Seeking Alpha

Dr. V

Dr. V
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View Dr. V's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • "Only a few large universal banks will remain," says new Deutsche Bank (DB) co-CEO Anshu Jain, expecting significant consolidation as "the price of being global has gone up dramatically." If he's right, 25K job cuts in investment banks announced so far is just a down payment. [View news story]
    Fortunately, DB will not be among the survivors.

    The $354 BIL USD they borrowed from FED, (GAO FED Audit pgs. 130-31) is due, and they cannot pay. Despite asking for refinancing, FED says, "pay me", as FED is already the de facto owner of DB, as Germany laid out not only the keys to the bank, but sovereign collateral as well, to get that loan from FED.

    US taxpayers again carrying the load for Germany.

    If that isn't enough to raise a red flag, Deutsche Bank keeps claiming to have 2.2 TRIL in assets, yet only carries a microscopic $54 BIL in equity. And still, not even a hint of mention from Moody's as to Germany's financial credibility.

    One need not be a financial savant to smell what DB has been cooking. With DB as DAX 30's house bank,(all major German Industrials bank with DB) when, (that's right, when), they go face down, they take the top German Industrials with them, (SIEMENS, TELEKOM, LINDE, THYSSEN KRUP, DAIMLER MERCEDES, VW, BMW, HEIDELBERG CEMENT, BASF, RWE, K&S AG, Deutsche Bahn, Deutsche Post etc.), and the invisible infrastructure they have so cleverly lied about to the entire world, becomes transparent.

    The only way out: CHINA, as Germany hands China the keys to the backdoor, and we have a Chinese footprint right in the middle of the EU, and China goes on a shopping spree, picking up the now failed German stocks for pennies on the Euro.

    So, if in fact Germany is the strongest EU economy, and their best bank (DB) is doing so badly, start shorting all things German.

    No secret, this was seen 1000 miles away.
    Nov 22, 2012. 03:00 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The fireworks have commenced over H-P's (HPQ -10.4%) Autonomy write-down and fraud accusations. Leo Apotheker, CEO when the Autonomy deal (controversial from the start) was pushed through, insists H-P's due diligence was solid. Fired Autonomy CEO Mike Lynch unsurprisingly denies everything. Meg Whitman, who voted for the deal as a board member, effectively threw Apotheker and former strategy chief Shane Robison under the bus during H-P's earnings call. H-P execs claim both Autonomy's revenue and margins were inflated by hardware deals. [View news story]
    The kicker was, when Meg Whitman, appearing live on CNBC yesterday morning said, "when this FIRST surfaced in MAY 2012, we looked into it."

    So, according to her statements on National Television, she (Whitman), personally had knowledge of the irregularities (alleged fraud), which not only makes her as CEO complicit in fraud, but further exposes the endemic ineptitude demonstrated on her behalf since the diversity issue which led to her even being allowed to warm the chair.

    Look for Whitman to step down as CEO, as an act of contrition from HP, now desperate to keep public trust and confidence, and to keep themselves from flat-lining.

    Both feet in mouth, Ms. Whitman. When accusations arise, go to ground, not TV.

    Deloitte....well, same thing you did at SIEMENS, eh? Book the hours, look busy, and claim you found no irregularities, right?
    Nov 21, 2012. 06:29 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fiscal Cliff... Of 1937 [View article]

    I hardly need any advice, as at my stage of the game, I am quite capable of managing my legal affairs myself. Having served five (5) Administrations in this town, I am quite aware of how my government works, thank you.

    It is painfully obvious that you cannot understand what I posted, as it was indeed not an endorsement for those refusing to pay income tax, quite to the contrary, It was to prove a point, which seems to have flown right past you, out the window, above and beyond your legal horizons.

    Law is no longer taught in US Law Schools, policy is taught, as in the UCC, full stop. If you did not learn that in Law School, or (when / if) you have sworn your oath before the Bar, then we know all we need to, thank you for your post.

