YesToHellWith Podcast Por and may TRUTH reign supreme! arte de portada

YesToHellWith

YesToHellWith

De: and may TRUTH reign supreme!
Escúchala gratis

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 Ciencia Política Política y Gobierno
Episodios
  • 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
    Más Menos
    5 m
  • 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
    Más Menos
    6 m
  • The Liberty Dialogues Conference Call

    The Liberty Dialogues Conference Call
    Mar 7 2026

    It’s March 7th. Welcome to yestohellwith.com.

    Tomorrow I will host a call at 10:00 a.m. Eastern Time about the Liberty Dialogues and how to use them with AI and ChatGPT.

    These calls have been extremely informative, and the feedback from those who have attended has been outstanding. People are beginning to see that if we want any realistic chance of prevailing in our personal legal matters, we must first understand the existing authoritarian process.

    We cannot navigate a system we do not understand.

    If you have the SOU for You package and would like to attend tomorrow’s call, send me an email with the subject line “Liberty Dialogues”, and I will send you the call credentials.

    Also, a quick note: a few people reported that the payment processing on statementofunderstanding.com was not functioning properly. The programmer is currently reviewing and refining the system. If you experienced problems earlier, please try again.

    The SOU program and the documentation of our good faith beliefs is an essential component to defeat the element of willfulness in any proceeding. To be forewarned is to be forearmed. And one more important point.

    Inside the Statement of Understanding program, there is a document about presumption that is extremely powerful.

    If we fail to understand presumption, we fail to understand how the system actually works.

    The system operates almost like a conveyor belt. People move through it one after another, and a rubber stamp of presumption is placed on each person automatically—often leading to an outcome that favors the government from the very beginning.

    Understanding that mechanism is the first step toward dealing with it intelligently.

    I hope to see many of you on the call tomorrow.



    Get full access to YesToHellWith at yestohellwith.substack.com/subscribe
    Más Menos
    2 m
Todavía no hay opiniones