16th Amendment On Trial in Chicago

Be sure to mark your calendars and show up for this landmark court case.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE TO ALL MEDIA AND MAILING LISTS

7th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals to Hear Landmark Sixteenth Amendment  (Income Tax) Case

Court to determine whether proof of non-ratification of the Sixteen  Amendment Irrelevant.

Chicago, Oct. 27. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has scheduled oral  argument in the government's case against William J. Benson, author of The  Law That Never Was-The Fraud of the 16th Amendment and Personal Income Tax,  for Oct. 28th at 10:00 a.m. in the Main Courtroom, Room 2721 of the United  States Courthouse, 219 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois. Among other  issues  the Court will decide whether the several states sufficiently  ratified the 16th Amendment, and whether evidence of non-ratification  constitutes legally admissible evidence in a court of law.

Patriots generally agree that the 16th Amendment falsely alleged to allow  Congress to impose an unapportioned, direct, personal income tax on  virtually all American earners. The Supreme Court claimed the 16th  Amendment gave Congress no new taxing powers, but merely put the income tax  in the class of an excise. The IRS and its advocated claim the 16th  Amendment allows Congress to impose a direct unapportioned tax upon people's  property. The Constitution specifically requries that Congress apportion  direct taxes among the states according to percentage of population. That  would mean every taxpayer would owe the same amount of tax, and the states  would have the responsibility of allocating, assessing, and collecting the  tax. Then the states would give the money to Congress. That has not  happened since the times of the War of Northern Agression (Civil War),  possibly because the 17th Amendment removed the state legislatures from the  power to choose US Senators, and thereby deprived the states of  representation in the "United States"  government.

The Supreme Court has never ruled on what constitutes the actual subject of  the income tax, and it has stymied patriot efforts to get the courts to  compel the IRS and other government entities truthfully and fully to respond  to petitions for redress of grievance regarding income tax and the work of  the IRS in unlawfully imposing it directly upon the people.  Furthermore, the Supreme Court refused to address the legality of the 16th  Amendment, claiming its ratification by the states and approval in Congress  is a "political" issue. The issue at stake has nothing to do with what the  16th Amendment means. It has to do only with whether the 16th Amendment  exists lawfully.

The Department of Justice charged William J. Benson with falsely telling the  American People that the several states did not ratify the Sixteenth  Amendment and that the implementation of a direct unapportioned income tax  violates the Constitution. The US District Court struck evidence of the  truth of his statement from the record, claiming it "irrelevant and  immaterial." The appeal before the 7th Circuit raises the question of  whether American Citizens may prove their innocence in the courts of this  country.

In 1895 the United States Supreme Court declared the federal income tax  unconstitutional as an unapportioned direct tax. Congress proposed the  Sixteenth Amendment to allow the government to impose and collect taxes on  income. The proposed amendment was sent to the States for ratification. Then  Secretary of State, Philander Knox, received certificates of ratification  from the States which showed differences between the language proposed by  Congress and what was ratified by the States. Certified documents on file in  the United States National Archives establish that Knox, knowing that States  cannot change the language of a proposed Constitutional amendment, relied  upon a presumption that no State had done so, and declared the Sixteenth  Amendment as having been properly ratified.

Benson, who once worked for the Illinois Department of Revenue, visited the  National Archives in Washington, D.C., as well as the capitols of all  forty-eight states. Benson obtained certified copies of the House and Senate  Journals pertaining to the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment. These  documents show that several states did, intentionally, modify the language  proposed by Congress, proving the presumption relied upon by Secretary of  State Knox was false. Benson published his findings in a two volume set of  books, and sold his books and supporting documents on his website:

http://thelawthatneverwas.com .

In 2004, the government sued Benson to enjoin him from falsely telling the  American people that states had not ratified the Sixteenth Amendment. In  response, Benson's attorney, Jeffrey A. Dickstein of Milwaukee, Wisconsin,  offered the certified documents into evidence. On motion of the government's  attorney, the judge struck evidence from the record as irrelevant and  immaterial, and the District Court issued the injunction. The complete set  of pleadings filed in the District Court are available at

http://jeffdickstein.com/pleadings.aspx

.

The appeal before the 7th Circuit raises four fundamental questions of  national significance:

1. whether an American, charged with making a false statement, is  entitled to present evidence that his statement is true;

2. whether the injunction violates the First Amendment right to  freedom of speech;

3. whether Secretary of State Knox committed fraud in proclaiming  the Sixteenth Amendment ratified; and

4. whether the federal income tax is unconstitutional.

Testimonials:

Wanza & Gene Webb - "William Benson Has been one of the finest men we have  ever known. He never dropped the ball on this lie that the 16th Amendment  had been ratified. He is a true American and it is a privilege to know him.  Gene and I feel blessed to see his efforts will now bring the TRUTH to light."

Davis Mauldin - "Jeff Dickstein was my defense attorney in IRS vs.  Holland & Mauldin (we hung the jury... 5 of our 12 jurors joined our  activist organization following our 30 day criminal trial in Tulsa...  Sep-Oct, 1990)... the Benson appeal is a landmark case on several  Constitutional issues... please distribute this widely... the government

doesn't want this case to get any press for obvious reasons."

denver.craigslist.org/rnr/896516714.html