http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/unframed/5/551.html > > Sec. 551. Definitions > > For the purpose of this subchapter - > (1) ''agency'' means each authority of the > Government of the > United States, whether or not it is within or > subject to review > by another agency, but does not include - > (A) the Congress; > (B) the courts of the United States; > (C) the governments of the territories or > possessions of the > United States; > (D) the government of the District of Columbia; <---!!! >IRS is not an > "agency" either and, therefore, FOIA is > not appropriate for them to answer. >The implications are far-reaching; so, we > have petitioned a California federal court > for declaratory relief on this important > question. We have asked a USDC judge to > rule that IRS is not an "agency", as that > term is defined in the FOIA, i.e. 5 U.S.C. 551. > We argue they DO answer FOIA's, to maintain > the lie that they are really a bureau within > the U.S. Department of the Treasury. For example, > we have now received certified copies of > Form 61 Appointment Affidavits from IRS > disclosure officers! > > So, we DON'T get Form 61's for DOJ attorneys, > who SHOULD have them; and we DO get Form 61's > for IRS employees, who should NOT have them. > > This world of ours is upside down, yes? :) > > Ah, but you already knew that, didn't you? 8-) > > Along these same lines, IRS employees should > NOT be executing Form 61 Appointment Affidavits > either; such affidavits are counterfeits, > once it is shown that IRS is not U.S. Treasury; > is domiciled in Puerto Rico; and, therefore, > is not, and cannot be, an "agency". > > The IRS is Trust #62 in Puerto Rico, and > the exclusion of the governments of > territories and possessions supra, > drives another BIG nail in their coffin.
