Chet is Fighting the IRS

I almost posted this in Religious History because it feels like this style of argument is an ongoing religion. Definitely a flashback from the '90's for sure!

It came to me from an email distribution by a think tank that old too; Tuesday Night Law Club. An old friend collected some of the old gang and posted this Letter to the magistrate over a year ago. The Letter flopped but this regurgitation of patriot mythology is ongoing and the latest paper (75 pages) was filed December 1st but is too big for Attachments here so I link it from gdrive.

I have Chet's phone number at the bottom in case anybody wants to invite him to learn here. I find interaction and current events more edifying than history. Please understand that I am only hard on Chet because I am sensitive; I have done this exact sort of thing!

Quote:

---

To: The Honorable Judge THALKEN

Ref: Case 8;13CR273

US Court House

111 South 18th Plaza

Omaha NE 88102



Your Honor,

This is in reference to case 8;13CR273 where I, Chet Lee West, have been charged with three counts of Tax Evasion. Sir, I cannot tell you how excited I am about this event. It is the culmination of a dozen years of myself, my friends and my associates asking questions of the United States Government (USG) through their collections arm the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). These questions were never answered in any responsive way. It was always misdirection, gibberish, threats or malignments. However, the tables have now turned! Please allow me to explain.



Around the turn of the present century, I was looking at the Constitution of the United States and the Income Tax as it was being implemented and discovered some incongruities. The Constitution gives authority and places restrictions on all humans that become part of that organization. One of which is “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.” However, the Income Tax implementation says “You made money and you will give us some or else!” So as to better understand this apparent conflict, I began a study of the subject and became aware of several legal findings concerning the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) and the Income Tax in particular of which I ask the court to take notice.



The first were:

"The revenue laws are a code or system in regulation of tax assessment and collection. They relate to taxpayers, and not to nontaxpayers. The latter are without their scope. No procedure is prescribed for nontaxpayers, and no attempt is made to annul any of their rights and remedies in due course of law. With them [nontaxpayers] Congress does not assume to deal, and they are neither of the subject nor of the object of the revenue laws". Economy Plumbing and Heating Co. v. United States, 470 F. 2d 585 (1972)



And:

GOULD v. GOULD , 245 U.S. 151 (1917)

“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, or to enlarge their operations so as to embrace matters not specifically pointed out. In case of doubt they are construed most strongly against the government, and in favor of the citizen.”



Next:

"The laws of Congress in respect to those matters [Federal Income Taxation] do not extend into the territorial limits of the states, but have force only in the District of Columbia, and other places that are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the national government." Caha v. United States, 152 U.S. 211, 215, 14 S. Ct. 513 (1894)



Then:

Federal Crop Ins. Corp v. Merrill, 332 U.S. 380, the Supreme Court held: “Whatever the form in which the government functions, anyone entering into an arrangement with the government takes a risk of having accurately ascertained that he who purports to act for the government stays within the bounds of his authority, even though the agent himself may be unaware of the limitations upon his authority.”



From these, and a plethora of others, I drew the following enlightenments:

1. There are two distinct classes of persons in the USA; Taxpayers and Nontaxpayers. Only Taxpayers are subject to the IRC by virtue of meeting the definition of Taxpayer. That definition being found at section 7701(a)(14) “Taxpayer: The term ‘‘taxpayer’’ means any person subject to any internal revenue tax.”

2. That there must be a clear definition of the class of person on whom the tax is applicable, as in who, what, where and when, in the statue. Only in this way can the citizen be certain as to whether they are “subject to” or “liable for” the tax, or not.

3. There are limits on the jurisdiction of the USG’s taxing power.

4. If the USG agent that is bringing a claim on my property cannot verify their authority, there is no reason to comply with the demand.



Wishing to be sure of any valid requirement, I consulted the IRC and others that had studied it, as to the class of person on which Congress had laid the Income Tax. Subtitle A of the IRC is labeled “Income Tax” and one would believe it reasonable to find the definition of that class.



These extensive investigation returned that only one person is “made liable” for the Tax and that is a “withholding agent” that has responsibility over money flowing to various “foreign persons” (§ 1461. Liability for withheld tax). So do these “foreign persons” constitute the class of persons on which Congress laid the Income Tax? The research indicated that they do, which would put it in line with the Constitutional authority of Congress to tax the privilege of a “foreign person” making profit in the USA and the money flowing out of the country. For the record I have never assumed the responsibility of a “withholding agent” and being born in the great State of Florida of parents born in the same State, “foreign person” does not seem to describe me.



Armed with my “due diligence”, I asked the IRS to supply me with verification that I was a Taxpayer by sighting the “class of person” on which Congress had laid the Income Tax and what events brought me into that class. They refused to do so, most often by saying “The 16th Amendment authorized Congress to tax income from whatever source derived.” Which is fine that Congress has that power, but what did they DO? What class of person did they impose the Income Tax on? The IRS gave no substantive answer, therefore, I ceased contributing or offering any “return” that is “required” by the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), as there has been no proof offered that I am subject to that statute or its corresponding regulations.



Over the years I continued to bring my enriching products and services to the market in order that I might receive valuable consideration. With this consideration I sustained myself and my family along with providing for several charitable activities. If statistics from the Department of Labor can be believed, that consideration was in the top 4.37% of Americans.



The IRS would occasionally send me letters requesting “returns”, requiring that I pay non-adjudicated bills and threatening to take my property. I responded to some of these with a variety of phrasing the question “Am I subject to the Income Tax?” The responses I received were typically unsigned versions of “Our records indicate that you had income so pay us money!” or “We have decided that you owe us money and told you to pay. As you did not we will seize your property and rights to property!”



