Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

In the on-going case against the IRS, the facts assert that Mike Ioane was being prosecuted in a selective and vindictive manner based on “individious discriminatory animus” (Latin for being singled out because of personal animosity). He goes on to state that he feels the prosecutor in his case (i.e. Mark Cullers), holds personal animosity towards him for the reason that Mike Ioane was involved in “protected First Amendment and political activity.” Or to put it more bluntly the US government tried to jail him for two reasons. One is that he basically wrote the book that established the now well-known Tea Party. His book: The Boston Tea Party was written and published in 1998. People began connecting with Ioane in a political dialogue in 2000. It became the foundation for some of the political ideals and platforms of the Tea Party which arose during the housing crisis of 2007/2008. It seems, if one looks into the facts of Mike Ioane’s battle with the IRS,  this publication factors in greatly as being one of the reasons the U.S. Government wants Ioane in jail and his free speech stifled.

The basic legal idea of Selective and Vindictive Prosecution is that, though a prosecutor has a lot of lee-way in bringing just about anyone before a court to be prosecuted, there are certain things which cannot and must not apply when prosecution is begun. #1. Is that race, creed, color, national origin or gender/sexual preference cannot be a prime factor for bringing someone up on charges. #2. Political affiliations, and the fact that a person has written a book, published and article or otherwise spoken out against the government is not an excuse to prosecute someone either…especially if the material is not discussing any treasonous acts or asking people to break any laws or commit any acts of violence, etc. {Bordenkircher, 434 U.S. at 364, including the exercise of constitutional rights. Goodwin, 457 U.S. at 372}.

Ioane’s Boston Tea Party book was more of a treatise on how to protect one’s assets and property from government pilfering. It explained things like charitable trusts, blind trusts, tax havens and other things like using the already extent tax-loopholes within the tax codes to keep one’s property safe from exorbitant or unwarranted taxes. It was a How-To book, not a political manifesto. Many of these various asset protection theories are in use by the very rich and have always been used to good effect by many well-known upstanding U.S. citizens. There is no law that says you cannot make it hard for the government to take your property. However Ioane now offered this information to the masses so that even “the little guy” can now form a protective trust. (My 75 year old mother is doing that as we speak). And the government of the United States under both the Republicans and the Democrats, have resented anyone telling us how to prevent the government from abusing us or stealing from us.

The second reason the IRS was upset enough to secure a criminal prosecution in what amounted to nothing more than a personal tax case by Dr. S.V. Booth, Chiropractor, is that Mike Ioane also sued the govt. twice and was in the process of winning those suits when the IRS claimed he had committed a crime against them. The IRS is notorious for not liking it when people win suits against them, which from the look of things, happens about 80% of the time. The IRS isn’t very good at defending themselves against lawsuits. So they resort to other measures. Like trying to lock people up for no good reason. Seems in this case they couldn’t even do that right.

At the time of this writing Mike had already served time in the Lompoc Federal Prison Camp for alleged tax fraud. He had been released in 2011 pending appeal; The Ninth Circuit Court issued very strong language indicating that Ioane would be successful   upon completion of his appeal. Basically overruling Judge Lawrence O’Neil’s harsh sentence and ordering Ioane released.  Also, according to law he should not have been sentenced until a “monetary amount owed” had been figured by the IRS which Dr. Booth (not Ioane), would have to pay. No such amount was ever offered to the court, because the IRS didn’t know who owed what to whom or how much! His release from Federal custody on these grounds was unprecedented. When the Feds lock someone up, they almost invariably stay locked up. Now they are scrambling to make a new case because Ioane has once again embarrassed them by getting his appeal heard and a release granted.

The point of the matter is this: Mike Ioane was singled out and brought up on charges by a government hell bent on pilfering private property and putting the man who wrote the book on the Tea Party in jail, so as to prevent publication of any other materials they did not approve of. This is called Tyranny. Exactly what the Boston Tea Party fought against in 1773 and what the new Tea Party is fighting against today.

Everyone in this country is guaranteed equal treatment under our laws. That means one cannot prosecute someone simply because they don’t like their politics or their business. Still it is nearly impossible for a person to overcome a government prosecution based on Selective and Vindictive  Prosecution motion because a person has to prove that the prosecution is in fact, abrogating their rights or picking on them because of their color, sex, age, etc. Usually this type of motion is dismissed out of hand by most judges because there is simply too much of a grey area involved. However in this case the facts would seem to indicate that indeed, Mike Ioane was selected out of a host of other people under similar threat of prosecution by the IRS, solely because he was the writer of a politically charged book and fought back against IRS tyranny in a court of law.

