Liberty Liberally - Vol II Issue II - February 2022

From the Journal of Joshua Fryfogle

Liberty, Liberally Volume II - Issue II

February 2022

Alaska

by Joshua Fryfogle

Liberty, Liberally, is at the center of The People’s Paper, literally and philosophically.

Liberal Arts are synonymous with philosophical thought.

This publication (Liberty, Liberally) is actually mine, whereas The People’s Paper (and MAS Magazine) are made public by members of the public each month. I’m not the publisher of those papers - I’m a steward instead. My team works hard to facilitate freedom for the People in our community.

My sense of duty to those publications (The People’s Paper and Make A Scene) is expressed earnestly, here in the pages of Liberty, Liberally, which is found here in the center of the pages of The People’s Paper. My heart is opened up, here in your hands, to help you understand why I would devote my life to lifting your voice.

Liberty isn’t something that can be represented. It can’t be assigned to a proxy. The People’s Paper doesn’t publish anything, the People do. They make the decision to send it in, to make it public, and we agree to print their sincere expressions of conscience.

But Liberty, Liberally, allows me to remind our readers why The People’s Paper exists.

The supporting philosophical orientation that is required for The People’s Paper to remain true to its mission is broad.

It is the Liberal Tradition, it is the founding philosophy of the West, that each individual is, by nature, free already, and that they need only realize their freedom. This happens in the mind before it happens in the social milieu.

I’v been writing my whole life. Songs, poems, all manner of writings, really.

My interest in the liberal arts is lifelong.

All the world’s a stage

At the center of my working life, in everything I’ve chosen to do with my professional life, is this aspiration to amplify the voices of the community, and to vivify their communication. It is this idea, that a Free Society can be peaceful and prosperous if individual rights are respected, that steers my ambitions.

And we have stages too Acting out our ages Working our way through Poets write our lines

My decision to start publishing my writings was arrived at after nearly 15 years. I could have published my writings all along, alongside the other community members who make use of our public service. (I’ve written much more than I’ll ever publish.) My worry was that as the attendant of The People’s Paper, and thus the People, my own use of the pages of The People’s Paper would send the wrong message. For this reason, I’ve only occasionally published my own writings in Make A Scene or The People’s Paper.

And we just play our parts

It’s conundrum, really. Liberty, Liberally, solves that problem.

Until our part is done

Though I would have been within my rights, and within my purview to publish my own essays in The People’s Paper, I would have risked reinforcing idea that you, the reader, are only that.

But you, dear reader, have all the rights that I have. You, the individual, have just as much right to freedom of the press that anyone else has, regardless of academic credentials. Freedom of press is for everyone.

Waiting for our time Our cue for when to start Nothing new is made No new song be sung We only make believe

This poem was inspired by the oft-quoted Shakespearean monologue in ‘As You Like It’, Act II Scene VII

I’ve tried to explain this ethos to as many as would listen these last 15 years.

But I’ve also tried to avoid the pitfall that other media companies have always fallen into. By not publishing my writing in every issue, and sparingly when I do, The People’s Paper could not be confused as The Josh’s Paper.

Sometimes, it’s what you don’t say that says the most.

Donate. Subscribe.

Support.

907-373-2698

www.LibertyLiberally.com

Liberty, Liberally

www.LibertyLiberally.com

From the Journal of Joshua Fryfogle

Volume II - Issue II

Liberty, Liberally

2

Fifteen days to slow the spread You can’t believe a word they said Looking back, in your head You can’t believe the words you’ve read

Written August 29, 2021 There is that famous quote, attributed to Churchill, “History is written by the victors.” There is some debate as to the origin of the phrase, or at least its sentiment, that sentiment being: those who win the battles write the books.

In fact, there are many written records that predate Churchill - and that perhaps he’d read - that point to this idea. It was not a new thought, but of those who have expressed that thought in various languages, Churchill was definitely the dominant historical character, and that being the case, it is usually attributed to him.

You might say that Churchill was the victor, rewriting the history of that very statement, simply by his saying it.

Still, those inclined to do so can dig up old books, and find that same sentiment, reiterated again and again. So this shows the modern thinker that the victor can not only write the history, but re-write history, over and over. This is not because we cannot research and reassign the credit for that statement to a series of thinkers throughout time, but because we do not do so. Our apathy accepts that those we revere are surely worthy of reverence. Our ego, combined with apathy, creates the potential that we will misunderstand history, all while written books with more accurate accounts collect dust on countless shelves.

Then came the internet...

