David Cay Johnston, formerly of the New Whorke Times, is well known within the Tax Honesty movement to be a shill for the IRS.

I'm not wasting much of my time on this oinker but, here are a few links for those interested to peruse:

Dave Champion shares some back and forth he’s had with David Cay Johnston, the tax reporter for the New York Times who won’t debate the proper application of US tax law.
http://www.americanradioshow.us/archive/20040313-2.mp3

David Cay Johnston: Reporter, author, and coward.
http://www.americanradioshow.us/archive/20040228-2.mp3

David Cay Johnston moves from coward to blatant liar.
http://www.americanradioshow.us/archive/20040515-2.mp3

New York Times (Sore Loser)
http://taxhonesty.com/
-by Larken Rose

It's almost funny how glaringly obvious the slant of David Cay Johnston at the New York Times has become. (Of course, the New York Times in general has an overall bias that's pretty darn hard to miss.) His "story" about Joe Banister's acquittal starts by saying: "The federal government's campaign against income tax protesters suffered a major setback yesterday..."

Aside from his usual dishonest "tax protestor" label, look at the viewpoint of the sentence. The theme was not "man found not
guilty." No, that's too pro-Joe. The theme is a "setback" for the United States government. And what does using the term "setback" imply? It implies that Joe was guilty of a crime, but "got away with it." Having an innocent person acquitted would never be characterized as a "setback"; it's called JUSTICE.

Like a good psy-ops fear monger, Johnston wastes no time in mentioning two convictions of OTHER people (referring to Al Thompson and Dick Simkanin). And of course, he had to include the usual vague bashing routine of "The
theories [Banister] has put forth have been uniformly rejected by the courts." Um, why is this story about someone BEATING the federal leviathan mostly about the leviathan insulting and hurting people? Because that's the message Mr. Johnston wants to hammer into the brains of everyone in the country: resistance to Mr. Johnston's god (the federal government) is
futile. Of course, what the story SHOULD be about goes directly against that, but let's not let facts and reality get in the way of a good propaganda piece.

And then, just in case Mr. Johnston had any credibility left, he cites that ridiculous "Quatloos" web site as if it's some authority. Hmmm... he's mentioned me by name SEVEN TIMES in his articles, but NEVER mentioned any of my web sites. Nice "balance." The article also included this: "The verdict stirred concerns that it would encourage more Americans to
refuse to pay taxes..." Note the passive tense, and the vague reference. Stirred concerns among whom? The article is written from the perspective of the government.

Hell will freeze over before the New York Times will ever speak of the federal government's terror campaign against anyone with an honest disagreement "stirring concerns" among the people. Why? Because Mr. Johnston has no connection to the real American people, only to those in government. But at least he quoted Mr. Bernhoft, one of Joe's attorneys, saying that "American citizens have the right to ask the government questions and the government has a duty to answer in good faith." While that is both true, and well said, it's pretty darn sad that we live in a country where anyone needs to state such a thing.

Congratulations, Joe [Banister]. Mr. Johnston can continue with his self-imposed delusions, but a whole lot of REAL Americans know who the good guys are, and are very thankful for what you have done for all of us. Bless you, and your family.

Sincerely,
Larken Rose

http://yannone.blogspot.com/2005/08/david-cay-johnston-vs-truth.html

http://yannone.blogspot.com/2008/05/david-cay-johnston-talks-about-taxes...

http://billstclair.com/clairewolfe.com/wolfesblog/00001012.html

http://www.populistamerica.com/stephen_neitzke

--
"But truthfully, I don't really know. We've had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7."
~Dr. Shyam Sunder - Acting Dir. Bldg. & Fire Research Lab. (NIST)
"We are [still] unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse." (NIST)