The 16th amendment is unconstitutional. The government does not have the right to tax income.
76 2017-06-21 by LightBringerFlex
16th Amendment:
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
Side note: Laws are always made unclear purposely so that the rulers can abuse them legally.
I'm building up the story on income tax so if anyone has any useful links, please comment them in.
Basically, if I'm not mistaken, what happened was that Woodrow Wilson, an Illuminati stooge, brought into existence the 16th amendment with the excuse that it would only be temporary until the war ended. The rich were to pay about 90% tax and the poorer people would pay less.
NOTE: Today, the rich people pay 0% tax and the poorer people pay up at least 30% when combining income and payroll taxes. The starving poor people can't afford to pay so they are thrown in prison where they become real life slaves making ten cents an hour. They flipped it around on us.
Also, the Illuminati of the time had decided to create tax free foundations for sinister reasons. The Clinton Foundation is a good example of one of those modern day foundations and these foundations are often used to fund fake civil right movements like Black Lives Matter tax free. Of course, they pocket a lot of the money too.
Federal Tax of 1884
In 1894, the Illuminati wanted to seize the wealth of Americans but they simply couldn't because it was clearly unconstitutional but they tried anyway. They were going to tax 2% on all income over $90,000 (in today's monetary value).
Pollock v. Farmers Loan Trust Co.
In 1885, the Supreme Court of the United States, in Pollock v. Farmers Loan Trust Co., struck down the Federal Income tax of 1884 claiming it to be unconstitutional.
More info on this here:
Somehow, someway, Wilson eventually ignored the Supreme Court ruling and brainwashed Americans into pay income tax anyway to support the war. Note that all wars are fake rackets designed to enrich weapons companies and their stooges so this income tax that was supposed to pay for the war was actually supposed to weaken the common man by removing money from the economy.
After a while, the Illuminati stooges in the US government were able to convince people to accept income tax as a permanent fixture in society and the 90% tax rate on the rich was eventually moved down to a 0% tax wage we see today. However, there is a huge strain on the middle class who has to pay 3 different taxes:
Payroll tax - This is typically about 30%.
Income tax - varies.
Sales Tax - 6-10% on all purchases.
All of these taxes were made to sound like necessities to keep society running to hide the fact that this is really just like any mafia tax but the money is going to the worldwide Illuminati mafia. Not only does it make them richer but it weakens the Goy who they greatly fear and wish to enslave.
Of course the Federal Reserve was also thrown in the mix to further bankrupt the nation and the IRS is basically a private company of henchman that twist American citizens' arms to milk them of every last dime they have. The ultimate goal is to exhaust every nations to the point where the citizens of the world beg the Illuminati for peace at which point the Illuminati will offer peace in exchange for a 1 world government controlled by the Illuminati. Therefore, the triple tax on Americans with the Federal Reserve tumor was created as an efficient machine to eventually bankrupt America.
Did You Know the IRS and the Fed are Private Corporations?:
http://www.wakingtimes.com/2015/01/27/know-irs-fed-private-corporations/
Wilson, an Illuminati stooge, illegally passed the 16th amendment even though the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional in 1885 with the hopes that America would swallow this painful pill without fighting back. For this reason, legally, the 16th amendment is null and void and the IRS is an illegal organization in cahoots with the Illuminati puppeteers.
Any lawyers reading this should start a class action lawsuit.
A speech from 50 years ago explains how income tax is unconstitutional and illegal perfectly:
https://youtu.be/6X_xB1JJ_Es?t=40m8s
Some might say that these taxes are used to build roads and pay for public services which may be partially true but most of it is used to enslave humanity. Basically, we pay people to enslave us.
97 comments
n/a soonerchad 2017-06-21
Great post! Thanks
n/a outtanutmeds 2017-06-21
Who are the Illuminati? More ghosts to chase. I go by who Congress listens to and gives devotion. What foreign leader got more standing ovations in a speech to Congress than any U.S. President?
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
I think the Council of Foreign Relations is the American branch of the Illuminati beast which has similar organizations in most every country. They consist mostly of Zionists and English monarchs. They also operate through Masonic lodges they planted worldwide. The Rothschild family may or may not be the head of the Illuminati but they are the highest members I can think of. The members seem to be connected to an old, diabolical country called Khazaria that worshiped some kind of Satanic being but later claimed to be Jewish to hide the truth of their sick religion.
n/a outtanutmeds 2017-06-21
So, in a nutshell, are you are saying that international Jewish bankers working for the House of Rothschild blackmailed Congress into passing the Federal Income Tax Law? If that is the case, just say so. But, to list all these spooky groups that hide in castles and dungeons and nobody knows who they are is a bit ludicrous.
