Would President Paul Pardon All Tax Evaders?

[Mesogen]

Has Ron Paul ever said anything indicating that he would pardon those convicted for not paying the Federal Income Tax?

If not, do you think he should pledge to do so if elected president?

 

[Marceline88]

Interesting question. I would also like to know if he would pardon those with felonies for producing marijuana......'nother thread huh?

 

[ItsTime]

he would not pardon "all" nor should he.

 

[MooCowzRock]

No, he wouldnt and shouldnt. Regardless of whether he believes these should be decriminalized doesnt change the fact that that these people knowingly committed crimes. Ex-post facto works both ways. If you want something to be legal, you work to change the law before you do it. Thats the point of our democracy.

 

[snaFU]

No, he wouldnt and shouldnt. Regardless of whether he believes these should be decriminalized doesnt change the fact that that these people knowingly committed crimes. Ex-post facto works both ways. If you want something to be legal, you work to change the law before you do it. Thats the point of our democracy.

absolute bullcrap

How do you use the system to stop getting used by special interests and politicians who want to stay in office?

 

[boberino]

In my opinion:

It would depend on your definition of 'Tax Evasion'.

If it is simply choosing not to file a 1040 by April 15th, then I do think those people should be pardoned.
If it is falsifying documents to avoid federal witholdings, then I do not think those people should be pardoned.

 

[Futurity]

In my opinion:

It would depend on your definition of 'Tax Evasion'.

If it is simply choosing not to file a 1040 by April 15th, then I do think those people should be pardoned.
If it is falsifying documents to avoid federal witholdings, then I do not think those people should be pardoned.

Exactly, not many people are aware of the fact that you don't have to pay Federal Income Tax. You can comply to pay it by filling the form.
Watch "America: Freedom to Fascism" by Aaron Russo, it is free on google video.

 

[Mesogen]

So I'm only obligated to pay income tax if I file a 1040? If I don't fill out a 1040 form, I don't have to pay? As in I won't get charged with anything as long as I don't file the 1040?

 

[MooCowzRock]

absolute bullcrap

How do you use the system to stop getting used by special interests and politicians who want to stay in office?

You vote, like we're doing now. This election is a perfect example of what we should do as soon as government starts to lean towards tyranny. Only when the democratic system fails and our power to elect and chenge our representatives are stripped do we need to pick up arms and stop following the law.

 

[ccannizzaro]

NO, people have to accept responsibility for their actions, including the form of protest they choose. Watch Ron Paul say it in his own words...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZnzGredcIs&eurl=http://ccannizzaro.com/

 

[Brian in Maryland]

No, he wouldnt and shouldnt. Regardless of whether he believes these should be decriminalized doesnt change the fact that that these people knowingly committed crimes. Ex-post facto works both ways. If you want something to be legal, you work to change the law before you do it. Thats the point of our democracy.

An unconstitutional law is invalid from it's inception, not from the point it is declared unconstitutional by a judge.

We The People are the ultimate defenders of The Constitution and of our own liberties.

"We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the Courts -- not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution." Abraham Lincoln

 

[Perry]

he would not pardon "all" nor should he.

No kidding. This is actually a scary question and I am glad it's being brought up now.
"If half the United States decides to avoid paying taxes under your administration would you pardon them"?

Insert nightmare scenario.

 

[Brian in Maryland]

No, he wouldnt and shouldnt. Regardless of whether he believes these should be decriminalized doesnt change the fact that that these people knowingly committed crimes. Ex-post facto works both ways. If you want something to be legal, you work to change the law before you do it. Thats the point of our democracy.

Also, we don't live in a democracy. We live in a constitutional republic. See this article by Dr. Paul about proper use of words.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/articles/161/what-does-freedom-really-mean/

 

[johngr]

In my opinion:

It would depend on your definition of 'Tax Evasion'.

If it is simply choosing not to file a 1040 by April 15th, then I do think those people should be pardoned.
If it is falsifying documents to avoid federal witholdings, then I do not think those people should be pardoned.

Bullshit! Ron Paul's view is that income taxes are slavery anything about your personal finances is none of any gov't agents' business. He will pardon all tax evaders. Deal with it.

While he's at it, he should imo turn the table on the IRS and investigate them under the RICO statutes.

 

[johngr]

No, he wouldnt and shouldnt. Regardless of whether he believes these should be decriminalized doesnt change the fact that that these people knowingly committed crimes. Ex-post facto works both ways. If you want something to be legal, you work to change the law before you do it. Thats the point of our democracy.

