Artificial Intelligence (AI) Discovery
Validation of the position of this website
EDITORIAL: For more information on this subject, see: The fact that its called INTERNAL Revenue Service implies its INTERNAL to the corporation, which is NONGEOGRAPHICAL. Good luck proving that INTERNAL means INTERNAL to the geographical United States. I’ve been searching for that kind of info for years. The party with the burden of proof is…
Read MoreQUESTION 1: Would it be accurate to say that earnings under 26 U.S.C. 871(a)(1) relate to PROFIT from wages and not the gross receipt of wages, since everything listed there as FDAP relates to “fixed or determinable annual or periodical gains, profits, and income,”? ANSWER 1: Your question involves interpreting 26 U.S.C. § 871(a)(1), a…
Read MoreEDITORIAL: 26 U.S.C. §1461 is the ONLY statute making anyone liable for ANYTHING in Internal Revenue Code Subtitle A. It limits itself to “nonresident aliens and foreign corporations”. Thus, 26 U.S.C. §1461 is deceptive because it doesn’t distinguish between “nonresident aliens” who are NATIONALS and those who are ALIENS. This is done to dissuade American…
Read MoreQUESTION 1: What are the elements of a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 case for discrimination? ANSWER 1: A 42 U.S.C. § 1983 case for discrimination typically involves the following elements: It’s essential to note that the specific elements and requirements may vary depending on the jurisdiction, the nature of the claim, and the rights at…
Read MoreSOURCE: Meta AI. 2/26/25 EDITORIAL: More on the Public Rights Doctrine discussed in this interchange at: Catalog of U.S. Supreme Court Doctrines, Litigation Tool #10.020https://sedm.org/Litigation/10-PracticeGuides/SCDoctrines.pdf The de facto government described in this exchange is further characterized in: This exchange NUKES all of Washington, DC. It’s WASHING….a TON of laundered money stolen from you in the…
Read MoreEDITORIAL: Microsoft Copilot, Microsoft Edge Browser, version 131. QUESTION 1: Write a legal proof proving that “nationals of the United States” are included in the “nonresident aliens” but not for withholding purposes in 26 C.F.R. 1.1441-1 because the definition of “individual” at 26 C.F.R. 1.1441-1(c)(3 ) is more restrictive. ANSWER 1: Certainly! Here’s a structured…
Read MoreEDITORIAL: Microsoft Copilot, Edge Browser version 131, 12/30/24 The following series of questions establishes that: Those with a foreign tax status such as “nonresident aliens”, even if they do DONATE their private property to a PUBLIC use by taking privileged “trade or business” (effectively connected) deductions against it are STILL not eligible for other privileges…
Read MoreEDITORIAL: Meta AI, 12/25/24 For more information on this subject, see: While the Union Refrigerator Transit Co. v. Kentucky, 199 U.S. 194 (1905) case deals with state income tax, the principles are universal because the national income tax behaves as a state income tax for the District of Columbia as the equivalent of a “State”,…
Read MoreQUESTION 1: We actually want to help and empower de jure governments that proceed only upon explicit consent to collect what they charge for their CIVIL SERVICES that you have signed up for in writing in advance of actually receiving them. There is a simple way to eliminate the need for ALL the government deception and chicanery…
Read MoreEDITORIAL: Meta AI, 12/23/2024 Additional information at: Sources of Extraterritorial Civil Jurisdiction, FTSIGhttps://ftsig.org/civil-political-jurisdiction/sources-of-extraterritorial-civil-jurisdiction/ QUESTION 1: What are the judicial implications of someone domiciled and present in a legislatively foreign state pursuing a privilege in a specific venue other than their own? Is it entirely a matter of judicial discretion if the foreign persons doing so…
Read More