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
That is just part of the story. Every vile thing you can imagine does happen within the Illuminati.
n/a outtanutmeds 2017-06-21
I need names. Who did Bernanke give $2.3 trillion to? Who did he give another $16 trillion to? You find that out, and you will be a hero.
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
Wasn't it to,bail out the banks?
http://aheadoftheherd.com/Newsletter/2011/Bernanke-Secretly-Gives-away-Sixteen-Trillion-Dollars.htm
n/a outtanutmeds 2017-06-21
Yeah, that is what they say. But, to whom and where exactly did the money? How about the Russian central bank. How many hundreds of billions did Bernanke give to the Russian central bank?
n/a Armaedus 2017-06-21
ummm you need to do more research.
Roosevelt wasn't president when the 16th amendment passed. That was Woodrow Wilson. You're off by about 7 years.
n/a GuruOfGravitas 2017-06-21
Thanks, I was about to make the same statement, not to mention a President can't amend the U.S. Constitution, only the sates or Congres
n/a plebsareneeded 2017-06-21
Also an amendment by definition can't be unconstitutional.
n/a GuruOfGravitas 2017-06-21
Thank you, for assisting in the project to debunk every sentence of that post.
n/a plebsareneeded 2017-06-21
LOL fair enough. You're right that was a little excessive. I guess it just bugged me a little more than most posts for some reason.
n/a GuruOfGravitas 2017-06-21
Yes, we have real problems with our "self" governance, we don't need to fight over the imaginary.
n/a Smoothtank 2017-06-21
Sure it can be. When it begins infringing the established amendments or conflicts with them.
n/a plebsareneeded 2017-06-21
No, it still would not be unconstitutional. The Supreme Court would have to decide how to interpret the new amendment but they cannot declare it unconstitutional. I believe that in general the most recently passed amendment would take precedence.
n/a Satori42 2017-06-21
Sounds like someone's forgotten that We, the People are the ultimate arbiter of what a Constitution ordained and established by We, the People means.
Where the Supreme Court conflicts with that, good luck to 'em. The owner of a company always trumps the manager.
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
Oh ok, I'm just researching this now so I could be wrong about which stooge it was that passed it.
n/a Armaedus 2017-06-21
If you want a decent movie that sums it all up pretty nicely see Freedom to Fascism.
I will warn you though, that some of the quotes provided are taken out of context to some degree. But the overall information is fairly accurate concerning how things came into being and how they're implemented today.
n/a flyinghighernow 2017-06-21
I would recommend Money As Debt. Have you seen that yet? :)
n/a Armaedus 2017-06-21
I have not. I'll have to check it out.
n/a JayCeePup 2017-06-21
So you didn't know which president did it, but you know the secretly reason why. I guess you research isn't to find out, you already know!
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
Like I mentioned in the post, I am barely finding out about this and could use the help of commenters.
n/a JayCeePup 2017-06-21
But you already have your conclusion. Silly me I learn first,then conclude.
n/a flyinghighernow 2017-06-21
OP is way over his head here, and the sources are really bad.
The prior rule was that "indirect" taxes had to be apportioned. The 16th Amendment does basically one thing: it says apportionment is no longer required. That's why income tax is covered under it -- because income tax is not normally apportioned. The change was to make the income tax legal.
The 16th Amendment was passed by congress in 1909. Wilson became president in 1913.
A Constitutional amendment overrides the Supreme Court. All Wilson did was certify the ratification by the states.
SSA is 6.2 percent, Medicare is 1.45 percent, totalling 7.65 percent. Add employers' share and it becomes 15.3 percent.
Look at the federal budget. More than all of the tax money is accounted for.
The Federal Reserve System is inherently corrupt, but not for the reasons you claim.
No. LOL
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
Ah yes, I was waiting for someone to come in here and defend the Illuminati's fraudelant tax system designed to bankrupt America.
n/a flyinghighernow 2017-06-21
NOTHING I said was opinion, and nothing I said indicated that these things were done for innocent reasons. You were wrong on the facts, and now, anything analysis you do is worthless.
