A bit of a cheat day for me, but I showed a $1,200,000 horse farm right before this, and was beat. Also, Ian Underwood of the Bardo crew and Croydon school showdown (see this NBC docuseries), is always worth listening to. You don’t have to agree with every word someone says; you do need to consider things for yourself. Restore common sense!
free state project
An Appeal to President Trump to Free Crypto Political Prisoners: Ian Freeman, Ross Ulbricht, and Roger Ver
Join me now for Day 16 of My Living Xperiment: Press Conference for crypto political prisoners Ian Freeman, Ross Ulbricht, and Roger Ver. https://t.co/J3h1UWvBZm
— Carla Gericke, Live Free And Thrive! (@CarlaGericke) January 16, 2025
My full speech:
Ladies and gentlemen,
Thank you for gathering here today. I stand before you to discuss the grave injustices of three crypto-pioneers: Ian Freeman, Ross Ulbricht, and Roger Ver.
Their cases exemplify how the state can deploy false narratives—the “Big Lie”—to tarnish reputations and suppress dissent.
These cases also highlight systemic problems in the federal justice system such as overcharging, over-sentencing, inconsistent enforcement, legal uncertainty, and the stifling of innovation—these LAWFARE tactics undermine the very principles upon which this great nation was founded.
Let’s talk briefly about the power of the Big Lie
Throughout history, we’ve witnessed the state’s use of falsehoods to manipulate public perception. Consider the unfounded claims of weapons of mass destruction that led to the Iraq War, resulting in immense loss, death, destruction, and geopolitical instability.
More recently, we saw the dismissal by the media of the Hunter Biden laptop story, and the initial branding of the highly plausible COVID-19 lab leak theory as a “conspiracy”–showing how easily and quickly narratives can be constructed, dare I say MANUFACTURED, to serve particular agendas.
For example, in Ian Freeman’s case, the state dropped a press release right after his conviction labeling him a “fraudster” even though he was not convicted of this charge. This is purposeful, manufactured misinformation which the media then dutifully spreads simply because the government told you to…
Everyone knows Ian Freeman is a dedicated advocate for individual and financial freedom. Calling him a “fraudster” is a deliberate character assassination aimed to delegitimize his decades long efforts to promote individual empowerment, including financial freedom through crypto-currencies.
The state’s actions against him, and Ross and Roger, reflect a broader strategy to stifle innovation and maintain control over all financial technologies.
Here’s the reality: If they can control your money, they can control you.
Now luckily, President Trump has already promised to pardon Ross Ulbricht, but he too was subject to the Big Lie…
Ross, we all know by now, was “Dread Pirate Roberts,” the creator of Silk Road. Back when he was arrested in 2011, they immediately accused him of heinous crimes, including murder-for-hire—charges that were never substantiated or formally brought. Yet, these unproven allegations were instrumental in securing a double life sentence without parole, just like the “lonely hearts testimony” in Ian’s case was used to garner an 8 year sentence–unheard of for the charges he was convicted for!
Overcharging in order to blackmail defendants into taking a plea deal destroys lives but it also sets a dangerous precedent and creates a silencing effect for future activists. That, of course, is the point.
Take Roger Ver’s case…
Roger, who, com’on, is so clean cut and nice he is known as “Bitcoin Jesus,” has faced relentless legal challenges and was labeled a “tax evader” years after he renounced his US citizenship but just two weeks after he published his book Hijacking Bitcoin, which exposes state corruption and interference in the Bitcoin market. The timing of his persecution is not an accident. They want to silence “Bitcoin Jesus.” Guess he must be onto something!?
We all know overcharging and over-sentencing are totalitarian tools of suppression, but the dirty tactics don’t stop there–Did you know that the IRS raided Ver’s tax lawyers’ offices? No more “attorney-client privilege” for some defendants??? This is the type of thing you’d hear happening in a Communist country…
In all three cases, the DOJ overcharging the defendants, together with each’s manufactured Big Lie, resulted in ultimate over-sentencing, which is how the state punished defendants for daring to take the case to trial rather than pleading out.
