74
75

The 16th amendment is unconstitutional. The government does not have the right to tax income. (self.conspiracy)

LightBringerFlex が 投稿

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:

https://taxfoundation.org/today-history-income-tax-ruled-unconstitutional-pollock-v-farmers-loan-trust-co/

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:

  1. Payroll tax - This is typically about 30%.

  2. Income tax - varies.

  3. 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.

全 94 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]Armaedus 40 ポイント41 ポイント  (27子コメント)

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.

Edit - Unless of course you're referring to Franklin Roosevelt, then you're way off the fucking mark. The 16th amendment had already been there for a while when he was president.

[–]flyinghighernow 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (13子コメント)

OP is way over his head here, and the sources are really bad.

Laws are always made unclear purposely so that the rulers can abuse them legally.

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.

Woodrow Wilson, an Illuminati stooge, brought into existence the 16th amendment

The 16th Amendment was passed by congress in 1909. Wilson became president in 1913.

Somehow, someway, Wilson eventually ignored the Supreme Court ruling

A Constitutional amendment overrides the Supreme Court. All Wilson did was certify the ratification by the states.

Payroll tax - This is typically about 30%.

SSA is 6.2 percent, Medicare is 1.45 percent, totalling 7.65 percent. Add employers' share and it becomes 15.3 percent.

this is really just like any mafia tax but the money is going to the worldwide Illuminati mafia.

Look at the federal budget. More than all of the tax money is accounted for.

Of course the Federal Reserve was also thrown in the mix to further bankrupt the nation

The Federal Reserve System is inherently corrupt, but not for the reasons claimed.

[–]GuruOfGravitas 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (6子コメント)

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

[–]plebsareneeded 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (5子コメント)

Also an amendment by definition can't be unconstitutional.

[–]GuruOfGravitas 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Thank you, for assisting in the project to debunk every sentence of that post.

[–]plebsareneeded 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (1子コメント)

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.

[–]GuruOfGravitas 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes, we have real problems with our "self" governance, we don't need to fight over the imaginary.

[–]Smoothtank 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Sure it can be. When it begins infringing upon the established amendments or conflicts with them.

[–]plebsareneeded 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

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.

[–]LightBringerFlex[S] -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (5子コメント)

Oh ok, I'm just researching this now so I could be wrong about which stooge it was that passed it. Also, fixed.

[–]JayCeePup 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

So you didn't know which president did it, but you know the secret reason why. I guess your research isn't to find out, you already know!

[–]LightBringerFlex[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Like I mentioned in the post, I am barely finding out about this and could use the help of commenters.

[–]Armaedus -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (2子コメント)

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.

[–]flyinghighernow 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I would recommend Money As Debt. Have you seen that yet? :)

[–]Armaedus 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I have not. I'll have to check it out.

[–]bwburke94 15 ポイント16 ポイント  (30子コメント)

That's certainly one of the more entertaining 16th Amendment posts recently, but you failed to explain why exactly the amendment is invalid.

[–]LightBringerFlex[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (29子コメント)

The Supreme Court ruled it's invalid.

[–]twsmith 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (23子コメント)

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.

[–]LightBringerFlex[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (22子コメント)

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.

[–]plebsareneeded 21 ポイント22 ポイント  (20子コメント)

Says the fool who doesn't know the difference between a law and an amendment.

[–]LightBringerFlex[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (19子コメント)

Instead of worrying about grammar, you should worry about this country being purposely set on the course for bankruptcy.

[–]plebsareneeded 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (18子コメント)

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.

[–]LightBringerFlex[S] -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (17子コメント)

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.

[–]plebsareneeded 15 ポイント16 ポイント  (2子コメント)

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.

[–]LightBringerFlex[S] -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

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

[–]slanaiya 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (0子コメント)

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.

[–]neverthatone 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (10子コメント)

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.

[–]LightBringerFlex[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (9子コメント)

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.

[–]reegdor 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

In your ignorance, you believe you know all. This is what cognitive dissonance looks like up close, if only you could see it.

[–]slanaiya 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Specifically the Dunning–Kruger effect.

[–]slanaiya 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

That ruling can be used in court to discredit the 16th amendment.

Nope.

[–]bwburke94 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (3子コメント)

What exactly is the "it" the Supreme Court ruled invalid?

[–]LightBringerFlex[S] -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (2子コメント)

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.

[–]HelperBot_ 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

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

[–]motdidr 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The decision was superseded in 1913 by the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 

you might actually be retarded

[–]slanaiya 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Nope.

[–]benjamindees 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (1子コメント)

You should start by correctly defining income.

[–]plebsareneeded 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Not to mention correctly defining amendment.

[–]plebsareneeded 34 ポイント35 ポイント  (7子コメント)

It is fucking impossible for an amendment to the Constitution to be unconstitutional you fucking idiot!!!

[–]LightBringerFlex[S] -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (6子コメント)

And why not? The Supreme Court ruled income tax to be unconstitutional in 1885.

[–]nliausacmmv 23 ポイント24 ポイント  (3子コメント)

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.

[–]LightBringerFlex[S] -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (2子コメント)

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.

[–]nliausacmmv 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Lol. Just admit you don't have a clue what you're on about. "I didn't get a pretty easy to check historical fact wrong, it's the Illuminati's fault!"

[–]dinodares99 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Dude. The latest ruling holds

That's litrally how everything works, law or not

[–]plebsareneeded 15 ポイント16 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Because by definition an amendment to the constitution is part of the constitution.

[–]slanaiya 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

What do you think "unconstitutional means"?

[–]jeddzus 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (3子コメント)

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).

[–]LightBringerFlex[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

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.

[–]jeddzus 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

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.

[–]slanaiya 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Ok but who was it that decided to tax us to death?

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.

[–]outtanutmeds 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (6子コメント)

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?

[–]LightBringerFlex[S] -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (5子コメント)

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.

[–]outtanutmeds 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (4子コメント)

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.

[–]LightBringerFlex[S] -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (3子コメント)

That is just part of the story. Every vile thing you can imagine does happen within the Illuminati.

[–]outtanutmeds 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (2子コメント)

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.

[–]LightBringerFlex[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Wasn't it to,bail out the banks?

http://aheadoftheherd.com/Newsletter/2011/Bernanke-Secretly-Gives-away-Sixteen-Trillion-Dollars.htm

[–]outtanutmeds 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah, that is what they say. But, to whom and where exactly did the money go? How about the Russian central bank? How many hundreds of billions did Bernanke give to the Russian central bank?

[–]lehberger 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (3子コメント)

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.

[–]plebsareneeded 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

It was even more cringe worthy when he didn't understand how the U.S. government​ works.

[–]LightBringerFlex[S] 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

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.

[–]lehberger 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Your statement is too sweeping and it's factually inaccurate. Quote Rockefeller blah blah. But it's not a true statement.

[–]Loose-ends 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is a good legal rundown on the situation... http://www.foundationfortruthinlaw.org/Griffin-article.html

[–]slanaiya 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

The Constitution isn't constitutional!

[–]Mattandsuch 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is the basic gist.

[–]CalcifiedNaniteEnrgy 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The constitution is unconstitutional! Down with the system! /s

[–]5dreality 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

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

[–]Dysnomi 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The constitution is a statist prop. Legal rights mean nothing. The only rights that matter come from nature.

[–]soonerchad -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Great post! Thanks

[–]space_rangers -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (1子コメント)

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!!!!!!!!!!!

[–]LightBringerFlex[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Also payroll tax destroys everyone's check.