More of Title 15

I am getting a lot of calls and e-mails on Title 15 so I will try to explain our
concept again. Use this with the previous explanation and people interested sho
uld understand the concept with very little research.
The first rule of winning in court is to win before court. The second rule is to
make the other party argue about something other than the case at hand. IRS att
orneys know this, so should we.
Going to court and arguing about taxes using Title 26 is ineffective for the fo
llowing reasons.
1) Title 26 is used by the government to determine the tax. see Title 26
2) The IRS is a debt collection service, not a government agency. see Diversifie
d Metal v. T-Bow trust/IRS
3) The bill issued by the U.S. TREASURY (under Title 26) becomes a debt collecte
d by the IRS (which has to follow Title 15).
4) If you fight the IRS under Title 26, you are fighting something they have not
hing to do with. It is like contesting the electric bill to the mail man, he wil
l just think you are a nag and he can't do anything about it anyhow.
5) The bill has already been adjudicated under nihil dicit judgement and stands
if not contested under Title 15. You can not contest the bill under Title 26 sin
ce that is the government code on how to figure the bill, not the bill itself.
6) Demanding the IRS verify the assessment (read as bill) requires them to cease
and desist (under Title 15) until the supply the docs.
7) The IRS can not supply the requisite docs and therefore you have beat them be
fore court. see rule 1
8) If you go to court you can argue the correct issue, the bill, not how they de
termined the bill, thusly you can win by arguing the right argument. see rule 2
9) You can force the IRS to do the action in the judicial district, ie the court
nearest the debtor, which they will not do, and therefore you won't go to court
. see YHWH's scriptures.
a) See; TITLE 26 > Subtitle F > CHAPTER 76 > Subchapter A > § 7408
§ 7408. Actions to enjoin specified conduct related to tax shelters and reportable
transactions
(d) Citizens and residents outside the United States
If any citizen or resident of the United States does not reside in, and does not
have his principal place of business in, any United States judicial district, s
uch citizen or resident shall be treated for purposes of this section as residin
g in the District of Columbia.

I know this seems over simplified, but a cursory study of unsuccessful IRS litig
ation against their victims will lead one to determine that one of the common de
nominators of acquittals is that somewhere or somehow the victim did some type o
f assessment request that was never affirmed. This is diametrically opposed to a
ll the victims that lost using Title 26 and the absence of applicability to the
code.

In summary, just like a charge in a traffic ticket, don't fight the law and thei
r reasoning, deny the bill and require them to prove it exists as a matter of re
cord, before they make it a matter of record under nihil dicit judgement because
you didn't deny it.

Example:
A contractOR (government under Title 26) issues you (contractEE) a bill through
their third party collection service (IRS), you do not respond. Third party coll
ector service, whose actions and remedies are defined in Title 15, goes to court
ex-parte and receives a nihil dicit judgement. You get dragged into a foreign c
ourt (USDC) and attempt to fight the contractOR and their rules for issuing the
bill under the Constitution and/or Title 26, neither of which applies, since it
is the bill being discussed not the entity that issued the bill or how said enti
ty determined the amount. Any attorney would tell you this is a waste of time. Y
ou (contractEE) must first void the bill under the appropriate code (Title 15) a
nd demand the case be kept in the proper jurisdiction (nearest judicial district
).
In essence, Title 26 applies to the government entity that determined the bill a
nd Title 15 applies to the collection agency attacking you for payment. Its almo
st incomprehensible to believe that legally Title 26, THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE
has little to do with the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE. This appears to be a well or
chestrated word trick.

John-Chester: Stuart: sovereign without subjects