Thur, Oct 29, 2015
Subject; District of Columbia Municipal Corp Lies
When Congress defines a word or expression by legislative act, the ordinary and popular meaning (as found in the dictionary or encyclopedia) is stripped away and the new term means only what Congress defines it to mean—and there is no discretion for anyone to take such term in any other way than provided in the statute.
In all civil and criminal proceedings in United States District Courts, “United States” is a term with a special definition and meaning.
In Title 28 U.S.C. Judiciary and Judicial Procedure, in the chapter and section that defines “court,” “debt,” “judgment,” and “United States” (Chapter 176 Federal Debt Collection Procedure, Section 3002), “United States” means a Federal corporation (28 U.S.C. 3002(15)).
In a United States District Court, “United States” means a Federal corporation. And the ultimate parent Federal corporation, over all other Federal entities of any kind—is the District of Columbia Municipal Corporation.
Every appearance of “United States” in anything and everything relating to Federal district courts means, literally, District of Columbia Municipal Corporation; e.g.:
o “Congress of the United States” means, literally, Congress of the District of Columbia Municipal Corporation.
o “Title 28 United States Code” means, literally, Title 28 District of Columbia Municipal Corporation Code.
o “United States District Court” means, literally, District of Columbia Municipal Corporation District Court.
o “United States District Judge” means, literally, District of Columbia Municipal Corporation District Judge.
o “United States Attorney” means, literally, District of Columbia Municipal Corporation Attorney.
In Federal civil and criminal proceedings, there is no discretion for anyone to take “United States” any other way.
Actors in government rely on cognitive dissonance on the part of victims of the Federal word game to perpetrate the fraud, commit treason to the Constitution, and subject the American People to District of Columbia municipal law.
The hoax is protected by a culture of silence among all initiates in the Federal judiciary, Department of Justice, and other key positions in government.
And that is how they get away with it.
In summation: United States District Courts (i.e., Article 4 § 3(2) District of Columbia Municipal Corporation Courts) have extended their jurisdiction beyond the boundaries fixed by the Constitution for territorial courts of general jurisdiction (District of Columbia and the territories only), into geographic area fixed by the Constitution exclusively for constitutional courts of special / limited jurisdiction (into the Union).
CONGRESS HAS NO AUTHORITY TO ALTER THE
CONSTITUTION BY ORDINARY ACT (STATUTE).
It is a proposition too plain to be contested, that
the constitution controls any legislative act
repugnant to it; or that the legislature may not alter
the constitution by an ordinary act. Marbury v.
Madison, 5 U. S. 137, 176 (1803).
CONGRESS EFFECTIVELY ALTERED
THE CONSTITUTION BY ORDINARY ACT (STATUTE).
As of June 30, 1864; March 9, 1878 (retroactive
to December 1, 1873); and September 8, 1916, for
purposes of internal revenue, Congress transmuted
the words “state,” “State,” and “United States,” respectively,
into statutory terms via specific definition whose meaning, upon standard application of the basic
rule of statutory construction known as expressio unius
est exclusio alterius (the inclusion of the one is the
exclusion of the other), comprehends only
the District of Columbia and the territories/
Territories and excludes all of the commonwealths
united by and under authority of the Constitution and
admitted into the Union, the last of which being
Hawaii, August 21, 1959. Since June 30, 1864,
there is no statutory definition of “state,” “State,”
or “United States” that comprehends any aforesaid
In the contemporary controlling definition of “United
States” in 26 U.S.C. 7701(a)(9), . . . Congress define “United
States” in a geographical sense to mean the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the
Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and
no other thing.
ONLY CITIZENS OR RESIDENTS OF THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA ARE THE SUBJECT OF TITLE 26 U.S.C.
Whereas, the governments of the five aforesaid insular territories impose their own income taxes and withholding taxes on their own residents), the only residents of the Title 26 U.S.C. geographical United States who are of the subject of Title 26 U.S.C. are those of the District of Columbia.
JOINT TENANTS IN THE SOVEREIGNTY: NONRESIDENT
ALIENS RE THE TITLE 26 U.S.C. GEOGRAPHICAL
UNITED STATES (DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA)
Title 26 U.S.C. 7701 provides, in pertinent part:
(a) When used in this title * * *
(b) Definition of resident alien and nonresident
(1) In general
* * * (B) Nonresident alien
An individual is a nonresident alien if such
individual is neither a citizen of the United
States [District of Columbia] nor a resident
of the United States [District of Columbia]
* * *
POTUS WILLIAM HOWARD TAFT REVEALS THE
LEGISLATIVE INTENT BEHIND THE 16TH AMENDMENT:
AN INCOME TAX UPON THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT.
I therefore recommend to the Congress that both
Houses, by a two-thirds vote, shall propose an
amendment to the Constitution conferring the
power to levy an income tax upon the National
Government without apportionment among the
States in proportion to population. [Emphasis
added.] Message from President of the United
States William Howard Taft to both Houses of
Congress, quoted by the Secretary of the Senate
and read into the Congressional Record (Senate),
44 Stat. 3344 (June 16, 1909).
NONRESIDENT ALIENS WHO ARE NOT PART OF THE
NATIONAL GOVERNMENT ARE NOT OF THE SUBJECT
OF THE REVENUE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND
HAVE NO DUTY TO MAKE AN INCOME TAX RETURN.
Our records indicate that the Internal Revenue
Service has not incorporated by reference in the
Federal Register (as that term is defined in
the Federal Register system) a requirement to
make an income tax return. Michael L. White,
Attorney, Office of the Federal Register, letter to
Richard Durjak, May 16, 1994.
AMERICAN NONRESIDENT ALIENS (JOINT TENANTS
IN THE SOVEREIGNTY) MAY ELECT TO BE TREATED
AS A RESIDENT OF THE TITLE 26 U.S.C. UNITED
STATES (DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA) AND MAKE
THEMSELVES LIABLE TO FEDERAL INCOME TAX.
Title 26 C.F.R. 1.871-1 provides, in pertinent part:
(a) Classes of aliens. For purposes of the income
tax, alien individuals are divided generally into
two classes, namely, resident aliens and nonresident
aliens [Joint Tenants in the Sovereignty].
* * * [N]onresident alien [Joint Tenant in the
Sovereignty] individuals may elect, under section
6013 (g) or (h), to be treated as U.S. residents for
purposes of determining their income tax liability
under Chapters 1, 5, and 24 of the code. * * *
Tags: dc municipal law, district of columbia municipal law, Federal Reserve Fraud, IRS Fraud, joint tenants, joint tenants in the sovereignty, non resident aliens, potus william howard taft, USofA Corp