Monthly Archives: August 2015

Glenn Ambort on Al Adask Radio Show

Al Adask has invited me as his guest on his radio show, today, August 4th, 2015.

TIME: 9-11 pm EDT (Eastern)

            8-10 pm CDT (Central)

            6-8 pm PDT   (Pacific)

WHERE: http://americanvoiceradio.com/

CALL-IN #: 800-932-1980

LINK to Al’s Blog: https://adask.wordpress.com/

AL ADASK BIO:

*I started studying law after my divorce in A.D. 1983. I’ve been involved in legal reform issues for 32 years.

* One thing led to another and I started publishing the “AntiShyster” news magazine in A.D. 1990.

*In A.D. 1992, I ran for the Texas Supreme Court (which is supposed to be illegal and received 201,000 votes).

*I continued to publish until A.D. 2002 when I was arrested without warrant and extradited without warrant based on two alleged felony counts of non-support of a child. The allegations were fraudulent. I was never actually charged with a crime. I was held for 344 days in a Level-5 Maximum Security Jail and then released.

*The IRS has come after me twice (A.D. 1991 & A.D. 2008). I stopped them both times with the grace of God and a couple of letters filled with relevant questions.

*The Dallas Bar Association came after me for Unauthorized Practice of Law back about A.D. 2000. I stopped them with the grace of God and an eleven-page letter filled with questions.

*In A.D. 2006, I was added as the last of seven defendants in case that started in A.D. 2001 and was based on the manufacture and distribution of a controlled substance (colloidal silver) and prosecuted by the Texas Attorney General. The first three defendants had spent $160,000 on one of Texas’ better law firms to defend them and achieved nothing. Each defendant (including me) was individually threatened with fines of $25,000/day ($9 million/year). I read the relevant law concerning the definitions of “drugs” in both the Texas and federal statutes and realized, with the grace of our Father YHWH ha Elohiym, that the drug laws only applied to animals.     I drafted a freedom of religion defense arguing that I cannot be an “animal” since I am a “man made in God’s image and given dominion over the animals” as per Genesis 1:26-28. The Texas AG, after investing six years and nearly $500,000 in pre-trial investigations and pre-trial hearings, dropped the case.

* I currently co-host two radio shows (American Independence Hour Tuesday nights from 8PM to 10PM Central; and, Financial Survival, Mon-Fri., 3PM to 4PM central.

If you want to read about the Motion to Dismiss based upon the IRS’s False-Return Scheme, filed in the Tax Evasion case, click HERE

ARCHIVE: If you’d like to receive a LINK to the archive of this show, please fill the form below, let me know, and I will send the LINK as soon as it becomes available.

Thanks,

Glenn

Motion to Dismiss – IRS False-Return Scheme

IRS FALSE-RETURN SCHEME

On Friday, July 31, 2015, three Defense Attorneys for Dr. William Bailey filed a Motion to Dismiss (MTD) the Government’s tax evasion case against him. The Motion is based upon the claim that the Indictment and the Prosecution were based upon false evidence, deliberately fabricated by the IRS in its deficiency procedures.

This MTD challenges the process which the IRS used to determine an income-tax deficiency on the Defendant for a year in which he did not file a Form 1040 income-tax return.

     Sample quotes from the Motion:

Following extensive discovery proceedings, Dr. Bailey now alleges herein that the government deliberately fabricated false evidence critical to the prosecution of this case and that the government’s conduct was so outrageous that due process principles now bar the government from using this Honorable Court to obtain a conviction.

At the onset in 1998, the government first contacted Dr. Bailey via a civil audit; it then manufactured entries into the IRS computer system to make it appear that Dr. Bailey had filed tax returns and had tax deficiencies when the IRS had created a substitute for return (SFR) under IRC § 6020(b) which, in actual fact, the Commissioner’s safeguard procedures will not permit without the use of an override function which produced the false-return scheme. The Internal Revenue Manual, itself, notes that an SFR is not, in actual fact, a return under § 6020(b). “An SFR, in and of itself, does not constitute a return under IRC 6020(b).” IRM 4.4.9.6 (05-08-2012) Substitute for Return. LINK

The Motion has an Appendix attached to it titled

IRS COMPUTER PROCEDURES AND THEIR STRICT RULES

Here is a quote from that fascinating Appendix:

This Appendix seeks to unravel the information encoded in computer language in these transcripts so that this Court can discern how the Commissioner actually implements his Congressional mandate primarily by execution of “strict rules” in the IRS computer systems.

Again:

If an evidentiary hearing validates this finding, the inescapable conclusion would be that the IRS never actually created an SFR for 1998 and that the transcripts that reflect that an SFR was created have been intentionally falsified as part of a false-return scheme.

Some of my friends have been following this case since Dr. Bailey was indicted in August 2013.  It appears to be coming to a crucial point.

I have never seen a tax evasion prosecution with the kind of issues raised in this Motion to Dismiss.

I obtained a copy of the actual Motion filed in Court. It is available on a donation basis by clicking on the button below.

Add to Cart