Detecting language using up to the first 30 seconds. Use `--language` to specify the language
Detected language: English
[00:00.000 --> 00:01.860]  Welcome to the show.
[00:01.860 --> 00:04.120]  Virtually every American who gets a job
[00:04.120 --> 00:07.840]  is required to fill out a Form I-9
[00:07.840 --> 00:11.160]  as a condition of employment.
[00:11.160 --> 00:13.860]  The title of Form I-9 is
[00:13.860 --> 00:17.160]  Employment Eligibility Verification.
[00:17.160 --> 00:19.420]  And here's what it says about the Form I-9
[00:19.420 --> 00:22.160]  on the website of the U.S. Immigration Service.
[00:22.160 --> 00:25.160]  Quote, use Form I-9,
[00:25.160 --> 00:27.820]  Employment Eligibility Verification,
[00:27.820 --> 00:31.700]  to verify the identity and employment authorization
[00:31.700 --> 00:35.900]  of individuals hired for employment in the United States.
[00:35.900 --> 00:38.980]  So, are we to take from that
[00:38.980 --> 00:42.520]  American citizens are not allowed to work in this country
[00:42.520 --> 00:45.900]  without federal government approval?
[00:45.900 --> 00:47.900]  Like so many controversial
[00:47.900 --> 00:50.620]  or problematic areas of federal law,
[00:50.620 --> 00:53.260]  the law pertaining to Form I-9
[00:53.260 --> 00:56.940]  does not say what the public
[00:56.940 --> 01:00.180]  and employers believe it says.
[01:00.180 --> 01:03.140]  Today, I'm going to show you that what the law says
[01:03.140 --> 01:06.360]  is not remotely what the government propaganda tells you
[01:06.360 --> 01:09.220]  or what employers claim the law requires.
[01:09.220 --> 01:14.220]  The Dr. Reality Vodcast with Dave Champion.
[01:25.380 --> 01:26.740]  Let's start with this.
[01:26.740 --> 01:30.620]  I've been reading law for more than three decades.
[01:30.620 --> 01:33.180]  My interest in the law began with federal income tax,
[01:33.180 --> 01:37.020]  but over the years has branched out into many areas.
[01:37.020 --> 01:39.340]  Perhaps the most important thing I've learned
[01:39.340 --> 01:42.280]  from three decades of reading federal law is this.
[01:43.180 --> 01:44.900]  Within the states of the union,
[01:44.900 --> 01:49.860]  the Constitution grants Congress very little authority.
[01:49.860 --> 01:51.460]  To get around that limitation,
[01:51.460 --> 01:53.340]  legislative draftsmen have developed
[01:53.340 --> 01:56.620]  a number of different ways to draft laws
[01:56.620 --> 02:00.780]  so that the people of the states of the union are fooled,
[02:00.780 --> 02:04.740]  literally hoodwinked into thinking certain laws apply to them
[02:04.740 --> 02:06.780]  when in fact they do not.
[02:06.780 --> 02:10.300]  That is true of quite a number of federal legal schemes,
[02:10.300 --> 02:12.380]  including the income tax.
[02:12.380 --> 02:14.820]  My decades of research into income tax law
[02:14.820 --> 02:18.260]  resulted in me publishing Income Tax Shattering the Mist,
[02:18.260 --> 02:21.700]  which is the only comprehensive compendium in existence
[02:21.700 --> 02:23.420]  that details how the federal government
[02:23.420 --> 02:28.340]  has wrongly convinced hundreds of millions of Americans
[02:28.340 --> 02:34.420]  that income tax applies to them when the law says no such thing.
[02:34.420 --> 02:36.140]  As a quick example,
[02:36.140 --> 02:38.420]  unless one has read Income Tax Shattering the Mist,
[02:38.420 --> 02:42.180]  one would not know that since 1913,
[02:42.180 --> 02:44.380]  when the income tax was enacted,
[02:44.380 --> 02:50.940]  the Secretary of the Treasury has said in 11 official documents
[02:50.940 --> 02:55.700]  that Form 1040 is to be used exclusively by non-resident aliens
[02:55.700 --> 02:59.580]  with U.S. source income or the non-resident alien's domestic agent.
[02:59.580 --> 03:03.060]  More strikingly, there is nothing in the statutes, the regs,
[03:03.060 --> 03:07.340]  or treasury decisions in the 111-year history of the income tax
[03:07.340 --> 03:10.180]  saying anyone other than a non-resident alien
[03:10.180 --> 03:14.980]  or the non-resident alien's domestic agent is to file Form 1040.
[03:14.980 --> 03:16.700]  Before we get rolling on the I-9,
[03:16.700 --> 03:19.260]  I want to let you know I'm running a special on my website,
[03:19.260 --> 03:23.220]  DrReality.News, DrReality.News.
[03:23.220 --> 03:26.220]  Any order containing Income Tax Shattering the Mist
[03:26.220 --> 03:30.180]  gets free shipping by using the code tariffs.
[03:30.180 --> 03:31.420]  More on that later.
[03:31.420 --> 03:35.700]  The law concerning Form I-9 is found in Title VIII of the United States Code,
[03:35.700 --> 03:39.180]  which is entitled Aliens and Nationality.
[03:39.180 --> 03:43.700]  Accordingly, let's begin our inquiry by looking at Title VIII.
[03:43.700 --> 03:47.020]  Here you can see the chapters within Title VIII.
[03:47.020 --> 03:50.740]  The ones with a green line through them have been repealed.
[03:50.740 --> 03:53.820]  If you take a moment to read down the titles of the chapters,
[03:53.820 --> 03:57.100]  you'll see there is nothing in Title VIII
[03:57.100 --> 04:01.180]  that has anything to do with Native-born American citizens
[04:01.180 --> 04:05.300]  except for a single section that discusses what one can do
[04:05.300 --> 04:08.700]  to legally renounce his or her citizenship.