Talk about crazy sentences: Ian Freeman got 8 years for “conspiracy to money launder,” Ross Ulbricht received two life sentences without the chance of parole for building a website, and Roger Ver is facing more than a hundred years if convicted.
Again, this reveals a disturbing pattern:
The State lies, then piles on excessive charges and seeks disproportionately harsh penalties. They do this to intimidate and silence the people challenging their unConstitutional actions.
Remember what they did to Aaron Schwartz, who created RSS feeds and co-founded Reddit? They overcharged him so much, he was facing 35 years, that, at the age of 26, he committed suicide, 12 years ago this month.
This tactic of overcharging in order to over-sentence in order to force defendants to take a plea, not only destroys individual lives it also serves as a chilling effect on others, as a warning not to challenge the status quo.
And, this lawfare gets even worse when you consider the inconsistent enforcement we see… the DOJ isn’t hauling the CEO of eBay in for questioning or putting the head of TD Bank in Super Max, instead, the state targets popular “outside the box” thinkers, individuals whose messages of peace and prosperity resonate with large audiences… those of us who recognize the state’s corruption and core rottenness, and call it out…
How can you accuse Ian Freeman of “conspiracy to commit money laundering” for running a BTC kiosk/atm, but no bank managers are being similarly accused and harassed? This type of selective enforcement is just another corrupt lawfare tactic that erodes public trust and undermines the rule of law.
And, on top of that, the actions of the DOJ is killing innovation in the crypto space because…
The lack of clear regulatory guidelines creates an impossible environment for innovation…. Legal uncertainty deters entrepreneurs from pursuing innovative ventures and by targeting people like Ian, Ross, and Roger, the state is stifling innovation across the entire crypto industry—a practice that runs counter to the American spirit of entrepreneurship and progress.
America was built on the ideals of freedom and innovation, and suppressing these qualities threatens the very foundation of our society. (That’s why NH should secede from the federal government and forge our own future–but that’s a different press conference!)
Mr. President, I stand here today to call for clemency
You have personally experienced the weaponization of the legal system—lawfare—used to undermine and discredit.
The parallels between your experiences and those of Ian Freeman, Ross Ulbricht and Roger Ver are striking. Each has faced disproportionate legal actions fueled by political motivations rather than genuine justice.
In light of these injustices, I urge you to exercise your presidential pardon power to rectify these wrongs.
You have already promised to pardon Ross Ulbricht, and I know Free Staters and libertarians across the world are watching very closely to see that you keep your word. I know you will.
In addition, granting presidential clemency and pardoning Free Stater Ian Freeman, and “Bitcoin Jesus,” Roger Ver would not only restore their lives and return them to their communities, but it would also send a resounding message to those in our government who misuse their power to persecute thought leaders, innovators, and dissenters.
In conclusion
The cases of Ian Freeman, Ross Ulbricht, and Roger Ver are not isolated incidents but part of a broader pattern where the state employs false narratives, overcharging, over-sentencing, inconsistent enforcement, and legal uncertainty to suppress anyone who challenges its authority.
All three these men have stated how cryptocurrencies can help end wars and restore peace and prosperity to the world.
Who wants to stop this from happening? Those who get rich from wars, from printing and lending money, those who, in the end, choose to prosecute the brave heroes who stand against such exploitative practices.
We here today stand for truth, justice, transparency, free speech, innovation and the principles upon which our nation was founded.
President Trump, please do the right thing and pardon all three these crypto-pioneers: Ian Freeman, Ross Ulbricht and Roger Ver on Day One.
To sign the petition for Ian Freeman, please go to FREEIANNOW.ORG.
Thank you for your time.
