You wrote: "On April 5, 2001, the Senate Finance Committee, under the chairmanship of Senator Charles Grassley, held a hearing specifically to warn taxpayers about illegal tax schemes, scams, and cons.

That is true.

You also wrote: At that hearing, newspaper advertisements published by the WTP group urging taxpayers to defy the tax laws were prominently displayed as examples of illegal tax schemes and as a warning that those who follow such advice may be subjecting themselves to criminal prosecution, penalties and judicially-imposed sanctions.

This is a gross misrepresentation of the truth. Here, again, are the facts.

During the evening of March 30, 2001, I received a telephone call from David Cay Johnston of the New York Times. He asked, "Do you know the Senate Finance Committee has scheduled a hearing on your ads next Thursday and they will have large blow-ups of your ads on easels?" I told Mr. Johnson, "No, I was not aware of that." He asked, " What are you going to do about it?" I said, "I don’t know. What can I do about it?" He recommended that I could call the Committee Monday morning and ask to be put on the witness list to testify because "the media is very interested in our side of the story."

On Monday morning, April 2, 2001, I faxed the request to the Senate Finance Committee. Late that day I received a fax from Senator Grassley, refusing to let me testify at the hearing on our USA TODAY publications and telling me that if I submitted a written statement the Committee would decide whether it would be added to the official record of the hearing.

Chairman Grassley responded that afternoon by faxing a letter to me, dated April 2, 2001, advising that the witness list had been closed days before the Committee announced the hearing and suggesting that I submit my statement to the Committee for insertion in the record of the hearing.

My statement to the Senate Finance Committee had twenty (20) exhibits attached to it, including a copy of a letter from Senator Inouye’s office, dated June 26, 1989 and a copy of my letter to Commissioner Rossotti, dated February 14, 2001. Attached hereto as Exhibit J is a copy of Sen. Inouye’s letter which reads in part:

On April 4, I received by fax a copy of an article that appeared that day in the St. Petersburg Times which quoted Senator Grassley saying WTP was not being allowed to testify at the April 5, 2001 hearing because our message would "detract from the message the Committee was trying to convey."

Our USA TODAY full-page ad, as published on February 16, 2001, had been enlarged, mounted on an easel, and placed on display during the Committee hearing.

At the hearing there were five witnesses on the first panel. Here is how Chairman Grassley introduced them:

The second panel consisted of:

Charles O. Rossotti, Commissioner, Internal Revenue Service

It is important to note that the only apparent reason a WTP ad (the February 16, 2001 ad) was blown up for display at the hearing was because the WTP ad was referred to in JJ MacNab’s testimony.

During the Q & A session, Chairman Grassley asked a question and Ms. MacNab answered it. The Q & A are repeated here to show that even during the Senate Finance Committee hearing on the growing number of people "evading" taxes, the government is being asked by one of its star witnesses to answer our questions.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me touch on one thing that we have not discussed yet. And maybe, I referred to it in my opening comments. And maybe it is not as big of a problem as we think it is. But we have a new situation where employers are saying that they are not going to withhold their employee’s income and payroll taxes. And obviously, that is unacceptable. But the problem is we have employees choosing between their jobs and the tax man. What is the panel’s thoughts on this matter?

Ms. MacNAB. Your question is actually very good. This is very fairly new industry. If you can nip it in the bud, you can stop this from blossoming like the pure trust schemes. These people, they are not hiding, as I showed earlier, the USA TODAY has a full-page ad. They have concerns and they truly believe they have a right to address them. They have asked on numerous opportunities for the IRS to review their materials and tell them they are wrong. Let the IRS do that. If they are trying so hard to get attention, give it to them.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you another?

Ms. MacNAB. And this was a full-page ad in which they show three IRS agents who have endorsed their program, three ex-IRS agents.

The CHAIRMAN. One last thing, you may get questions in writing from either of us, but also more importantly because of the bill on the floor, a lot of the members could not come. They are at other committee hearings…

Another telling exchange occurred a moment latter between Chairman Grassley and Senator Baucus as follows:

The CHAIRMAN. Well, maybe, there has been more than one Iowan, but I can only think of one Iowan that for the last 20 years has been bothering me about the income tax being unconstitutional. Now, I suppose there is a lot.

Senator BAUCUS. There are a lot in my state, Mr. Chairman. [Laughter.]

So, Mr. Bryant, what you have here are our elected representatives admitting that there are many people in their states who are questioning the constitutionality of the income tax system, but that it is a "bother" to these elected representatives when their constituents question them about the constitutionality of the income tax system.