When the government convicted Ioane of a major felony fraud, this put him into a new kind of jeopardy. According to the Patriot Act any person found guilty of a misdemeanor or felony crime, said person can  considered a “terrorist.” A terrorist suspect can be detained indefinitely without trial. He can be “disappeared,” so that no one, friends or relatives will ever hear from him again. He can be held in prisons in foreign countries and have no access to an attorney or even a fair trial. Suddenly free speech rights, in fact all civil rights are completely torn from a citizen and being an American becomes meaningless. One may as well be a Serbian or an Afghan. You can be thrown in a dark hole and forgotten. Thankfully, though the government accused Ioane publicly of being a con-man and a criminal, Ioane has many friends that vouched for his character. Only the judge was able to see who those people were.

Presently Ioane and his attorney have actually called for the prosecutors and instigators of the case against him, to be subpoenaed before the court so he might prove Selective and Vindictive Prosecution. Turning the tables on them, he determined that his accusers should be seen as abusers. His list is as follows:

1.Mark Eugene Cullers    AUSA,

2.James Richard Terzian  AUSA

3.Susan Phan AUSA

4.Lawrence G. Brown, acting United States Attorney

5.Dennis Collins, Revenue Officer

6.Revenue Officer Michael Hoos

7. Revenue Officer Fred Chynoweth

8. John A. DiCicco, Acting Assistant Attorney General

9. Verna Santos AUSA

10. Special Agent Kent Spjute

11. Ronald A Cimino, Chief Western Criminal Enforcement Section

12. Special Agent Brian Hodges

13. Special Agent Michele M. Casarez

14. Special Agent Brian Applegate

15. Special Agent Jean Nole

16. Lauren M. Castaldi, AUSA

17. G.Patrick Jennings, AUSA

Ioane’s attorney wants charges brought  against this group of almost untouchable IRS agents, attorneys and court officials which, should such a case be heard by the court, might shake the Fresno court and perhaps the U.S. Justice and Treasury departments to their very foundations.

The charges include: Failure of the IRS to remove liens from properties which they did not have legal right to seize. The IRS producing and working under wrongful and illegal search warrants, signed by a judge who was not empowered ot authorize a warrant, and said warrants used to search private residences and abscond with personal money and valuables. (For which Ioane sued them). The IRS’ constantly assailed the court with motions to dismiss all of Ioane’s lawsuits and motions against them based on the fact that, well, they are the IRS and can do as they please to whom they please for whatever reasons they please. The IRS, having gone through several civil cases against Ioane never once indicated that there was any evidence or even allegations of criminal wrongdoing on his part. Yet they used all these cases against him as evidence in their prosecution that he was obstructing them and attempting to defraud the government! They did this because they lost most of the cases. They were so angry that one agent complained anonymously to the court that “TP (Ioane: The Plaintiff) files frivolous lawsuits against IRS employees so I need to document my case history accurately.” The IRS never once looked into any of the violations reported to them by Ioane, which is why he felt compelled to sue them. All this was done well before the criminal case was instigated.

The facts suggest that Ioane was a constant thorn in the side of the IRS and the courts and that they decided to prosecute him, not because of any real crime, but simply because they hated what he was doing to them. The IRS was so aggravated they even accused Ioane of “reading a speech document;” (in this case it was a document dealing with protecting one’s assets…) as if reading anything about one’s own business was somehow prohibited by law! This is an indicator that the government regarded asset protection pamphlets as they would some politically charged treatise on how to build a homemade bomb! It was certain the IRS and Treasury wanted to abrogate Ioane’s rights and make him stop thinking, acting or even reading for his own benefit. The IRS visited this egregious tyranny against his freedom of speech, but not upon any of the others, they threatened or cajoled.

Ioane’s attorney goes on to claim that the government, as well as the courts are upset with the Boston Tea Party Book, and has punished the defendant, profiling him as the  creator and leader of the Tea Party political movement. The Boston Tea Party book was published in 1998 and defendant started the genesis of the Tea Party movement in year 2000.  No doubt that the result being spread far and wide has caused Ioane and those associated with him concern and political motivation to put this defendant away or to stop him from furthering the Constitutional objective of the party.

