ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

Aaron Key wasn't sure he wanted a tattoo on his neck. Especially one of a giant squid smoking a joint.

But the guys running Squid's Smoke Shop in Portland, Ore., convinced him: It would be a perfect way to promote their store.

They would even pay him and a friend $150 apiece if they agreed to turn their bodies into walking billboards.

Key, who is mentally disabled, was swayed.

read more:

Views: 1229

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Our government has gone absolutely power mad! Orwell's "Big Brother" has certainly arrived in America !

Why are you still paying taxes? Do you like paying the salaries of these idiots?

Ever hear about why Al Capone went to prison? One thing you can be sure of, Obama will enforce the Tax Laws! Now if you had millions of tax payers who marched on DC, tearing up their IRS 1040's, like the young men tearing their draft cards did in the 60's, and screaming no representation without taxation ( 47% of Americans don't pay federal income taxes ) then you would get the Governments attention! FEMA CAMPS, here we come!

My observation is that most of us on this blog are older retired people who believe in the old out of date " work ethics "!,,, None of us men would have burned their draft card. Some of us our Viet Nam Vets!

We were all drooped into believing that these were going to be are golden years. I hear a lot on this site that SOMEONE aught to do SOMETHING!!!!!! So the next time your looking into the mirror, tell that person to do something


You miss a very important point.  This is supposed to be a "Government OF the People, BY the People, FOR the PEOPLE".  Not government OF the people BY the Government, FOR the Government.  The CONgress is SUPPOSED to work with the consent of the People.  Did anyone (other than the CONgress)  ever get the chance to VOTE on the "income" tax?  Of COURSE not...  So why PAY it?  As applied, it is illegal and UnConstitutional. 

Mr. Capone OWED it.  (Profits and Gains)  YOU probably do not.  (paycheck)  If you can't hold your INCOME (Profits and Gains) in one hand, and your PAYCHECK in the other, you probably have NO INCOME, thus no 'liability' to an "income" tax.

My point is under the Constitution Congress has the right to tax the people. My point is you are telling someone else not to pay their taxes and see what happens. FYI I worked until I was 70 and paid Federal Income Tax every year for the past56 years. The IRS reports my income to SS every year so that they can charge 4X the cost of Medicare Part B.

My last point is there are a lot of people on this site saying someone ELSE should break the law because we don't support and that is the only reason I responded to your comment " why are you still paying taxes ". Maybe it's because Johnathon knows Obama will in force that law!


"...under the Constitution Congress has the right to tax the people."

Where is that?  I see where the CONgress has power to tax imports, and coroprate profits, as well as Capital Gain.  (PROFIT AND GAIN.)  It can levy a DIRECT TAX upon the States, based upon their population as of the most recent census.  The States then collect from the People.  But they (CONgress) do NOT have the power to tax the People directly, as is seemingly done with the 'income' tax.  They couldn't in 1912, and they couldn't in 1913, after the phony ratification of the 16th amendment. 

Go to the library and find the Lawbook, 240 U.S.  Go to page ONE, and READ THE CASE.  Mr. Brushaber lost the case, but he argued incorrectly.  Or rather, he argeued correctly, but had no standing, since he did, indeed, owe a tax.


The Sexteenth Amendment to the US Consitution allows Congress to tax us! Maybe they should have stoped after the Second Amendment.

You should work for IRS!  This is how THEY read the 16th.  It is NOT SO.  Did you READ the Brushaber case?  It tells the story.  I can supply MANY more. 

"INCOME" is PROFIT OR GAIN.  Your PAY is NOT profit or gain, it is, in fact, a LOSS.  SCOTUS has said so often.  IRS doesn't want you to know it, but it is so. 

SHOW ME, in the 16th a SINGLE WORD that REPEALS the Article One provisions that forbid a DIRECT TAX on the People.  There are TWO such  provisions, but NOT A WORD repealing them in the 16th.  That lack of REPEAL provisions (must be explicit) is what keeps the amendment Constitutional.  It is APPLIED in an un-Constitutional manner.

Check out

What Robert is saying is that one man alone does nothing it takes all of us !!!


I am doing something, but trying to get you old guys to stick your neck out and stand with me is like pulling teeth out of an elephant with a pair of tweezers. Simple... all you have to do is call the Washington state legislators and ask why the Attorney General and the lawmakers themselves are making it illegal for themselves to be a good neighbor doing their civic duty to uphold our Supreme Law of the Land. I have just emailed everyone of them the following:

Dear Senator/Representative/Governor, 
    Please help with my questions which follow this update.
    I would like to update you on the current status of my defense of our constitutionally protected right to publish a list of our skills in an effort to serve our neighbors and make new friends. Please be aware that hanging an innocent truthful flyer on a private bulletin board will generate $1500.00 in fines from WDLI without warning and without a personal presentation of credentials. Two citations arrived by mail and were accompanied by two letters threatening “further legal action,” ”liens,” “warrants,” and a court order to “withhold and deliver.”  Two citations for the same flyer on the same bulletin board for the same day. 
    It has taken 2 years of arguing with government employees to reach my current status, also much personal time and expense. I have appealed both citations to the Court of Appeals for the State of Washington. I requested a waiver of the $290.00 fees required for the appeal. Waiver of Fees requires a Declaration of Indigency which must be approved by the Superior Court judge whose RULING I am appealing. Both Judge Moreno and Judge Sypolt have approved my request for fee waiver based on my Declaration of Indigency. Their Approvals and my Declarations have been sent to the Supreme Court of the State of Washington for that court to give final approval of Fee Waiver, or not. If the Supreme Court grants Fee Waiver, then the Court of Appeals will take up my Appeals of the Superior Court decisions which upheld the $1000.00 and $500.00 fines--without me paying additional fees to the Court of Appeals. I have already paid a total of $450.00 in fees in order to defend my right to publish a list of skills in order to find work to provide an income for the maintenance of the family household.
     See how none of this makes sense? Prevent a guy from offering his services for an income and then demand that he pay fees to get due process of law? I thought "liberty and justice for all" is free for Americans. I thought that is why we have the Supreme Law of the Land, our state and federal constitutions. I thought "liberty and justice for all" was free in America because we have so many soldiers who pay the price by giving life and limb defending our constitutions from "all enemies foreign and domestic." I should certainly qualify for "liberty and justice for all" because my father and three of my sons took the military oath and served overseas risking life and limb.  But... apparently, government employees are oblivious to the Supreme Laws of the Land. They have convoluted every word of our constitutions and statutes and regulations.
    Throughout my defense, I have endeavored to keep my state representatives aware of what their out of control bureaucracies are doing outside of constitutional restraints which were written to protect We the People and preserve liberty and justice for our posterity. At this stage in the battle it has become obvious that what the bureaucrats are doing is being supported by the Superior Courts, also. 
     I was taught in elementary school that it is every citizens' civic duty to support and defend our constitutions, the Supreme Law of the Land. That makes sense because that is what we ask our neighbors in the military to do, risking life and limb. What does not make sense is encountering government attorneys for the state who make it illegal for public servants to be good neighbors doing their civic duty to support our Supreme Law of the Land. Assistant Attorney General Angela Zurlini made it illegal for members of the Electrical Board to base their decision on the Supreme Law of the Land here: 
QUOTE from the AAG's Brief to the Electrical Board: 
The Electrical Board does not have the authority to render an opinion regarding the constitutionality of RCW 19.28 or the issuance of citation number EJORP004884.  Addressing these arguments falls outside the scope of what the Electrical Board has authority to address. The power of an administrative tribunal to fashion a remedy is  strictly limited by statute. Skagit Surveyors and Engineers, LLC v. Friends of Skagit County, 135 Wash. 2d 542,558,958, P.2d 962, 970 (1998). While Mr. Hinds cites to a  constitutional right to free speech, due process, the right to a jury, and equal protection, Mr. Hinds fails to provide any legal authority to support his position that the Electrical Board can decide such issues. Mr. Hinds constitutional arguments are without legal support and should be disregarded.
    Have you ever read such nonsense? My constitutional arguments "are without legal support and should be disregarded?" My goodness! The legal support for my claims is the Supreme Law of the Land itself! My state and federal constitutions ARE MY LEGAL SUPPORT! What, not “who,” am I arguing with? Any logical thinking human being understands that our constitutions are the ultimate legal support… Mind boggling!  
    According to Zurlini, I have no right to free speech, due process, speedy trial by jury, and equal protection under the law. My goodness! Who would have thunk it? Don't government employees such as AAG Zurlini and the Superior Court judges take an Oath of Office to support our Supreme Law of the Land? Not to mention that supporting our founding documents is the civic duty of every good neighbor in the land of the free and home of the brave--which includes our neighbors employed by the government. 
    Let me also inform you that a lot of my correspondence from my representatives in the state legislature contains wording that appears to make it illegal for them to support our founding documents, too. Many of my representatives say that they cannot intervene on my behalf because of ethical rules in the legislature.
     What is this? I understand that my representatives cannot unethically take bribes for assisting their constituents, but I am not offering a bribe, and neither am I asking for their intervention.  I am simply keeping my representatives informed of an opportunity for them to rightly and dutifully support and defend our Supreme Laws of the Land just as their Oath of Office requires, and just as our military men sacrifice their lives to do. As fellow citizens, our legislators have a civic duty to support and discuss our Supreme Laws of the Land among themselves and among the bureaucracy and among the judiciary, holding each other accountable to their Oath of Office and accountable to our servicemen who risk life and limb for their countryman’s Constitutionally Protected Rights and Freedoms. Any and every legislator can lawfully pick up a phone and voice their disapproval of ignoring our Supreme Law of the Land to any bureaucrat, judge, and government employee. They can also legally use my case as an example. It appears there is much confusion in the high offices of We the People's government. Evidently, some individuals representing We the People cannot correctly interpret and comprehend the ethical rules of the legislature. It is highly ethical and mandatory to support our Supreme Law of the Land, yet, just like Zurlini, some of my representatives are making it illegal for themselves to be good neighbors doing their civic duty to support our state and federal constitutions by incorrectly citing the legislature's “ethics rules.”  
    There was a time in our history when it was necessary for a brave leader to state the obvious. His name was Abraham Lincoln. There was a huge constitutional crisis during his day, just like we have today. Government in Lincoln's day was so chaotic and in disarray that the whole government was about to collapse and the nation to become divided. Lincoln's vision was to hold the republic together under its constitution. Lincoln succeeded, but at great loss of life during the Civil War. Lincoln freed the slaves, but if we don't get our act together this whole state of Washington, and our whole nation, is going to become slaves to the government employees without any constitutional protections at all. Lincoln stated the obvious here:
"We the People are the rightful masters of Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."
    Mr./Ms. People's Representative, perhaps you can find a copy of the legislature's Ethics Rules for me, or direct me to a place where I can read them online. I am just curious. 
1.  If the Supreme Court grants my Fee Waiver, does that mean the Court of Appeals must hear my case, or can they still refuse to hear it and let the Superior Court's  decision stand?
2. If the Court of Appeals refuses to hear my case, can I appeal that to the Supreme Court? 
3. If the Supreme Court, our courts are supposed to be our guardians of liberty and justice, ultimately ignores our Supreme Law of the Land and rules that I must pay fines for publishing a list of my skills, what is my next step? Lobbying the legislature? Running for Representative or Senator? 
4. If the Supreme Court does not grant me a Fee Waiver, do you know some people or an organization who can help me pay the fees quickly before the Court of Appeals  decides to throw out my appeal due to a lack of fees paid? 
5. Do you know how I can get more access to informing the public? I have been trying very hard to reach out to my neighbors, but with no success with the media. I simply  do not have a large enough platform to stand on. Little ol' Russ doesn't throw around much weight. 
    The above questions are not seeking legal advice, rather they are regarding the court's procedures. Please understand that, as a citizen, it is very difficult to feel my way through the system by the seat of my pants. I don't know where to look for the answers to the above questions. Obviously, I do not have the funds to hire an attorney, either.  
     You can learn the complete story of my experience dealing with government employees who have been trying to convince me that I am a bad neighbor who deserves to pay the government employees $1500.00 for hanging a flyer on a private bulletin board by visiting my blog online:
     I have kept a running record of my experience which includes the correspondence from government employees and my responses. The latest UPDATES are at the bottom of the blog. 
     Here is the bottom line question which should provoke an epiphany among our elected representatives and the government employees:
    Why are our young military men and women getting their asses shot off in foreign nations defending our Supreme Laws of the Land and liberty for We the People while our elected representatives and the un-elected bureaucrats are destroying our Supreme Laws of the Land here at home? 
Sincerely thank you for your attention,
Russ Hinds


