later date.  This lengthy blog, however, will focus on the one case filed in California and the events leading up to my flight to Fresno in May 2017 to support a pro se Plaintiff during her initial court hearing.

Before I begin, though, it is important that I remind all of you of the reasons why Michael and I have filed, or assisted in the filing of, fourteen (14) cases in U.S. District Court. Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The moment many of you have been waiting for has finally arrived.

Michael and I finalized the Rule 20 Motion for Permissive Joinder, which will allow you to join case number 17-CV-00022 Stanley, et al. v. Lynch, et al. as a Co-Plaintiff.

In this case, we/you are suing John Koskinen, IRS Commissioner, Loretta Lynch, U.S. Attorney General, and Barack H. Obama, in personal capacity, for 1) falsifying federal records, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1001; 2) misprision of felony, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §4; 3) conspiracy to defraud the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §371; and, obstruction of the due administration of justice, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1503. Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Apparently, the “Safe Harbor Letter” and “Opposition to DoJ Motion to Dismiss” I sent to the DoJ had one desired effect.  Ms. Caroline Ciraolo-Klepper and Mr. Ryan McMonagle responded before the December 4th deadline with a document entitled “United States’ Reply Memorandum In Support Of Motion To Dismiss”.

See Document 009 at the following link: (9 pages 594kb)

http://www.ram-v-irs.com/CV-Docs/009-20151130-DoJ-United-States-Reply-Memorandum-In-Support-Of-Motion-To-Dismiss.pdf

As expected, they failed to address any of the core factual issues of this case and opened with this statement in the “Introduction”:

“Once the Opposition’s inflammatory rhetoric and ad hominem attacks are stripped away, very little remains for discussion. The plaintiff does not present any legal authority that would allow him to challenge the IRS’s preparation of returns or the use of such returns in proceedings to collect taxes. The plaintiff does not show that he has standing to enjoin the assessment and collection of taxes from him. Nor does the plaintiff identify any legal authority lending even an iota of legitimacy to his constitutional and Administrative Procedure Act claims. Most importantly, neither the Opposition nor the Complaint establishes any facts showing that the IRS violated the law in any way.”

Further, in the “Argument” section, they state this:

“This action must be dismissed for two reasons: (1) the Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s claims because the injunctive relief he seeks is barred by the Anti-Injunction Act, and he lacks standing; and (2) the plaintiff cannot state plausible claims under the Fifth Amendment or the Administrative Procedure Act. The plaintiff has not meaningfully opposed either point.”

For your information, the Anti-Injunction Act, written and passed by the very people we elected to represent us in the House and Senate, withdraws jurisdiction from the Courts to hear a lawsuit of this nature because it is a suit “for the purpose of restraining the assessment of a tax”.

According to the DoJ, if a plaintiff seeks to challenge the “lawfulness” of the tax assessments, he has one option: he must pay the disputed tax, file a refund claim, and sue in Court for a refund under 26 U.S.C. § 7422.

However, since the assessment of the income tax for a “non-filer” is based on falsified and fraudulently prepared documents (a criminal violation), my argument is that the Anti-Injunction Act cannot shield ANY government employee, or agency, from criminal acts, and, therefore, is “inapposite” (not apt or pertinent).

Ms. Ciraolo-Klepper and Mr. McGonagle go on to further obfuscate my claims, which is a continuation of their previously noted behavior, and will add more evidence when I file a “Motion for Sanctions”, up to, and including, disbarment.

Please read this latest document in its entirety and spread this blog far and wide.

No born-free American should live under this tyranny.

In liberty,

Bob McNeil
21st Century American Revolutionary
Founder/President – American Citizen Party

ACP-RAM-flag-small

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,