Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascon may reverse course on some of his key policy decisions as Public Anger rises.

One wonders if the daily George Gascon exploits by KFI-640 AM co-hosts John and Ken were the difference makers in finally getting Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascon to rethink his penchant for seeming to be more concerned about the well being of repeat offenders than their victims. 

The boiling point for Los Angeles residents finally occurred after a  one a day murder tragedy that involving stellar members of the community being murdered by mentally impaired homeless people who while walking the streets; began stabbing, punching, shooting or kniving to death working members of the community along with attacking those famous for their philanthropy as they resided in their home late at night.

The George Soros funded invasion of Public Defenders posing as District Attorneys has surfaced in several major cities, including San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia and New York City. Maybe the compassionate approach would have worked in Los Angeles if Progressive values did not include waving in as many Undocumented into California at such an alarmingly fast rate one can actually count more Undocumented entering California every year than the total number of California homeless.

Clearly there is a correlation between attempting to provide for an ever burgeoning Undocumented Population and a now dug in Unhoused Population that doesn't want those who live differently, telling them what to do or where to go. George Gascon has become more concerned with the Unhoused and the Undocumented than those who have had a modicum of success who are now wondering why their own concerns and fears are not being considered equivalently by Gascon, aka the victims of crime.

I do not think it is possible to provide for every homeless person in California while the Undocumented continue to enter California every year in higher numbers than the total number of homeless.

Sadly, no one has the guts to say they support Building a Wall to help control the number of Undocumented entering California every year, but I have.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Alessandro Machi runs for 2022 California Governor.

I have lived in California for over 40 years after moving from the Midwest. I still am loyal to my Cleveland Sports Teams, but I was so lucky to watch my folks build their backyard from dirt as hard as concrete into an exotic blend of fruit trees.

During those 40 plus years I was able to go to College at Cal State Northridge, win a prestigious Internship Scholarship with the Academy of Television Arts and Science, have my own video editing and video camera services production company for over 10 years, then be a full time live-in Caregiver for both of my Parents.

My parents had given so much to me, and since I had no children of my own, I was honored to take care of both of them after they had allowed my creative passions to take root and manifest.

While both of my Parents have now passed, I think of them and am reminded of them everyday because I never left the nest. Along the way I have learned so much about how California seems create amazing opportunities, while being sluggish when it comes to really supporting our Seniors.

Over the next 3 months (March, April, May) I intend on making dozens of short videos that detail how I can make California better for homeowners, small business owners, and renters. These videos will all reside on this page.  I intend on keeping everything I post on here, up, because my long vision intention is to correct what California Politics seems to get wrong when it comes to treating their homeowners, small business owners, and renters, with more respect and fairness.

I am on a deadline right now. I have about 24 hours to collect 100 Petition signers so I can qualify for California Governor. I will have already paid a non-refundable application fee of approximately $4,300 whether I reach my petition goal, or not, within the next 24 hours.  

If you are reading this, give me a chance to shine a light on dozens of issues that somehow never get mentioned in the media that involve our Homeowners, Small Business Owners, and Renters.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Trump was right about Tik Tok after Tik Tok stops service to Russia because of the Ukraine Invasion.

Either the mainstream media is lying again, or Tik Tok is incredibly stupid, or China told Tik Tok to stop sending internet videos to Russia. Instead, we are being spun a story that Tik Tok is boycotting Russia. 

One of the only ways to shake up Putin is if all of his constituents realize he is brutalizing a neighboring State for personal reasons.

What better way to get though to Putin than showering the Russian people with videos of people in Ukraine begging Putin to stop destroying the country of Ukraine? What better platform than Tik Tok to do the informing?

Are we really to believe that Tik Tok took proactive steps to punish Russia by stopping Tik Tok service to Russia? I can't think of a dumber plan than preemptively cutting off Russia from Tik Tok instead of having Russia cut off Tik Tok.

Maybe Russia had already cut off Tik Tok so the West spun it around and said that Tik Tok was boycotting Russian Internet? 

Either way, either the media is lying about whom cute off whom between Tik Tok and Putin, or Tik Tok's parent company located in China did Putin a favor by cutting off Tik Tok to Russia, or Tik Tok screwed up a chance to win the hearts and minds of Russians in what might be the best way to get Putin to back down from his invasion of Ukraine.  

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Lew Rockwell's defense of Russian Invasion of Ukraine misses 2 key points.

