that I might be allowed to be strengthened and encouraged and not let down. Everything was working. Everything was perfect. And it was a wonderful experience in many regards. I really do know what that's like now, and I don't advise people do that. So maybe Melissa... Are there questions? Or maybe Melissa would like to speak about her experience? Melissa was the foundation, the stalwart, is that what we say? Like a pillar, because she was there that day when I walked into that little cubbyhole to sign all the documents, she showed up with her face just absolutely supportive of me. And then I saw my good friend Paul out there. I mean it was just, and then Hilda and all, and then I knew I could call Rick and I mean, this is my family, right?

And I could call Doris and E.J., but I know they've got thousands of things to do. So I don't ever usually do that. But I just felt totally supported. I mean, absolutely supported. And at times you get a little bit. I get a little bit. When I look at it, I get a little bit. If I get focused in on just the problem rather than the broad context of what we're up to here on planet Earth. As soon as I get back in touch with what my mission is, to serve God, to really be the hands, ears, eyes, and feet of the righteous way of living in love and harmony. And I'm not talking about New Age stuff now, I'm talking about living within the law, being a good man and a good wife, I mean, it's not that I'm a wife, a good father, a good dentist, just a good person.

I mean, it's just very simple but difficult. So, we'll see. I don't like that. When I say that, that kind of confuses me because I would like to have it dismissed. That would be my will. But then I have to keep saying, Your will, Father, not my will, be done. If it needs to go this way, it's going to go that way. And I don't believe that they have the power.

They do not have the power but that God allows it. Something like that. I haven't got it all sorted out. I can't say it exactly how it is for me, but I know that I have power to present to them all the documentation as powerfully as I can. And I will do that and have done that. And I will stand before them and I will bring those issues up. However, if it's going to go the course it's going to go, as Doris and EJ have found, and the judge says, this is the way it's going, or this is what's going to happen, the threats, then I know that that's what's going to happen, and I need to get out of my way, I think.

Yes? So your trial is coming up in a couple of months? No, no trial date has been set. We're simply in the stage of motions, and we have done two motions prior to this. One is the Bill of Particulars, which basically says we want a specification of the charge. We don't know what person you are talking about and we don't know what tax you are talking about. Because Title 26 has many different kinds and there are many categories of taxes and kinds of taxes and that's not explained in 7201, it just says tax. And then it says a person. Now a person, for the purposes of the code, can be a corporation, an employee of a corporation, or a person who works for the government, or an individual.

So we want them to say, what did that section say? And they dismiss that. The Bill of Particulars was dismissed. In the motion to dismiss that we have now, we're bringing up the fact that 7201 has no implementing rules or regulations, has never been published in the Federal Register, and is therefore not law. We bring up the issue of positive law as a foundation of the fact that 7201 is not published. It's only a penalty statute. It only assigns a penalty. It doesn't explain the person nor the tax, nor clarify the exact rules and regulations that I broke. Plus, if you looked at most of the code sections, or what they call the codes of federal regulations, the parallel tables of authorities will tell you what code, what section of law within the Internal Revenue Service is implemented by what rules and regulations. And the rules and regulations for most all code sections under Title 26 are for alcohol, tobacco, and firearms. Title 27. But we've also found out now from Cotmeyer's information, which will be a supplemental memorandum to dismiss, to support my memorandum, is number one, that Subtitle A is for the purposes of income tax, but only is applied to non-resident aliens, foreign corporations, or United States citizens living in a foreign country, receiving foreign earned income under a tax treaty.

And it's all written in the law. It's all codified. Subtitle B is for estate and gift taxes. It doesn't apply to me. Subtitle C is employment tax. Most human minds think income tax is employment tax. Two different subtitles. Employment tax, which you know is withholding tax, is for the purposes of social security. It's voluntary. Title A, income tax, is by law mandatory, but the law doesn't apply to United States citizens.

That's basically it. I mean, I'm simplifying it, but in this 12-hour video series that I brought for the Constitutional Law Center, I've given it to Ray, for him to have. I said, you've got to see this, because it sorts it out. The guy goes through and he just sorts out the entire code, and I've studied it 18 years and I've had no handle on it the way he has it. Raid. Not like a magic bullet, not like grasping at straws again, but all of a sudden it became very clear what I was talking about. I can now talk somewhat intelligently about what I'm saying, is that I can go to the code sections to show that the income tax is only for foreign earned income, for non-resident aliens, or United States citizens in a foreign country and the title C which is employment tax is only for the purposes of social security.