Pursuant to the last remark the IRS filed several “Notice of Lien” in various jurisdictions totaling more than $300,000. However, not once did they state the “class of person” on which Congress laid the Income Tax, nor the events that took this free and independent human being into that class.

---

Continued...

Here is the remainder of Chet's Letter:

Quote:

---

These correspondences culminated in a face to face interview with an IRS Criminal Investigation Department (CID) agent, that identified himself as Evan Carpenter along with another agent, Derrick Tarr, in early 2011. In the course of the “interview”, that began with a Miranda warning, I asked Agent Carpenter “Would you please articulate the attributes of the class, or classes, of person on which Congress has laid the Income Tax?” Being he has accepted the responsibility of enforcing the tax laws of the USG, it goes that he should know what they are, right? The agent gave the most disconcerting reply of “We cannot give you legal advice.” I replied that I was not asking for “legal advice”, I wanted to know if he was aware of what the law said. I assured him that, were I in his shoes and mucking around with a free born American’s life, I would want to know, for sure, that the American was indeed in the proper class to deserve such mucking. He continued the reply ad nauseam and finished the interview by presenting me a summons for books and records. This form had the most interesting line at the bottom; “Under the authority of the Internal Revenue Code.” As he refused to bring evidence that I was subject to the IRC, I felt no compunction to produce any books or records. I did however send him two manuscripts which gave detailed explanations of tax law in America, that he might become more informed.



A few weeks after the interview, Agent Carpenter called to confirm that I was complying with the agreement and I asked him “Is anyone listed in this summons a Taxpayer?”



He responded with ”Well we have information that they had income…”



I said “It’s a real easy question. Yes or no, is anybody on this list a Taxpayer?”



He said “Well you need to call when you have…”



I interrupted with ”How’s about you call me when you have the answer to my question.” and rang off.



That was the last communication I have received from the IRS CID until I was served.



Some time ago, I entered into association with a group known as We the People. We negotiated with the IRS to come to a public forum and answer questions that would clear up these misconceptions that have plagued Americans for some 60 years. Although the IRS and other USG representatives agreed to the event, when it arrived, they did not. We the People brought the matter to court in order to get clarity on the extraction of our money. However, as we were the moving party, the USG was allowed to simply question the evidence brought forward and otherwise remain silent. They have continued that trend in the recent Congressional hearing on their possible misdeeds. Their obvious stonewalling has brought great consternation to many truth seeking Americans and that bring us to this case.




With the filing of the “Tax Evasion” charges against me, the USG, through its collection arm the IRS, has become the moving party and assumed the “burden of proof” for those claims, correct? I mean, how can I be accused of evading a tax that I am not subject to? Therefore, I do hereby request of the court, that it confirm the existence of the human being the prosecution intends to bring forth that can, under oath, publish the class of person on which Congress has laid the Income Tax (or any other applicable tax) from the IRC and state the events which brought Chet Lee West into that class.



If there is no such witness, would not that be grounds for immediate dismissal? Without the foundation of proof that I am subject to the Income Tax, or any other Internal Revenue Tax, should the case proceed? If the court concurs with the reasoning here, I request that the dismissal be with prejudice and the IRS be required to remove all “Notice of Lien” filed where ever.



Were the case to be continued in open court, would the lack of foundation render any proposed evidence, that is connected with the IRC, objectionable? Looking back at Economy Plumbing and Heating Co. v. United States, statement “With them [nontaxpayers] Congress does not assume to deal, and they are neither of the subject nor of the object of the revenue laws.”, does the lack of foundation preclude the entry of any evidence pertaining to “gross income”, “taxpayer”, “employee” or any of the myriad of terms defined in the IRC? What about forms such as W-4, W-2, 1099 and such? Would not an objection of “Irrelevant, no foundation presented!” be appropriate if their admission were to be requested?



What would be appropriate questions when selecting an informed jury? Perhaps something along the lines of “Have you ever seen a description the class of person on which Congress has laid the Income Tax?” and “Then what evidence do you have that you are part of that class?” These and several more could be arrayed to be sure the pool is well acquainted with the premise of specific application, wouldn’t you say?



Your Honor, I am working a 24/7 maintenance contract in Jersey City, NJ. It would cost me about $1000.00 in travel, lodging and lost revenue, to attend the hearing on August 16th. Could I impose on you to determine if the prosecution does indeed have a witness that can give testimony to the premise that I meet the definition of Taxpayer, before the 13th? As not having a witness appears to damage the credibility of their argument, it would really be nice if the case were dismissed immediately. This will save further expense on a Tax that, having no evidence presented, cannot apply to me.



Thankyou so much for your time and

Ipray that justice be done this day.



Chet Lee West

Chet Lee West
32 Fairbanks St.
Hillside, NJ 07205
575-644-6702

---

Most likely the judge never even read it.
I had piles of papers sitting beside a judge on the bench and he even said he never read them.
i got a letter from the head judge saying not to write the judges.

The Judge made a remark on the docket report Attached.

Ref: Case 8;13CR273

On April 10, 2013, United States Magistrate Judge Thomas D. Thalken engaged in Coercion and Duress by requiring me, Randall David Due, to sign under Coercion and Duress a conditional release contract, which imposed upon me violation of my Constitutionally guaranteed Natural and Civil Rights. http://www.zoominfo.com/p/Thomas-Thalken/27267003

Rule 53. Masters