Ioane’s attorney further claims that the IRS under the directive of Mark Cullers threatened and brow-beat witnesses to make false claims and deliver false testimony in order to entrap Ioane in crimes he did not commit. The IRS claims that he was setting up “sham” trusts to hide money for his clients, or to sway his clients to make claims and proceed against the government in order to defraud them, are completely spurious. Ioane had been paid to work as a trust manager for a group of trustees for the Booth’s trusts. The Booths were not involved in said trusts any longer. The trustees and their attorneys were giving Ioane his orders, not the other way around. Yet the IRS insisted Ioane was some evil-mastermind criminal who was into vague money-laundering schemes and forcing others to defraud the government. Even at his trial, they brought up no clear evidence of such a crazy claim. The IRS relied solely on the hearsay testimony of false witnesses whom they themselves had paid off through plea bargaining agreements, or on whom they used strong-arm tactics.  Iaone’s attorney further indicts the U.S. Dept. of Justice of having full knowledge of Cullers’ machinations and who might have been helping Cullers secure a conviction based on false evidence and hearsay from witnesses who were being manipulated by the State.

A list of the various Booth Trustees is as follows:

  1. Lorien McCan
  2. Margaret Squires
  3. Dr.John James Inis jr.
  4. Jean Annette Liascos
  5. Dr. Thomas T. Rios

It should be noted here that every one of these people colluded with the IRS by perjuring themselves on the stand, claiming they had never had meetings. That they had done everything he demanded they do by some form of osmosis. That they had signed documents at Dr. Booth’s behest that they did not understand or had even read. And they claimed they were all working under the influence of Dr. Booth to hide the Bakersfield Properties from the government tax-man! Dr. Booth of course in perjured testimony said that Mike Ioane was his “Svengali” and had made him do everything he did, even before he ever heard of Ioane! Quite a trick!

Now a “Trustee” is supposed to be a trustworthy, smart and responsible individual entrusted with the Trust monies and properties, which they hold (in this case for the Booth’s children), until which time these trusts are turned over to the beneficiaries. Does this sound like a group of smart, erudite and capable individuals? Should such stupid people, bending to the will of the person they hired, be allowed to be in such a position of trust? These are people who don’t read documents, who sign the papers without reading them, who have no idea what a trust is or how it functions. One, Dr. Thomas T. Rios had previously been investigated by the IRS and found to have overcharged his patients through various programs like insurance and Medicare and taken the ill-gotten gains and himself stashed them in sham trusts! He had also been extorting money from Dr. Booth, his employer, because he was going to tell the IRS that Booth had sham trusts and hidden money as well! He was more than willing to perjure himself to get money from Dr. Booth. To keep the IRS from auditing him Booth paid him! $30,000 a month! (He should have had him arrested, but that’s another story).Yet Dr. Rios was one of the trustees of one of Booth’s trusts! Rios employed Ioane. Not the other way around. This criminal was running the trust, not Ioane. So you have a pack of ner-do-wells and a criminal extortionist in charge of Booths’ trusts…all suddenly pointing the finger at Mike Ioane. Seems a little too pat, doesn’t it? Sounds like a case of the criminal blaming the victim.

Ioane’s attorney also calls out a list of other people who were a part of the case against him. These were people who were also abused by the IRS. Each one was directed by Mark Cullers and his team of thugs to libel Ioane and to further perjure themselves, lying to  judge and jury about their own dealings in business, medical practices, and finances, because they were terrified of going up against the IRS. There are indications that some of these “witnesses” and others under the scrutiny of the IRS may have made pay-offs to certain agents, in order to garner preferential treatment, for certainly not one of them is being prosecuted for anything, even though the IRS threatened each of them in some way with prosecution or action against their financial security. It seems that the IRS wanted to make Mike Ioane out to be a “Big Fish” in an organized criminal conspiracy to defraud them, without one shred of solid evidence that there was even a pond for these fish to swim around in (i.e. a massive criminal conspiracy to defraud the IRS), and without convicting one of the “little fish” for anything more than failing to pay a tax burden.