    Good luck, and good business to you.
    Nov 20, 2012. 05:02 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • BP (BP) reportedly intends to buy back up to £3.7B ($5.9B) in shares despite last week agreeing to pay $4.5B to settle civil and criminal claims over the 2010 Gulf oil spill and possibly being liable for billions more. Still, BP, whose shares are worth about a third of their pre-spill value, is due to receive $12.3B from the sale of its stake in TNK-BP. [View news story]
    It will lend temporary support to the share price but ONLY, until the civil suits start to pour in, you can smell the short already, much like the one 12 hours before the platform exploded, or?

    The move is basically due to takeover fears, as was the talk in the Square Mile on Thursday morning.
    Nov 19, 2012. 04:19 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fiscal Cliff... Of 1937 [View article]
    You obviously are determined to argue a point to suit yourself.

    The aforementioned explanation which I submitted, covers the information which you suggest has not been explained to your personal satisfaction. I do apologize that I am not able to dumb the explanation down any further. Again, if you are indeed an attorney, you should know exactly what I am talking about.

    In the future, please bring cogent, constructive argument, not one-upmanship.
    Nov 17, 2012. 06:18 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fiscal Cliff... Of 1937 [View article]
    According to the Internal Revenue Manual (dated 07/27/98):
    Part 5, Collection Activity
    (1) Our system of taxation is dependent on taxpayers´ "belief" that the tax laws they follow apply to "everyone", and that the Internal Revenue Service will respect and protect their rights under the law. These are fundamental principles of voluntary compliance.

    Shocker, huh?

    As it appears, the IRS has no jurisdiction to apply their ´special laws´ for the District of Columbia over American Nationals [nonresident alien non-individuals] who derive no income that is effectively connected with the conduct of ´the performance of the functions of a public office´ [trade or business as defined at 26 USC §7701(a)(26)] within the ´District of Columbia´ [the United States as defined at 26 USC §7408(d)] or participate in any federal franchise scheme.

    The Internal Revenue Service is the National Government´s tax bill collection bureau. The statutory laws it operates under are found in Title 26 of the United States Code. This is also referenced as the IRC or Internal Revenue Code. The IRC statutes were created by Congress.

    The only group that the IRS is authorized to deal with are those identified in 26 USC §7701(a)(14) to be ´Taxpayers´. The IRC shows that the term ´taxpayer´ means any person subject to any internal revenue tax. There is no issue with their authority to address ´Taxpayers´ but one needs to understand that their statutory laws are applicable only toward those who are ´Taxpayers´ or just as commonly the IRS uses the term "U.S. persons" as ´Taxpayers´.

    Since you will again ask for proof, here you go:

    As stated in the federal court case Economy Plumbing & Heating v. U.S., 470 F.2d, 585 (1972)

    "Revenue laws relate to ´taxpayers´ [legal fictions created by the Congress, officers, employees, certain U.S. citizens, resident aliens, elected officials of the national government, and those who operate in a representative capacity in behalf of the national government such as via a federal franchise established by the Social Security Act of 1935 by being engaged in the conduct and performance of the functions of a public office called a ´trade or business´ within the District of Columbia referenced as ´the United States´] and NOT to ´Non Taxpayers´ [American Nationals a.k.a., non-resident alien non-individuals who have no physical or statutory domicile within the District of Columbia and do not derive any income from being engaged in the conduct of a trade or business within the District of Columbia].

    The latter are without their scope of revenue laws. No procedures are prescribed for non-taxpayers and no attempt is made to annul any of their Rights or Remedies in due course of law. With them Congress does not assume to deal and they are neither of the subject nor of the object of federal revenue laws."
    Nov 17, 2012. 06:18 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fiscal Cliff... Of 1937 [View article]
    Then, (fellow attorney), read it again. I was quite clear and concise with my explanation. It is indeed at 101 level to prove the point.

    ALL LAW, is the protection of property rights.

    EVERYTHING ELSE, is policy, AND policy, requires CONSENT.

    The public laws no longer exist, we run under policy the UCC. (This is covered by Law Professors in the first semester, in case you forgot it, it was explained again in great detail before you sworn your oath, should you indeed be a member of the Bar.)