In the modern world, where most information is only stored in the digital format, our human apathy is no longer the only threat to our understanding of history. Now, those who would mislead the people, in the pursuit of profit and power, can simply delete those records that are inconvenient to their interests.

Before, the propagandist could only bend the truth to a certain point, banking on the willful ignorance of the populace to prevent their researching and reading otherwise. Now, the propagandists are able to bend reality into a completely new shape, because conflicting accounts can be hidden from view, and those who would remind the world of those forgotten facts can simply be removed from the high-traffic internet platforms.

Yet we’ve been all too eager to turn over this sacred, civic engagement to exactly those who lack the moral mandate that truth be told. The People are apathetic, and that is part of the problem. Thus the other oft-quoted phrase, “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”

Truth be told, that aphorism was probably originally, “"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." George Santayana was perhaps the one who deserves credit, but unlike Churchill, Santayana is detached from his famous aphorism. We’ve forgotten him, though his perspective is repeated, time and time again.

Modern victors are powerful like Churchill, but lack the individuality required for a moral dilemma to arise.

Never will the corporate “person” struggle with the right thing to do, as Churchill certainly struggled, because the profitable thing to do is all a corporation has the right to do.

An editable history, as has arisen from the internet age, compounds the effect of our apathy. When society drifts back towards the power and control model of Monarchs and Totalitarian tyrants, that is when society tends to review history with more interest. When things revert, and absurd propaganda becomes difficult to ignore, that’s when humanity tends to look back to our history, and to reassess our future. But how can we, if history is an online database? How can we trust that what we see online is accurate? Without written records, our records are rewritten, and rewritten again. The victor will always be the corporation that has control over that record, because history is written, and re-written, by the victors.

—— There is no record of Churchill speaking or writing the phrase, “History is written by the victors.”

We’ve gotten a surprising number of donations from community members at The People’s Paper and Make A Scene Magazine over the years, and recently it’s increased with the publication of Liberty, Liberally.

We’ve also received many requests for subscription services, requests to mail Liberty, Liberally, and our other publications to people near and far...

So we thought, why not make it easier to donate, and get something in return, too?

Fifteen days to slow the spread You can’t believe a word that’s said Looking back at things instead If it’s all just in your head?

Fifteen days to slow the spread All you get is blue and red

by Joshua Fryfogle

Ballot Stuffing Ballot stuffing is a phrase that we’ve come to use, colloquially, to represent a simple, common form of election fraud. It’s been depicted in pop culture, and described in history.

It’s important that we take pause and consider that “ballot stuffing” is likely the most common type of election fraud - but why? Why would those who seek to skew election outcomes resort to stuffing ballots into the ballot box? Why not simply lie about how many ballots were cast? Why go to the trouble to create fraudulent ballots?

It’s simple, really. If anyone raises concern about the outcome, if the outcome is within a certain margin of error, then the first thing that will happen is a recount of the ballots.

Recounting ballots is quite common, in fact, because it is common for elections to be close - because the two-party system has overwhelmed the process. As a result of two-party dominance over our elections, close races are commonly decided by the simple recount.

A recount, then, is not a tool to determine election fraud, except in those cases where the fraudsters are foolish and unfamiliar with finer points of election integrity. No, a recount is simply a tool to count the ballots one more time.

This is because human error exists, not because of suspicion of fraud.

In Arizona, in one county (Maricopa), they’ve (almost) completed a forensic audit of that county’s 2020 election. I say ‘almost’ because election officials have resisted turning over subpoenaed materials, and continue even now to refuse. Still, a few months ago the auditors of the election released a considerable report for public review.

It is many pages long. When they did a presentation before the AZ Senate regarding their findings, it took many hours.

Churchill actually did say, in a speech before the House of Commons on Jan. 23, 1948:

“For my part, I consider that it will be found much better by all parties to leave the past to history, especially as I propose to write that history myself.”

With a minimum $8 per month donation, you’ll receive a copy of each publication - and even special publications and other things that might fit in a Manila envelope!

Thanks so much for your words of encouragement and financial support over the years. We take your trust very seriously, as we steward content from you and your neighbors onto the printed page. It’s an American tradition which we are blessed to uphold.

www.LibertyLiberally.com

Liberty, Liberally

Fifteen days to slow the spread You can’t believe a word you’ve said You have to keep your family fed But all you get is blue and red

Now that we’ve clarified what a recount is, what it does, and why, on to the subject at hand.

