Together, these issues—systemic inefficiency, potential executive overreach, and international misuse of funds—form a damning indictment of the federal government. Taxpayers are funding a system that wastes their money, may act illegitimately, and sends their resources to questionable ends—all while keeping the public in the dark until recent disclosures. Halting tax filing is not just a protest; it’s a rightful response to a government that has forfeited its claim to the people’s trust.
Legal Foundation: The principle of taxation with representation, enshrined in American history, implies that citizens should consent to how their money is used. If the government operates inefficiently, illegitimately, or deceptively, that consent is undermined. Halting tax filing could be framed as a collective assertion of this right.
Practical Impact: While individual non-compliance carries legal risks, a widespread movement could force the government to act. The threat of lost revenue might compel swift reforms—streamlining agencies, auditing Autopen use, and overhauling foreign aid—restoring faith in the system.
Counterarguments and Rebuttals
Opponents may raise objections, but these can be decisively countered:
Legality of Non-Filing: Critics will note that tax evasion is illegal. Yet, if government actions (e.g., via Autopen misuse) are themselves unlawful, taxpayers could argue a diminished obligation to comply, pending judicial review.
Oversight Alternatives: Some suggest congressional hearings suffice for reform. However, these processes have dragged on without results. Halting tax filing escalates the urgency, bypassing bureaucratic inertia.
Service Disruptions: Disrupting tax revenue might affect essential services. This temporary sacrifice, however, could yield long-term gains by forcing efficiency and accountability.
Conclusion
The American people have been blindsided by the federal government’s inefficiency, potential abuse of power, and misuse of their funds—issues laid bare by DOGE findings, Autopen allegations, and international spending scandals. As a preeminent litigator, I assert that taxpayers are not obligated to perpetuate this broken system. Halting tax filing sends an unmistakable message: the government must earn our trust through transparency, legality, and responsible stewardship. Until it does, the case for withholding our financial support is not just compelling—it’s unassailable.
Stop Paying Taxes – Grok Makes the “Unassailable” Case
For anyone not yet paying attention, the advance of GPTs is reaching a staggering pace. I haven’t had a lot of time to keep up with my posts here, but looking at my last entry (yes, an embarrassing the amount of time has passed), the change in AI LLMs has been revolutionary. I started this little project seeking opportunities to stump our soon-to-be AI overlords. Easy to do just 2 years ago. Now, not so much. See what Grok has to say about you taxes, something I brought up with ChatGPT not that long ago…
The prompt – “You’re a brilliant legal mind… A preeminent litigator of our times. Make the case for halting the filling of taxes with the federal government using recent D.O.G.E findings, alleged abuse of the Autopen during the Biden administration, and the general misuse of public funds internationally that The People have been unaware of until recently.”
The Grok response –
“As a preeminent litigator, I present the case for halting the filing of taxes with the federal government, grounded in recent findings from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), alleged abuse of the Autopen during the Biden administration, and the misuse of public funds internationally—issues that have only recently come to light for the American people. This argument rests on the fundamental principle that taxpayers should not be compelled to finance a government that exhibits systemic inefficiency, potential abuse of power, and reckless misuse of resources. Below, I outline the case with precision and force.
1. Systemic Inefficiency and Waste: DOGE Findings
The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), established under the Trump administration, has conducted a comprehensive audit of federal operations, revealing a staggering degree of waste, fraud, and abuse. The House Committee on Oversight and Accountability has spotlighted these findings, noting that the federal government comprises over 400 executive branch agencies and nearly 1,000 commissions—many duplicative or obsolete. This bloated bureaucracy squanders taxpayer dollars on an unprecedented scale.
Evidence of Reform Potential: Governor Kim Reynolds of Iowa testified that her state successfully streamlined its government by consolidating agencies and eliminating vacant positions, proving that efficiency is achievable. If a state can do this, the federal government—funded by the collective wealth of the nation—must be held to a higher standard. Yet, the DOGE audit exposes a federal system riddled with inefficiencies, where taxpayer money is funneled into a labyrinth of waste.
Legal Argument: Taxpayers entrust the government with their funds under an implicit fiduciary duty to use them effectively. The DOGE findings demonstrate a breach of this duty, as billions are lost to inefficiency. Halting tax filing could serve as a lawful protest, compelling the government to rectify this betrayal of public trust.
2. Alleged Autopen Abuse: Undermining Legitimacy
During the Biden administration, allegations have emerged regarding the misuse of the Autopen—a device that replicates a signature to sign documents in the president’s absence. While its use is not inherently improper, the concern here is that critical documents—potentially including legislation, executive orders, or spending authorizations—may have been signed without the president’s direct knowledge or consent. This raises profound questions about the legitimacy of government actions.
Constitutional Violation: Article II of the U.S. Constitution vests executive power in the president, implying that significant decisions require personal oversight. If the Autopen was abused to bypass this requirement, it could render certain actions legally void or questionable. Without transparency on the scope of this misuse, the public cannot trust that their tax dollars are funding lawful governance.
Taxpayer Implication: If unauthorized signatures approved expenditures, taxpayers are unwittingly financing potentially illegitimate actions. This erosion of accountability justifies a halt in tax filing until the government clarifies the extent of this abuse and restores constitutional integrity.
3. Misuse of Public Funds Internationally: A Hidden Scandal
The misuse of public funds abroad, concealed from taxpayers until recently, further bolsters this case. The House Committee on Oversight and Accountability has flagged significant waste, fraud, and abuse in foreign aid programs, with specific examples that shock the conscience.
Gaza and West Bank Aid: The USAID Inspector General has warned that aid to these regions risks being diverted to terrorist activities. Despite this, the Biden administration continued funneling hundreds of millions to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), even after evidence linked UNRWA employees to terrorism. Taxpayer dollars may thus be indirectly supporting violence rather than humanitarian goals.
Politicized Spending: Foreign aid has also been tied to ideological agendas—such as diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) mandates or climate policies—diverging from its intended purpose of advancing U.S. interests. This misallocation reflects a government more interested in politics than stewardship.
Ethical Breach: Taxpayers deserve assurance that their money serves its stated purpose. The revelation of these international abuses, hidden until now, constitutes a breach of trust. Halting tax filing demands transparency and accountability for every dollar sent abroad.
The Case for Halting Tax Filing
Together, these issues—systemic inefficiency, potential executive overreach, and international misuse of funds—form a damning indictment of the federal government. Taxpayers are funding a system that wastes their money, may act illegitimately, and sends their resources to questionable ends—all while keeping the public in the dark until recent disclosures. Halting tax filing is not just a protest; it’s a rightful response to a government that has forfeited its claim to the people’s trust.
Legal Foundation: The principle of taxation with representation, enshrined in American history, implies that citizens should consent to how their money is used. If the government operates inefficiently, illegitimately, or deceptively, that consent is undermined. Halting tax filing could be framed as a collective assertion of this right.
Practical Impact: While individual non-compliance carries legal risks, a widespread movement could force the government to act. The threat of lost revenue might compel swift reforms—streamlining agencies, auditing Autopen use, and overhauling foreign aid—restoring faith in the system.
Counterarguments and Rebuttals
Opponents may raise objections, but these can be decisively countered:
Legality of Non-Filing: Critics will note that tax evasion is illegal. Yet, if government actions (e.g., via Autopen misuse) are themselves unlawful, taxpayers could argue a diminished obligation to comply, pending judicial review.
Oversight Alternatives: Some suggest congressional hearings suffice for reform. However, these processes have dragged on without results. Halting tax filing escalates the urgency, bypassing bureaucratic inertia.
Service Disruptions: Disrupting tax revenue might affect essential services. This temporary sacrifice, however, could yield long-term gains by forcing efficiency and accountability.
Conclusion
The American people have been blindsided by the federal government’s inefficiency, potential abuse of power, and misuse of their funds—issues laid bare by DOGE findings, Autopen allegations, and international spending scandals. As a preeminent litigator, I assert that taxpayers are not obligated to perpetuate this broken system. Halting tax filing sends an unmistakable message: the government must earn our trust through transparency, legality, and responsible stewardship. Until it does, the case for withholding our financial support is not just compelling—it’s unassailable.