Lew Rockwell's column attempt's to explain why Russia is right and the rest of the world is wrong. However, what is missing from Rockwell's analysis is Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons. Even if Ukraine became a NATO ally, as long as Ukraine never has nuclear weapons Russia does not have to feel "surrounded". 

Also not sure how Putin's Russia, the country with the largest amount of land and the largest exporter of Oil and Petroleum has to feel "threatened" and surrounded by NATO when Russia could kick everyone's butt economically by having a superior budget surplus, and sharing more wealth with its populace because of its booming petroleum and gas export trade.

Instead, Putin's Russia has chosen to not help its own people even with a Budget Surplus by instead waging an unnecessary war. Defending Russia's actions because Russia is AFWAID of doze dastardly Westerners is highly ridiculous when Putin is riding high with his Petroleum and Gas Exports. 

Only a coward would feel sorry for Putin when he could could be doing so much more for his own people. Putin even raised taxes during his booming Gas and Petroleum empire. Putin is an Arse hat for not doing Russia better than the U.S. is doing Capitalism. 

The fact that Putin can't see his winning hand when it is already in his hands without going to war somewhat proves Dictators will always be flawed as they crush dissenting viewpoints because of an inflated sense of self importance.

Putin's Russia already has an export windfall that only an Angry Dictator would be too obtuse to see.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

How Environmentalism and Global Warming Advocates gave Putin Free Money to build up his Military and go on the Offensive.

While I support the efficient, non wasteful use of Petroleum resources, the reduction of U.S. production of Petroleum helped pave the way for oil prices to rise. Since Russia's economy and military economy rely on oil and gas exports, the higher the price of petroleum, the more export profits Putin can put into his military.  While the U.S. created inflation with more and more trillion dollar bailouts, Russia was creating higher profits from higher priced tangible oil exports.

Putin is playing with free petroleum money as Russian petroleum export profits continue to rise. While petroleum conservation can actually lower petroleum prices, as petroleum suppliers other than Russia drop out, Putin and the Russian military, win. Russia's war in Ukraine was funded by the ever increasing profit margin Russia gets from exporting Petroleum. 

In 2016 Barack Obama said....Russia “doesn’t produce anything that anybody wants to buy except oil and gas and arms. They don’t innovate.” - Barack Obama

When one considers that George Soros funds most of the adrenalized, anti-America sentiment in the United States, including ending the use of Petroleum, the anti-petroleum sentiment has now brought the world, war. If oil prices keep going up, this will continue to fund Putin's War efforts going forward.

Petroleum consumption reduction in the U.S. while exporting more oil at lower prices could help reduce Russia's profit margins from their oil exports, otherwise Russia's big three exports of Petroleum, Natural Gas, and Arms will apparently be enough for Putin to profitably continue his war efforts.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Whenever the Media calls Trump's claim of a rigged 2020 election false, they always say there was no "Widespread" Voter Fraud.

This CNN Quote "Trump and his allies in Congress, including Miller, have attacked the legitimacy of the 2020 election despite there being no evidence of widespread fraud" is why I think there was 2020 Voter Voter Fraud.

I have noticed that every time the Mainstream Media accuses Trump of Falsely claiming that there was "widespread 2020 Election Fraud",  they use the word "widespread".

But what about "Targeted" 2020 Election Fraud? There were around 155 million votes cast in the 2020 Election, less than 100,000 targeted votes could have changed the outcome. 100,000 targeted votes is .000645 of the total votes cast. Is .000645, or .0645% of the 150 million votes cast really considered widespread vote fraud? 

.0645% is one vote out of every 1,500 votes cast could have changed the Presidential Election outcome. Is altering one vote out of every 1,500 votes considered Widespread Voter Fraud? And, if a vote was simply flipped from Trump to Biden, then one in 730 Trump votes would be needed to be flipped to give the Election to Biden. I just don't consider flipping one vote from Trump to Biden out of every 730 Trump votes widespread fraud when one Ballot Harvester could have been harvesting dozens of ballots in Sanctuary cities for Biden.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Seattle eliminates bicycle helmet law because it allegedly is a form of racial or economic profiling.

Hearing the pro's and cons of eliminating the Seattle, Washington bicycle helmet law is something a fan at a tennis match would appreciate.

On first glance many might say it is ridiculous to not enforce a bicycle helmet law that apparently has cut bicycle head injuries in half, and to then blame the removal of the Bicycle Helmet Law on racism seems even more appalling. However, Police apparently pull over and cite minorities at a significantly higher rate than White Bicyclists.

