Although limitation generally begins to run when the cause of action accrues, which in Texas means when facts have come into existence that authorize a claimant to seek a Judicial remedy. Id
Pro Se Plaintiff Slave Negro Louis Charles Hamilton II USN # 2712, “Plaintiffs Slaves et al” collective Further appearances Affirm, State and fully declare all allegation, contention, disputes, disputation, argument, conflict and disharmony, fully furtherance’s plaintiff(s) collectively legally affirm
“A tort is a civil wrong made against a person or property. Torts may be classified as unintentional or intentional. Malpractice: is negligence committed by a professional such as a nurse or physician. Intentional torts are willful acts that violate another's rights”.
“Congress are professional, Supreme Court Justice, District Court Judges, Police, Doctors, Attorney General of State of Texas, Mayor and “Lawyers” being the same,.
Pro Se Plaintiff Slave Negro Louis Charles Hamilton II USN # 2712, “Plaintiffs Slaves et al” collective Further appearances Affirm, State and fully declare all allegation, contention, that defendant in each profession described above acting as a “UNIT” no less as described in great detail,
*See Hamilton v. United States of America et al Chief Defendant U.S. Docket No. 4:2016-CV-01354, Hamilton v. Federal Reserve Bank U.S. Docket No. 4:2016-CV- 00831, Hamilton v. Donald John Trump Sr. U.S. Docket 4:2016 –mc-01633
“Legally” in direct violation under defendant (USA) own rules of governing laws, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1589 (forced labor), 18 U.S.C. § 1590 (trafficking with respect to peonage, slavery, involuntary servitude, or forced labor),
“Slavery Servitude” money laundering statutes, 18 U.S.C. 1956 and 1957, “Slavery Servitude” money laundering statutes, RICO statute (18 U.S.C. § 1961(1), all having “Professional Jobs” As in law and equity on behalf of all (Plaintiffs) and Plaintiff Nigger/Negro Slaves under the
(RICO) statue nature of this precedents of a Grand scheme of things in direct human right violation of the government and it “Police” involved in Slavery Servitude case of continual time line since the infamous back (RICO) date august 20th 1619 – 2016 (December) and everything “so mess up” that the clock of limitation of “unintentional or intentional”
legal Malpractice, Intentional torts, mixed with Intentional Professional misconduct by professions in possession of a fiduciary duty owed to the August 20th 1619 “Slaves Negro/Nigger Pro Se Plaintiff (Hamilton) being born into defendant (USA) already
“Breach of Fiduciary duty” to find the brass balls and end the wicket garden of sinful unjust enrichment by scheme always forevermore con artist lazy slow ass
“White Man” stealing 24/7 since august 20th 1619, then put their “Murderous Klansmen intentional, and unintentional RICO Slave Trade also Henchmen’s” namely Rouge
“Congress professional, Supreme Court Justice, District Court Federal and State Judges, Police, Doctors, Attorney General of State of Texas, Mayor and “Defense Lawyers” as saying and producing absolute legal garbage declared quite legal in what the fuck ever they “Judicial Fraud (RICO) enterprise endeavor whites only rules of governing laws like, print
(RICO) slave regime report and recommendations, and usage of police to enforce, Judicial Fraud, even Government police engaging in kidnapping, and or murder by designed of the same continual “Slave Regime” of defendant (USA), engaging in a “Well Legal Malpractice intentional tort, especially on or about December 23rd 1913, as the passage of the
The most misunderstood amendment is the 16th (1913). It says:
"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."
If you talk to any tax attorneys or other so called 'tax professionals' they will tell you that the 16th Amendment allowed the income tax to be collected as a direct tax without apportionment among the 50 states. This is totally false, and this is the major problem with today's tax collection efforts.
The IRS believes that the income tax can now be collected as a direct tax without apportionment, and collects it in that fashion. It is totally unconstitutional to collect a direct tax, in the 50 states, without apportionment, as we learned in earlier chapters. We are the victims of mass brainwashing by the government.
What is apportionment?
Black's Law Dictionary says,
"Apportion. To divide and distribute proportionally."
"Apportionment. The process by which legislative seats are distributed among units entitled to representation. The U.S. Constitution provides for a census every ten years, on the basis of which Congress apportions representatives according to population; but each state must have at least one representative."
U. S. of A. CONSTITUTION
Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3: "Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the states which may be included within this Union, according to their respective numbers..."
Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4: "No capitation, or other direct tax, shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken."
Direct taxes must be apportioned among the states, not among the people. The 16th Amendment did not change this! As we learned, the income tax is an excise tax on corporate profit, and always has been, therefore it does not need to be apportioned.