Join me now for Day 10 of My Living Experiment! https://t.co/qRrBiZ2kXy
— Carla Gericke, Live Free And Thrive! (@CarlaGericke) January 10, 2025
Carla Gericke kicks off Manch Talk by saying goodbye to co-host Tammy, and then delves into steps you can take to stick to your New Year’s resolutions. Carla shares her own tips on how she stays healthy and happy as she transitions into her new role as a successful real estate agent, with almost $4 Million in sales. Contact her at Carla (at) Porcupine Real Estate (dot) com.
Here is what I wrote for 2024, and I’m going to do a critical self-audit [LIKE THIS] now.
“Not to brag, by which I mean, to brag, but I lost 2.75 inches around my waist last year, which for an almost 52 year-old, menopausal woman, is… not bad. [MY WAIST GOT FATTER IN THE LAST 6 MONTHS OF 2024 AS MY REAL ESTATE CAREER KICKED OFF–ALMOST $4 MILLION IN DEALS!]
This year, it’s all about that free hanging time. 90 seconds is the goal. 48 seconds is my current best. [I GOT UP TO 59 SECONDS, AND THEN I SIMPLY STOPPED PRIORITIZING THIS, BOO!]
My mantra: I’m in my prime!
But, to be honest, this year has kicked off kind of MEH. [SAME FOR 2025 BUT IN BETTER, WIDER HEALTH lol]
Both Louis and I are just recovering from The Current Fever Thing. My anemia exhausts me, as in it is very difficult to even function after 8pm, which obviously isn’t optimal. Getting this sorted out is a priority for 2024.
Another vast and unchartered territory for me to wade into this year is organizing my clothing situation… Hah! Even just writing that made my palms sweat.
As I’ve been working through childhood issues and become more self-actualized, I have discovered that buying clothes was one of the only “independent” things I could control as a child.
Buying new clothes for boarding school was a “treat” bestowed upon us by our parents, who, sorry Ma and Pa, but I am going to say it, used this “benevolence” as a way to assuage their guilt for leaving us in boarding school while they went gallivanting across the globe.
Choosing my own clothes came to represent both being “grown-up and independent”–“Look at the Big Girl picking her own clothes!” (I was 10) AND it was closely tied to a total lack of control (few children CHOOSE boarding school), resulting, I now see, in me developing a bit of a clingy relationship with my clothing collection.
In journaling last year, I processed some of the excuses I’ve used to avoid doing The Purge (by which I mean, “Deal with your clothes” has been on my goal list for at least 2 years, le sigh).
Many of my excuses boil down to: But what if I need this [knee-length embroidered puff skirt] one day?
Now, this isn’t an insignificant concern, especially when considering after losing the 50+ lbs I’d put on thanks to the S.A.D., a destroyed biome, and too much wine, I was thrilled to rediscover an entire “skinnier” wardrobe awaiting me again.
But now that I have kept the weight off for 5+ years and regained much of my health, maybe it is time to let go of the extra shit, including clothes, that don’t serve me anymore?
I only recently learned “hoarding” can be a childhood trauma response. I’m not a hoarder–I’ve moved too much in life for that–but it is difficult for me to just toss stuff… [ASIDE: AS I READ THIS, MADE VERY LITTLE PROGRESS, OR RATHER, MANAGED TO SPREAD THE CLOTHING PROBLEM FROM 2 LOCATIONS TO… 5? BUT IN MY DEFENSE, I HAVE THROWN SOME STUFF OUT, I HAVE KEPT UP WITH THE JOURNALLING, I WROTE “LEARN TO CULL THINGS THAT DON’T SERVE YOU” AS RECENTLY AS THIS WEEK, AND, AND I THINK THIS IS A BIG DEAL, I ALSO REALIZED THAT THE WHOLE CLOTHES THINGS DOESN’T REALLY BOTHER ME. LIKE, I DON’T PERCEIVE IT AS SOMETHING IN ME THAT NEEDS ‘FIXING,’ OR THAT IS ‘SLOPPY,’ OR ‘DISORGANIZED’. IN FACT, I TURNED IT AROUND IN MY HEAD, WHAT IT MEANS IS I NEED BETTER ORGANIZING TOOLS AND A BIG MASTER CLOSET. HEH.]