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
Ok, but how can you possibly believe anything TBTB say. They just throw fake reports to make you think your tax dollars are hard at work so you settle down instead of fighting back.
n/a flyinghighernow 2017-06-21
I don't believe anything. I see that there are debt payments going to the oligarchs, huge contracts going to the military contracting oligarchs, retirement and disability money going to disabled people and seniors, and medical money going to various places, and a little sliver left over for everything else. It makes pretty good sense to me. :)
It all fits together pretty well -- except of course all the money the Defense Department disappeared -- which has been well covered in Conspiracy and which would reduce the money available and cut exactly the wrong way to support your hypothesis that:
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
Ah, sorry for the friendly fire. Shills have been knee deep in this sub lately.
n/a saenor 2017-06-21
You didn't have to wait long. Plus, don't taxes pay for roads and schools? With out taxes, who would pay for those? I'm guessing you wouldn't be on the front line giving money to pay for those services.
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
I prefer that the people arrange something that pays for schools roads ect.. This way the money isn't jacked.
n/a saenor 2017-06-21
Isn't that what taxes are suppose to do?
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
Ya but instead of giving it to the government, we can give it to a community owned, open source fund and use that funding to build our own roads.
n/a saenor 2017-06-21
But what happens if people don't want to give their money?
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
We need a free commercial system where we broadcast projects that need funding, how much we have saved, and how much is needed. We also need a website that does the same. This way, the people are completely informed on what's happening with their money. For example, we might need a bridge to replace a broken one and need $100,000. We post an ad on our TV channel to the whole nation and we will easily be able to fun $100,000. The fund raiser will run every day until it is capped and the people will fully understand that without this money, there won't a bridge which will make life a lot harder on the locals.
Also, if you are worried about people not helping, take a look at sites like GoFundMe.com where people from all over the country are paying to make other people's dreams come true.
We can do this no problem. We can do anything if we use our brains and strategize wisely.
n/a saenor 2017-06-21
So you're saying we need more Telethons instead of fixing the loop holes and other vaguely worded phrases in the laws that allow the rich shit bags to not contribute like you and me?
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
We chat fix the system within the system. We simply have to make a new one on the side and slowly shift our entire society to it leaving the old order cabal behind.
n/a benjamindees 2017-06-21
You should start by correctly defining income.
n/a plebsareneeded 2017-06-21
Not to mention correctly defining amendment.
n/a plebsareneeded 2017-06-21
It is fucking impossible for an amendment to the Constitution to be unconstitutional you fucking idiot!!!
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
And why not? The Supreme Court ruled income tax to be unconstitutional in 1885.
n/a plebsareneeded 2017-06-21
Because by definition an amendment to the constitution is part of the constitution.
n/a nliausacmmv 2017-06-21
And what year was the Sixteenth ratified? 1913. That's how amendments work. By very definition, they cannot be unconstitutional because they're part of the constitution.
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
We can sit here and argue about the way the Illuminati made the laws so they can legally fuck us or we can think outside the box and come up with sensible solutions that work for us. We all know the tax laws are shit and we know the cabal likes it this way as it is their wish to bankrupt us. That is the bottom line and the riddle we have to solve.
n/a nliausacmmv 2017-06-21
Lol. Just admit you don't have a clue what you're on about.
n/a dinodares99 2017-06-21
Dude. The latest ruling holds
That's litrally how everything works, law or not
n/a slanaiya 2017-06-21
What do you think "unconstitutional means"?
n/a bwburke94 2017-06-21
That's certainly one of the more entertaining 16th Amendment posts recently, but you failed to explain why exactly the amendment is invalid.
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
The Supreme Court ruled it's invalid.
n/a bwburke94 2017-06-21
What exactly is the "it" the Supreme Court ruled invalid?
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
Income tax child. "Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company, 157 U.S. 429 (1895), affirmed on rehearing, 158 U.S. 601 (1895), with a ruling of 5–4, was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the unapportioned income taxes on interest, dividends and rents imposed by the Income Tax Act of 1894 were, in effect, direct taxes, and were unconstitutional because they violated the provision that direct taxes be apportioned."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollock_v._Farmers%27_Loan_%26_Trust_Co.
n/a HelperBot_ 2017-06-21
Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollock_v._Farmers%27_Loan_%26_Trust_Co.
HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 82638
n/a motdidr 2017-06-21
you might actually be retarded
n/a twsmith 2017-06-21
The Supreme Court, before the 16th Amendment was passed, ruled that certain parts of the 1894 income tax act were unconstitutional.
The 16th Amendment was created specifically to overrule the Supreme Court. It passed Congress in 1909 and was ratified by the states from 1909 to February 1913. That's all during the Taft administration.
Also, it is not true that the rich pay 0% tax. The IRS is not a private corporation.
Part of the Federal Reserve is a government agency and it also includes 12 corporations that are quasi-private.
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
Of course it was before the 16th amendment was passed. That ruling can be used in court to discredit the 16th amendment.
Taxes are highway robbery. The 16th amendment was made because the Illuminati knew it could not seize property from American citizens thanks to the constitution so they made the 16th amendment to rob us legally.
Wake up fool. You're defending the thief.
n/a plebsareneeded 2017-06-21
Says the fool who doesn't know the difference between a law and an amendment.
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
Instead of worrying about grammar, you should worry about this country being purposely set on the course for bankruptcy.
n/a plebsareneeded 2017-06-21
It has nothing to do with grammar. It has to do with you not knowing what's an amendment is. Although apparently you don't know what the word grammar means either so I shouldn't be surprised.
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
What I'm trying to say is that instead of worrying about grammar, spelling mistakes, or small errors, think about the catastrophe the cabal dropped on our heads an and generate ideas on how to solve these problems. We will get a lot further ahead when we focus on the important stuff. Fuck the rules the cabal made. These laws benefit them and destroy us.
n/a plebsareneeded 2017-06-21
None of those things have anything to do with the fact that the entire premise of your post is false. Screwing up the definition of a word is not a spelling mistake, grammar issue, or small error. It is like a vegetarian eating chicken because they think it isn't meat.
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
Did you listen to this part of the video where he says pretty much what I am saying in the post?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&t=40m8s&v=6X_xB1JJ_Es
n/a plebsareneeded 2017-06-21
Who cares if someone in a video said it? It doesn't mean it's true. This guy obviously doesn't understand how the constitution works.
n/a reegdor 2017-06-21
In your ignorance, you believe you know all. This is what cognitive dissonance looks like up close, if only you could see it.
n/a slanaiya 2017-06-21
Specifically the Dunning–Kruger effect.
n/a slanaiya 2017-06-21
We're not talking about a small error but a monumental cock up.
You are arguing that the Constitution is unconstitutional because when the Constitution was different it was different. FFS.
n/a neverthatone 2017-06-21
It's not a small mistake, an amendment to the constitution changes the constitution. It's why prohibition was added to the constitution and then a wholly seperate amendment was needed to repeal it.
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
They snuck that shit in there. Fuck the law. The government breaks every last one.
The only real law is the common sense morale code we all hold within us.
n/a neverthatone 2017-06-21
No morals are a terrible determination of ethical behavior, I find nothing morally wrong with chopping off a thieves hand... but some one else finds nothing morally wrong with kidnapping pot smokers, and someone else thinks it's moral to pay a woman's family some money after they rape her... morals are too inconsistent to be a basis of society. I don't expect you to understand why your "common sense" is not universal, as you've already demonstrated a lack of understanding as to the definition of constitutional and amendment, as well as the concept of times forward progression.
n/a KingOfTek 2017-06-21
So tell me then, what is Article 5 of the Constitution?
n/a plebsareneeded 2017-06-21
You seriously have no idea how difficult it is to amend the Constitution do you?
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
Who gives a shit about the way it happened. Its a failing system. Instead of arguing about the "monopoly rules" the elite made, why don't we focus on solutions.
All the laws are made by Illuminati to serve them and harm us. They made it legal to hurt us. Should just shrug our shoulders and agree that it is perfectly OK to hurt us because the Illuminati made a crime legal?
We need to think outside of the box if we want to succeed. We can't fix the system from within.
n/a plebsareneeded 2017-06-21
If you want people to listen to you it would probably help to not tell blatant lies in the title of your post. It would also help to know what the fuck you are talking about.
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
The purpose of the post is to expose the tax system as a system designed to help bankrupt America. As I mentioned in the post, I am just learning about this stuff myself.
Why don't you make a post discrediting income tax and PM me with a link since you know so much about this subject matter?
n/a plebsareneeded 2017-06-21
If that's the purpose that should probably be the title rather than some bullshit about income tax being illegal.
Why should I do your work for you? If you want to discredit income tax then put in the effort to learn about it first.
