United States Tax Court

Marian Patriot                     	)
Petitioner	     			)  	Docket No. 171-000	
                                        )
v.                                      )
				        )
					) 	Opposition to Motion to Show Cause
C I R, 					)       (2001)
Respondent      			)

1. Respondent did send a set of Stipulations to Petitioner, this is a true statement.
2. Respondent states that Petitioner refused to stipulate. This is a false statement. Petitioner did respond to Stipulations. Attached is copy of that response dated November 14, 2008. Petitioner fully complied with the request for stipulations.
3. Petitioner fully answered stipulation number 1. Stipulation 2 and 3 taxpayer replied in the form of the 5th Amendment. Objection against self-incrimination is classified by the courts as production or answer.
4. District Counsel’s said motion is disingenuous because it does not inform the court the whole truth. The IRS attorney insinuates that taxpayer did not respond to request for stipulations.
5. The District Counsel’s office is using the stipulations procedure to bludgeon a pro se litigant. Stipulations are to be used after both parties aggress on certain facts. District Counsel should have used a Request for Admissions for these questions.
   District Counsel is using the overwhelming resources of the government against an opinion less citizen with no legal education. This violates the code of professional responsibility.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE: I do hereby certify that on this date a copy of this pleading was properly sent to opposing counsel.

___________________________ Date: December 7, 2008

Marian Patriot
Wichita, KS 67211