YesToHellWith Podcast By and may TRUTH reign supreme! cover art

YesToHellWith

YesToHellWith

By: and may TRUTH reign supreme!
Listen for free

YesToHellWith is determined to expose the wrongful conviction and imprisonment of Orlando Carter. We are asking that President Trump review this injustice and exonerate Carter.

yestohellwith.substack.comyestohellwith Political Science Politics & Government
Episodes
  • The Definition of "Trade or Business" in the IRC

    The Definition of "Trade or Business" in the IRC
    Mar 12 2026

    It is March 12. Welcome to yestohellwith.com.

    In the Internal Revenue Code, Congress often explains how the statute operates by defining key terms. One of those definitions appears in 26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(26).

    There Congress states:

    “The term trade or business includes the performance of the functions of a public office.”

    That language deserves careful attention.

    When Congress writes statutory definitions, the words chosen are not random. Definitions reveal how Congress structured the operation of the law itself.

    In this case, Congress specifically identifies the performance of the functions of a public office within the definition of trade or business.

    That drafting choice becomes clearer when we look at the historical origins of the federal income tax.

    During the Civil War, Congress enacted the Revenue Act of 1862, which established the first federal income tax system. In the debates recorded in the Congressional Globe, Congress described the taxable class as including:

    “all salaries of officers, or payments to persons in the civil, military, naval, or other employments or service of the United States.”

    In other words, the early federal income tax system identified taxation in connection with persons serving within the government itself.

    Now compare that historical structure with the modern statutory definition.

    Today, the Internal Revenue Code identifies the performance of the functions of a public office within the definition of trade or business.

    This reflects the same drafting method Congress has long used: identifying specific classes of persons and activities that bring individuals within the operation of a statute.

    And when interpreting tax statutes, the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the scope of those laws must be determined by the language Congress enacted.

    In Gould v. Gould, the Court stated that taxation statutes must not be extended beyond the clear import of the language used.

    And in United States v. Merriam, the Court reaffirmed that tax laws cannot be expanded by implication or presumption.

    Which means that when Congress defines a term such as trade or business, the meaning of that definition must be determined by the words Congress actually chose.

    Understanding these definitions is essential, because statutory definitions reveal how Congress structured the tax system itself.

    In the next discussion, we will examine another important part of that structure — the statutory classes of persons described in the Internal Revenue Code and how those classifications relate to the operation of the tax statutes. But rest assured, if you are sensing that the class of persons liable for the tax today and in 1862 were those in the employ of the federal government, your intuition is not wrong. Then and now, the Federal government’s jurisdiction was and is Washington DC and those within its domain.

    And as always…

    May truth reign supreme.



    Get full access to YesToHellWith at yestohellwith.substack.com/subscribe
    Show more Show less
    4 mins
  • The Definition of "Includes"

    The Definition of "Includes"
    Mar 11 2026
    It is March 11.Welcome to yestohellwith.com.In federal statutes, words are not used casually. They are chosen deliberately, and the meaning of those words determines how the law operates.One of the most important words in statutory law is the word “includes.”Most people assume the word simply means for example. They read a statute, see the word includes, and assume it is simply providing a loose illustration of something broader.But statutory language does not operate that way.Congress itself explained how this word is supposed to function. In 26 U.S.C. §7701(c) Congress states:“The terms ‘includes’ and ‘including’ shall not be deemed to exclude other things otherwise within the meaning of the term defined.”This tells us something very important.The word includes introduces items that fall within the meaning of the defined term. But those listed items are not random examples. They are deliberate indicators of how Congress chose to frame the scope of the statute.And when Congress uses that word in the definitional section of the Internal Revenue Code, particularly in the provisions that establish the statutory framework of jurisdiction, the language must be read carefully.Courts have long recognized that statutory language must be interpreted according to established rules of construction. One of the oldest of those rules is expressed in the Latin maxim:inclusio unius est exclusio alterius.This means the inclusion of one thing implies the exclusion of others not expressed.In other words, when lawmakers deliberately identify certain items within a definition, the choice of those items is legally significant.This principle becomes especially important when interpreting tax statutes, because the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that taxation laws must be interpreted strictly according to the language enacted by Congress.In Gould v. Gould, 245 U.S. 151 (1917) the Court stated:“In the interpretation of statutes levying taxes it is the established rule not to extend their provisions by implication beyond the clear import of the language used.”The Court repeated the same rule in United States v. Merriam, 263 U.S. 179 (1923):“Tax statutes are not to be extended by implication beyond the clear import of the language used.”These decisions establish a fundamental rule of law.Tax laws must be applied as written, not expanded by implication, presumption, or administrative interpretation.This is why the word includes becomes so important in the definitional structure of the Internal Revenue Code.When Congress uses the word includes in the statutory framework that describes the jurisdictional terms of the Code, the language must be interpreted according to the words Congress actually chose.Congress has demonstrated throughout Title 26 that when it intends to explicitly enumerate geographic jurisdictions, it knows how to do so clearly and unmistakably.In some provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, Congress expressly lists “the 50 States.”When Congress uses that language, there is no ambiguity.But in other provisions within the definitional framework of the Code, Congress chose different wording and relied upon the term includes instead.Under the rules of statutory construction recognized by the Supreme Court, the language of a tax statute cannot be expanded beyond what Congress actually wrote.Which means that the meaning of statutory definitions must be determined by the language of the statute itself, not by assumptions about what Congress might have intended.This is why careful attention to statutory language matters.Because the enforcement of federal tax law ultimately depends upon the definitions enacted by Congress itself.Understanding how Congress used the word includes is therefore essential to understanding how the statutory framework of the Internal Revenue Code operates.And it is precisely this kind of statutory interpretation that raises legitimate questions concerning congressional intent.Which is why, at the conclusion of this series, a letter will be sent to members of Congress requesting clarification regarding the statutory definitions contained in 26 U.S.C. §7701 and how those definitions relate to the income tax imposed under 26 U.S.C. §1.Be strong.Be wise.And as always,May truth reign supreme. Get full access to YesToHellWith at yestohellwith.substack.com/subscribe
    Show more Show less
    5 mins
  • The Definition of "United States" and "States"

