The government wins against freedom fighters in
court most of the time because it is very successful in getting them
to both argue and litigate the
wrong issues so
that jury attention isn’t focused on the important or more provable
issues. This is a famous war tactic: Get your
enemy to use up all his ammunition on decoys before the real war starts.
Getting freedom fighters to argue the wrong issues is also how the government’s
opposing counsel can make litigants look incompetent and stupid in front
of the court and justify sanctions against them. That’s why we
argue what your opponent wants to argue about. Stick
to your own issues or you will spend all of your time defending against
their frivolous verbal abuse and never get to your issues. If
you have to address their issues, do so
last as time permits
and discuss your issues
Therefore, one of the most important things you
need to learn before
you litigate is what the
best and most important
and successful issues are to litigate. If you spend all your time
arguing unimportant minutia, you will lose the jury and the case and
piss off the judge. One attorney we spoke with even had a term
he uses to describe the process of arguing the wrong issues: "mental
masturbation". Furthermore, only a fool would let an attorney
lead the case or leave it up to their attorney to decide what the important
issues are, because as we said in section 1.11.3 of the
Hoax, most attorneys are licensed by the state and don’t dare blow
up the fraudulent income tax system for fear of losing that license
and literally starving to death. The judges are just as biased
because they think their pay comes from income taxes and if they turn
on the IRS, they could be audited or harassed endlessly by collection
actions or have all their pay confiscated in retribution. How
is judicial independence possible with that kind of insidious conflict
of interest overpowering our laws and constitution?
Remember that all litigation is broken down into
which are handled by the jury;
- Law which
is handled by the judge.
The only exception to this general rule is when
the judge has bias, in which case Thomas Jefferson said:
is left... to the juries, if they think the permanent judges are under
any bias whatever in any cause, to take on themselves to judge the law
as well as the fact. They never exercise this power but when they suspect
partiality in the judges; and by the exercise of this power they have
been the firmest bulwarks of English liberty."
[Thomas Jefferson to Abbe Arnoux, 1789. ME 7:423, Papers 15:283 ]
As much as possible, you should try to break the
issues down in your mind, in your arguments in court, and in your pleadings
between these two major areas, so that the litigation can be divided
into things for the jury and things for the judge to decide. The
facts are disclosed in the affidavit section within your pleading.
The law is addressed in the Points and Authorities section of your pleading.
All successful tax litigation boils down the issues to
facts in controversy
that a judge and a jury respectively can establish and rule on which:
- Are as simple as possible.
- Reveal with evidence the conflict of interest present in the
opposing counsel and the judge. The best time to do this is during
voir dire, and you should grill the judge and the attorneys mercilessly
to show their bias. See sections 18.104.22.168 and 6.9 of
IRS Hoax for more details on this.
- Are embarrassing for the government to talk about, so that they
will default and acquiesce to your position.
- Show lack of jurisdiction on the part of the government.
- Point out all important presumptions that violate your due process
rights under the Constitution. See section 2.8.2 of
IRS Hoax for a list of some of the false presumptions.
- Reveal the hypocrisy and arrogance of the government towards
most citizens, which gets the jury mad enough to rule against the
- Include evidence that is entertaining for the jury and conclusive
of the facts you are trying to establish.
Before you formulate a list of issues to litigate,
you must have read at least the first five chapters of this book or
you won’t have enough background to understand most of the issues.
These chapters provide excellent preparation and background that is
invaluable. After you have read these chapters, you hopefully
will realize that that the important issues, arranged in descending
order of importance, are:
Table 3-12: Important issues to litigate
Section(s) in this book where discussed
Section(s) in Great IRS Hoax book where discussed
No territorial jurisdiction of I.R.C.
5.2 through 5.2.11
Internal Revenue Code Subtitles A through C only apply inside
the federal zone.
No territorial jurisdiction of federal court
6.4 through 6.4.9
Federal courts have jurisdiction to enforce only crimes under
Title 18 inside the federal zone.
Not a “U.S. citizen”
4.12 through 4.12.9 , 5.6.12
In most cases, your proper status is either “state-only citizen”
or “U.S. national” depending on which of the two you chose and
based on your expatriation paperwork.
“Income” is constitutionally defined as corporate profit
Lack of liability statutes and the IRS has no authority to legally
“assess” a liability
5.4.4, 5.5.8, 5.6.1, 5.6.13
There is no statute making anyone liable for the income tax
imposed in 26 U.S.C. §1. The IRS’ own Internal Revenue
Manual section 22.214.171.124 clearly lists the types of returns for
which a Substitute For Return (SFR) can be prepared and the
listed, and neither does 26 U.S.C. §6020 or the IRS’ own training
materials authorize such an assessment either. The only
amounts a “taxpayer” is liable for are the amounts on a return,
and only the “taxpayer” can file the return under 26 U.S.C.
§6151 and 26 CFR §1.6151.
I’m not a “taxpayer” and neither the IRS nor the federal courts
have the power to confer that status upon me
The only people who are “taxpayers” are those who volunteer
to be, because there is no statute making anyone liable for
payment of Subtitles A income taxes.