Before going back and forth on this issue, let's go to the end game, the kids. Kids ride bikes. When kids see many adults not wearing helmets when the Adults are riding their bikes, the kids may wonder why they have to wear a helmet. This to me is the number one issue. A head injury to a child may be more lethal than to an adult because a kids skull is still maturing and thickening up. The neck muscles of a kid are not as strong as an adult, so when a kid falls off of a bicycle, the damage and medical cost may be extraordinary. Think of the kids as the cons of the Helmet law are discussed below.

Homeless and Minority bicyclists are cited by the Police at a much higher rate than White Bicyclists for not wearing a helmet. What if a bicycle helmet citation had no financial penalty, but was more of a pep talk to encourage the cyclist to wear a helmet and "by the way, if you can't afford a helmet, here is this nifty coupon you can redeem at the bike store for a free helmet"? Would that be so terrible? Some would still yes because it would still give the Police an opportunity to "snoop", "harass", or monitor the comings and goings of minorities who ride without wearing a bicycle helmet.

So Law Enforcement actually positively acting to help ensure the safety of minorities would still be considered a bad thing? Perhaps some Racial Justice Advocates may believe that if the same un helmeted minority is repeatedly cited for not wearing a helmet, even if there is no actual fine imposed, it still be a way to track the helmet less cyclist's movements and could be used to profile the helmet less cyclist as evidence of a lifestyle that is short on safety and long on carelessness? 

Or perhaps the helmet less homeless cyclist might keep selling their free helmet for food, clothing, bike repair, or drugs?

Strangely, this situation reminds me of Voter ID laws. For some reason requiring everyone to have a Photo ID who wants to vote is considered racist, even if the Photo ID were given out for free and even though ironically a Photo ID is required to apply for any Government related entitlement or program.

Ultimately, this may be less about race and more about the right to live among those who comply with bicycle helmet laws while not complying with those same laws. It appears that the goal is to be less traceable in public, and I believe that is proverbial elephant in the room that hides under the cover of racial profiling where none was intended.

When Racial Justice Advocates lobby for the rescinding of laws and ordinances that actually do reduce accidents and serious head injuries, I think mostly of the kids and how they will be influenced to be less careful because the rights of less responsible adults have to be respected.

However, not requiring a bicycle helmet DOES become a teachable moment for responsible Parents regarding a discussion they should have with their kids..."Whenever you see someone riding a bicycle without a helmet, either they are too poor to have one, or they don't want to do their part to avoid tragic head injuries. Either way, you wearing your helmet helps the Hospitals to afford taking care of those who don't wear a helmet and get injured."

I am not sure reducing Head injuries by wearing a helmet allows resources to be spent on the more careless, but at least it's an explanation in a world where adults just don't care how their actions negatively influence kids.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

COVID gut, Flu gut, and Virus gut have been ignored for the first 2 years of the Gutdemic.

Oct. 26, 2022 update. I forgot I had written this article. I just went through a 2 week stomach flu / food poisoning gut battle. I may write a book about it. I ended up losing 15 pounds over a 2 week period of time.  Once I recovered I only gained back about 2 to 3 pounds max. The rest was fat, most from my gut. Here's the weird part, I have lost all desire to eat anything sweet. I was once told that our gut actually influences our desire for sweet food. I think it may be true. The only thing sweet I have eaten once I recovered has been watermelon.

End of Oct. 26, 2022 update.

 

If you have excess belly fat you may have COVID gut, Flu gut, or Virus gut. While a vaccine may help reduce your chance of getting COVID-19, fat gut may mean you have to keep taking new vaccines as new strains of COVID come out.

This Nobel Peace Prize winning virologist discusses fat gut and its role in COVID-19. I already started my fat gut reduction diet when I discovered this article but for me it reaffirms my beliefs. I personally created a diet that works great for me. Although I have only lost four pounds so far, none of it is water loss and it is all from my gut and I already feel a lot better.

For just 100 dollars I will send you my secret COVID-gut diet. 

KIDDING! Here it is. I start my day by drinking at least 2 eight ounce glasses of water in the morning. This does several good things. It washes out any toxins that may have built up from the day before. The 2 glasses of water keep me from feeling hunger pangs. When I do eat my first meal some time after the noon hour I am not thirsty so I am not co mingling fluids with the eating or digesting of my meal, yet I am already well hydrated from having my morning water.