    Have you given your consent to be taxed ,OR to voluntarily pay taxes?

    Don't want to hear it from a Policy Administrator, then hear it from a former Chief Economist of the Federal Reserve Bank:

    The UNLAWFUL, (as opposed to illegal), obtaining of another's property by design, but without criminal intent, and with the assent of the owner obtained by ARTIFICE or MISREPRESENTATION. Actual or positive fraud includes cases of the intentional and successful employment of any cunning deception, or artifice, used to circumvent, cheat, or deceive another.

    IRS claims they exercise NO CRIMINAL INTENT in extorting the citizen by taking amounts from his checking account with a levy.

    IRS claims the "INCOME TAX" is by VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE (with the assent of the owner), BUT CANNOT explain or justify their prosecutions for "WILLFUL FAILURE TO FILE."

    IRS returns demand amounts and sums be quoted in "DOLLARS" (an artificial device), which they repeatedly refuse to define!

    "What is the unit you know that is a dollar it's just something artificial we throw out there . . . . what you're doing is you're fooling people into thinking they have purchasing power when in fact they do not."

    Denis Karnofsky Chief Economist Federal Reserve Bank
    Nov 17, 2012. 05:50 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fiscal Cliff... Of 1937 [View article]
    First: All law is the protection of private property rights,
    all else is policy, and policy requires consent. The making of a valid Reservation of Rights preserves whatever rights the person then possesses, and prevents the loss of such rights by application of concepts of waiver or estoppel. (UCC 1-308 (old 1-207).7)

    You took the oath, did you not?
    Nov 16, 2012. 07:43 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • ArcelorMittal Worthy Of Traders, Speculators, Or Investors [View article]
    WOW, more bad news for MT, how wonderful,

    Right again, huh?

    Dumping assets to pay down debt, remember when I said this a year ago?
    Nov 16, 2012. 07:43 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fiscal Cliff... Of 1937 [View article]
    Exactly, the psuedo "democracy" is only a concept to keep the masses COMPLIANT under the guise of fairness and fake freedom.
    Nov 16, 2012. 04:51 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fiscal Cliff... Of 1937 [View article]
    It is to prove a point, not to entice people into stop paying taxes. If we are to discuss the absurd, we must include the little known facts that support the absurd. Your mention of being an attorney (so I am confident you will understand this, myself a former CONLAW Prof. and current Public Policy Administrator), you must surely be aware that we no longer deal with Public Law, rather Public Policy, (UCC).

    Here, CONLAW will be looked at, regards tax.

    It is an unconstitutional violation of due process of law for any judge or prosecutor to "presume" that one may be a franchisee called a "taxpayer" without any supporting evidence. All such presumptions also amount to the establishment of a religion by the government, because they amount to a belief that either is not supported by evidence or is not required to be supported by evidence.

    Further, if Federal courts can’t make declaratory judgments relating to federal taxes, then how can they decide that one may be a "taxpayer" who is subject to the franchise agreement to begin with? If they are enjoined from declaring people "taxpayers", then they can’t enforce the franchise agreement against anyone because they can’t determine who is subject to it.

    Understand the legal reality, namely that "taxpayer" means "fiduciary" and that has to be asserted at what may be the one and only time to compel "them" judicially to prove up the basis for their purported claim, namely the necessary trust agreement on which their claim depends.


    1. The so-called "income" tax can only be applied to those individuals engaged in certain revenue taxable activities as defined in the revenue statutes of the United States, and

    2. Some agents of the Internal Revenue service routinely apply the so-called "income" tax to individuals that are not engaged in those activities,

    It can be concluded that those agents are misapplying the revenue statutes of the United States.

    Furthermore, since:

    1. Certain agents of the Internal Revenue service have been informed of this misapplication of the revenue statutes of the United States, and

    2. These same agents of the Internal Revenue Service continue to misapply the revenue statutes of the United States,

    It can be concluded that those agents are misapplying the revenue statutes with the full knowledge that they are, in fact, misapplying those statutes and, thus, operating under the color of law in such a manner as to constitute fraud.

