Quantcast
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat

Opinion


THOMAS MITCHELL: Subpoena seeks names -- and lots more -- of Web posters

"Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech and assembly. Men feared witches and burnt women. It is the function of speech to free men from the bondage of irrational fears. To justify suppression of free speech, there must be reasonable ground to fear that serious evil will result if free speech is practiced."

-- Justice Louis Brandeis


Most Popular Stories
  • THOMAS MITCHELL: Sacrificing free speech won't appease fanatics
  • EDITORIAL: Stood her ground
  • Smart meters not all they're cracked up to be
  • EDITORIAL: Numbers stink?
  • VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: Some things are worth fighting for
  • EDITORIAL: Going to extremes
  • LETTERS: Nursery did the right thing with laborers
  • LETTERS: Teachers not most important learning variable
  • SHERMAN FREDERICK: Here's a scary thought
  • LETTERS: Agassi remains a good citizen




  • Free speech should be practiced only by those who are ready to deal with the consequences, which just might include a knock on the door by a friendly federal investigator wanting to know if you posted an anonymous comment on a Web site. Were you advocating violence or confessing to breaking the federal tax laws?

    This is not a hypothetical.

    On May 26 the Review-Journal published an article about an ongoing federal tax evasion trial. The primary defendant, Las Vegan Robert Kahre, stands accused of tax fraud for using the rather inventive argument that he could pay people in U.S. minted gold and silver coins based on their precious metal value but for tax purposes use their face value, which is many times less.

    The story was posted on our Web site. When last I checked nearly 100 comments were appended to it, running the gamut from the lucid to the ludicrous.

    This past week the newspaper was served with a grand jury subpoena from the U.S. attorney's office demanding that we turn over all records pertaining to those postings, including "full name, date of birth, physical address, gender, ZIP code, password prompts, security questions, telephone numbers and other identifiers ... the IP address," et (kitchen sink) cetera.

    Tantamount to killing a gnat with an A-bomb.

    There was no indication what they were looking for or what crime, if any, was being investigated, just a blanket subpoena for voluminous and detailed records on every private citizen who dared to speak about a federal tax case.

    Sure, some of the comments were a bit rough, but criminal?

    One person who signed himself "Louis D. Brandeis" called federal prosecutor Greg Damm, whose name is on the subpoena, "evil incarnate and everything that is against the American justice system."

    "Christian Patriot" wrote a couple days later, "I suggest we go back to a gold and silver standard, which would immediately wipe out the national debt, not charge us interest for their toilet paper, or better yet, I'll trade you eggs for milk. Tax that if you will."

    "Randall" wrote, "If it is legal tender, value of said legal tender it set by the gov and stamped on the face.

    "Maybe the Government should be on trial."

    Read them yourself at http://www.lvrj.com/news/46074037.html.

    These comment posters are not reporters; they have no shield law protection, especially since Congress has yet to pass the pending federal shield law. A grand jury can subpoena just about anyone for any reason.

    But what time, effort and tax-funded expenses are being expended by the U.S. attorney's office to track down a bunch of posturing blowhards squandering their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination?

    My first instinct is to fight the subpoena tooth and nail. After all, John Peter Zenger was just the printer who published anonymous essays critical of the colonial governor. His jury nullified the existing law and freed him.

    On the other hand, if someone were to confess to a real and specific crime on our Web site, I'd give him up at the drop of a hat.

    Bottom line: We could fight the federal subpoena, at considerable expense, and lose. Our attorneys are now trying to see if we can limit the scope of the information sought.

    What the prosecutors don't appear to understand is that we don't have most of what they are seeking. We don't require registration. A person could use a fictitious name and e-mail address, and most do. We have no addresses or phone numbers.

    To add prior restraint to the chilling effect of the sweeping subpoena, we were warned: "You have no obligation of secrecy concerning this subpoena; however, any such disclosure could obstruct and impede an ongoing criminal investigation. ..."

    I wonder if Thomas Jefferson could have been subpoenaed when he wrote from Paris in 1787: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is its natural manure."

    The Sedition Act wasn't passed until 12 years later. I thought it had since been repealed.

    Thomas Mitchell is editor of the Review-Journal and writes about the role of the press. He may be contacted at 383-0261 or via e-mail at tmitchell@reviewjournal.com. Read his blog at lvrj.com/blogs/mitchell.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 86 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Report abuse

    Chris wrote on August 31, 2009 09:21 AM: As every good Editor knows...including Mr. Mitchell
    "The Truth will set you free"
    keep sending us the truth and We, the people, WILL vote them OUT of office!
    No one is above the law!


    Report abuse

    Nunya wrote on August 30, 2009 09:53 PM: Are you serious? I can't believe they even tried to subpeona the paper.

    Hilarious.