My second meal is several hours later, and that is it, I basically substituted one meal for at least 2 full glasses of water (not necessary to take them at the same, I space them out). As people age, too much water becomes less water than at a younger age so know your limits when it comes to drinking water because the heart doesn't pump as strongly the older we get. Drinking too much water can be dangerous among the elderly.

Although I have only lost four pounds so far, I can tell it is all from my gut and none of it is water loss because I am drinking two glasses in the morning of water, plus another two glasses throughout the day, but never during or within two to three hours after eating.

Sadly, people with too much belly fat have been the unwitting troops of Government Vaccine regulators who like to point out how only drug and vaccine care can save the humans and that a fat, vaccine compliant human is to be lauded while a healthy, non overweight, non vaccinated human is the devil; when it is possible that food care, health care, and fat care also matter just as much, and maybe more, than if one is vaccinated or not.

Our Government's Vax centric mentality is so tunnel visioned that nobody knows how fat gut works to make someone vulnerable to COVID-19. It may be possible that a person does not even have to lose all of their fat gut to fight off future attacks of COVID-19, but what might be certain is losing some belly fat could make a big difference.

To reiterate, it's not just the drinking of water that can help one lose belly fat, it is strategically separating drinking water with eating and then separating drinking water with the digestion of the food that makes the water before noon diet work so well.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

The Arbery, Chauvin and Potter Murder trials expose a flaw in our judicial system, Vengeance Masquerading as Justice trumps Intent..

In the Ahmaud Arbery, Kim Potter and Derek Chauvin murder trials the judicial process was not based on finding the truth, the judicial process empowered Vengeance masquerading as Justice at the expense of the Truth.

In each of these three murder trials, yes, I think all three parties were guilty, but, not guilty of murder, and there in lies the problem. The Prosecutor sets the charges and the Defendants must fight for acquittal against these charges.

While innocent until proven guilty has been the de facto belief system in the United States regarding our court, the U.S. court system is actually based on the Prosecution setting the parameters for the trial that is to go forth, while the defense gets no say in what the Charges could be. This seems more like, guilty and good luck being found innocent because we stacked the charges in such a way that the jury must find the defendants guilty of inflated charges because there is no other option being presented.

Lets examine all three trials one at a time. Kim Potter mistakenly shot and killed Daunte Wright once Mr. Wright escalated the situation by trying to flee in his car. Clearly Kim Potter did something wrong, but the prosecution set the case up as either Murder, or Officer Potter walks. What if Officer Potter's defense could have presented their own Defense platter of charges and the Jury chooses which set of charges they will consider once all the evidence has been presented. Now we are talking dimensional chess in which both sides can legitimately convey their version of events and let the jury choose which set of charges they wish to consider.

Potter's defense could have offered the following three lesser charges, 

• unlawful pull over, 
• dereliction of duty after a tragedy has occurred, 
• Improper series of actions that allowed the defendant Wright access to his key and the driver's seat.
• Not guilty on the above charges

Meanwhile the Prosecution powers forward with their manslaughter and Murder charges.

Suddenly, the jury has a real choice. Obviously the three charges the Potter Defense could have put forward would be a reasonable alternative for the jury to consider if the jurors truly believed the shooting incident was an accident.

Instead, the jurors were caught in the unenviable situation of either innocent, and Officer Potter walks, or guilty of charges that maybe the Jurors thought were excessive but without any other choice, would go for the excessive charges because no other guilty options exist.

I will add to this topic later today.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Kyle Rittenhouse entire interview creates radically different vibe than shortened 10 second segment being used by Progressive Media that shows Kyle saying F.U. Lebron.

This can be a learning opportunity for the public. When news sites pull a very short clip from the middle of an hour long interview and pump it as showing Kyle Rittenhouse as being...whatever, whatever, Remember this is what was done to Donald Trump over and over.

Don't show a longer version of the clip, don't show that there were actually four people and a dog in a room, make it look like Kyle was running the show with a female side kick instead.

here is the REAL VERSION of the interview....

Progressive media is kicking around a version that basically shows a few seconds of Kyle before he says F.U. Lebron. The difference between watching the show, and watching just that short segment, is mind bending.