    Furthermore, since the aforesaid agents use coercion and threats of fines, penalties, interest, and incarceration to fraudulently enforce those misapplied revenue statutes of the United States, those agents are operating under the color of law in such a manner as to constitute extortion.
    Nov 16, 2012. 04:50 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fiscal Cliff... Of 1937 [View article]
    “Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own destruction. When money ceases to become the means by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of other men. Blood, whips and guns—or dollars. Take your choice—there is no other.” Ayn Rand

    My choclate side.
    Nov 16, 2012. 04:50 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Starbucks Is Brewing Up Big Bucks For Shareholders [View article]
    Those are the rules we all agreed upon. The current company model allows this to happen, as it does for 67% London Corporations, cleverly registered on neutral ground.

    IF HMG wants to start playing at that, good luck. Anything existing within the Square Mile is exempt by law, good luck.
    Nov 16, 2012. 04:50 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fiscal Cliff... Of 1937 [View article]
    That's where you are wrong, leave the ideology out of it and stick to fact.

    Democracy, is one of the most dangerous words in the dictionary, as the vast majority of Americans believe it means helping others and being fair, when nothing could be further from the truth. You see how a simple word and concept can be devastating for a country without the reading comprehension level of a 10 year old child.

    99% of the population have no earthly idea of what Democracy is, if they did, they surely wouldn't be voting the way they are.

    * Professor Alexander Fraser Tytler, nearly two centuries ago, had this to say about Democracy: " A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of Government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess out of public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that Democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, always followed by a Dictatorship."

    Ask Germany how that worked out for them, nu?

    A democracy is majority rule, and is destructive of liberty because there is no law to prevent the majority from trampling on individual rights, full stop. Whatever the majority says, goes. There is no debate, it's an order.

    A lynch mob is an example of "pure democracy" in action. There is only one dissenting vote, and that is cast by the person at the end of the rope. opposed to a Republic..............

    Republic: Authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them.Attitude toward property is respect for laws and individual rights, and a sensible economic procedure. Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidence, with a strict regard to consequences.

    * Remember 50 years ago in school, (at least in Hebrew School) when the entire class recited the "Pledge of Allegiance" ?

    "...and to the Republic, for which it stands"

    Sadly, the 99%, includes 100% of the "uneducated", helping to drive this country into the wall.
    Nov 15, 2012. 05:57 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fiscal Cliff... Of 1937 [View article]
    CONLAW helmets on, here we go:

    In 1937, taxes were still levied through Public Law, as prior to 1938, the Supreme Court was dealing with Public Law. Since 1938, the Supreme Court has dealt with Public Policy.

    This system of law was codified as the Uniform Commercial Code, and has been adopted in every state.

    "Nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands... " These are the words of Judge Learned Hand (1872-1961), Judge, U. S. Court of Appeals in the case of Gregory v. Helvering, 69 F.2d 809, 810 (2d Cir. 1934), aff´d, 293 U.S. 465, 55 S.Ct. 266, 79 L.Ed. 596 (1935)

    "Anyone may arrange his affairs that his taxes shall be as low as possible; He is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the Treasury; There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one’s taxes.
    Over and over again courts have said there is nothing sinister in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible, everyone does it, rich and poor alike and all do right; for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands. (f) Taxes are an enforceable extraction, and not a voluntary contribution."

    The IRS cannot assess a Citizen of a state of the Union (not capitalized with reason) living and working in said state, who does not file a tax return, or have any "information returns" filed against him.

    * So you see, the IRS would like you to believe that they can assess anyone, anytime, but that is a lie.. However, the IRS does sometimes assess a "non-filing" Citizen by committing computer fraud. The IRS simply enters a code into their computer system that converts you to a corporation in their database. In effect it changes "John Q. Citizen" into "John Q. Citizen, Inc." (so to speak). Once that fraudulent entry has been made on their computer, it then "permits" them to [fraudulently] assess a tax against you.

    Start asking "the right questions".
    Nov 15, 2012. 05:50 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment