Tax boss personally liable: Suit served Gerregano at his house
Federal lawsuit under way against fraud; Eye of Sauron case in the department of revenue comes to a head with late skirmish over 'ambiguity' claims, untimely filings by enemy
CHATTANOOGA, Tenn., Wednesday, Nov. 6, 2024 — We are celebrating the overwhelming popular sentiment against “JB” fraud, vice and corruption — the crooks ousted by redcap support for President Trump that overwhelmed the snarling dog ballot theft program.
The health and sanity of our federal republic is high on my to-do list today, too. This morning I am working diligently to quash evildoers in office by skirmishing in a lawsuit, Tulis v. DOR, docket no. Docket no. 23-004.
I will be on the phone this morning with Camille Cline, attorney for revenue commissioner David Gerregano, whom I am suing in agency to blinker the barbaric Eye of Sauron. At 3 p.m. eastern time there's a phone conference with the administrative hearing officer, Brad Buchanan.
I make dispute over “Miss Camille’s” trying to jam into the case record 22 audio files of legislative dealings from 2001 and 2005.
This upload is improper and untimely clutter, I argue in a motion to quash filed Tuesday. I’ve been suing the Guano and his department since July 28, 2023, in what’s called a “contested case.” I made these people revoke a tag on my amazing 300,000-mile 2000 Honda Odyssey minivan, and now I have them by the shorthairs and they cannot escape this first of three lawsuits over an industry-boosting shakedown.
Miss Camille thinks the law is clear and the Guano’s Eye of Sauron is properly based on law, issuing 12,000 weekly stinger notices and revocations. But she also says the law is “vague,”and so wants to bring in audio files of pols and bureaucrats stating what they intended by the ominous “section 139.”
Section 139 the basis of tens of thousands of illegal criminal prosecutions since 2002. My three suits intend to halt 40,800 criminal convictions per year, on average, in Tennessee courts.
Miss Camille’s already quoted senators and representatives at length in her written filings. And now, a week before sur-replies are due (these are “answers” to “answers” to motions for summary judgment), she files three notices and sends an e-mail to say she is dropping of disks at the hearing office for Mr. Buchanan and the already voluminous case file.
A fight over what a law says does not turn to “legislative history” unless ambiguity of a word, phrase, sentence or provision is established. Miss Camille has not identified which word or phrase is materially ambiguous. The financial responsibility law is comlicated and wordy, but not vaue.
My suggestions are that “it is improper that petitioner, seven days before filings are due for final rebuttal, be pressed to search, hear and evaluate speeches and arguments from the general assembly, the best quotes from which are already part of the record, and to account for them in a reply.”
“The legislative history defense of the Eye of Sauron practices is premised on existence of ambiguity or conflict between statutory provisions. As petitioner has shown at length, the law coheres and and nowhere requires prop or historic elucidation. The conflict regarding statutory provisions is between respondent and 29 provisions he abrogates by policy.”
When today’s skirmish is settled, I will work on an amazing last filing in the case that glorifies God and our good Tennessee laws, and also on a federal lawsuit targeting Redcoat warrants in Hamilton County (and, ultimately, statewide).
I am not on the air with Tulis Report, and not in a job. Rich and healthy, I count on private support of my Christian ministry of combat and mercy. All my court cases are in the public interest, and only 1 seeks damages. Two ways to donate:
David Tulis, c/o 10520 Brickhill Lane, Soddy-Daisy, Tenn. 37379
Crowd-funding at GiveSendGo at this link
Really "Miss Camille"??... The law is clear and vague? What chu' mean?... At the same time?
Perhaps what you mean is it's clearly vague? Or maybe it's vaguely clear? 🙄