From the October 2007 Idaho Observer:

Jury verdict deals federal tax collectors severe blow

On Monday, September 17^th, Constitution Day, a Las Vegas federal jury acquitted nine defendants of all 161 federal tax crimes they had been charged with. The charges included income tax evasion, willful failure to file and conspiracy to evade taxes.

The four-month trial centered around the family businesses of Robert Kahre who paid numerous workers for their labor with circulating gold and silver U.S. coins and did not report the wages. The payments took place over several years, allegedly totaling at least $114 million dollars.

The only corporate media outlet that reported the outcome of this landmark case was the Las Vegas Review Journal. Reportedly under a degree of public pressure, The Journal ran its first (and only) story about the case Sept. 20, 2007.

In this trial, the jury was able to hear the truth about our money, the truth about our (privately-owned) central bank and the truth about the fraudulent nature of the operation and enforcement of the federal income tax system.

According to defense attorney Joel Hansen, who represented co-defendant Alex Loglia, the primary "willfulness" defense was that the defendants believed they had no legal obligation to withhold, pay income taxes or report anything to the government because, in part, the nominal (i.e., face value) of the gold and silver coins is so small as to fall beneath the reporting thresholds set by the Internal Revenue Code.

The Defendants also argued that regardless of the valuation of the coins for internal revenue purposes, there is no law that requires average American workers to file or pay direct, un-apportioned taxes on the fruits of their labor.

The government argued that the payments in solid gold and silver U.S. coins must be considered at their bullion (i.e., intrinsic full-market) value when considering the worth of the wages for purposes of the internal revenue code.

The defense offered the jury two Supreme Court cases supporting the defendants’ "face value" argument, which was at the heart of their "willfulness" defense. The first case, Ling Su Fan v. U.S., 218 US 302 (1910) establishes the legal distinction of a coin bearing the "impress" of the sovereign. The second case, Thompson v. Butler, 95 US 694 (1877), established that the law makes no legal distinction between the values of coin and paper money used as legal tender:

In essence, if a worker is paid with such coins, his taxable "income" (if any) can only be the face value indicated upon the coin money paid ($1 for a circulating silver dollar or $50 for a circulating gold U.S. coin).

Though some defendants were acquitted of multiple counts, and several were acquitted completely, others may have to stand for a retrial if the government brings charges a second time.

For a full report on the Kahre decision and a complete timeline of tax-honesty campaign efforts by We the People Foundation for Constitutional Education, go to www.givemeliberty.org.

Note: Repeal of the 18^th (Prohibition) Amendment came after juries began drinking the evidence, that is, they stopped issuing guilty verdicts. The Kahre verdict, however ignored by the corporate media, is a sign that Americans are getting wise to the 16^th Amendment fraud. (DWH)