But once I made this connection between my inability to throw things away and my past, I have developed a hack: I have become very mindful of the process of throwing things away…
Whether it’s a bill or an old pen, I let my hand hover over the trash can and I take a moment to focus on a sense of joy and freedom in physically letting go. [I DID KEEP THIS PRACTICE UP ALL YEAR. MINDFULLY FOCUSED ON THE ACT OF THROWING SOMETHING AWAY.]
This morning, as the stack of Xmas cards I was grateful to receive last year slid from my fingers, I thought, Yes, more of this… More letting go! [TOSSED THIS YEAR’S TWO DAYS AGO WITH A MENTAL NOTE OF: ‘GOOD GIRL.’]
Do you have a similar challenge in your life that you want to address this year? Something you want to change, where you might identify a physical step that can start to help to underscore the habit you are trying to develop?
What do YOU want to let go of in 2024? And how can I help?” [DITTO FOR 2025! HAPPY NEW YEAR, Y’ALL!]
Learn how to claim self-ownership. It starts with control of your mind. https://t.co/2i68vtrFlD
— Carla Gericke, Live Free And Thrive! (@CarlaGericke) January 4, 2025
Tell me about the Free State Project
Answer
The Free State Project (FSP) is an initiative aimed at moving thousands of libertarians to a single state in the United States with the goal of concentrating their political influence to promote individual liberty, reduce government size, and foster a society based on free-market principles. Here’s an overview of the project:
Origins and Goals
- Conception: The Free State Project was conceived by Jason Sorens, who proposed the idea in 2001 while at Yale University. The idea was to have at least 20,000 libertarians move to one state.
- Selection of New Hampshire: After considering several states, New Hampshire was chosen in 2003 due to its relatively small population, existing small-government ethos, and the famous state motto, “Live Free or Die.”
- Objectives:
- To achieve a “critical mass” of libertarians to influence state politics, legislation, and culture.
- To reduce the size and scope of government intervention in people’s lives.
- To promote personal freedom, economic freedom, and civil liberties.
Strategy and Activities
- PorcFest: Since 2004, the FSP has organized the annual Porcupine Freedom Festival (PorcFest), an event that brings together members of the libertarian community for networking, education, and celebration of libertarian values.
- Political Involvement: Members have run for and won various local and state offices, influencing policy in areas like education, taxes, and regulation.
- Community Building: Beyond politics, the project encourages the creation of libertarian-friendly businesses, schools, and social networks within New Hampshire.
Impact and Criticism
- Impact on New Hampshire: There’s been a noticeable influence on state politics with the introduction and passage of laws reflecting libertarian principles, like those expanding gun rights and reducing certain taxes.
- Criticism:
- Political Polarization: Some argue that the influx of libertarians has led to increased political polarization within the state, potentially alienating other residents.
- Practicality: Critics question whether libertarian ideals can be fully realized in practice or if they might lead to unintended social consequences.
- Demographic Changes: There’s debate over how the project might change the demographic and cultural fabric of New Hampshire.
Current Status
- Although the initial goal was to move 20,000 people, the project has not reached this number officially, but it has significantly influenced state politics and culture. The Free State Project continues to attract individuals who are committed to libertarianism, with ongoing efforts to increase their numbers and impact.
The Free State Project stands as an intriguing experiment in political activism, community building, and the application of libertarian philosophy in a practical setting. Its legacy is still being written as participants continue to work towards their vision of a freer society.
Tell me about FSP leadership
The leadership of the Free State Project (FSP) has evolved over time, with various individuals taking on prominent roles to steer the initiative. Here’s an overview of key leadership figures:
Current Leadership (as of 2024):
- Eric Brakey – As of late 2024, Eric Brakey serves as the Executive Director of the Free State Project. Brakey is a former Maine State Senator, known for his libertarian views and activism. His involvement in the FSP was announced through social media posts, highlighting his transition from Maine politics to leading the FSP.