Before the 16th Amendment, an individual's income was NOT taxable, either with apportionment or without. Eliminating apportionment, among the states, would still require the tax to be imposed on the states, not on the people. To better understand this concept, let's look at an actual example of taxation by apportionment.
On July 14, 1798, the Fifth Congress, Session II, Chapter 77, laid the first direct tax on the United States of America in the amount of 2 million dollars. It was to be laid upon the United States of America and apportioned to the states respectively, as per the Constitution.
What they did was to take the 2 million dollars and divide it equally among the number of people in the United States of America at that time, based on the census. They figured out how many people were in each individual state.
Then each state was assigned their portion of the tax based on the population of that state.
The tax was collected, through the Secretary of the Treasury, by collectors of the internal revenues. (Note: In this case 'internal revenues' applies only to the 50 states, since this is a direct tax on the 50 states of the Union) The states collected the tax by assessing the property of the state Citizens, according to the value of the property.
Much the same way that property tax is assessed and collected today. This direct tax was just a national property tax laid upon the states according to their population. The states each paid their share proportionally according to their population.
This is how a direct tax is legally and constitutionally collected. It is directly on you or something you own (inalienable property rights).
But, doesn't everyone believe that the 16th amendment changed the income tax from an indirect excise tax to a direct tax? How can all the authorities be wrong?
If the authorities were never wrong, the world would still be flat, with the sun circling around it, and we would still be dunking witches.
Most people think that the income tax is on ALL income you receive from whatever source. That is not correct! The confusion arises from the wrong interpretation of the 16th Amendment (1913). Let's look at it again. It says:
"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."
This looks like it is making an exemption and is putting income taxes in the category of direct taxes, to be collected without apportionment. But it isn't. Remember, they tried this once before in 1894, and it was found unconstitutional! Notice that this amendment doesn't say whether the tax is to be collected as a direct or indirect tax. It just says that it is collected on 'incomes without apportionment.'
Can indirect excise taxes be collected without apportionment? Yes. It has always been that way. As we learned previously, the income tax is an excise tax on corporate profits.
The only difference is that before the 16th Amendment, corporations did NOT have to pay tax on their property income.
The 16th Amendment was passed so that corporate property income could NOW be taxed with an excise tax, IF the property income was connected to a corporate activity.
Change the order of the amendment around a little and it reads; The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes without apportionment, from whatever source derived, among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
On incomes, without tax apportionment. What incomes can be taxed without apportionment? Income from corporate privilege can be taxed without apportionment because the tax is an excise tax. Or to make it simpler yet, have the amendment read - power to lay and collect excise taxes on corporate incomes.
That is really what it is saying.
The 16th amendment is worded to deceive people into thinking that the Constitution was changed. But the Supreme Court has ruled many times that the 16th amendment changed nothing!
A tax on the income from an inalienable right, can only be taxed with a direct tax, and therefore this income would be taxed WITH apportionment.
The 16th Amendment only applies to a tax on corporate incomes not requiring apportionment! If a tax on your income requires apportionment, then it it not subject to the 16th Amendment tax. Is this just semantics? Or is that what it really says?
To understand this clearly, we need to go back to the Constitution.
In Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 it says:
"Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this Union, according to their respective numbers,..."
And: Article 1 Section 8, Clause 1: "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States: But all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States."
Since the income tax is NOT presently collected as a direct tax with apportionment, then it must still be an indirect tax! As we learned earlier, all direct taxes must be apportioned, and all indirect taxes (duties, imposts and excises) must be uniform. These requirements in the Constitution have never been amended, despite the 16th Amendment. These are the constitutional requirements!
Again, let's rely on the Supreme Court to straighten it out for us.
In 1920, the Supreme Court said:
Eisner vs Macomber 252 U.S. 189 at 205 (1920). "The Sixteenth Amendment must be construed in connection with the taxing clauses of the original Constitution and the effect attributed to them before the Amendment was adopted."
But, before this, in 1916, there were two landmark Supreme Court cases that also helped to clear up the confusion. The first was:
Brushaber vs Union Pacific R.R. Co 240 U.S. 1 at 10-11 (1916).
It states "The various propositions are so intermingled as to cause it to be difficult to classify them. We are of opinion, however, that the confusion is not inherent, but rather arises from the conclusion that the Sixteenth Amendment provides
for a hitherto unknown power of taxation, that is, a power to levy an income tax which although direct should not be the subject of apportionment applicable to all other direct taxes.
And the far-reaching effect of this erroneous assumption will be made clear by generalizing the many contentions advanced in argument to support it, ..."
Whoa! Read that again. The 'conclusion' that the income tax can be levied as a direct tax, without apportionment, is an erroneous assumption! But, what happens if it is levied as an indirect tax?