During her oral testimony Ms. MacNab said, "The promoters [of tax fraud] are not hard to find. As an exercise, I put aside two hours of uninterrupted time to see what kinds of things I could find by browsing the Internet. To summarize, in 2 hours, I looked at 28 websites promoting questionable tax products and information…As I said earlier, the promoters are not difficult to find. They are not hiding what they are doing. Almost every website I found in my 2-hour search included the name, address, and phone number for the promoter. All but one was located in the United States. And they do not just exist on the Internet. They are in in-flight magazines, on radio talk shows. They take out full-page ads in USA TODAY and the Washington Times. There is actually an example on a chart on the side here. This ran, I believe, three times in major publications. They are practically begging the IRS to review their products…." (Footnote)

From her testimony then, it is safe to assume that Ms. MacNab couldn’t understand WTP’s message or what WTP was up to with its ads. Consequently, Ms. MacNab completely misunderstood and mischaracterized WTP. She implied we were a promoter of a technique to evade taxes, but she did not associate us with any tax evasion technique.

While she identified lots of "techniques" being promoted by various other organizations, such as pure trusts and off-shore accounts, she did not associate us with any tax evasion technique. She apparently just assumed that we were marketing some tax evasion service or product and was galled by the boldness of our ads. She obviously felt WTP was making money hand over fist from our "tax evasion technique" to be able to afford all those ads at $65,000 each. Little did she know we were selling nothing and the money for the ads was raised from no-strings-attached-donations, by people who wanted nothing but the questions answered and constitutional governance.

It is also important to note that JJ MacNab, is an "insurance analyst and financial planner" with a hobby. Her hobby is maintaining a website list of what she refers to as "big picture [tax] cheaters." She decides whom she puts on her list. The criteria she uses is known only to her, but from her testimony before the Committee it is obvious she takes as the gospel truth everything the IRS has to say, she is not familiar with the practice of critical analytical thinking (especially when it comes to governmental behavior), she is not at all familiar with the controversy regarding the constitutional and legal foundation of the government’s taxing powers, she is unconcerned about the government’s failure to respond to the People’s Petition for Redress, she shows no interest in the research and the facts causing legions of individuals to stop filing tax returns, the research and facts leading up to the publication of the WTP ads, the research and the facts leading a growing list of businesses to stop withholding the income tax from the paychecks of their employees or the growing list of credentialed professionals who are questioning the validity of the federal income tax.

The record of the hearing shows Ms. MacNab to be interested only in staying in the good graces of the IRS and "snitching" on anyone and everyone who she, and she alone, decides is doing something out of the ordinary – i.e., not the way the IRS wants people to behave.

From my presence at that hearing, I can personally testify that the Committee itself showed no (apparent) interest that day in WTP or in its USA TODAY ads.

You also wrote: "The Chairman and members of the Finance Committee strongly urged the IRS to be more aggressive in attacking illegal tax schemes, scams and cons."

That may be true, but it has nothing to do with WTP, our questions, our Petition for Redress and your constitutional duty to respond.

You wrote: "Executive Branch. The Justice Department and the IRS have intensified their efforts to bring to justice people who defy the tax laws and raise frivolous theories to justify their conduct. The Department’s efforts include criminal prosecutions and injunction suits to shut down tax scams. We are working with the IRS to increase its referral of cases and bring more such tax cheaters to justice."

That may be true, but it has nothing to do with WTP, our questions and Petition for Redress and your constitutional duty to respond.

You also wrote: "In two cases brought by the Justice Department, the courts recently granted injunctions against unscrupulous individuals and corporations, including Harold E. Hearn, Atlanta, Georgia, and Joseph N. Sweet, Bradenton, Florida. One case involved the promotion of tax scams, and the second concerned baseless legal positions taken on returns prepared for others."

That may be true, but it has nothing to do with WTP, our questions and Petition for Redress and your constitutional duty to respond.

You also wrote: "Injunction suits are also pending against two individuals whose actions are prominently mentioned in WTP’s advertising material, David Bosset, Clearwater, Florida, and Thurston Bell, Hanover, Pennsylvania, for their actions in promoting illegal tax schemes."

In point of fact, WTP was forced to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to tell the general public what actions people like David Bosset and Thurston Bell were taking regarding the income tax system -- all because the government would not respond to our questions and our Petition for Redress.

In fact, everything we reported about David Bosset and Thurston Bell was true. They were doing what we said they were doing.

In fact, our ads were educational ads, designed to inform the general public about what was actually happening in America, regarding the tax system, and the only reason we undertook the expense of publishing the ads was the government’s failure to respond to our Petition for Redress of Grievances regarding the origin and operation of the federal income tax system.

In fact, as we accurately reported, Bosset and Bell were advising people that they were not required to file a tax return or pay the tax based on their interpretation of the tax laws. They based their advice on the plain statutory language of Section 861, the so-called "861" argument, which has not been specifically determined by any federal district or appellate court to be baseless. In fact, the only "court" to "rule" on this issue is US Tax Court, which is not an Article III court. In addition, IRS’s own regulations prohibit them from citing Tax Court rulings as precedent for any other taxpayer.

In fact, as you know, the "injunction suits" you refer to, if successful, would not include a final determination of the underlying legal question: whether the income of most US citizens is taxable and therefore, whether they are required to file a tax return and pay the income tax. These harassment suits are designed to get the courts to order the defendants to stop talking about US tax law.

Our Petition for redress contains specific questions concerning Section 861. These have not been answered.