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
So you are totally OK with the tax system? If you are that's fine, but if you are educated on how these things work, you would do a better job than me and the people will appreciate the knowledge which empowers us.
n/a plebsareneeded 2017-06-21
No I'm not totally okay with the tax system but I also don't think the idea of an income tax needs to be discredited. And I certainly don't care enough to write a treatise on it. Also, I never claimed to be an expert. I just used logic and 8 seconds of googling to confirm I was right.
n/a slanaiya 2017-06-21
Nope.
n/a JPrufrock13 2017-06-21
An amendment amends the constitution, and is part of the constitution. The text and intent of the constitution, by definition, cannot be unconstitutional.
n/a slanaiya 2017-06-21
Nope.
n/a lehberger 2017-06-21
It was cringe worthy when you kept saying the rich pay 0%. I was following you until you kept repeating that. That's just factually inaccurate.
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
Here's a quote from the billionaire (possible trillionaire) Rockafellar:
You know, gentlemen, that I do not owe any personal income tax. But nevertheless, I send a small check, now and then, to the Internal Revenue Service out of the kindness of my heart.
The laws are designed so that an expensive accountant can make enough deductions to reduce taxes to near 0. Some people like rockafellar don't even bother to file and yet was never audited.
n/a lehberger 2017-06-21
Your statement is too sweeping and it's factually inaccurate. Quote Rockefeller blah blah. But it's not a true statement.
n/a plebsareneeded 2017-06-21
It was even more cringe worthy when he didn't understand how the U.S. given works.
n/a jeddzus 2017-06-21
They passed the amendment in order to amend the constitution so that it is legal to collect taxes. It wasn't legal in the case you cited, so they legally changed the wording of the constitution to override the supreme courts decision. Your methodology is incorrect here. This is like if we were all playing monopoly, and I wanted to build 10 hotels on my property while the rule book says I can only build 5. You (rightly so) complained when I tried to build a 6th hotel. So 3/4 of the people playing decided let's change the rules in order to allow for 10 hotels. We rewrite the rule book, everybody agrees to it, now I'm allowed to put 10 hotels on boardway (fuck everybody else).
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
Ok but who was it that decided to tax us to death? Cabal members? I'm pretty sure the people from 100 years ago didn't vote this garbage in.
Also, I heard the president made false promises that it was going to be a temporary tax that would be eliminated once the war ends. Another false promise.
n/a jeddzus 2017-06-21
Come on man lol, you can get a fairly accurate and well sourced breakdown of the passage even on Wikipedia for something like this. A constitutional amendment is very very difficult to pass, it's something that's a little difficult to fake and push through by some cabal at the top, especially when the government was initially only looking to tax businesses at 2% (most of these rich cabal members got there with their businesses). So they would be pushing through an amendment and getting 3/4 of the state legislatures in the country to force through legislation? It's hard to pack the state legislatures in 3/4 of the country, I don't care how much power you have.
n/a slanaiya 2017-06-21
Right wingers. They've been steadily transferring the tax burden to the middle class and low income earners for decades but it really took off when neoliberalism became hegemonic during Reagan's tenure.
n/a 5dreality 2017-06-21
The funny part about the shills in this post is how much of their 7 dollars an hour is going to taxes and their paid to argue for taxes
n/a TotesMessenger 2017-06-21
I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:
If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)
n/a Dysnomi 2017-06-21
The constitution is a statist prop. Legal rights mean nothing. The only rights that matter come from nature.
n/a space_rangers 2017-06-21
the thing that gets me about tax, is that first you get income taxed, and then you get taxed on the goods you buy. It's literally double taxation. Your payment of $1.00 becomes $.70 after income tax; and then you can only purchase about $.65 worth of products since $.05 of that will be going to sales tax. Thats almost half!!!!!!!!!!!
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-06-21
Also payroll tax destroys everyone's check.
n/a slanaiya 2017-06-21
The Constitution isn't constitutional!
n/a Mattandsuch 2017-06-21
This is the basic gist.
n/a Loose-ends 2017-06-21
This is a good legal rundown on the situation... http://www.foundationfortruthinlaw.org/Griffin-article.html
n/a CalcifiedNaniteEnrgy 2017-06-21
The constitution is unconstitutional! Down with the system! /s
n/a plebsareneeded 2017-06-21
LOL fair enough. You're right that was a little excessive. I guess it just bugged me a little more than most posts for some reason.
n/a saenor 2017-06-21
So you're saying we need more Telethons instead of fixing the loop holes and other vaguely worded phrases in the laws that allow the rich shit bags to not contribute like you and me?