Historical and Notable Leadership:
- Jason Sorens – Jason Sorens is the founder of the Free State Project. He conceptualized the project while a Ph.D. student at Yale University, publishing his idea in “The Libertarian Enterprise” in 2001. Sorens continues to contribute to the broader libertarian movement, including through his academic work in political science.
- Carla Gericke – Known affectionately as “Queen Quill,” Carla Gericke has been a significant figure in the FSP. She served as the executive director and has been involved in organizing events like PorcFest. Gericke, originally from South Africa, has been a vocal advocate for the project’s principles, often serving as its spokesperson.
- Jeremy Kauffman – Jeremy Kauffman was involved with the FSP board but departed in 2023 after a vote by the board. His tenure was noted for extending the project’s social media reach.
- Board of Directors: The FSP is governed by a board, which includes or has included other notable figures like:
Leadership Roles and Influence:
- Executive Director: This role involves strategic leadership, managing operations, and being the public face of the FSP. The executive director works to advance the project’s goals by mobilizing participants, engaging with the community, and influencing state politics.
- Board of Directors: The board oversees the strategic direction of the FSP, ensuring it aligns with its mission. They also manage organizational governance, finances, and major decisions.
- Event Organizers: Figures like Carla Gericke have been instrumental in events like PorcFest, which are critical for community building and recruitment.
- Political Activists: Many in leadership or influential roles also engage in local politics, either running for office or supporting candidates who align with FSP principles, thereby directly impacting policy and legislation.
The leadership of the Free State Project has always been about promoting the ideals of liberty, individual responsibility, and limited government within New Hampshire. Over the years, they’ve navigated the challenges of growing a movement while maintaining its core values, influencing state politics, and fostering a community of like-minded individuals.
List top 5 challenges for FSP movement
Based on various analyses, criticisms, and the experiences of the Free State Project (FSP) members, here are the top five challenges facing the movement:
- Public Perception and Backlash:
- Challenge: The FSP has faced significant backlash from some segments of New Hampshire’s population and media, who view the movement with skepticism or outright opposition. Concerns include the potential for radical changes to the state’s social fabric, fears of libertarian ideologies being imposed, and the political polarization this has caused.
- Examples: Local resistance, like the case of the Concord City Council’s application for an armored vehicle citing “Free Staters” as a security concern, or the public and media portrayal of FSP members as outsiders trying to take over the state.
- Internal Cohesion and Strategy:
- Challenge: With a diverse group of libertarians, anarchists, and others, maintaining unity and agreement on strategies and goals can be difficult. There’s a wide spectrum of what “liberty” means to different members, leading to internal disagreements on tactics, from electoral politics to civil disobedience.
- Examples: Debates over whether to work within the existing political framework or to engage in more confrontational activism; the expulsion of members for advocating violence or holding views not in line with the project’s non-aggression principle.
- Achieving Critical Mass:
- Challenge: Although the FSP hit its initial goal of 20,000 sign-ups in 2016, the actual number of movers has been lower. The challenge lies in turning signatories into residents who actively participate in the project’s objectives.
- Examples: The logistical challenges of moving, job opportunities, housing, and acclimating to New Hampshire life can deter potential movers, resulting in only a fraction of signatories actually relocating.
- Political Influence vs. Practical Impact:
- Challenge: While FSP members have made gains in local and state politics, translating these into broad, lasting changes that reflect the project’s ideals remains complex. There’s tension between immediate political wins and the long-term vision of transforming the state’s governance and culture.
- Examples: Legislation passed by FSP-affiliated politicians sometimes faces pushback or is seen as catering to a narrow segment of the population, leading to mixed community reception.
- Sustainability and Community Building:
- Challenge: Building a cohesive, sustainable community in New Hampshire where FSP ideals are not just political goals but part of daily life is challenging. This involves not only attracting more libertarians but also ensuring they integrate well into existing communities without alienating locals.
- Examples: Efforts to create libertarian-friendly businesses, schools, and social networks have met with varying degrees of success. There’s also the challenge of maintaining enthusiasm and involvement over time as the novelty of the movement wanes.