Now you know how Progressives cheat when they want to assassinate someone's character, they cherry pick a short enough clip that changes the narrative of what actually happened.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Kyle Rittenhouse Trial reveals how Armed Protectors of Property in the future can remove all doubt about carrying weapons

As I watched the Kyle Rittenhouse Trial, day 7 (November 10. 2021) it dawned on me that there was one point the Prosecution has repeatedly made...Lawbreaking Protestors should be afforded the identical rights that a lawful Protestor is entitled to, a point the Defense apparently was unable to challenge while Kyle Rittenhouse was repeatedly called a Killer by the Prosecution.

Going forward and in the future if there are identical types of Protests in which the Police have stood down and the Lawless Protestors have hidden among the Peaceful Protestors, and then peel off in small groups to vandalize, terrorize, commit arson and looting, Armed Volunteers may need to do something BEFORE they brandish weapons.

Volunteers who are committed to protecting property may need to have two types of Volunteers, the Unarmed Camera Volunteers who carry video cameras and not weapons, and the Armed Volunteers who carry actual weapons. Before the Armed Volunteers can brandish their weapons, the Camera Volunteers will need to document situations in which the non Peaceful Protestors are not heeding lawful orders designed to stop lawless behavior, lawless behavior being defined as behavior or actions that result in property destruction, rioting, looting, vandalism, or the building of fires or gathering of projectile objects.

To repeat, in the future, Volunteers will need to show video evidence that an escalation from Camera Volunteers to Armed Volunteers was necessary to protect property and prevent arson, looting, weaponizing, vandalism and rioting from occurring.

Volunteers will need to have two different units, an Unarmed Camera unit, and an Armed unit. The Camera unit can gesture they have armed back up if unlawful acts continue, but documentation  needs to exist that the Lawless Protestors were not complying with orders to not cause damage, mayhem, and fires BEFORE the armed volunteers can come forward to the edge of the properties being protected.

As abusive and somewhat ridiculously premised the Prosecution was towards Kyle Rittenhouse not needing to use his weapon when it was obvious Mr. Rittenhouse was dealing with Lawless Protestors who wanted to harm him, something positive can be taken from the Rittenhouse trial going forward. Armed Volunteers CANNOT be the first line of defense if Police are not present. Unarmed Camera Volunteers have to try and keep the peace and once it becomes evident they are in danger or are having to put themselves in danger to prevent fires or damage to property, then Armed Volunteers can come forward to stop illegal protesting that is going to lead to loss of property and the endangering of lives by starting fires or lobbing projectiles.

The Kyle Rittenhouse trial MUST BE ABOUT MORE THAN GUILTY OR INNOCENT, sensible rules need to be put in place going forward so we don't allow Big Government to make a proclamation that the mentally unstable have the right to destroy property without impunity from anyone who is not the Police even when the Police have had to stand down because they were the cause of the Protesting to begin with.

The real danger for Society from the Rittenhouse Trial is the Government using whatever verdict is reached to outlaw the armed protection of private property when Police are not present.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

New York Times fails to mention from where infrastructure components will be purchased.

Just curious where the components needed for all of the infrastructure projects just approved will be purchased from. Equally important, how much money will go towards bloated salaries during delays caused by lack of necessary components?

The California rail project has pretty much been a financial boondoggle for a decade as people who oversee the project get paid very handsome salaries even when nothing is built.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Texas Firefighters Union invests 25 million in Crypto rather than invest in their own State's Infrastructure.

There is something sniveling about any State Union Pension fund that invests massive amounts of their pension money outside of their own State. Whether or not the Texas Firefighters Crypto Investment crashes, The Texas Firefighters Pension fund could not find anything in Texas to invest in?  

Seriously?  

And if this crypto fund crashes, the pension fund investment will be bailed out by guess whom, the same people who could have directly benefited from the 25 million being directly invested within their own State, Texas Taxpayers.

Why are Democrats so hot to spend trillions on infrastructure on a Federal level while looking the other way at how little State Sanctioned Unions are investing on infrastructure in their own State? 

Considering Texas is considered a Red State all the more suspicious why Democrat Politicians don't question the practice of investing taxpayer generated wages into out of State pension investments.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

The Strange Supreme Court case of Nancy Pelosi vs Joe Biden

Nancy Pelosi and the Biden White House sued each other over a lawsuit first filed by Pelosi when Trump was President. 

Apparently it was completely acceptable to sue Trump over using Defense budget funds to fund the Wall, the core reason Trump was elected to be President, but suddenly Joe Biden sees the error of Pelosi's ways and wanted the lawsuit set aside as the two duked it out in the Supreme Court.

