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.
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)
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.
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.
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.
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
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)