These challenges highlight the complexities of executing such a unique political and social experiment, where the ideals of liberty must navigate through the realities of community dynamics, political systems, and personal life adjustments.
Describe an ideal libertarian society
Answer
An ideal libertarian society, as envisioned by many proponents of libertarianism, would be characterized by several key principles and practices aimed at maximizing individual freedom, minimizing government intervention, and fostering a society based on voluntary cooperation and free markets. Here’s how such a society might look:
1. Limited Government
- Minimal State: The government’s role would be severely limited, focusing only on essential functions like protecting individual rights, maintaining law and order, and possibly national defense. Some libertarians advocate for even less, envisioning a society with no government at all (anarcho-capitalism).
- No Coercive Taxation: Instead of mandatory taxes, services could be funded through voluntary contributions, user fees, or private insurance.
2. Individual Rights and Freedoms
- Personal Liberty: Individuals would enjoy extensive personal freedoms, including freedom of speech, religion, association, and the right to privacy. Any form of coercion or aggression against individuals or their property would be prohibited.
- Property Rights: Strong protection of property rights would be central, with clear, enforceable ownership rights over both real and intellectual property.
3. Free Market Economy
- Voluntary Exchange: All economic interactions would be based on voluntary trade, free from government regulation beyond basic fraud and contract enforcement. This would foster innovation, competition, and consumer choice.
- No Central Planning: The economy would be driven by market forces rather than government planning, with prices reflecting true supply and demand dynamics.
- Private Solutions for Public Goods: Even services traditionally seen as public goods (like roads, education, healthcare) would potentially be handled by private entities through market mechanisms, philanthropy, or mutual aid societies.
4. Decentralization and Localism
- Local Governance: Governance would be as local as possible, with communities having the autonomy to set their own rules within the framework of respecting individual rights. This could lead to a variety of living arrangements tailored to community preferences.
- Decentralized Law and Order: Law enforcement could be privatized or community-based, with dispute resolution through private arbitration or community courts rather than a centralized legal system.
5. Voluntary Associations and Mutual Aid
- Community and Cooperation: Voluntary associations would be key to providing services, support, and community governance. Mutual aid societies could handle issues like health, welfare, and education.
- Social Networks: Social bonds would be strong, with individuals relying on networks of friends, family, and community rather than state welfare.
6. Peace and Non-Aggression
- Non-Aggression Principle: This principle would be a cornerstone, asserting that no one should initiate force against others or their property. This ethos would extend to international relations, favoring peace and non-interventionism.
7. Education and Culture
- Freedom in Education: Education would be decentralized, with schools run by private entities, co-ops, or families, allowing for diverse educational philosophies and methods.
- Cultural Diversity: With less state control over cultural norms, there would be a rich tapestry of cultural practices, but all would be expected to respect the rights of others.
Challenges and Considerations:
- Balance: Achieving a balance between absolute freedom and the need for some form of order or community standards would be a constant challenge.
- Equity: Critics often point out potential disparities in wealth and power, suggesting mechanisms for equality might be less robust without government intervention.
- External Threats: How such a society would handle threats from external forces or manage collective action problems like environmental issues remains debated.
This vision of an ideal libertarian society emphasizes individual autonomy, voluntary interaction, and a minimal state, aiming to create a society where people are free to live as they choose, as long as they do not infringe upon the freedoms of others. However, the practical implementation of such ideals involves significant challenges and requires innovative solutions to age-old societal problems.
This week on Manch Talk, we cover several topics from satanic statutes at the State House, to school choice and the City of Manchester’s billion dollar proposal for a new school (no thanks!). We delve into the controversy of American holiday greetings and salutations, and rip off a few BandAids!
Carla has the latest on what’s happening this week in the Free State… Catch Robbie The Fire, vote for your friends, and more!
Interested in the property being auctioned off that I mention at the end? HMU! Carla at Porcupine Real Estate dot com.