California has become a legal scourge against common sense when it comes to Building a Wall. While California clamored for more and more funding to allow homelessness to thrive California also demanded the flood gates be left open so more Undocumented enter California every year than there are homeless. Any move Trump made in regards to Building the Wall in California was instantly shadowed and responded to by Gavin Newsom and former California Attorney General Xavier Becerra.

Now that Biden is President, he realizes just how insane Nancy Pelosi's lawsuit was and he wants it rescinded. Pelosi disagrees and the two filed legal briefs in opposition to each other with the Supreme Court. These are the people in control of our Government?

Here is an excerpt from the article...

Trump wanted $5 billion in a fiscal 2019 spending bill to build a wall, one of his main campaign promises. Congress appropriated only $1.375 billion for fencing. But after the shutdown, Trump announced plans to transfer up to $8.1 billion from other funds for the border wall construction.

The Democratic-led House argued the move violated the Appropriations Clause in a way that usurps Congress’ authority over spending — and a key part of the lawsuit was whether the House by itself could go to the courts to stop the spending.

A panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled in 2020 that the House had the right to sue, which Speaker Nancy Pelosi called at the time “a strong victory for the Constitution and the rule of law.”

This year, the Biden administration asked the Supreme Court to erase that ruling, arguing that it could put federal courts in the middle of an “infinite” number of spending disputes between a president and one chamber of Congress.

The House countered in a brief that future courts would be unlikely to read the D.C. Circuit opinion to apply to other situations because of the “remarkable circumstances — unique in our nation’s history,” that caused the legal fight in the first place.

Also, the House argued that the appellate court’s ruling did not address many of the other more substantive issues in the case, even as basic as whether the House could jump over other procedural hurdles. 

So Progressives and the White House fought with each other over Pelosi's Insurrection against the will of the voters who wanted a Wall Built. Now Pelosi continues to fan flames over January 6th, 2021 which was a reaction to the constant attacks against Trump during his tenure.

The Supreme Court took the clever way out, stating that since Donald Trump is no longer President, the lawsuit has no standing and therefore it is as if it never happened. But the lawsuit did happen and millions of American Citizens will go with either higher taxes or less entitlements because of the resources that will continue to be diverted to anything related to the Undocumented who continue to stream in, in record numbers. Because there is no wall lots of Instant Entitlements with the names of the Undocumented continue to be  earmarked in exchange for their future vote.

Progressive constituents who don't read other viewpoints may soon have to consume their Kool Aid by the Boat load. Maybe that explains what is inside the record number of backlogged cargo ships on the West Coast.

Build the Wall so U.S. Seniors can receive the full extent of their Entitlements they spent decades earning.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

CDC Home Quarantine Policy an 18 month work in Progress, Part II.

For the first 18 months of COVID-19, NO treatment protocols were suggested during home quarantine that might reduce the overall impact of COVID-19 were the person to actually get sick. 

But now, there is a COVID Drug that may be very effective that can be given during Home Quarantine. 

It seems as if the CDC is fine with drug remedies, even if it takes 18 months to come up with one.

Suddenly, now it is a big deal among the medical community that there was no treatment protocol available during Home Quarantine because now there is a DRUG one can take to allegedly reduce the effects of COVID-19.

Has healthcare become Drug Care in the United States? The Mainstream Media, Twitter, and Progressives blamed Donald Trump for 600,000 COVID deaths and we will never know how many COVID-19 deaths could have been prevented if the Mainstream Media had not attacked Trump's efforts to discover if any existing drugs or treatments might have been effective. 

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

CDC Home Quarantine Policy an 18 month work in progress.

According to the CDC, the vaccines do not prevent transmission. For the first 18 months of COVID-19, NO treatment protocols were suggested during home quarantine that might reduce the overall impact of COVID-19 were the person to actually get sick. 

But now, there is a COVID DRUG that supposedly is very effective and can be given during Home Quarantine. 

It seems as if the CDC is fine with drug remedies, even if it takes 18 months to come up with one.

Suddenly, it is a big deal among the medical community that there was no treatment protocol available during Home Quarantine because now there is a DRUG you can take to allegedly reduce the effects of COVID-19.

We don't have healthcare in the United States, we have Drug Care. Everyone blamed Donald Trump for 600,000 COVID deaths when for that entire time no Home Quarantine Protocols were in effect, but now there are.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Texas Abortion law fraught with inconsistencies.

The 2021 Texas Abortion Law did not go far enough. Since a man's sperm is required to create a circumstantial situation where an Abortion may be desired, all men who are the direct cause of an Abortion or the desire to get an abortion should be DNA identified and logged into a database of men who create unwanted pregnancies.