But we get them collapsed. We think income is employment tax. No because in employment tax you sign a W-4 form that is a contractual agreement with your employer to withhold income, this is where it gets collapsed, for the purposes of Social Security, old age retirement benefits. Income taxes, you and I know them when you sign the 1040 form, are in subtitle A. And a 1040 form has a little number up on the right hand corner that's in the OMB number, which is 1545-0067, which is for foreign earned income. But when you read the individual 1040 form, it never says foreign earned income. The 1040 form that you fill out every year and send in with your check or maybe you'll get a refund, actually is to be applied to the back of form 2555, which is foreign earned income.

Kottmeyer explains all of that. I mean it's just remarkable information. So that information that I just shared with you will also be placed within the supplemental memorandum in support of the motion to dismiss. The theory is even if they dismiss my motion to dismiss and I have to go to trial, I can bring all those points of law up in a trial. But until I bring that up to the court as an issue, I can't talk about it. My question is the reason that you're not in tax court because you're a protester, is that it? Well, let me tell you about it. If I may, if you want, we can end it whenever you want to. I can go, I'd be happy to talk about this. I love, actually I love talking. My wife can tell you that. The tax protester terminology that you hear that the IRS uses is actually a defined term with internal revenue manual. And the word tax protester came from the 1960s when certain people would file an income tax form and withhold a certain amount on the income tax form, but sign the form.

And they were, remember Joan Baez? Remember she did that? She got thrown in jail. I think. I think she spent jail time. But she withheld a certain part because she protested the war. That's a tax protester. The terminology tax protester only applies to a person who has filed an income tax form and withheld a certain amount to protest something. That's true. And I can't tell you the exact code sections, but it's an internal revenue manual. If you see Ray Bilger in the tapes, it'll tell you where to go. So that's a tax protester. What was the other question? Tax court. Don't IRS things usually end up in their own courts?

Tax courts are administrative courts, and they only try facts. They make no determinations of law. They're a bogus court. You don't want to ever go there. Don't play with it. It's a trap. Tax court applies to taxpayers as defined in law. And unless you are a taxpayer, you don't belong in tax court. But if you are under the normal understanding that you have been led to believe for the last 70 years, you think you're a taxpayer, and you're probably not, although you may pay taxes. Paul has been in and out of the IRS stuff too.

Pardon? Paul has been in and out of the IRS stuff as well. Yeah. Well, I think most everybody has been in and out of it. I see my, I ask my patients, you know, for years I've been practicing my profession and for some reason, maybe it's the magnetism, right? I ask people, you know, we'll start having conversations and they'll talk, I'll just mention something off the cuff a little bit about government and about Internal Revenue Service and the next thing I know they're telling me that they're going into an audit and they've got all this big time problem and I can't believe the number of people that are experiencing that. I mean, it's like everybody's up against that.

At some point in time they've been in there or they're out of it now but they're going to be in there shortly again. Taxpayer is exactly what Paul says. It's defined in the code and it's one word. Taxpayer, T-A-X-P-A-Y-E-R, is one word, and it's anyone who is subject to any tax within code 27. There is another word called T-A-X hyphen, or not hyphen, but separated payer. It's a person who pays taxes. You pay gas taxes, you're a taxpayer. But you're not a taxpayer for the purposes of the Internal Revenue Code. So the laws are very specific, as it said explicit not implicit. It's defined and each code section, each subtitle is for each subtitle. You can't switch from subtitle A to subtitle C.

And that's what the IRS does. They keep muting everything. They will say well over here in subtitle A it says this, and therefore because you have withholding in subtitle C, you're subject to the tax. They bring those in together. But if you don't know, read 7806. It says that the cross references and anything said in the headings of any of those things, they have no legal effect. Right. Yeah, the headings are not part of the code. They're like... Just to break it down, right.

And so if you go by the heading, you think that's part of the code, and it's not. But the code is also written so that many times the favorite verses, pardon my reference to like scripture, Scripture because there is no breakdown in Scripture of verse numbers either in the original text. But in the code, what happens is they will say, any person made liable, any person subject to, and everybody thinks, well, that applies to me because I'm a taxpayer. But when you go to the code of the federal regulations, which is what gives the power to the code, you find out that the regulations do not make you subject, you're not liable under the regulations, and therefore none of what's being written applies to you.

Yeah, plus 6-0-9, the pamphlet, the little, if you ever received a little... The little thing, the Privacy Act notice, it's about that high, maybe about 6 inches by 4 inches wide and most people discard it. But it tells you what the legal right that they have to ask these questions and then they cite the codes that you just mentioned. And what they say is according to the statutes and regulations and yet when you ask them for a regulation, they will never, ever, ever give you a regulation. You know why? They don't exist. Plus, it's also been found out that the code sections have not been registered, they have not been published in Federal Register. According to law.

According to law. And then the slip law becomes into the statute at large, which is a big potpourri of laws. And then it's taken from that and put into a code section where it's applicable, like Code 26 is income revenue. So that then they'll put that in there. But before they put it in there, they have to publish it in the Federal Register, which is a weekly publication, it's a public notice, that this law has been published and if you're going to react to it, you have to speak to it now or it becomes law. But if it's never published, it's not law. But now the judges probably won't hear those arguments. Many of the things that I'm saying now have been looked at by various judges in various circuits and thrown out, or not even heard, because the judges will pick and choose what they will hear.

My trust is I'll be able to bring enough of the code and also assert that I am going to show by Code 26, only by that code, the facts of the law that I'm not subject to the income tax and the income tax is not applicable to me, a United States citizen. One final thing. One remarkable piece of information that I found is that in the tapes it speaks about the United States codes annotated. And annotated codes, the United States code, USC means United States code, annotated as I understand it means footnoted. a number of references and notes. Case law, history, things like that. So it's a very lengthy volume. It's much more expansive. And if you're going to do research into the meaning of the law, that's the best place to go.

It has a thing called the General Index. And it comes out in these videos. And the General Index, under United States Code annotated, all the laws applicable to a specific topic, idea, or colloquialism. There's one other thing that, but basically when, under a topic, if you were to take the topic citizen and look in the United States Code Annotated Index, you would find citizen and then you'll find underneath offset all the laws that are applicable to a citizen, right? Like agriculture, maybe certain things that are, you know, like, maybe banking, perhaps, that are applicable to United States citizens. There are only three citations out of 350, 320, excuse me, three citations out of 320 that are for the United States Code 26, which is income.

There are only three sections, and all those sections fall into estate or gift taxes. So there's no income tax applicable to you. You can draw that conclusion. You have to conclude that. Well, you can make any conclusions and be wrong, right? But here, if you go then, and you looked under income tax, you'll see that under the term income tax, there are only three code sections that are applicable to United States citizens. They're the same ones you find under citizen. If you go to the word alien for non-resident alien, because non-resident alien falls under the term alien in that section, you'll see 430 citations of law for aliens, of which but 30 are for United States Code 26. You see there are about 390 or almost 400 code sections that are for aliens.

It tells you overwhelmingly that the income tax laws are made for aliens or people who live in foreign countries at least, people who are here in this country doing business and that was probably the original intent and then Cottmeier's work goes back to the original intent of the income duty the income duty, the first income duty or income tax as we understand it occurred in 1862 and it was for the purposes of raising revenue for the United States States on duty for importation of goods and commodities, et cetera. Ray, I know. I know. Yes. Why do you think he doesn't show up?

So that that's another piece of that's a piece of evidence that I'll also, a fact, that I'll also present to the court so we'll have to deal with it if we do go to trial. There's been enough said about it. I was wondering why they don't change the law and make it easy for themselves. They're starting to do that now, though. You notice the hearings? See, I really, this is not tooting a horn, but I say that there have been enough people like me, not me particularly, but enough people like me, that have made such a ruckus, that have made such a challenge, I would hope this be true, that it's brought the IRS to the head where it's at right now. It's not a kindly looked upon organization. And right now, of course, they're going to reform it?

You know, you've heard that before, right? And in about 19 months, they're going to lose a lot of their records anyway. There you go. And when the year 2000 switches around, they won't admit it in public, but they have admitted pretty much that they will not, they will be going by Social Security records. They won't have all their records. And the Social Security Administration is way behind on converting its computers to be adaptable to the year 2000 problem. That's why they're pushing heavily for a flat tax. But the flat tax is basically the income tax anyway, because the income tax, as you know it, is an excise tax.

That's an excise tax, that's applied equally. But the graduated income tax that you have is actually employment tax. Because you went into an agreement, that's constitutional. Some people, Kottmeyer points out in this video very clearly, that people claim that the income tax is unconstitutional. He said it's totally constitutional because it does exactly what it was intended to do. It's just that you volunteer and send in your money every year. And if you don't, then they come after you with a misapplication of the code sections and you don't know enough about the code sections to talk to them. And even if you do know enough about the code sections and go into a conversation with them attempting to edify them, they will say they don't want to hear that.

They're not going to be there that long anyway. And with the long arm of the law, if you have property in your name, they will go get your property because possession is nine-tenths of the law, which is why things like Nevada corporations are an advantage before you start playing the game that Ron's talking about. That's right. The best way to do it is to have a corporation operate out of that. And then you're totally within. You don't have to do the corporation. Yeah. Well, I'm sure that they can they can cause problems even if you're playing the game the right way. I think they had also tried to they had looked at my records for 1987, 88, 89, but they decided not to indict on those years. I knew they were doing that and I challenged that at that time, but then they came back with 91, 92, 93, because there was a certain thing I did at that time.

