JKSAW
A belated welcome to Wikipedia!
Regarding this statement:
- "Some critics contend that one of the reasons why the courts routinely strike down such challenges is that salaries of the judiciary are paid for by tax money."
That's a constant and repeated tax protester argument. Yet, after thousands of cases where the tax protesters have lost every single time, I have yet to see anyone actually come forward with even one speck of evidence any court has ever rejected a challenge to the tax law because a judge's salary is paid for by tax money.
After studying tax protesters for over 15 years, I have yet to find even one reliable source that makes such a claim.
It's a silly argument, and it's completely fabricated -- by tax protesters. Like all other frivolous tax protester arguments, it has absolutely no basis in reality. Famspear (talk) 21:03, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
By the way, a related argument that I've seen some tax protesters make is that federal judges won't rule against the IRS because the judges are "afraid" of the IRS. Anyone who deals with both IRS personnel on a fairly frequent basis, and who also stands before federal judges -- as I have for many years -- knows how silly this argument is. Not only that, but federal judges have ruled against the IRS in court many times.
I can just see what would happen to an IRS employee if he or she decided to retaliate against a federal judge because of a ruling made by that judge. That would probably be extortion or willful oppression under color of law, and that would be a felony. See 26 USC section 7214(a)(1). We're talking about an IRS officer or employee losing his or her job, being fined up to $10,000, and going to prison for up to five years.
I've never seen a case where an IRS employee was stupid enough to threaten to audit a federal judge, etc., but I do know of a case where a woman (who happened to be an IRS employee) in New York City -- who was being arrested by New York police -- threatened to have the policeman audited.
She was sent to federal prison. Famspear (talk) 21:29, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
If you're interested, the IRS employee in New York was named Eva Temple. She was found guilty of willful oppression under section 7214. The incident occurred in March of 2003. She ended up as inmate # 55237-054 at the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Famspear (talk) 21:43, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 9 edit
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Live television, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page HLN. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:29, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello there. I added HLN as a reference. However, I have no idea how to fix that link so it correctly points to that site. That link has been removed. Sincerely, JKSAW.
Disambiguation link notification for October 10 edit
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Live! with Kelly and Michael, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ABC. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:47, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello there, I am not sure why you are saying that the ABC link I inserted points to a disambiguation page (translation--->dead link) since that link did work. However, in order to prevent any confusion, I have removed the link to ABC while retaining the word ABC as that show does air live to ABC affiliates in the Eastern Time Zone. Sincerely, JKSAW
October 2014 edit
Hello, I'm Winkelvi. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Buddy Holly, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Also, please read WP:MOS for standards with use of punctuation in Wikipedia articles. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 01:25, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open! edit
Hello, JKSAW. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message edit
Hello, JKSAW. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message edit
Hello, JKSAW. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)