Additionally, all men who produce fertile sperm should be required to take an in person class educating them that there is no such thing as free sex with a woman who is fertile.

If the purpose of the Texas Abortion law is to stigmatize Abortion, and therefore penalize those who have abortions, then the men who created the situation for the Abortion should be equally identified  DNA databased and financially penalized so woman can review who to watch out for in the future.

If the Man wanted the pregnancy to come to term, and duly states so, they would go into a different DNA data base, one that states Father is willing to accept financial responsibility for Unwanted Pregnancy. 

And to ensure the Father is not just taking the easy way out, the Father would be required to pay monthly child care payments even if the child is aborted, the 18 year's worth of proceeds assisting orphans and single family homes instead.

If you are a guy and you think the above is outrageous, probably at least some women out there would say to you is....F.U., literally.

Men should either Man up and stay out of the issue of abortion, or, for those Men who choose to have a voice against Abortion, take financial responsibility for wanting their voice heard for all unwanted pregnancies regardless of whether or not the fetus is aborted.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Texas 2021 Abortion Laws point to a larger issue not being discussed.

The 2021 Abortion laws in Texas point to a larger issue. Americans are over taxed and Democrats use the over taxation to curry favor with the Undocumented. Democrat policies overtax Americans so Democrat Politicians can provide Instant Entitlements to the Undocumented and win their eventual vote when they become U.S. Citizens. 

Interesting California statistic to consider...at age 21, only 17% of Californians are Republican, by age 55, the number of Californians who consider themselves Republican shoots up to 55%, more than a 200% increase!

In Texas, without a border wall, the streaming in of hundreds of thousands of Undocumented on a yearly basis places a tax burden on the State and other States as well. Undocumented pre-natal or post natal healthcare can be of an astounding amount. In California, 10 to 15 Seniors could remain in their home for a full year, with a full time live-in Caregiver, for the price of ONE Undocumented Premature birth.

How about a compromise, build the border wall to reduce Undocumented Migration, and Texas can ease its anti abortion laws knowing that more taxpayer revenue is available for tax paying Americans. Until this happens, Americans are actually having less babies because they are over taxed, and part of that tax money is going to pay for the babies of the Undocumented.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Why can't 3 million homeowners who are in mortgage forbearance pay with Home Equity?

We don't think of our alleged heroes as being self important narcissists, but such a case can be made for the FED and our Medical community. 

When it comes to COVID-19, the lack of hundreds or even thousands of clinical trials devoted to any and all methods of reducing the risk of death or serious health issues from COVID-19 does not seem to be a priority to our vaccine centric Medical Heroes. Home Quarantine could prove to be an incredible opportunity to do all sorts of Clinical trials to see if there are any early treatment protocols that can fend off a weeks later dangerous outcome.

When it comes to Mortgage forbearance, the Fed is dishing out money at zero percent to banks who in turn are offering very low interest rates to those who "qualify". Meanwhile Jane and Joe Homeowner are in arrears on homes they have accrued home equity in at an equivalent to double, triple, or even higher ratios than the amount of forbearance they owe. Why can't a forbearance homeowner have the option of trading off of their increase home equity to square off their COVID-19 related forbearance?

There are homeowners with half a million dollars of home equity that the FED won't tap into so the homeowner could be paid a modest interest rate of say 4%, and in turn that equity could be re distributed to other homeowners at 5% or 6% who didn't qualify for a super low interest rate. Why can't a homeowner with plenty of home equity create home equity loan opportunities through their local bank to those who do not qualify for a conventional home equity loan?

Most don't realize that a private loan of $100,000 at 9.9% can cost 10 to 12 times more in interest rate charges than if that person could have tapped into a Home Equity line of credit at 4% because the private loan is charging interest on the full amount of the loan from day one, whereas the Home Equity line of credit only charges interest on the amount being used. 

Example: A $100,000 private loan at 9.9% costs 825 dollars per month in interest only. However, a $100,000 Home Equity line of credit at 4% in which the homeowner would like to tap $3,000 dollars per month would cost 10 dollars in interest rate charges the first month, 20 dollars the second month, 30 dollars the third month and so on, it would take approximately 12 months until the same amount of interest was charged on the Home Equity line of credit as was being charged in just the first month on the private loan. But even after 12 months, the actual interest charge is still only around 120 dollars per month as compared to the 825 dollars per month on the private loan. So after one year, the interest rate difference is still more than six times. 

