Little Caesar
original poster (1930)

What if an attorney wrote a letter/memo to a client explaining how she did not have to withhold taxes on her employee's wages.  What if a lawyer wrote a memo telling the President of the United States that he should feel free to torture certain people as defined in the memo.

What if a lawyer went ahead and told the President of The United States of America that it was okay to tap every telephone or pc in the nation if his intent was good?

I came across this little tidbit from Huffpo today. Beck, someone whom the 50 states and federal government have denied a license to practice law, is telling people not to pay their taxes and then quoting as his source the Mahatma.

Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution states Congress has the power to lay and collect taxes. Secondly, the 16th Amendment states: "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration." In other words, the income tax is constitutional if Congress wants to use that power. It has. If you don't like it, then I suggest you work to repeal the 16th Amendment and Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution.

The US code, (26 USC 6012) states: "Returns with respect to income taxes under subtitle A shall be made by the following:...Every individual having for the taxable year gross income which equals or exceeds the exemption amount, except that a return shall not be required of an individual." In other words if your income exceeds the exemption amount you have to file a return. That's the law.

Black's Law Dictionary (copyright 2004) provides the following definition of tax evasion: "The willful attempt to defeat or circumvent the tax law in order to illegally reduce one's tax liability." Put another way, if your intention is to not pay taxes when they are owed the government can hit you with fines and jail time.

However, taxpayers are allowed to plan their affairs to minimum their tax liability. This was the essential ruling in Gregory v. Helvering a 1935 Supreme Court case. That case stated, "The legal right of a taxpayer to decrease the amount of what otherwise would be his taxes, or altogether avoid them, by means which the law permits, cannot be doubted." If as a lawyer I engaged in any sentiment similar to what Mr. Beck is advocating I would be disbarred. Period. No ifs ands or buts. While I'm sure Mr. Beck does not see it that way, the reality is his statements are encouraging people to think about breaking the law.

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hale-stewart/a-tax-lawyer-refutes-glen_b_209610.html

It was interesting here, anyway, that beck, who has the intelligence of a bottle of beer but delivers much less satisfaction, would cite Gandhi. Because Gandhi, like Martin Luther King or even Martin Luther, advocated the breaking of the law by the masses.  All three of course advocated lawful acts as well.

BUT ALL THREE ENDED UP IN PRISON FOR THEIR ADVOCACY. And they knew that that was a risk they should take in their advocation of equality, democracy or basic human rights.

Beck will advocate the shunning of a basic duty of every American Citizen. And he will be as blatant as to call for the assassination of Michael Moore.

Rush will advocate the destruction of a city like Denver for holding the Democratic Convention.

But as all good conservatives and repubs, NOT ONE OF THESE NAZIS would ever willingly go to the hoosegow for their advocacy. They have not the guts.

The principal argument of the paper is that abuses of Chinese lawyers are in some ways signals of (or result of) the progress that is being made in establishing China's legal system. Lawyers are intimidated and prosecuted because lawyers have become more proactive, aggressive and innovative in defending the rights of their clients and of their own, posing serious legal challenges that prosecution has never encountered before. This challenge is possible because criminal justice reform in China in the past ten years have created opportunities and incentives for a growing legal profession. Thus, the predicament of lawyers today should be examined in the context of a profession in fundamental transition. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=956500

I was thinking about this today. There is a wonderful movie with Richard Gere. He is an American Businessman, ready to make money for his fascist American company and runs into a murder charge that ends up being a cover up by some Chinese muckity muck. He is represented by a court appointed attorney (played by Bai Ling).  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Corner

I love the movie for a million reasons. But the fact that some rich capitalist could not BUY JUSTICE was interesting.  EVERYBODY GETS COURT APPOINTED COUNSEL. Hahahaha

God I would love that here. Hahahaha. Madoff would still get 150 years but his entire family and everybody that ever worked for him would be in prison. HELL SO WOULD EVERYONE HE EVER KNEW.

But like our own court appointed attorneys, there are limits as to how far you are going to push the system.  Oh the repubs would have no problems jumping up and down about the lack of legal rights in Red China, as we like to call it.  But they have no problem legislating the Patriot Act and setting up 'tribunals' and such for 'terrorists' before they have been adjudicated terrorists.

I think I want to do a series on culpability. Culpability as a concept. Culpability for attorneys.

I mean if an attorney 'counsels' a corporation (a corporation for all those who refuse to see it is a 'concept' not a real person or thing) to hide its money in the Caymans or Switzerland or whatever.  Hell how much money, American capital, is hidden in China or Saudi for that matter?

Does anyone know where twelve billion dollars of our money is that was dumped on Bagdad streets?  How many American Enterprises got to that little pile of manna from the skies?

In April 2006, (some nurses) left their posts in protest over job conditions. The district attorney accused the nurses of abandoning their patients by leaving their shifts without giving administrators enough notice to find replacements.

And so were their attorneys.

They, along with Vinluan, were indicted in March 2007 on 13 counts, including charges of sixth-degree conspiracy, endangering the welfare of a child, and endangering the welfare of a physically disabled person. Vinluan, after hearing the nurses' complaints about substandard pay, poor living conditions, changes in work shifts and other alleged violations of their contracts, "advised them that they could resign if they wanted to as their contracts were already breached." http://www.jdjournal.com/2009/01/20/attorney-cannot-be-prosecuted-over-bad-advice/

More than one lawyer was pissed. http://federalism.typepad.com/crime_federalism/2009/01/lawyer-prosecuted-for-giving-legal-advice.html

It is always the powerless who are prosecuted. Either here or in Red China or in Saudi Arabia I suppose. The human condition.

I think I might continue in this vein and discuss the culpability of attorneys.  I will wrap this little rant up with F. Lee. Baily.

In 1994, while the O.J. Simpson case was being tried, Bailey and Robert Shapiro represented Claude DuBoc, an accused marijuana dealer. In a plea bargain agreement with the U.S. Attorney, DuBoc agreed to turn over his assets to the U.S. government. His assets included a large block of stock in BioChem, worth approximately $6 million at the time of the plea deal. When the government sought to collect the stock, it had increased in value to $20 million. Bailey claimed he was entitled to the appreciation in payment of his legal fees and refused to turn over the stock to the government. In 2000, he was sent to prison for contempt. After 44 days at the Federal Correctional Institution, Tallahassee, Bailey agreed to relinquish his claim to the stock and was freed.[2][3]

F. Lee ended up getting disbarred.

This all had to do with the RICO statute. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Corrupt_Organizations_Act

Where did the attorneys for Madoff get their monies?

Where did AIG's attorneys get their monies?

Hell, where did ENRON's attorneys get their monies?

Just a thought as I ponder the conduct of Professor Yoo.