    Report abuse

    Mo Donnell wrote on August 30, 2009 09:51 AM: In the early days of the United States, the term "dollar" was commonly known as a coin minted by Spain called the Spanish Milled Dollar. These coins were the standard money then in use in the United States. On April 2, 1792, Alexander Hamilton, then the Secretary of the Treasury, made a report to Congress having scientifically determined the amount of silver in the Spanish Milled Dollar coins that were then in current use by the people. As a result of this report, the Dollar was defined[5] as a unit of measure of 371 4/16th grains (24.057 grams) of pure silver or 416 grains of standard silver (standard silver being defined as 1,485 parts fine silver to 179 parts alloy[6]). Therefore paper is not the dollar, instead, it is 'worth', not 'is', 1 dollar (US Silver certificate.) In section 20 of the Act, it is specified that the "money of account" of the United States shall be expressed in those same "dollars" or parts thereof. All of the minor coins were also defined in terms of percentages of the primary coin — the dollar — such that a half dollar contained 1/2 as much silver as a dollar, quarter dollars contained 1/4 as much, and so on.

    In an act passed on January 18, 1837, the alloy was changed to 10%, having the effect of containing the same amount of silver but being reduced in weight to 412 1/4 grains of standard silver which was changed to 90% pure and 10% alloy. On February 21, 1853 the amount of silver in the fractional coins was reduced so that it was no longer possible to combine the fractional coins to come up with the same amount of silver that was in the dollar.


    Report abuse

    ed hardy wrote on August 04, 2009 06:08 AM: cheap ed hardy

    cheap ed hardy


    Report abuse

    george washington wrote on July 28, 2009 05:07 PM: When one makes a Revolution, one cannot mark time; one must always go forward - or go back. He who now talks about the "freedom of the press" goes backward, and halts our headlong course towards Socialism.
    Vladimir Lenin


    Report abuse

    ed hardy wrote on July 26, 2009 02:32 AM: http://www.edhardy-zone.com/
    http://www.ed-hardy.cc/


    Report abuse

    Nimesh wrote on June 19, 2009 10:29 PM: Nice post
    Nimesh


    Report abuse

    Marxist Hater wrote on June 17, 2009 09:11 PM: DP,

    The biggest problem is that Congress has not defined what a dollar is but there is one thing that is 100% clear.

    FRNs are NOT dollars.

    If I take a $50 gold coin and I exchange it with a coin dealer tomorrow and ask him to pay me in silver dollars he would give me 65 Silver "legal tender" U.S. dollars minted by the U.S. mint.

    So what is the "fair market value" of the $50 gold coin? $65.

    What if I took in $65 dollars in silver dollars minted since 1986 and exchanged them for gold. What is the fair market value of 65 silver dollar coins? Well of course it is $50 in U.S. legal tender.

    What law requires ANYONE to use Federal Reserve Notes to determine the "fair market value" of other forms of currently minted U.S. Legal Tender?

    There is no law that requires it.

    You are correct. He has a point.

    And remember that the US Supreme Court ruled that if the taxing language is not clear and unequivocal that the citizens is exempt. That case has NEVER been over ruled.

    The reason they are trying to convict Kahre is because they are desperate to keep the Fraud THEY COMMIT from being exposed to the Sheeple.

    Federal Reserve Notes ARE NOT DOLLARS. They are legal tender by so are pennies.

    No law requires you to calculate the fair market value of U.S "money." YOu may have to calculate income you get that is paid in "property" but not "money." And I have a letter from the IRS that says so.

    Silver and gold coins minted since 1986 are "money." They are also legal tender.

    Get more information here: http://www.independentamerican.org/


    Report abuse

    DP wrote on June 17, 2009 08:55 PM: I think this guy is pretty clever. I know if I make a mistake in understanding MY TAXES, I get no sympathy and have to pay up. If the IRS didn't understand that they needed to specify VALUE and not FACE VALUE of income in the tax code....well, oh well. There is no assurance of the price of gold or silver on any given day, either. I'm thinkin' he has a point.


    Report abuse

    Marxist Hater wrote on June 17, 2009 07:01 PM: Dear AngryPoster,

    If a person does not owe an Income tax because he uses legal loophole is he a tax cheat?

    Here is what Justice Louis D. Brandeis said:

    "I live in Alexandria, Virginia. Near the Supreme Court Chambers is a toll bridge across the Potomac. When in a rush, I pay the dollar toll & get home early. However, I usually drive outside the downtown section of the city
    and cross the Potomac on the free bridge. This bridge was placed outside the downtown Washington DC area to
    serve a useful social service getting drivers to drive the extra mile & help alleviate congestion during the rush hour.
    If I went over the toll bridge and through the barrier without paying the toll, I would be committing tax evasion. If, however, I drive the extra mile & drive outside the city of Washington to the free bridge, I am using a legitimate, logical & suitable method of tax avoidance, & I am performing a useful social service by doing so. For my tax evasion, I should be punished. For my tax avoidance, I should be commended. The tragedy of life today is that so few people know that the free bridge even exists."

    Kahre found the free bridge and then you call him a tax cheat. Drook Gerg Damm hated that loophole so he illegally came after Kahre.

    As ye judge so shall ye be judged.

    I judge that you are a slave because you are too uninformed to know what is really going on.

    Karl Marx, the prophet of Marxism, wanted all good Marxists to pay income tax tithing.

    Stop pushing your Marx religion on me and saying that if I don't pay your "voluntary" tithing that I am a tax cheat. I am not. I just live my religion of liberty while you pay your Commie tithing.


    Read All Comments