You have no idea what you're talking about. The legal doctrine you cite is wholly irrelevant to the discussion.

President Paul's pardon power will be unlimited (except for impeachment and non-US citizens). Read Federalist #74 and Article 2 Section 2 of the Constitution and get back to me.

President Paul will indeed be able to pardon a class of people (US v Klein 80 US 128). That means the non-violent drug users that the federal gov't won't be pestering (see Philadelphia rally speech) and tax evaders.

 

[ErikBlack]

An unconstitutional law is invalid from it's inception, not from the point it is declared unconstitutional by a judge.

We The People are the ultimate defenders of The Constitution and of our own liberties.

"We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the Courts -- not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution." Abraham Lincoln

If the 16th Amendment is found to be unconstitutional it would not require a presidential pardon. Tax protesters would be released the same way a prisoner convicted of murder is released when it is found that his case was handled unlawfully. In order to restore a sense of justice the state usually pays reparations to someone who was unlawfully incarcerated for a long period of time. Not only would tax protesters demand reparations but many ordinary citizens who felt they were defrauded into paying an illegal income tax for so many years would. Since the government has no money to pay back the people this would probably result in a great deal of civil unrest, loss of faith in the United States government and perhaps the concept of government in general.

I think any reasonable person knows that the 16th amendment will never be found unconstitutional. The lie that would expose is too great and would cause too much turmoil. The best peaceable resolution we can hope for is a new constitutional amendment overturning the 16th, like the 21st did to the 18th to end prohibition of alcohol. This would allow the United States government to fix the problem without admitting that it has been involved in illegal extortion of its citizens for the last 90 years. Justice would not be entirely served in this scenario but at least future injustice will be prevented. Ron Paul as president could choose to pardon anyone he feels morally correct in pardoning. The only check to that power would be public sentiment raised by his actions, which might not be positive. The majority of people who have paid taxes all of their lives out of a misled sense of duty to country and fear of incarceration might not take kindly to the minority who refused to pay being let off Scot Free, when they themselves know that they have no hope of ever recovering their wrongfully extracted money.

It can be argued that tax protesters are patriots who were willing to take a risk that ordinary citizens are not willing to take, and that entitles them to the benefits of amnesty from past taxation in the event that the principles for which they stood and sacrificed are proven legitimate. Whether this explanation would be good enough to satisfy the people remains to be seen.

 

[drpiotrowski]

No, he wouldnt and shouldnt. Regardless of whether he believes these should be decriminalized doesnt change the fact that that these people knowingly committed crimes. Ex-post facto works both ways. If you want something to be legal, you work to change the law before you do it. Thats the point of our democracy.

Rosa Parks shouldn't have sat in the front of the bus until it was legal to do so.

 

[ccannizzaro]

Jesus christ, just watch him say it in his own words. why are we still discussing this?


/thread

 

[fedup100]

I would like to see every state, after Dr. Paul is elected require every student to study, learn and pass a test on the founding fathers the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. We cannot have a free people who are ignorant of the very documents that give us our freedom.

The comments on this thread is evidence that we have woefully failed in educating the citizens. I know this has been done on purpose, if you don't know your rights, then you don't have any.

I can assure you if Paul is elected, being a strict Constitutionalist, he will do what must be done. People who have committed victimless crimes shall not be imprisoned, PERIOD!

As far as the IRS and a 1040, please everything they have ever done has been done through fraud and duress, they must all be freed.

 

[ccannizzaro]

OKAY, Apparently nobody can be bothered to watch a youtube video of Ron Paul in this thread, so I'll post the transcript of the pertinent question from Niel Cavuto....

“If you were president of the United States, would your first statement be on January 20th, ‘look, you don’t have to pay income taxes, nor should you’?”

“No. But I would certainly work with the Congress, the proper way, and get the Congress to pass a law to change it, and to repeal the 16th amendment. So no, a president… you’re always making the assumption that the President is an authoritarian. The President should be responsive to the government and to the Congress and to the people. But a president like myself, even though I would believe this, I couldn’t do it. But I would try to persuade people to do it, just as I do in the Congress, and just as I do in campaigning for the presidency.”

That's right kids. Even though, by strict constitutionalist standards, income taxes are not legal.... and even though he sympathizes and agrees with those who refuse to pay their income taxes, he's not going to tell people not to pay them, or that they don't have to. If he's not going to do that, what in the hell makes you think he's going to use such an authoritarian and utilitarian power of the presidency to pardon the people who have chosen to protest by breaking the current law???


Again....

/thread