Let's continue with this Brushaber case at pg 11-12:
"But it clearly results that the propositions and the contentions under it, if acceded to, would cause one provision of the Constitution to destroy another, that is, they would result in bringing the provisions of the Amendment
exempting a direct tax from apportionment into irreconcilable conflict with the general requirement that all direct taxes be apportioned. Moreover, the tax authorized by the
Amendment, being direct, would not come under the rule of uniformity applicable under the Constitution to other than direct taxes , and thus it would come to pass, that the result of the
Amendment would be to authorize a particular direct tax, not subject either to apportionment or to the rule of geographic uniformity, thus giving power to impose a different tax in one State or States, than was levied in another State or States.
This result, instead of simplifying the situation, and making clear the limitation on the taxing power, which obviously the Amendment must have been intended to accomplish, would create radical and destructive changes in our constitutional system and multiply confusion"
As “Nigger/Negro Pro Se Plaintiff Slave (Hamilton) and others similarly the same DNA 44.5 plus Million Nigger/Negro Captures Conquered Plaintiff(s) Slaves herein individually and collectively paying unjust enrichment taxes twice, first being a non - citizenship, pursuant to Pursuant to: Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857),abused poor having no legal standing in law and equity
running currently with pursuant to The 1790 Naturalization Act reserves naturalized citizenship for whites only with “Black Code Laws”, Jim Crow Laws” and Never ending “Slavery Servitude” (RICO)
“Slave Regimen” 2016 (December) scam forevermore in defendant all legal professional fully committed to conspire, past and present direct at this particular Pro Se Nigger/Negro Plaintiff (Hamilton) herein suffrage of defendant (USA) et al never ending “UNIT” of a Government “Slave regime” secured by engaging in “Legal Malpractice, past, present and future august 20th 1619 start date in said direct continual (RICO) enterprise of massive 44.5 million plus
Human Rights Violation committed against the defendant (USA) herein Government “Police” on rules of governing laws
As defendant (City of Houston and City of Houston Police) conspired well into documentation exhibit before the “Honorable Court” of a Legal Malpractice professional “Lawyers” and Judges” grand scheme 2016 in a shameful “Cover up” in now no difference but original august 20th 1619 (RICO) racket still in 2016 (December) committed to
Legal Malpractice to maintain and direct unjust enrichment directly from this particular Pro se Nigger/Negro Slave taxes by federal reserve banking system, *see Hamilton v. Federal Reserve Bank et al U.S. Docket No. 1:2016-CV-00831 “Legal Malpractice” involving the same ongoing 18 U.S.C. § 1589 (forced labor), 18 U.S.C. § 1590 (trafficking with respect to peonage, slavery, involuntary servitude, or forced labor), on behalf of “White Supremacy” of defendant(s) collectively
“United States of America” as this Breach of fiduciary duty claims being render “forevermore” the scheme (RICO) Slave Master White Man forevermore and his forefather (RICO) devise, as malpractice in the legal capacity now in 2016 (December) having Nigger Pro Se Plaintiff herein direct subject be an official “Slave paying defendant (USA) Taxes with breach of fiduciary duty(s) even by
Defendant (Texas) State Hospital, fully committed in the capacity of a “Doctor no less to administer mental medication in a (RICO) endeavor ungodly 2011 manner being in charge of “Whites Supremacy” forevermore, directed to keeping pro se plaintiff nigger/negro slave herein in a continual false imprisonment in 2016 (December) in direct violation under defendant (USA) own rules of governing laws, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1589 (forced labor), 18 U.S.C. § 1590 (trafficking with respect to peonage, slavery, involuntary servitude, or forced labor),
“Slavery Servitude” money laundering statutes, 18 U.S.C. 1956 and 1957, “Slavery Servitude” money laundering statutes, RICO statute (18 U.S.C. § 1961(1),, leaving the statute of limitation under Texas law for two years concerning “Legal Malpractice” of “Congress professional, Supreme Court Justice, District Court Federal and State Judges, Doctors, Police, , Attorney General of State of Texas,
Mayor and including claimed “defense Lawyers”…? clock of limitation on this particular pro se nigger/negro Plaintiff (Hamilton) being kidnap while still being a “Slave” official (RICO) endeavor officially tic and tock still running, until the issue of “Slavery Servitude, has been address being this particular pro se nigger/negro Plaintiff (Hamilton) being the “direct party” fully 1000% involved in said (RICO) Slavery, False Imprisonment
and once ended and fully constitutional fixed, by all defendant(s) collectively responsible “Parties” then and only then can the 2 year time frame can commence at such time Plaintiff(s) of the future may make such a 2 year time limitation protocol filing as required pursuant to “Legal Malpractice” 2 year limitation time period.
No comments:
Post a Comment