Involuntary income taxes violate the Thirteenth Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits involuntary servitude
3.10.6, 3.10.9, 4.12.5 thru 126.96.36.199, 5.4.1, and 5.4.2
In a free country, slavery and involuntary servitude has to
be illegal. I never volunteered or consented to pay the
tax so it can’t apply to me. Any tax forms that I signed
or filed were submitted under duress, in which case they are
not admissible as evidence of consent. Income taxes, unless
voluntary, amount to slavery.
No implementing regulations authorizing enforcement actions
against state citizens living in 50 union states
3.8, 3.14.2 through 3.14.4, 5.4.7, 5.4.8 of our
Great IRS Hoax
A statute cannot be enforced without: 1. An implementing
regulation; 2. An agency with investigative jurisdiction;
3. Publishment of the implementing regulation in the Federal
Sixteenth Amendment does NOT authorize Subtitle A income taxes
and there isn’t a Constitutional provision that
taxes on income that is other than “corporate profit”
3.10.11 through 188.8.131.52, 3.16.11, 5.4.2, 5.6.6, Intro to
According to the Supreme Court, the Sixteenth Amendment never
authorized a tax on other than “corporate profit”. Only
an indirect tax on corporations involved in revenue taxable
activities, which are foreign commerce.
Illegal collection actions under
U.S.C. §7433 and
The IRS cannot administratively lien or levy the property of
a private person outside of the federal zone without violating
their constitutional rights.
The Internal Revenue Code is “void for vagueness” and there
is no possible way that I can sign a return
under penalty of perjury
stating that it is true because I not only don’t know the law,
but it is impossible
for me to fully understand the law without making reading and
learning all 9500 pages of it into a career.
Laws that are simple enough for the common man to read and understand
are the only thing that are enforceable in court. Any
other type of law is void for vagueness and violates the right
of due process of law under the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Amendments.
However, even many tax professionals, attorneys, and most federal
judges admit that they don’t understand the tax laws.
Notice that we didn’t put the 861 argument of section
5.6.11 of the
Hoax in the above list, because the regulation at 26 CFR §1.861-8
upon which it is based have been so obfuscated by the Treasury Secretary
so as to be extremely confusing and the case would therefore focus too
much on minutia to be comprehensible for most juries. A better
way to attack that regulation is that it is “void for vagueness” or
by using Larken Rose’s Theft
By Deception video. Below are some additional issues
that should NOT be litigated for the reasons above and other reasons.
We have listed only the most popular bad arguments, but there are many
others not listed. Chapter 9 provides an exhaustive listing of
all the bad arguments you shouldn’t address in your litigation because
they don’t hit the important points:
- The Sixteenth Amendment
was not properly ratified. There has been a lawsuit
in each federal circuit over this issues spearheaded by
Larry BeCraft and
Bill Benson and in each case, the U.S. District Court of Appeals
ruled that this was a political question and that the court could
not address the issue. See U.S. v. Stahl, 792 F.2d 1498 (1986)
as one example. As we point out repeatedly throughout this
book, the federal income tax under Subtitles A through C only applies
inside the federal zone and most people don’t live in the federal
zone. We agree that the Sixteenth Amendment wasn’t properly
ratified, but it doesn’t matter, because the Supreme Court has repeatedly
ruled that the Sixteenth Amendment “conferred no new powers of taxation”
upon Congress. See Stanton v. Baltic Mining,
240 U.S. 103 (1916), for instance.
- The income tax is
a “direct tax” and the Constitution doesn’t authorize direct unapportioned
taxes under 1:2:3 and 1:9:4. This argument has
been lost several times because it doesn’t focus on the definition
of “income”, which the Supreme Court has ruled several times means
“corporate profit”. Eisner v. Macomber,
252 U.S. 189 (1920) took the focus off of what type of tax the
income tax is: direct or indirect and instead focused on which types
of “income” are taxable. We agree with you that the income
tax under Subtitle A is enforced by the IRS as though it were a
“direct tax” and that the Constitution doesn’t authorize a direct
tax, but the better argument to focus on that has more success in
court is "income" because the Supreme Court has ruled on it several
times is the definition of “income” shown in item 4 in the above
table. See sections 3.10.6, and 5.2 thru 5.2.5 of the
IRS Hoax for further details on this subject.
- The monies I received
are not “lawful money” but debt obligations of the U.S. government
owed to the Federal Reserve. Debt obligations aren’t taxable
in the States under
§3124 and neither are they taxable for the federal government.
See section 5.6.2 of the
IRS Hoax for details. This argument, although correct,
is not something that has traditionally gone very far and juries
don’t understand it very well.
Another very important thing to know is what you
can use as the basis for your legal rights and remedies. We emphasize
that you can only use sources of law that have what the courts call
the “force and effect of law”. You must be able to discern law
from hearsay. Anything that does not have the force of law is
hearsay and is usually inadmissible as evidence (fact) in a court of
law. We have taken the time to catalog on our website all the
various authorities, statutes, regulations, and IRS documents to explicitly
list which sources are admissible as evidence and which confer rights
and you should thoroughly review that section and understand it completely:
Below is a link to that portion of our website. It’s in the website
because it is frequently updated: