The gentleman continued to very artfully (very similar to how Marshall Applewhite convinced the Heaven's Gate Cult to take their own lives; I will make a post on that as it is something we are all vulnerable to) present a theory of law without any caselaw supporting his theory of law. Proving with caselaw is one of our rules and I try not to be ultra-strict about it, but this was too much. All of us need to focus and do what the winners do and avoid what the losers did. I've completed verification research on the theories being promoted. EVERY SINGLE FEDERAL CIRCUIT has explicitly rejected these theories as "patently frivolous." VERIFIED FACTS: - United States v. Benabe (7th Cir.): "These theories should be rejected summarily" - United States v. Mundt (6th Cir.): "completely without merit and patently frivolous" - Henry v. Fernandez Rundle (11th Cir.): "no arguable legal basis" REAL CONSEQUENCES: - Court sanctions: $5,000+ penalties - Criminal prosecution for tax theories - Destruction of legitimate legal cases - Contempt of court charges NO FEDERAL COURT has EVER accepted: - "Strawman" theories - Article IV § 3 "status correction" - "Equity citizenship" claims - "Dual jurisdiction" theories These theories have a documented 100% FAILURE RATE. If someone cannot provide a published federal court decision (or state court) supporting their claims, DO NOT FOLLOW THEIR ADVICE. DO NOT FOLLOW MY ADVICE, as I am not an attorney; I only try to educate so you can make decisions for yourself like an adult. Caselaw trailing gift: US v Mundt (29 F.3d 233) On the merits, defendant argues that the District Court lacked jurisdiction over him because he is solely a resident of the state of Michigan and not a resident of any “federal zone” and is therefore not subject to federal income tax laws. This argument is completely without merit and patently frivolous. To put the argument to rest, we quote the following from a Tenth Circuit opinion in which the court was responding to an identical tax-protester argument.

That the United States form, for many, and for most important purposes, a single nation, has not yet been denied. In war, we are one people. In making peace, we are one people. In all commercial regulations, we are one and the same people. In *414 many other respects, the American people are one, and the government which is alone capable of controlling and managing their interests in all these respects, is the government of the Union. It is their government, and in that character they have no other. America has chosen to be, in many respects, and to many purposes, a nation, and for all these purposes, her government is complete; to all these objects, it is competent. The people have declared, that in the exercise of all powers given for these objects, it is supreme. It can, then, in effecting these objects, legitimately control all individuals or governments within the American territory. Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. 264 ___________________________________________ The power of the State over the public property, is, at least, equal to that of an individual over his own; and particularly so, as to the navigable rivers in the State, which are, emphatically, the property of the people of the State, and subject to their authority, acting through the local Legislature.

Dear Members, I'm excited to announce the release of our newest educational resource: "Civil Rights 101: Your Litigation Starter Kit" designed specifically for those seeking to understand and navigate the complex landscape of civil rights litigation. This concise handbook provides a foundational education covering civil rights that we all should have had by the time we reached adulthood. What This Educational Resource Offers: This structured handbook provides an accessible framework for understanding civil rights litigation concepts: - Historical Context: An examination of § 1983's development from its Reconstruction-era origins to its current role in constitutional enforcement - Case Assessment Concepts: Practical frameworks for evaluating potential claims, identifying constitutional violations, and understanding defendant selection considerations - Jurisdictional Information: Clear explanation of federal versus state court considerations with procedural requirements and venue selection principles - Complaint Drafting Guidance: Language approaches and formatting suggestions that focus on constitutional violations while addressing potential immunity defenses - Liability Frameworks: Explanations of individual, supervisory, municipal, and conspiracy liability theories in the civil rights context - Immunity Defense Concepts: Educational overview of qualified immunity, judicial immunity, and sovereign immunity defenses, including relevant exceptions Additional Learning Resources: The guide also includes: - Examples of constitutional claim language for various constitutional provisions - Overview of documentation considerations in civil rights cases - Explanation of burden-shifting concepts in civil rights litigation - Information about pro se litigation standards when proceeding without counsel This educational resource is designed to help you understand the landscape of civil rights litigation whether you're interested in excessive force cases, search and seizure issues, free speech considerations, or due process concepts.