The victor, in the internet-age, is not a warlord or tyrant, but a corporate “person” who doesn’t care at all about truth. That corporate entity exists for the express purpose of profit. It isn’t burdened by conscience, because it has none of its own. It’s a legal person, but not a human being. It doesn’t worry with right and wrong, and has no morality of its own, except those malleable mores that change with board membership.

So history, then, if controlled by corporate masters, will only record those things that are advantageous to those who control the communication of such information. Before, with books, the bending of reality was recorded when it was first written, thereby becoming a reference for future generations.

Lockdown What a strange thing to call it Hunker down Like it’s wartime you called it Shut down downtown Online or call in

At the beginning of that report, as a matter of course, they did some housekeeping.

They explained that, while their forensic audit was always about the validity of the ballots themselves, and not about a simple recount of the ballots, they still performed a basic recount of the ballots prior to beginning their forensic investigation.

This makes perfect sense, to simply make sure that they’ve received as many ballots as were publicly reported.

Considering that the election officials of Maricopa County resisted and refused court orders - and continue even now it makes perfect sense that the auditors would would want to verify the count before moving forward with their forensic examination of their election.

A recount was never the goal of the forensic auditors, who were investigating fraud. A recount is a common tool to correct human error - innocent human error that inevitably occurs from time to time. In fact, when a recount if performed because an election outcome was within a slim margin, it is more common to find minor discrepancies than to not. If it weren’t a close call, then we assume that these predictable and honest errors would not amount to enough to change the outcome.

An audit as was performed in Maricopa was forensic in design. It’s important to understand what they mean by forensic.

They were looking at the ballots themselves, one by one, looking for evidence that the ballot box was stuffed.

Ballot stuffing being the common way

www.LibertyLiberally.com

Lock down What a weird way to say it Business down There’s no way to pay, it’s All ‘round, falls down We all better pray, it’s

that elections have been defrauded, and recounts being a means of determining honest human error and nothing else, the goal of the audit in Arizona was never to “recount” the ballots.

The corporate media, however, immediately seized upon the fact that the forensic auditors did a ‘recount’ and the results were within the predictable margin of error that is found in most elections.

The question is why? Why would corporate powers ignore the body of the report from the forensic audit, and misrepresent the initial recount as being the goal of the forensic audit? Why would all of the corporate press echo is false narrative? There is literally a report that is many pages long, that documents considerable evidence that more than enough votes were fraudulent than necessary to flip the presidential results for 2020. Not only were there enough fraudulent votes exposed by the forensic audit to overturn the outcome statewide, but this was only one county.

The implications of this are of great public interest, yet the corporate media isn’t interested.

Now, I didn’t vote for Trump, and never have. I have always voted third party for the Presidential race. My interest in the outcome of this forensic audit is not because I want Trump to be President.

It’s because I am keenly aware of the ongoing efforts of corporate media to prevent third party candidates from being heard. As a third party voter, I can’t help but be suspicious of the elections in our nation. My suspicions are not paranoia, nor partisan, but based on my experience in supporting candidates that aren’t allowed a voice by the corporate media. I’ve seen how the corporate media works to control election outcomes.

The point of this essay is not to prove election fraud. I am not even asserting that the election was stolen by writing this, but I am pointing to the lockstep lack of curiosity by the corporate media to look into this novel forensic audit. I suspect that, as has always been historically true, ballot stuffing is the most common form of election fraud.

That being the case, I believe that ballot stuffing has occurred without being noticed over the years. I suspect it might systemic, this ballot stuffing scheme. That’s not paranoia, because there are literally laws in place, processes implemented in our elections, that are aimed at assuring public confidence in the outcome of elections in our nation.

Of course there are.

For four years, we heard the Clinton campaign, along with the entire establishment, assert that the 2016 election was stolen. Ad nauseam, they advertised the idea that Russia colluded with Trump to steal the election. After all that time, the exact opposite has been exposed. A Russian national was just recently indicted, and this most recent indictment tied that Russian national back to the Clinton campaign. This indictment was the most recent, but two previous indictments, of an FBI agent and a lawyer, also implicated the Clinton campaign.

While the corporate media were willing to pursue the baseless claims of Russia/ Trump collusion for four years, they are not curious at all about these real indictments of Clinton cronies.

Neither are they curious about the body of the forensic audit report, only the first few paragraphs. Neither are they appropriately concerned about Ghislaine Maxwell - another Clinton associate - accused of child trafficking to rich perverts.

“C’mon, man.” - Joe Biden

From the Journal of Joshua Fryfogle