    The Definition of "United States" and "States"
    Mar 10 2026
    It is March 10. Welcome to yestohellwith.comThis series of videos will likely have a profound impact, especially for those who have been patient and supportive. Why? You are not asking for solutions that do not exist. Rather, you want to understand what we face daily. You want education. You want to prevail with wisdom. I respect this.There is a reason I approach the content as I do. As a people, we do not understand the prevalence and power of presumption enforced today. Candidly, if we do not understand the system, that is the enemy of freedom, we are at a distinct disadvantage.Law operates through structure, definitions, and presumptions, which is the Liberty Dialogues exist.The Liberty Dialogues is not just a discussion about law. It is a method of analysis.Every issue must be examined through the same sequence:Authority.Jurisdiction.Status.Standing.Obligation.Enforcement.Once we understand presumption, we can coherently establish a defense and our good faith beliefs, which is why I created the Statement of Understanding program.Because if you ever find yourself in a courtroom… the question will not simply be what you believe.The question will be: Did you hold those beliefs in good faith, and did you have a documented basis for them?That documentation can become admissible evidence.My hope is that no one ever has to face the situation that I faced when I was arrested and sent to prison.But if someone ever does… I want them to be far more prepared than I was.Now today we begin a series of videos that will show you exactly why this preparation matters.And at the end of this video series, those who have the Statement of Understanding program will receive a letter…A letter that will be sent to their representatives in Congress asking for clarification of the law itself.And we begin with a very simple place. Now listen carefully and with an opinion mindUnder the definitions section of the Internal Revenue Code are the terms United States and States.26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(9)Says: “The term ‘United States’ when used in a geographical sense includes the States and the District of Columbia.”Now on its face, that sounds straightforward.But law is never understood at the surface level.We must now go to the next definition.26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(10)says:“The term ‘State’ shall be construed to include the District of Columbia where such construction is necessary to carry out provisions of this title.”Now let’s pause and evaluate these terms.The first provision told us that the United States includes the States and the District of Columbia.But the very next provision tells us that the term State shall be construed to include the District of Columbia.Which immediately raises a critical question.What exactly does the term State mean inside this title of law?Does it mean the fifty sovereign states of the Union?Or does it refer to a federal jurisdiction such as the District of Columbia?Because the answer to that question determines something extremely important.Jurisdiction.And jurisdiction determines who the law actually applies to in order to exercise authority.This is where most people make a mistake.They assume the law applies to them simply because they were told it does.But in law, nothing applies automatically.Every law requires jurisdiction,and jurisdiction depends on definitions.If the definitions are misunderstood…Then the jurisdiction is misunderstood.And if jurisdiction is misunderstood…Then the entire structure of obligation collapses.This is precisely why the Liberty Dialogues begins with definitions.Because definitions determine authority.Authority determines jurisdiction.Jurisdiction determines status.Status determines obligation.And obligation determines enforcement.But when those definitions are unclear…the entire system begins to operate through presumption.And presumption is the conveyor belt of the legal system.People step onto it without realizing it…and the system stamps them automatically.This is the beginning of the journey to understanding the presumptive lie of federal tax enforcement and the creation of your solid good faith defense. Be strong, Be wise.And as always. May truth reign supreme. Get full access to YesToHellWith at yestohellwith.substack.com/subscribe
    Show more Show less
    6 mins
No reviews yet