This list of others involved in the case are as follows:

1. Real Estate Developer Bob Bell. For a long time the IRS interviewed him and apparently threatened him with audits and prosecution, prior to the indictment of Booth and Ioane. He was continually informed by IRS agents that he was involved in money laundering, tax evasion, aiding and abetting, and conspiracy with Booth and the trustees we named.

2.  Attorney Michael Mears. Wworked for Bob Bell and also worked with Attorney John Reedy, since about 2002 or earlier regarding the Treble LLC investment and real estate development, which involved Southern Financial Services, Bakersfield Properties and Trust Company, and Treble LLC.

3.  Attorney Steve Dakes of Dake-Braun-Monje. These folks reviewed the trusts and never informed Ioane there was a problem.  Attorney Steven Dake was one of the Attorneys representing the above referenced trusts subject of the indictment.

5.  Certified Public Accountant Clark Hurst of Bakersfield. Who stated to Ioane that Mr. Booth had employed his services since 2005 and is currently using the services of Mr. Hurst. Ioane had heard Mr. Hurst state that nothing was wrong with how Mr. Booth operated his business using various entities and corporations and that he, Clark Hurst took his instructions from Attorney John Reedy.

6.  Attorney Michael Kia. Wrote letters to the IRS setting up appointments for defendant Booth. He never told Ioane that defendant Booth was committing any crimes and he would discuss Booths IRS disputes in detail with Ioane.

7.  Attorney John Reedy. Defendant Steven Booth’s general counsel and corporate attorney, created and managed the Booth Corporations and trusts, wrote letters to the IRS and Inspector general regarding the allegations in the current indictment several years prior to any indictment being returned. Attorney John Reedy was in continual communication with Special agents at the IRS office and the AUSA regarding the alleged illegally created entities and even wrote communications indicating that he created and managed those entities. Dr. Thomas Rios, (who plead guilty to tax evasion, unrelated to Booth entities and got probation), Margaret Squires, Dr. John James Inis Jr.,  Jean Annette Liascos, Dr. Loren McCan, were all trustees of Booth’s and Reedy’s created trusts. Assuredly if these people had conspired to hide properties, wouldn’t the IRS want to prosecute them all? 

8.  Attorney Mark Lane. Mr. Lane contacted AUSA office after Steve Booth’s home was raided in March of 2006. Ioane recalls that he informed the IRS that the raid had no merit and that his client’s rights were being violated.

9.  Attorney Eric Fogderude, is more than directly involved since he worked with defendant Steven Booth regarding a civil contempt matter, (specifically related to each and every allegation of the indictment, in 2005.

 

In the end not one of these people were ever prosecuted or even as vigorously investigated as was Michael Ioane. Not one was accused of collusion, or tax-evasion, or conspiracy to hide properties. Mr. Bell even claimed that he had given the Federal agents over $400,000, (subsequently this money has gone missing and the agent that took it, Michael Hoos, now under investigation). It is my own conclusion that indeed Michael Ioane was selected to be prosecuted for political reasons. I think especially for the reason that he instigated law suits that embarrassed and tied the hands of the government and courts in their headlong rush to find a crime that was not committed by criminals which did not exist and to steal properties which did not rightly belong to them in order to pay a alleged tax-burden that was completely made up out of the whole cloth. To the government Mr. Ioane is an irritant. So therefore by their logic, he must be guilty of…something.

 

Just like the badly planned and executed sales of guns to the Mexican Drug Cartels by Federal agents called Operation Fast And Furious, this foray into crime stopping did not work out well for the Obama Administration.  They were seeking to trace the guns and entrap the cartels in what became a debacle when they realized they had no real way to track the weapons, and worse, said weapons were later used in the killing of a border patrol agent! This Selective and Vindictive Prosecution of one man who wrote a book the government doesn’t like, is another example of a badly planned, executed and expensive Federal operation that has lead nowhere. They have produced nothing but an opinion that some crime was committed by someone somewhere…but apparently they have yet to determine for sure what went down. So they made up a story, used tax-payer funds to play pretend with the California and Federal court system, and hurt a lot of innocent people in their little game of corruption and collusion. In order to protect their jobs and reputations they are continuing to try to make bogus cases against Booth and Ioane. This is just another Obama Administration bad idea in a growing list of bad ideas.

 

Tom Horne, Investigator

Advertisements