Who would kill the 1000's of peaceful Demonstrators tearing up their 1040's?

The FPS under the DHS? DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE THAT IF THE FPS KILLED 1000s of Americans at a peaceful demonstration, that Congress, the SC and the Military woul stand by and say right on? This is my last comment on this subject!!!




Political Cartoons by Tom StiglichPolitical Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by AF Branco


Joe Biden On Violence Against Women:   We Have To Keep ‘Punching At It, And Punching At It, And Punching At It’

 The audience laughed as he said this.

Former Vice President Joe Biden said that America needs to be “punching” back to combat violence against women during Wednesday’s Democratic debate.

Biden was asked if he would tackle specific issues regarding the #MeToo movement at the beginning of his presidency, if he were to be elected. The former vice president previously sponsored the 1994 Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), which aimed to protect victims of domestic violence.

The presidential candidate responded to the question about assaulting women by using the phrase “punching” repeatedly, apparently not thinking about the implications of using such a word.

“No man has a right to raise a hand to a woman in anger other than in self-defense, and that rarely ever occurs,” Biden said. “So we have to just change the culture, period, and keep punching at it and punching at it and punching at it. No, I really mean it.”

A few people laughed in the audience as he said this.

Biden added that it is important to pass the Violence Against Women Act, which has passed in the House and held up in the Senate. The former Vice President also suggested that America has to “fundamentally change the culture” of how women are treated, noting that it is “everyone’s responsibility.”

“It’s a gigantic issue, and we have to make it clear from the top, from the president on down that we will not tolerate it,” Biden said. “We will not tolerate this culture.”

Tucker's big takeaways from the Trump impeachment saga

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service