What's that? Criminal Investigation Division. The Criminal Investigation Division only applies to subtitles A, B, C, and D, which are subtitle income tax on foreign earned income. B is excise estate tax for people who are foreign residents. C is employment tax. D is excise tax. The criminal investigation division only investigates those subtitles and U, it has no authority to investigate a United States citizen. It tells you in the internal revenue manual, I memorized this one because I'm under criminal investigation. Under Internal Revenue Manual 1137.75, it talks about criminal investigation and it says that the agent, special agents they're called, can only investigate the following, and they never mention United States citizens.

They cannot investigate you, but they do. And that's been verified in the code section. I can't remember the code citation that Kottmeier goes in, but he references it in the Internal Revenue Manual, and then he goes into Code Section... Oh, it's Chapter 24 under Subtitle C, Section 3402. 3401 or 3402, which defines what a criminal invest... somebody with the authority to investigate criminal is and it's only it doesn't say United States citizen it said it says basically non-resident aliens people dealing in exercises and gift taxes and things of that nature I don't know how you made a video of earn a living.

Do your invention which came out in the magazine, I saw that, read that, and become an income tax expert. But now, if you could go back and do it over again, won't you do anything different about this tax? If I would know what I know now, which is impossible to know at that time, I would have established it. If Nevada corporations were existing, I would have done it that way. I do not advise people to do what I do. I would say don't do it if you want advice. It's not because it takes you off track.

It does. It's taken me way off track. You know, here I am going along working with this mission and all of a sudden, bang! I'm now having to deal with all of this stuff. And then it really draws up a lot of that old run away and hide. to make your declaration or would you have done something totally different? I don't know if I can answer that question. I don't. I think we discussed that one that I think you said that you had ignored the tax thing you got over the years. And you were assuming it was going to go away. And I said if you had dealt with it administratively early on, you could have avoided going to the district court. Right.

I had something to do with it administratively the way I was dealing with it, Ray. I had written letters and I had documentation of all the things that I had ever done. Now they had a certain point. It's a lengthy story because I prevailed in their civil attacks completely. I did. I won. My parents even won. I pulled one over on them. And if they're listening to it, they know it. The point is, is that if they don't get you that way, they will then get you this way. And this way is a lot hotter, you see.

And it's a show trial, like my good friend up in Cottage Grove, Oregon, who's an attorney I'd met, and he's a very strong man, and he may be also working with us in representation. He is actually. He said, you're a show trial. You are the perfect target for them to play with now. And they will present that and they will melt it as much as they can. Have you made the newspapers in Hawaii? Yes. A very small section, but then I was, they mentioned on TV, and they've even, they'll keep doing it though.

What they'll do is, as soon as the motion to dismiss is dismissed by the judge, set aside, which in all cases usually is the course of events, but we don't know, there's hope, that then they will go to trial. That's a lot of media then. So there's a possibility to make some history, I don't know. Ray's shaking his head yes, and I think that's okay with me too. There's nothing else, I mean what else am I going to do in life? You know, that's boring after a while. I've been out there 30 years, I've been to the beach enough. I still love the beach, but I'm saying that to me I have such a passion for truthfulness. I was so shaken in 1980 when I found out what was going on, when I was approached the way I was by my government.

I mean, I practiced ten years in my profession. I was going through a lot of turmoil at that time. I found out about Mercury Silver Fillings at the same time I found out about the IRS. I mean, my whole life was coming apart. My whole structure of reality was shaken to the core, and I thought I was going crazy. And at times I probably was. But somehow I kept hanging on enough, and I kept being supported enough, and I've always loved God so deeply, and not religiously either, because I didn't go to church a lot, although I have a heavy church background. But to me, truth is a passion. I really do want to know what it is. I mean, it's not like an is-ness. I want to live in it. I want to practice it. I'm tired of being lied to. I'm tired of being told that I can't do these things, that I don't have the power to overcome.

You watch the TV, and the first thing is you're qualified as a hunk of meat that goes and eats every day, and you think, and the sex, drugs, and rock and roll. Well, if that's what life's about, that's what Peggy Lee did. She committed suicide, didn't she? She sang the song, Is This All There Is? So, Commander had mentioned something about somebody got some piece of purpose. You know, what we're doing walking around the planet is without any purpose, most people are upright dead. At least I'm alive. I wake up every morning, my heart's beating like boom boom boom boom boom boom. And my gut's going, Melissa's saying, did you call Ross? Did you call Ross?