[04:08.700 --> 04:11.380]  Other than the part about renouncing citizenship,
[04:11.380 --> 04:14.940]  there is absolutely nothing in Title VIII
[04:14.980 --> 04:17.780]  that has anything to do with Native-born Americans.
[04:17.780 --> 04:20.780]  So then, if there is nothing in Title VIII
[04:20.780 --> 04:23.260]  that pertains to Native-born Americans,
[04:23.260 --> 04:26.340]  how can Title VIII contain a requirement
[04:26.340 --> 04:32.020]  that Native-born Americans must receive government approval to work?
[04:32.020 --> 04:34.900]  Let's go a bit further by looking at the area of Title VIII
[04:34.900 --> 04:37.180]  in which the I-9 law is found.
[04:37.180 --> 04:40.820]  That's Chapter XII, Subchapter II, Part VIII,
[04:40.820 --> 04:43.220]  entitled General Provisions.
[04:43.220 --> 04:48.860]  The specific area is Sections 1324 through 1324D.
[04:48.860 --> 04:50.780]  As one might expect in Title VIII,
[04:50.780 --> 04:54.620]  those sections deal exclusively with aliens.
[04:54.620 --> 04:57.900]  Right here, you can see Section 1324A,
[04:57.900 --> 05:00.540]  which is the section that controls everything
[05:00.540 --> 05:02.740]  about the use of Form I-9.
[05:02.740 --> 05:04.020]  Let's see what it says.
[05:04.020 --> 05:06.100]  The only two things we need to look at
[05:06.100 --> 05:08.060]  are the title of Subsection A
[05:08.060 --> 05:10.620]  and the first sentence of the section.
[05:10.660 --> 05:13.460]  The title of Subsection A is
[05:13.460 --> 05:17.940]  Making Employment of Unauthorized Aliens Unlawful.
[05:17.940 --> 05:20.900]  In my video on why the Corporate Transparency Act
[05:20.900 --> 05:24.260]  does not apply to citizens of the states of the Union,
[05:24.260 --> 05:26.140]  I pointed out that while the federal government
[05:26.140 --> 05:29.460]  absolutely has authority to combat money laundering,
[05:29.460 --> 05:32.340]  it does not have any authority to conscript the citizens
[05:32.340 --> 05:34.900]  of the states of the Union into doing so.
[05:34.900 --> 05:37.060]  In other words, the government is free to do it,
[05:37.060 --> 05:40.060]  but it can't make you a part of its efforts.
[05:40.060 --> 05:41.460]  Think about it this way.
[05:41.460 --> 05:43.820]  Your local police department can engage in activities
[05:43.820 --> 05:46.900]  to enforce anti-drug laws and stop drug dealing,
[05:46.900 --> 05:50.620]  but it can't place that duty on you.
[05:50.620 --> 05:52.580]  Whether we're talking about stopping money laundering
[05:52.580 --> 05:54.380]  or stopping unauthorized aliens
[05:54.380 --> 05:56.180]  from working in the United States,
[05:56.180 --> 05:58.820]  the only party that has the responsibility
[05:58.820 --> 06:01.340]  for doing that is the government.
[06:01.340 --> 06:03.820]  If the government could compel you
[06:03.820 --> 06:07.180]  to participate in its enforcement efforts,
[06:07.180 --> 06:09.620]  yeah, where would that end?
[06:09.620 --> 06:12.180]  Because the government can't compel American citizens
[06:12.180 --> 06:14.380]  to participate in its enforcement efforts,
[06:14.380 --> 06:17.340]  instead it has chosen to knowingly, willfully,
[06:17.340 --> 06:21.300]  and intentionally trick the American people into doing it.
[06:22.940 --> 06:24.580]  Isn't that nice?
[06:24.580 --> 06:26.100]  Before I continue, a quick note.
[06:26.100 --> 06:27.740]  If you enjoy this kind of knowledge
[06:27.740 --> 06:29.540]  that you'll never get from any source
[06:29.540 --> 06:30.620]  other than this channel,
[06:30.620 --> 06:33.700]  please take a moment to subscribe and hit the like button
[06:33.700 --> 06:36.500]  so the algorithm show this content to more people.
[06:36.500 --> 06:38.820]  Also, for a limited time, you can get free shipping
[06:38.820 --> 06:40.140]  on any of my books,
[06:40.140 --> 06:42.660]  as long as income tax shattering the miss
[06:42.660 --> 06:43.900]  is included in your order.
[06:43.900 --> 06:46.980]  Simply use the code tariffs at checkout.
[06:46.980 --> 06:48.740]  I'll share that again at the end.
[06:48.740 --> 06:53.100]  Now, let's examine the first sentence of 1324A,
[06:53.100 --> 06:55.140]  which reads, quote,
[06:55.140 --> 06:58.780]  it is unlawful for a person or other entity.
[06:58.780 --> 07:03.500]  Hmm, let's focus on the word entity for a moment.
[07:03.500 --> 07:08.460]  If we scroll down to A7, we find entity defined this way.
[07:08.500 --> 07:09.820]  For the purpose of this section,
[07:09.820 --> 07:12.100]  the term entity includes an entity
[07:12.100 --> 07:15.620]  in any branch of the federal government.
[07:15.620 --> 07:17.420]  I've discussed the word includes many times
[07:17.420 --> 07:20.020]  in these presentations, as used in statutory law.
[07:20.020 --> 07:23.180]  Includes means things not enumerated
[07:23.180 --> 07:25.460]  are to be considered a part of the definition
[07:25.460 --> 07:27.880]  if they fall within the class established
[07:27.880 --> 07:29.780]  by the words of the definition.
