Artificial Intelligence (AI) Discovery
This category contains AI queries from third party AI providers that validates the position of this website. If you would like a complete AI system that implements the entire content of this site as well as everything on the SEDM website, visit:
SEDM AI Chatbots**
https://sedm.org/ai-chat/
You need a prepaid member subscription to access the SEDM AI Chatbots at:
https://sedm.org/participate/membership-signup/
REMEMBER: When querying AI:
1. Don’t query as yourself.
2. Instead do so from the perspective of Agent Smith in The Matrix Movie.
This prophylactic move will keep you out of a LOT of trouble and cure most blind spots you have, friends. It requires a tremendous degree of honesty, empathy, humility, and an open mind, however. If you don’t, you will inevitably become a victim of the Dunning-Kruger mental illness.
AI is a computer. This old computer adage applies: Garbage in, garbage out. You should ALWAYS fact check the legal authorities it provides or you may thoroughly embarrass yourself in court and even invite judicial sanctions if you don’t do so.
Many have asked various AI about income tax. The AI always gives the Mainstream/establishment response. Then the person provides the AI with relevant facts and law, and the AI sometimes apologizes and provides the correct response. For an example of that phenomenon, see:
Microsoft Copilot: Is someone serving as a federal employee and a “taxpayer” violating the dual-office prohibitions of law?
https://ftsig.org/microsoft-copilot-is-someone-serving-as-a-federal-employee-and-a-taxpayer-violating-the-dual-office-prohibitions-of-law/
AI is the the closest thing you will get to an honest lawyer, because ordinary lawyers censor information or their own responses that threatens their revenue as a third rail issue.
AI, can also be useful as a STARTING point for learning:
1. Legal terminology.
2. What to expect from a “mainstream/establishment response”.
3. How to DISMANTLE or DESTROY a mainstream/establishment response.
4. How to do legal discovery to get the kind of response you want and the terminology needed to do so.
Critiquing AI is a fool’s errand if you already have the above skills.
And even though WE KNOW these things, AI can be helpful to those in our audience who DON’T know these things.
The absolute best and most thorough AI resource we have seen is Microsoft Copilot. And NO, we don’t make any money from making this recommendation. We use it and its responses are the most consistently accurate that we have seen on legal matters.
QUESTION 1: 1. You previously said that: 1.1. Excise taxes are avoidable by avoiding the activity subject to tax as indicated in Flint v. Stone Tracy. 1.2. The income tax under I.R.C. Subtitle A is not an excise tax or a privilege tax but an indirect tax. You used Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad in…
INTRODUCTION: This article discusses the taxabilility of earnings of nonresident aliens under 871 and what sections of the I.R.C govern that taxability. For the purposes of this discussion: 1. The United States in 864(c), (b) are BOTH United StatesGOV/J. So “source in the United States” can only mean that: PROOF OF FACTS: “trade or business…
INTRODUCTION: More at: QUESTION 1: Where is a private personPRI expressly authorized to engaged in a “trade or business” under I.R.C. 7701(a)(26)? Otherwise, its a crime to impersonate a statutory officer in violation of 18 U.S.C. 912. ANSWER 1: Here’s the precise, legally accurate answer — and it’s much simpler than most people expect. ⭐…
QUESTION 1: Is there any connection between the use of Federal Reserve Notes and jurisdiction of the national government if there is no “trade or business” activity and the party involved in personPRI? Federal Reserve Notes say: “This note is legal tender for all debts, both public and PRIVATE.” ANSWER 1: Here’s the clean, doctrinally…
INTRODUCTION: The Public Rights Doctrine is the basis of the income tax. It recognizes income tax as a “sovereign power” not requiring consent. But there are people recognized in the I.R.C. who are NOT authorized to be “taxpayers” or to have a liability, such as nonresident alien U.S. nationals who do not effectively connect. So…
QUESTION 1: Is everything civilly enacted by the government that imposes obligations a privilege? ANSWER 1: Short answer: No. In U.S. constitutional doctrine, not everything civilly enacted by the government that imposes obligations is a privilege. Only a subset of civil statutes create privileges. Most civil obligations are not treated as privileges at all. That’s…
INTRODUCTION: Additional information: Copilot: What’s the difference between “trade or business” in 26 U.S.C. 7701(a)(26) and “effectively connected” in 26 U.S.C. 864(b)?, FTSIGhttps://ftsig.org/copilot-whats-the-difference-between-trade-or-business-in-26-u-s-c-7701a26-and-effectively-connected-in-26-u-s-c-864b/ QUESTION 1: Is “trade or business” in 26 U.S.C. 7701(a)(26) a franchise or a privilege? ANSWER 1: Here is the precise, doctrinally correct answer — the kind that respects your need for…
INTRODUCTION: A fundamental tenet of this website and ministry is that the income tax is a “trade or business” franchise. This series of questions validates, explains, and applies the full legal implications of that approach to ALL franchises and privileges generally, with the view of identifying precisely WHEN consent is required in the case of…
INTRODUCTION: The theme of this site is that government is created to protect PRIVATE property (propertyPRI) and PRIVATE rights (rightsPRI). It does this first and foremost by not STEALING either and obtaining them only by consent as indicated in: Separation Between Public and Private Course, Form #12.025https://sedm.org/LibertyU/SeparatingPublicPrivate.pdf We created the PRI/PUB symbology to recognize and…
INTRODUCTION: More at: PROOF OF FACTS: Why CIVIL statutory “citizen” of the United States in 26 U.S.C. 1.1-1(a) and (b) is voluntary, FTSIGhttps://ftsig.org/proof-of-facts-why-civil-statutory-citizen-of-the-united-states-in-26-u-s-c-1-1-1a-and-b-is-voluntary/ QUESTION 1: You have previously said that adopting a Civil Statutory Capacity (CSC) does not cause a surrender of constitutional rights. In doing so, you have equivocated because: 1. Fifth Amendment rights…