Whether the lower courts erred in framing the decision under the doctrine of general-intent, using subjective deduction, being inconsistent in objective review, and with absence of specific-intent

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Pursuant to 26 C.F.R. § 1.183, whether the lower courts’ errored when framing decision under the doctrine of general-intent; using subjective deduction, being inconsistent in objective review, and with absence of specific-intent. 2. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1621 and judicial oath in objective review, whether justices of the United States Appeals Court for the First Circuit committed perjury with plagiaristic Tax Court opinion of DONOGHUE. 3. Pursuant to 28 U.S. Code § 454 and judicial regulation, whether the United States Tax Court justice violated the regulation when questioning trial witness. . 4. Pursuant to judicial remand, whether a United States Supreme Court remand puts taxpayers in jeopardy for the same offence where lower court opinion has not considered all objective fact and more importantly circumstance, but has “[clonsidered all of the arguments made by the parties and, to the extent they are not addressed herein, we find them to be moot, irrelevant, or ' without merit.“