[07:29.780 --> 07:33.940]  So then, what is the class established in this definition?
[07:33.940 --> 07:36.680]  That's stated clearly when it says,
[07:36.680 --> 07:38.760]  any branch of the federal government.
[07:38.760 --> 07:43.280]  In other words, it means the entire federal government,
[07:43.280 --> 07:44.640]  without exception,
[07:44.640 --> 07:46.960]  because Congress is applying this section
[07:46.960 --> 07:49.000]  to all three branches,
[07:49.000 --> 07:52.880]  the executive, the legislative, and the judicial.
[07:52.880 --> 07:54.440]  Congress needed to make that clear
[07:54.440 --> 07:56.940]  because many statutes imposing a requirement
[07:56.940 --> 08:00.200]  on the government cannot be constitutionally imposed
[08:00.200 --> 08:02.840]  on all branches.
[08:02.840 --> 08:06.200]  By the definition of entity in 1324A,
[08:06.200 --> 08:08.960]  Congress is expressly stating its intent
[08:08.960 --> 08:10.680]  that the I-9 requirement applies
[08:10.680 --> 08:14.340]  to all three branches of the federal government.
[08:14.340 --> 08:15.180]  Understanding that.
[08:15.180 --> 08:17.440]  Now, let's turn our attention
[08:17.440 --> 08:20.080]  to the unusual grammar of the sentence
[08:20.080 --> 08:25.080]  when it says, it is unlawful for a person or other entity.
[08:25.720 --> 08:30.520]  Huh, person or other entity.
[08:30.520 --> 08:32.480]  Let's remove the word entity
[08:32.480 --> 08:35.180]  and replace it with its definition.
[08:35.180 --> 08:37.980]  If we do that, it reads this way,
[08:37.980 --> 08:42.000]  person or other federal government branch.
[08:42.000 --> 08:44.060]  Because other is not defined by Congress
[08:44.060 --> 08:45.040]  for use in this statute,
[08:45.040 --> 08:47.540]  we have to find its meaning in the English dictionary.
[08:47.540 --> 08:50.740]  When we do, we find the only dictionary definition
[08:50.740 --> 08:53.780]  that remotely makes sense is additional.
[08:53.780 --> 08:57.040]  The only synonym that makes sense is another.
[08:57.040 --> 08:59.940]  Let's put each of those in place of the word other
[08:59.940 --> 09:01.500]  and read the clause again.
[09:02.500 --> 09:05.980]  Person or additional federal government branch,
[09:05.980 --> 09:10.620]  or person or another federal government branch.
[09:11.740 --> 09:15.780]  Why did the legislative draftsman include the word other?
[09:15.780 --> 09:20.780]  They did so because they needed to link person and entity
[09:21.540 --> 09:23.780]  without the public, that's you,
[09:23.780 --> 09:27.300]  understanding what they did or why they did it.
[09:27.300 --> 09:29.340]  As used in the sentence we're discussing,
[09:29.340 --> 09:32.900]  other is something called a reciprocal pronoun.
[09:32.900 --> 09:34.420]  A reciprocal pronoun is used
[09:34.420 --> 09:36.980]  when two things have a mutual relationship.
[09:36.980 --> 09:38.980]  In this case, the mutual relationship
[09:38.980 --> 09:41.060]  is they are government entities.
[09:41.060 --> 09:43.100]  Allow me to flush this out for you.
[09:43.100 --> 09:47.620]  Person as used here means an individual or organization
[09:47.620 --> 09:50.840]  acting in the capacity of the federal government.
[09:50.840 --> 09:55.100]  It does not embrace anyone in the private sector.
[09:55.100 --> 09:57.980]  As such, let's examine the definition of person
[09:57.980 --> 10:00.080]  as used in 1324A.
[10:00.080 --> 10:04.460]  You can find that at 1101B3 and it reads,
[10:04.460 --> 10:08.920]  the term person means an individual or an organization.
[10:09.820 --> 10:12.860]  That of course means we now have to know
[10:12.860 --> 10:14.820]  what organization means.
[10:14.820 --> 10:16.100]  Before I share that with you,
[10:16.100 --> 10:18.700]  I wanna let you know that after more than three decades
[10:18.700 --> 10:21.580]  reading federal law, I can assure you
[10:21.580 --> 10:22.900]  that when the law is written
[10:22.900 --> 10:25.140]  so that you have to seek out definition
[10:25.140 --> 10:27.020]  after definition after definition
[10:27.020 --> 10:30.220]  in order to find the true meaning of a provision,
[10:30.220 --> 10:34.220]  that's done intentionally to bamboozle you.
[10:34.220 --> 10:37.580]  So what is the definition of organization?
[10:37.580 --> 10:42.580]  Well, that's found at 1101A28 and reads,
[10:42.900 --> 10:46.700]  the term organization means, but is not limited to,
[10:46.700 --> 10:49.400]  an organization, corporation, company, partnership,
[10:49.400 --> 10:51.820]  association, trust, foundation, or fund,
[10:51.820 --> 10:53.300]  and includes a group of persons,
[10:53.300 --> 10:55.100]  whether or not incorporated permanently
[10:55.100 --> 10:56.860]  or temporarily associated together
[10:56.860 --> 11:00.460]  with a joint action on any subject or subjects.
[11:02.060 --> 11:07.060]  At this point, let's take a moment to recap.
[11:07.100 --> 11:09.100]  Title Eight of the United States Code
[11:09.100 --> 11:14.100]  has nothing to do with Americans, nada, zero.
[11:14.740 --> 11:18.740]  The I-9 requirement is within Title Eight.
[11:18.740 --> 11:20.740]  The government cannot conscript citizens
[11:20.740 --> 11:22.460]  of the States of the Union into enforcing
[11:22.460 --> 11:26.820]  or participating in the process of enforcing federal law.
[11:26.820 --> 11:28.820]  Being required to use a form I-9
[11:28.820 --> 11:31.300]  as a condition requisite to hiring someone
[11:31.300 --> 11:33.720]  would constitute being forced to participate
[11:33.720 --> 11:36.020]  in the enforcement of federal law.
[11:36.020 --> 11:39.460]  The first sentence of 1324A speaks of,
[11:39.460 --> 11:42.300]  person or other entities.
[11:42.300 --> 11:45.240]  In that sentence, the legislative draftsman used other
[11:45.240 --> 11:48.140]  as a reciprocal pronoun to show there is a mutual
[11:48.140 --> 11:51.460]  relationship between person and entity.
[11:51.460 --> 11:54.900]  Person, as defined for use in 1324A,
[11:54.900 --> 11:56.980]  includes organizations.
[11:57.940 --> 12:01.460]  Organization is defined to include corporations,
[12:01.460 --> 12:05.300]  companies, partnerships, associations, et cetera.
[12:05.300 --> 12:08.680]  Accordingly, for the purpose of Section 1324A,
[12:08.680 --> 12:11.460]  person is not limited to human beings,
[12:11.460 --> 12:14.620]  but includes various legal entities.
[12:14.620 --> 12:19.020]  In fact, contextually, it makes no sense to consider
[12:19.020 --> 12:22.620]  that in 1324A, person means a human.
[12:22.620 --> 12:27.620]  Let's read 1324A colloquially and see how it fits.
[12:27.900 --> 12:31.240]  A human being or other federal government branch,
[12:32.380 --> 12:34.060]  obviously that doesn't work.
[12:34.060 --> 12:37.420]  So now we're left with organizations.
[12:37.420 --> 12:40.460]  What might the organizations be that the legislative
[12:40.460 --> 12:44.500]  draftsman meant by person in 1324A?
[12:44.500 --> 12:48.620]  There is only one meaning that checks all the boxes.
[12:48.620 --> 12:51.900]  That is instrumentalities.
[12:51.900 --> 12:55.020]  So what are instrumentalities?
[12:55.020 --> 12:57.500]  A good working definition is this.
[12:57.500 --> 12:59.780]  A government instrumentality is an organization
[12:59.780 --> 13:03.260]  created by statute to perform governmental functions,
[13:03.260 --> 13:05.540]  but does not have the full power of government,
[13:05.540 --> 13:09.340]  such as police authority, taxation, or eminent domain.
[13:10.180 --> 13:12.420]  Examples of federal instrumentalities are
[13:12.420 --> 13:14.240]  the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation,
[13:14.240 --> 13:18.100]  more commonly known as FDIC, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac,
[13:18.100 --> 13:20.060]  the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation,
[13:20.060 --> 13:22.020]  and many, many others.
[13:22.020 --> 13:24.960]  Keep in mind that the word other was placed
[13:24.960 --> 13:27.940]  in the key sentence of section 1324A
[13:27.940 --> 13:31.060]  to establish a mutual relationship
[13:31.060 --> 13:35.180]  between the person and the three branches of government.
[13:35.180 --> 13:38.440]  The mutual relationship is that while instrumentalities
[13:38.440 --> 13:41.640]  are not technically within any of the three branches,
[13:41.640 --> 13:45.980]  they are at all times under the jurisdiction of Congress.
[13:45.980 --> 13:49.300]  That means when Congress applied the I-9 requirement
[13:49.300 --> 13:51.140]  to the entire government,
[13:51.140 --> 13:54.620]  it created a special definition of person
[13:54.620 --> 13:56.740]  in conjunction with the word other,
[13:56.740 --> 13:58.840]  used as a reciprocal pronoun,
[13:58.840 --> 14:01.460]  so that the requirement also embraced
[14:01.460 --> 14:04.180]  federal instrumentalities.
[14:04.180 --> 14:07.580]  With that covered, I wanna share a few thoughts with you.
[14:07.580 --> 14:12.580]  First, section 1324A does not require anyone
[14:12.580 --> 14:16.100]  to use a form I-9 other than the three branches
[14:16.100 --> 14:19.700]  of the United States government and its instrumentalities,
[14:19.700 --> 14:22.140]  period, full stop.
[14:22.140 --> 14:26.380]  Second, using the word other as a reciprocal pronoun
[14:26.380 --> 14:31.380]  is archaic, it's virtually unheard of in modern English.
[14:31.980 --> 14:33.820]  The sentence we've been discussing,
[14:33.820 --> 14:36.460]  which controls everything else in the section,
[14:36.460 --> 14:41.340]  wasn't written in the 1890s, it was written in the 1990s.
[14:41.340 --> 14:45.540]  My point is that a legislative draftsman worked very hard
[14:45.540 --> 14:48.060]  to come up with wordsmithing that sentence,
[14:48.060 --> 14:52.300]  so the statutory scheme retains its constitutionality
[14:52.300 --> 14:56.540]  while at the same time fooling everyone who reasoned.
[14:56.540 --> 14:59.740]  Let me give you an example of similar wordsmithing
[14:59.740 --> 15:01.420]  as it appears in tax law.
[15:01.420 --> 15:02.580]  This is part of a sentence
[15:02.580 --> 15:05.420]  straight out of an income tax statutes.
[15:05.420 --> 15:07.580]  All persons in whatever capacity acting,
[15:07.580 --> 15:10.020]  having the control, receipt, custody, disposal,
[15:10.020 --> 15:11.940]  or payment of any items of gross income
[15:11.940 --> 15:14.060]  from sources within the United States
[15:14.060 --> 15:17.540]  of any non-resident alien individual.
[15:17.540 --> 15:22.540]  In 1962, Congress passed a law taking that lengthy description
[15:22.780 --> 15:26.540]  and distilling it down to the term U.S. person.
[15:26.540 --> 15:29.580]  Of course, good hearted Americans who,
[15:29.580 --> 15:32.220]  when they see U.S. person in tax law,
[15:32.220 --> 15:35.060]  immediately say, oh, U.S. person,
[15:35.060 --> 15:38.580]  well, hell, that's me because I'm an American.
[15:38.580 --> 15:41.340]  They have no idea that to be a U.S. person,
[15:41.340 --> 15:43.780]  they have to have control, receipt, custody, disposal,
[15:43.780 --> 15:45.020]  or payment of U.S. source income
[15:45.020 --> 15:46.820]  belonging to a foreign person.
[15:46.820 --> 15:49.340]  How fucked up is that ploy?
[15:49.340 --> 15:51.020]  Not long ago, I put out a presentation
[15:51.020 --> 15:53.180]  discussing the Social Security Act.
[15:53.180 --> 15:54.980]  I'll put the link down in the notes.
[15:54.980 --> 15:56.700]  In that presentation, I pointed out that
[15:56.700 --> 15:59.860]  because there is zero subject matter jurisdiction
[15:59.860 --> 16:02.020]  in the constitution for Congress
[16:02.020 --> 16:04.300]  to enact the Social Security Act,
[16:04.300 --> 16:06.980]  Congress made it applicable solely
[16:06.980 --> 16:09.740]  for federal possessions and territories
[16:09.740 --> 16:14.340]  using what is called Congress's territorial jurisdiction.
[16:14.340 --> 16:16.740]  I showed the special definition of state
[16:16.740 --> 16:18.980]  that limited the act to the possessions and territories
[16:18.980 --> 16:20.900]  and even showed the legislation
[16:20.900 --> 16:24.500]  that removed Hawaii and Alaska
[16:24.500 --> 16:26.220]  from the definition of state
[16:26.220 --> 16:28.580]  once they became states of the union.
[16:28.580 --> 16:30.860]  My point is that congressional efforts
[16:30.860 --> 16:33.220]  to intentionally mislead the American people
[16:33.220 --> 16:36.380]  into believing laws apply to them that absolutely do not
[16:36.380 --> 16:39.620]  has been taking place since the early 20th century.
[16:39.620 --> 16:42.340]  But James, some people cry.
[16:42.340 --> 16:46.060]  If these things were true, lawyers would know about it.
[16:48.980 --> 16:53.100]  If only, my friends, if only.
[16:53.100 --> 16:55.500]  I've been speaking about the truth of the income tax,
[16:55.500 --> 16:56.780]  which is that it has never been imposed
[16:56.780 --> 16:58.340]  on ordinary hardworking Americans
[16:58.340 --> 17:00.420]  for more than three decades.
[17:00.420 --> 17:04.220]  In that time, I've spoken with hundreds of attorneys,
[17:04.220 --> 17:06.140]  including tax attorneys.
[17:06.140 --> 17:08.460]  It may shock you to hear that in those three decades,
[17:08.460 --> 17:11.580]  I've never met an attorney, including tax attorneys,
[17:11.580 --> 17:14.340]  who've read tax law.
[17:14.340 --> 17:16.660]  Several weeks ago, I was speaking with a tax attorney.
[17:16.660 --> 17:19.260]  I was explaining that the payroll withholding law
[17:19.260 --> 17:21.700]  does not apply to Americans earning domestic income
[17:21.700 --> 17:23.420]  in the private sector.
[17:23.420 --> 17:26.340]  He, of course, scoffed at that.
[17:26.340 --> 17:31.060]  Then I took him to 26 U.S.C., section 3401C,
[17:31.060 --> 17:33.380]  which defines employee
[17:33.380 --> 17:35.140]  for the purpose of payroll withholding.
[17:35.180 --> 17:36.820]  Here's what it says.
[17:36.820 --> 17:38.020]  For the purpose of this chapter,
[17:38.020 --> 17:40.140]  the term employee includes an officer, employee,
[17:40.140 --> 17:42.740]  or elected official of the United States, a state,
[17:42.740 --> 17:44.660]  or any political subdivision thereof,
[17:44.660 --> 17:46.660]  or the District of Columbia,
[17:46.660 --> 17:48.500]  or any agency or instrumentality
[17:48.500 --> 17:50.460]  of any one or more of the foregoing.
[17:51.340 --> 17:56.020]  That definition describes only government workers.
[17:56.020 --> 17:57.700]  There is nothing in the law that mentions,
[17:57.700 --> 18:01.460]  or even hints at, workers in the private sector.
[18:01.460 --> 18:04.820]  Because he had never read the law, when he heard it,
[18:04.820 --> 18:07.140]  he became completely flustered
[18:07.140 --> 18:11.020]  and made up an excuse to immediately end the discussion.
[18:11.020 --> 18:16.020]  And he's a tax attorney who had never read the law.
[18:16.860 --> 18:18.380]  As I mentioned a moment ago,
[18:18.380 --> 18:21.780]  that experience isn't a one-off or an unusual occurrence.
[18:21.780 --> 18:23.980]  In my 30 years, I have never spoken to an attorney
[18:23.980 --> 18:26.580]  who has ever read tax law.
[18:26.580 --> 18:29.340]  I wish I could tell you that reality is limited
[18:29.340 --> 18:33.620]  to what perhaps we can call establishment lawyers,
[18:33.820 --> 18:36.260]  but sadly, it's not.
[18:36.260 --> 18:38.540]  Even attorneys who claim to be fighting
[18:38.540 --> 18:42.020]  for personal liberty don't know what the law says
[18:42.020 --> 18:45.580]  about income tax, and worse yet, refuse to read the law.
[18:45.580 --> 18:47.860]  As an example of that is the so-called
[18:47.860 --> 18:51.100]  constitutional attorney, Chrisanne Hall,
[18:51.100 --> 18:56.020]  who has for years refused to read income tax shatteriness,
[18:56.020 --> 19:00.420]  despite countless followers of hers asking her to do so.
[19:00.420 --> 19:02.380]  In an exchange with me several years ago,
[19:02.380 --> 19:04.740]  she told me she doesn't need to read income tax
[19:04.740 --> 19:07.500]  shattering the myths because she's an attorney,
[19:07.500 --> 19:11.220]  and as such, she knows the income tax applies to everybody.
[19:12.180 --> 19:15.580]  I'm not sure whether she was speaking from fear
[19:15.580 --> 19:20.460]  or ignorance or arrogance, but she damaged her credibility
[19:20.460 --> 19:22.420]  with the tens of thousands of people
[19:22.420 --> 19:23.780]  who've read income tax shattering the myths
[19:23.780 --> 19:25.940]  and know the truth.
[19:25.940 --> 19:27.420]  Back to the I-9.
[19:27.420 --> 19:29.940]  Because the I-9 has no applicability
[19:29.940 --> 19:31.580]  outside the federal government,
[19:31.620 --> 19:35.020]  why do attorneys tell their private sector clients
[19:35.020 --> 19:37.460]  to get an I-9 from every new hire?
[19:37.460 --> 19:41.300]  First, just as with income tax, attorneys never read the law.
[19:41.300 --> 19:44.220]  They read some government propaganda,
[19:44.220 --> 19:46.660]  oh, I mean government publication,
[19:46.660 --> 19:49.780]  that cites a few provisions that superficially appear
[19:49.780 --> 19:51.780]  to support the false narrative
[19:51.780 --> 19:54.380]  the I-9 applies to private sector firms,
[19:54.380 --> 19:56.420]  and the attorney's just wrong with that.
[19:56.420 --> 20:00.180]  And of course, when an attorney tells company executives,
[20:00.220 --> 20:03.180]  this is what the law requires,
[20:03.180 --> 20:06.340]  none of the executives do a lick of independent research
[20:06.340 --> 20:08.220]  to see if the lawyer is correct.
[20:08.220 --> 20:11.980]  They just do what they've been told, you know,
[20:11.980 --> 20:13.500]  like children.
[20:13.500 --> 20:15.580]  The second reason attorneys tell their clients
[20:15.580 --> 20:17.660]  to get an I-9 from all new hires
[20:17.660 --> 20:22.660]  is because of section 132A, A3, which reads,
[20:23.420 --> 20:25.380]  a personal entity that establishes
[20:25.380 --> 20:27.140]  that it has complied in good faith
[20:27.140 --> 20:30.460]  with the requirements of subsection B of this section,
[20:30.460 --> 20:32.220]  which means getting an I-9,
[20:32.220 --> 20:34.580]  with respect to the hiring, recruiting, or referral
[20:34.580 --> 20:37.340]  for employment of an alien in the United States
[20:37.340 --> 20:39.500]  has established an affirmative defense
[20:39.500 --> 20:43.500]  that the person or entity has not violated paragraph 1A.
[20:44.660 --> 20:48.180]  In other words, if they get an I-9 from every one,
[20:48.180 --> 20:50.380]  and they are later accused of hiring an alien
[20:50.380 --> 20:52.780]  who is not authorized to work in the United States,
[20:52.780 --> 20:55.620]  they automatically, as a matter of law,
[20:55.620 --> 20:57.980]  have an affirmative defense.
[20:57.980 --> 20:59.820]  So what is an affirmative defense?
[20:59.820 --> 21:01.780]  An affirmative defense is a legal principle
[21:01.780 --> 21:04.260]  that allows a person who has violated a law
[21:04.260 --> 21:06.060]  to acknowledge they violated it,
[21:06.060 --> 21:08.540]  but not be punished for the violation.
[21:08.540 --> 21:10.940]  So in context of this issue,
[21:10.940 --> 21:12.740]  if the immigration folks find a guy
[21:12.740 --> 21:14.900]  who is not authorized to work in the US,
[21:14.900 --> 21:17.820]  working at a company, but the company is able to show
[21:17.820 --> 21:19.860]  it has an I-9 from the guy,
[21:19.860 --> 21:21.900]  the company is off the hook,
[21:21.900 --> 21:25.020]  as if the violation never occurred.
[21:25.060 --> 21:26.100]  It doesn't take a genius
[21:26.100 --> 21:28.820]  to see why companies find that appealing.
[21:28.820 --> 21:31.940]  Since they don't know anything about what the law says,
[21:31.940 --> 21:34.660]  they latch onto the fact that having an I-9
[21:34.660 --> 21:37.980]  from every worker means they won't be penalized,
[21:37.980 --> 21:41.220]  even if they do have aliens working for them
[21:41.220 --> 21:43.060]  who shouldn't be working in the US.
[21:44.740 --> 21:46.020]  I take a different approach,
[21:46.020 --> 21:48.420]  whether it's income tax, the Corporate Transparency Act,
[21:48.420 --> 21:51.220]  with its BOI reporting requirement, the Form I-9,
[21:51.220 --> 21:52.820]  and any number of other subjects.
[21:52.820 --> 21:54.380]  If the government contacts me,
[21:54.380 --> 21:56.740]  my approach is to tell the government,
[21:56.740 --> 21:58.500]  I know what the law actually says,
[21:58.500 --> 22:00.540]  and I'm more than happy to go to court
[22:00.540 --> 22:02.380]  and put the law and the facts into evidence
[22:02.380 --> 22:05.180]  for everyone to see.
[22:05.180 --> 22:09.260]  I say it politely and professionally in writing.
[22:10.140 --> 22:13.180]  While I am polite, the message is clear.
[22:13.180 --> 22:17.460]  If you push this, I will blow your scam out of the water.
[22:17.460 --> 22:20.500]  Since that's the last thing they want, they go away.
[22:21.460 --> 22:22.940]  With these legal scams,
[22:22.940 --> 22:26.220]  the government has fooled virtually everyone.
[22:26.220 --> 22:28.740]  In other words, the masses have bought
[22:28.740 --> 22:32.540]  the government's bullshit hook, line, and sinker,
[22:32.540 --> 22:35.540]  and are doing exactly what the government wants.
[22:35.540 --> 22:37.820]  Because of that, the government is willing to walk away
[22:37.820 --> 22:40.820]  from the tiny percentage of people who know the truth
[22:40.820 --> 22:43.820]  and are willing to stand upon it, or phrased another way.
[22:43.820 --> 22:48.500]  The government is happy to leave one informed person alone
[22:48.740 --> 22:51.340]  in order to keep 100,000 people fooled
[22:51.340 --> 22:53.740]  and ignorantly compliant.
[22:54.740 --> 22:57.180]  In my presentation about the Corporate Transparency Act,
[22:57.180 --> 23:00.460]  I offered my audience a letter they can send to the government
[23:00.460 --> 23:03.460]  if they are contacted for a BOI report.
[23:03.460 --> 23:06.340]  That letter isn't free, but it's also not expensive.
[23:06.340 --> 23:10.100]  I'll offer the same thing here concerning the I-9.
[23:10.100 --> 23:11.300]  If you own a business
[23:11.300 --> 23:13.420]  and don't want to screw around with I-9s,
[23:13.420 --> 23:14.780]  I have a letter you can send
[23:14.780 --> 23:18.340]  if the immigration folks contact you about an I-9 issue.
[23:18.340 --> 23:21.500]  You can send it, and they will leave you alone.
[23:21.500 --> 23:22.980]  If you want that letter in your files,
[23:22.980 --> 23:26.420]  shoot me an email at dave at drreality.news,
[23:26.420 --> 23:29.180]  and let me know you want the I-9 letter.
[23:29.180 --> 23:33.420]  Let's talk about the implication of signing an I-9.
[23:33.420 --> 23:35.420]  First off, and to be clear,
[23:35.420 --> 23:37.900]  signing an I-9 does not create
[23:37.900 --> 23:40.460]  the same kind of damaging implications
[23:40.460 --> 23:42.820]  one creates when signing tax forms.
[23:42.820 --> 23:43.740]  For those who haven't read
[23:43.740 --> 23:44.940]  Income Tax Shattering the Mist,
[23:44.940 --> 23:47.660]  let me take a moment to blow your mind.
[23:47.700 --> 23:49.620]  When you sign a form W-4,
[23:49.620 --> 23:52.300]  you are attesting under penalty of perjury
[23:52.300 --> 23:54.180]  that you are a non-resident alien
[23:54.180 --> 23:57.340]  receiving U.S. source income in the form of wages
[23:57.340 --> 24:00.900]  paid to you by a government entity.
[24:00.900 --> 24:02.940]  When you sign a form W-9,
[24:02.940 --> 24:05.540]  you are attesting under penalty of perjury
[24:05.540 --> 24:09.220]  that the money you're receiving does not belong to you,
[24:09.220 --> 24:11.140]  but you are receiving U.S. source income
[24:11.140 --> 24:14.020]  that belongs to a foreign person
[24:14.020 --> 24:16.940]  for whom you are acting as the U.S. agent.
[24:16.940 --> 24:17.980]  As you might imagine,
[24:17.980 --> 24:19.540]  those false declarations
[24:19.540 --> 24:22.060]  create some pretty nasty legal presumptions.
[24:22.060 --> 24:23.940]  In fact, those false declarations
[24:23.940 --> 24:25.580]  are what empowers the IRS to go
[24:25.580 --> 24:27.700]  after ordinary hardworking Americans
[24:27.700 --> 24:30.300]  who do not owe income tax,
[24:30.300 --> 24:33.980]  but have sworn under penalty of perjury, they do.
[24:33.980 --> 24:36.900]  The I-9 does not create that kind of inaccurate,
[24:36.900 --> 24:39.140]  harmful legal presumption.
[24:39.140 --> 24:40.860]  On the other hand,
[24:40.860 --> 24:44.060]  I-9 participation feeds into the construct
[24:44.060 --> 24:45.180]  that Americans living and working
[24:45.180 --> 24:46.580]  in the states of the union
[24:46.620 --> 24:49.820]  do not have the unalienable right to earn a living.
[24:49.820 --> 24:51.820]  Instead, the only way they can work
[24:51.820 --> 24:56.820]  is to provide documentary proof on a government form
[24:56.980 --> 25:00.700]  showing they are authorized to work.
[25:03.220 --> 25:08.060]  If I may state my view on that succinctly, fuck that.
[25:09.140 --> 25:10.180]  We've covered a lot of ground,
[25:10.180 --> 25:11.820]  so let me wrap up by telling you
[25:11.820 --> 25:13.820]  about the special offer I'm running on my website.
[25:13.820 --> 25:15.540]  Right now, and for a limited time,
[25:15.540 --> 25:17.260]  I'm offering free shipping on any order
[25:17.260 --> 25:20.700]  from my doctorreality.news website
[25:20.700 --> 25:22.580]  if the order contains a copy
[25:22.580 --> 25:24.500]  of income tax shattering the miss.
[25:24.500 --> 25:27.060]  I'm going to suggest you purchase the four pack
[25:27.060 --> 25:29.340]  containing income tax shattering the miss,
[25:29.340 --> 25:31.580]  the business guide to payroll withholding,
[25:31.580 --> 25:36.060]  the business handbook for forms W-9, 1099 in U.S. person,
[25:36.060 --> 25:38.260]  and body science.
[25:38.260 --> 25:39.820]  The first reason to get the four pack
[25:39.820 --> 25:42.500]  is the price is already deeply discounted
[25:42.500 --> 25:44.860]  from purchasing the four items individually.
[25:44.860 --> 25:46.420]  The second reason is that,
[25:46.420 --> 25:48.980]  in addition to it being deeply discounted,
[25:48.980 --> 25:52.420]  you get free shipping by using the code tariffs.
[25:52.420 --> 25:55.140]  Here's a quick overview of each item in the four pack.
[25:55.140 --> 25:56.460]  Income tax shattering the miss.
[25:56.460 --> 25:58.940]  You already know what that's going to give you,
[25:58.940 --> 26:01.500]  which is mountains of incontrovertible proof
[26:01.500 --> 26:03.780]  that the income tax has never been imposed
[26:03.780 --> 26:06.940]  on ordinary hardworking Americans like you.
[26:06.940 --> 26:08.300]  The business guide to payroll withholding
[26:08.300 --> 26:10.740]  is a 13-page item intended to help workers
[26:10.740 --> 26:13.580]  convey the truth we've been discussing today
[26:13.580 --> 26:15.620]  to the company for which they work
[26:15.620 --> 26:17.380]  in order to ask them to follow the law
[26:17.380 --> 26:18.940]  and stop withholding.
[26:18.940 --> 26:21.820]  Not everyone is articulate or can recall legal citations
[26:21.820 --> 26:22.980]  on the spur of the moment,
[26:22.980 --> 26:25.060]  so I wrote the business guide to payroll withholding
[26:25.060 --> 26:26.300]  to help with that.
[26:26.300 --> 26:29.100]  It's also a great primer if you want to wake someone
[26:29.100 --> 26:31.340]  up to the truth of the income tax.
[26:31.340 --> 26:35.420]  The business handbook for form W-9, 1099 in U.S. person
[26:35.420 --> 26:39.060]  is also 13 pages and is intended to help self-employed people
[26:39.060 --> 26:41.660]  communicate to those with whom they do business
[26:41.660 --> 26:44.300]  why they are not required to furnish a form W-9
[26:44.300 --> 26:46.700]  and why the person or entity paying them
[26:46.700 --> 26:50.180]  is not legally required and in fact is not legally permitted
[26:50.180 --> 26:52.260]  to file a form 1099.
[26:52.260 --> 26:54.220]  The handbook is also a great primer
[26:54.220 --> 26:55.300]  if you want to wake someone up
[26:55.300 --> 26:57.020]  to the truth of the income tax.
[26:57.020 --> 26:59.300]  Body science is my groundbreaking work
[26:59.300 --> 27:01.900]  on human physiology that is the key
[27:01.900 --> 27:05.140]  to what so many people say they want,
[27:05.140 --> 27:08.060]  which is to turn around the health of the American people.
[27:08.060 --> 27:10.660]  Sadly, the vast majority of Americans prefer
[27:10.660 --> 27:13.100]  to get their views on nutritional physiology
[27:13.100 --> 27:15.700]  from a corrupt media rather than a physiologist
[27:15.700 --> 27:18.380]  who tears down the false establishment health narratives
[27:18.380 --> 27:22.140]  and gives you the science of getting and staying healthy
[27:22.140 --> 27:25.220]  presented in a way everyone can understand.
[27:25.220 --> 27:27.860]  If you're sincere about getting and staying healthy
[27:27.860 --> 27:30.380]  and you want that for people you care about,
[27:30.380 --> 27:32.460]  you need to read body science.
[27:32.460 --> 27:34.260]  I practice what I preach.
[27:34.260 --> 27:37.020]  I adhere to everything you'll discover in body science.
[27:37.020 --> 27:39.900]  At 65, I'm as healthy as I was at 25.
[27:39.940 --> 27:43.140]  I'm in perfect health, no chronic diseases,
[27:43.140 --> 27:44.660]  no big pharma products,
[27:44.660 --> 27:47.420]  and I haven't been sick a day in years.
[27:47.420 --> 27:49.940]  During the COVID event, I never wore a mask,
[27:49.940 --> 27:52.020]  never social distanced, shook hands with people,
[27:52.020 --> 27:55.460]  hugged my friends, lived life as I always had,
[27:55.460 --> 27:56.860]  and I never got COVID.
[27:56.860 --> 27:59.060]  That's how your immune system will operate
[27:59.060 --> 28:01.300]  if you follow what you learn in body science.
[28:01.300 --> 28:05.620]  So go to drreality.news and pick up a copy of Income Tax
[28:05.620 --> 28:08.100]  Shattering the Mist or the four-pack.
[28:08.100 --> 28:10.300]  Remember to use the coupon code tariffs
[28:10.300 --> 28:11.740]  to get free shipping on any order
[28:11.740 --> 28:13.660]  containing Income Tax Shattering the Mist.
[28:13.660 --> 28:15.820]  Also, purchasing any of my writings
[28:15.820 --> 28:18.060]  helps me to continue to be here for you
[28:18.060 --> 28:21.260]  with these revealing and thought-provoking presentations.
[28:21.260 --> 28:24.540]  If you found today's content intriguing and compelling,
[28:24.540 --> 28:25.540]  please help spread the word
[28:25.540 --> 28:27.660]  by sharing this video far and wide.
[28:27.660 --> 28:29.700]  Thanks for sharing your time with me today.
[28:29.700 --> 28:31.660]  I hope you consider it time well spent.
[28:31.660 --> 28:36.500]  ["Income Tax Shattering the Mist"]