That may be true, but it has nothing to do with WTP, our questions and Petition for Redress and your constitutional duty to respond.

You also wrote: " Many people who defraud honest American taxpayers by using the scams and schemes promoted by WTP have been convicted by juries of their peers and sentenced to serve time in prison. The IRS web site chronicles many examples of such criminal prosecutions."

You have gone too far Mr. Bryant. I demand an apology. First, you breached our formal agreement and now you have issued an official written statement that is not in the public interest and tends to expose WTP and me to public ridicule and contempt and tends to injure our reputations.

You have falsely accused WTP of promoting "tax fraud schemes" that have been used to "defraud honest American taxpayers" who have then been "convicted by juries of their peers and sentenced to serve time in prison."

You wrote: "On the legislative front, the President in his recent budget message asked Congress to enact several proposals to further deter tax violations of the sort advocated by WTP. The legislation requested by the President would raise the frivolous return penalty from $500 to $5,000 and would impose a penalty of $5,000 for making a frivolous collection due process hearing request or submitting a frivolous offer in compromise or a frivolous request for an installment payment agreement."

That may be true, but it has nothing to do with WTP, our questions and Petition for Redress and your constitutional duty to respond.

You wrote: "The We the People Foundation and other promoters of tax fraud schemes are free to advocate tax reform, but they are obliged to comply with the existing tax laws."

With a reckless disregard for the truth you have issued a written statement that is not in the public interest and tends to expose WTP and me to public ridicule and contempt and tends to injure our reputations.

You have falsely accused WTP of promoting "tax fraud schemes" that have been used to "defraud honest American taxpayers" who have then been "convicted by juries of their peers and sentenced to serve time in prison."

Your April 18, 2002 letter is also suspect in light of what took place in the halls of Congress three days earlier.

On April 15, 2002, something rarely, if ever, happened on Capitol Hill. On that one-day, approximately 3300 different constituent letters were delivered to all 535 congressmen by hundreds of ordinary, non-aligned Americans who traveled to Capitol Hill at their own expense, from nearly every state in the Union, to accomplish their task. And, each constituent addressed the same subject and communicated the same request to his or her congressman – a demand letter, requesting a full-blown congressional hearing. Each congressman received similar documents and evidence.

Never before have the People gone to such lengths, and acted with such intelligence and with such professionalism and respect, to Petition the government for Redress of Grievances. Never before have the People, in such a dramatic, high profile, attention-getting but entirely proper and constitutional manner been called upon to exercise their 1^st Amendment Right to Petition. Never before have the People felt the need to do so. Never before have the People felt so moved to utilize the Right to Petition to remedy any issue of concern.

Each and every congressman received, from their constituent(s), a copy of the full record of the Citizens’ Truth-In-Taxation Hearing, with a request that DOJ and IRS to be present at a hearing called by the People’s elected representatives to answer questions and address our evidence, regarding the fraudulent origin and illegal operation of the income tax system.

I can only imagine the buzz – the confused sound of many excited voices - the People’s action must have generated in the halls of Congress that day.

Regrettably, I must assume that our elected representative do not have anything resembling a command of the subject matter, are themselves afraid of the IRS, or have loyalties that flow first toward their political parties and the status quo, rather than to the Constitution, for fear of falling out of favor with and not receiving a ballot designation the next time around – God forbid, they should ever have to petition for a ballot designation.

Regrettably, I must assume that the parties and our elected representatives turned to the IRS for advice on how to respond to the People who appeared to be so well armed with their meaningful Petition for Redress and well thought out questions and evidence, challenging the validity of the income tax system.

Regrettably, I must assume that Floyd Williams of the IRS was asked to prepare your official response from the DOJ. I have met the man. If ever I felt I was in the room with the devil himself, it was when Floyd Williams walked by me as he entered Congressman Bartlett’s office. I felt the hair on my neck stand up. He acted and sounded like a thug who owned the whole Congress. Only Floyd Williams could have written so mean-spirited a response for the Congressmen to use against the People and the Truth.

Regrettably, I must assume you, the Assistant Attorney General of the United States, accepted the instructions to sign your name to William’s handiwork and that you were instructed to address it to Congressman Bartlett because of his lead role in the earlier defense of our Right to Petition and government’s obligation to respond.

Regrettably, I must assume your letter, although addressed to Rep. Bartlett, was purposely delivered, or made available, to each and every congressman, along with a copy of the CRS Report, to provide each with the acceptable "correct" words and information to use in responding to their constituent’s demand letter(s).

Regrettably, I have now lived to see our government, once perceived as being comprised of honorable men dedicated to righteous and spiritual principles, unveiled to reveal the dark stains of tyranny and dishonor.

Mr. Bryant, you have violated the public trust and have committed a wrong against me, this Foundation, this Republic and all that our nation stands for. I pray for you and our future.

Mr. Bryant, I await your apology and a response to our Petition for Redress. 

Very truly yours,

_______________________

Robert L. Schulz
Chairman

Cc: Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (w/o attachments)

Sen. Charles Grassley