 |
Currency Reporting Requirements: You’ll Raise an Eybrow, read on
By Jon Baker – 1984usa.com |
1) A law enforcement officer, government agent, or other person who holds a position in local, state, or federal government that was specifically created by the black letter of the law is a “creature of the law.” Their position and authority is created by written law. Creatures of the law are obligated to obey the law and are strictly given authority within a narrow scope prescribed by that specific law.
2) Law enforcement officers, government agents, or other people who hold a position in local, state, or federal government take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. Those people who violate that oath by violating the Constitution are guilty of the crime of “violation of oath of office.”
3) Law enforcement officers, government agents, or other people who hold a position in local, state or federal government who allege authority they do not have are guilty of acting under “color of authority.” Those who make up laws as they go that do not exist or behave in a manner that implies there is a law are guilty of the crime of operating under “color of law,” the resemblance of law, but in fact no statutory authority. Title 18, United States Code, section 242 makes it a crime: This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S. This law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties, than those prescribed for punishment of citizens on account of such person being an alien or by reason of his/her color or race.
Acts under “color of any law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under “color of any law,” the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties.
This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes ordinances, or customs. Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
4) Every Citizen has a right to question authority and this is backed up by the U.S. Supreme Court in Federal Crop Insurance Corporation v. Merrill (332 US 380-388 1947), where the court declared: “Anyone entering into an arrangement with the government takes the risk of having accurately ascertained that he who purports to act for the government stays within the bounds of his authority, even though the agent himself may be unaware of the limitations upon his authority.”
This means that you question them BEFORE you answer them, as it is your RIGHT to accurately ascertain that the agent is within the bounds of his authority or you run the RISK associated with the failure to do so. The agent only has the legal authority under the law to ASK you the question; The law does not compel you to answer (that would be a violation of your Constitutionally protected Rights.) The agent is only authorized by statute to jibber-jabber all he wants, whether it be interrogatives or expletives, but that’s non-compelling on you unless he is giving you an order while you are being detained such as “put your hands on your head.” He steps out of his bounds of written statutory authority when he tries to compel you through an order to answer a question (interrogative), which would be a violation of your Constitutioinal rights, which is why they don’t give them that authority in the statute, which is why the statute is not unconstitutional. You should print a copy of this, fold it up and keep it in your wallet, glovebox, or otherwise on your person so that you can show them you have the authority recognized by the Supreme Court to question them before you go any further.
5) For provisions of a law to have force and effect, it must have an implementing regulation in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), and be published in the Federal Register. The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) found at 5 United States Code, sections 551, 552, and 553 governs this rule making and publishing requirement. Without implementing regulations, there is no executive enforcement ability of the law. It may be speculated that this final stage is purposely avoided so as to not “complete” the law, and thus allow courts to strike it down for unconstitutionality. The courts cannot strike down that which is “not a law,” however, if you accept it willingly in a plea bargain agreement, you have just entered into a contract with the government making certain acceptances and obligations where there were previously no laws requiring you to do so.
The “authority” to harass travellers regarding money they are carrying stems from a Treasury Department/Customs form 4790. You are asked to fill out a U.S. Customs and Border Protection Customs Declaration form 6059B, which directs you to fill out a 4790 if you are carrying cash instruments over $10,000 in value, as if it is anyone’s business. That’s the danger with the passage of just one bad law; a genre of bad attitudes and abuse of authority clouds around it – something the big government egg-head types refuse to believe in their perfect-government hallucinations.
The following documents are an excellent case and point. The problem the Ron Paul man faced at the St. Louis Airport is a textbook example of multiple abuses and Constitutional violations of authorities. If the common sit-in protester understood just 1% of the judicial and statutory shenanigans going on by the Feds, they would understand that none of that is going away without a second revolution and severe bloodshed. It took blood to get it in the first place; you’re a fool if you think you won’t have to spend blood again to get it back. That’s the reality check you need to do in your head of the current situation. You may squirm all you like, but the fact is, any one instance of abuse is worthy enough for the cause to restore the Republic. There’s a physical problem on the battlefield that must be fixed, and it can’t be done by meditation; It’s going to require some sort of physical action to halt it, and more force to reverse it – or the criminals win.
First off, the man has a right as a law-abiding Citizen to question the authority of the agents under the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation v. Merrill Supreme Court Case.
Second, carrying cash is not unlawful, and keeping it private is a Natural Right that existed before the Constitution was drafted. It’s nobody’s business how much paper or metal coin currency you are carrying. If the currency is legal tender for all debts, public and private, it would be impossible to jail someone for carrying legal tender currency and maintaining the secrecy associated with a “private” transaction. You have the protections under the Fourth Amendment: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
The problem is that this form is still in use in airports today, BUT it has never lawfully been implemented in the Federal Register. This means two things: 1) People continue to be harassed with the “color of law and authority” surrounding this form every day, some even get “caught” and pleabargain their way to jail, and 2) Those few who fight the system on the grounds the “implementing regulations” or publishing requirements have never been fulfilled get full dismissal.
Now this isn’t the only “Federal Law” that falls under this scenario. Everyday people are threatened with jail if they don’t pleabargain to something that isn’t even lawfully implemented in the first place. Government is a business and it needs bodies. Without victims, it doesn’t make money. It’s a racket, but it only works because the massive volume of dumb sheeple are so terrorized and ignorant of the law.
If it’s not technically implemented, it’s not technically passed. And if it’s not technically passed, it’s not technically a law. And if it’s not technically a law, the courts can’t hear a case on the Constitutionality to have it struck down. So nothing changes. Do you get it yet?
Cheryl Kordick, who was Chief of the Assistance Section at the Department of the Treasury in 1996, made the following statement regarding regulations:
“Regulations have, generally, been classified into three broad categories: legislative, interpretative, and proceedural.
Legislative regulations are those for which the Service [Internal Revenue] is specifically authorized by the Code [United States Code] to prescribe the operating rules. Generally, legislative regulations have the force and effect of law unless the regulation exceeds the scope of the delegated power, is contrary to the statute, or is unreasonable.
Interpretative regulations explain the Service’s position on the various sections of the Code. Although interpretative regulations do not have the force and effect of law, the courts customarily accord them substantial weight.
Procedural regulations are considered to be directive rather than mandatory, and thus, do not have the force and effect of law. The purpose of proceedural regulations is to outline both for public consumption and internal guidance those rules which control the operation of the Internal Revenue Service in carrying out its prime function of administering and enforcing the Internal Revenue laws.”
It would be noteworthy to point out at this time that you can tell a regulation is a legislative regulation if at the end of that particular Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) section there is a citation of authority that includes some statutory United States Code (USC) section.
The topic of Implementing Regulations is beyond the scope of this article, but it dovetails with it. You should seek out resources to become more familiar with it. There are little nuances in the law and plenty of mistakes (because imperfect people write law), and like everything else, regulations are a canvas for good and evil. If you understand that you will be smarter than a law professor who’s blind to it. I would start by studying the Administrative Proceedure Act at title 5 United States Code, section 551. The University of Delaware has a good online page about regulations generally: http://www2.lib.udel.edu/subj/godc/resguide/regulaw.htm
The following documents will make the point. These include the statutory USC authority for the currency reporting, the CFR section with regulations (notice the authority citations under each section do not reference a USC section or statute), and of course the Court decisions regarding the Form 4790 and how it doesn’t mean jack.
Here is a pdf of Form 4790: FORM 4790
Declaration Form 6059B:
Read them through once, and then go back and read them again and you should be able to put the pieces of the whole picture together. This is just a shaving of ice off the iceberg.
Filed under: ARTICLES by Patriot75
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.