Just as importantly, the higher interest rate charges from the get go mean the total amount of the loan that is actually available to the loanee is going to be considerably less, as much as 30,000 dollars less after two years when loan costs are added in!

While there is definite risk to having homeowners live off of their own home equity line of credit, there are many benefits to homeowners who are looking and planning for their future and don't want to be forced into a knee-jerk decision all at once, which is what could happen to 3 million homeowners in the late months of 2021. For those who would argue that the homeowner had plenty of time to plan for what to do during the forbearance period, that is not a fair assessment. One cannot easily plan a future when the present is in turmoil.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Why I am offering an 8% Annual Interest Rate that is both insured and backed up by a future Reverse Mortgage.

In as few words as possible, I can save $40,000 if I wait 2 years and 2 months to do a reverse mortgage versus doing one right now. I would like to share that $40,000 dollars savings with a few investors by offering a generous 8% annual return with a quarterly dividend. If an investor of mine were to find another 8% offer out there (probably won't), one could take their quarterly dividend and reinvest and increase their annual return to around 8.4%.

I can happily discuss how this once in a lifetime situation has arisen, but let's do it by phone so I can keep this article brief. On the phone you can interrupt or ask me to repeat something to fully understand. It is not complicated. If you want a paper trail, we can email back and forth. I have nothing to hide and abundance to share.

 I am offering an annual 8% return, a quarterly dividend, and the original investment amount GUARANTEED to be paid back by Oct.  05, 2023.

Meanwhile, Banks are paying 0.6% for their savings accounts, a somewhat questionable way of motivating their customers to invest in their Stock Market offerings from their bank locations THAT ARE NOT GUARANTEED and have RISK (read the fine print in case you thought otherwise).

But back to me. I have capped the total investment opportunity at $150,000 to ensure an excellent LTV so that your investment is guaranteed to be returned by Oct. 05, 2023. If you call and I don't answer, you will hear a cheerfully demented message from me proving my trustworthiness. Ok, it won't do that but it will alert me that you have called. I do not have caller Id so if you do not leave a number, we will both be forlorn and sad.

sincerely,  Alessandro Machi

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Why Daily PUMA supports a sugary drink tax.

Years ago I made a food tasting discovery that surprised me involving extreme sugary drinks.

If I purchased a soft drink that had reduced sugar (NOT Zero sugar BS, but reduced sugar) in it with a slice of Pizza that had too much salt in it, I couldn't taste the soft drink's less sugar flavor, not because it had less sugar, but because the Pizza Slice had too much salt in it.

And there in lies the reason why a Sugary Tax drink is a good idea. Surgary drinks force other vendors to amp up the ingredient that they use to make their product "tastier" to the tongue. Most of the time this would be salt or seasonings.

Too much salt requires another product consumed at the same time have too much sugar, and too much sugar can require another product being consumed at the same time have too much seasoning, and so on.

No one wants to take the first step if they are competing with other products that cheat.

In an unsalted nutshell, too much sugar in a drink is CHEATING as it requires other vendors to add excessive seasoning to "blend in". It's really that simple.

I did a grape juice test once. Grape Juice has a LOT of sugar per 8 ounces, one of the highest of any fruit juice and it may even be higher than most soft drinks and beer. I tried diluting Grape Juice and discovered 33% to 40% grape juice mixed with 67% to 60% water tasted fine. I APPRECIATE getting a more sweetly condensed Grape Juice Bottle because it is like getting an extra bottle and a half for free when it is mixed with water at the percentages mentioned above.

However, when products are sold with the higher sugar percentages and then consumed that way, it most likely leads to combining  unhealthy levels of other foods and the seasoning's they use, therefore should be taxed.

If Grape Juice manufacturers had a clue, they would market their product the way toilet paper companies market their products in which they claim one roll is like 3 regular rolls.

One container of Grape Juice is like getting another 1 and half bottles for free, and it is better for the environment than transporting liquids that don't require dilution.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

How anti vaxxers are being set up to be ruined at any time in the future.

A scene from your future if you decide not to get the COVID-19 vaccine shot???     

A person has been sued, accused of either giving someone else COVID-19 through a contact tracing mafia, or, are simply being discredited as a trustworthy witness because they have not worn a mask in a restaurant, and lied about it. The Defendant has been called to the stand by the prosecution.

"Isn't it true you have openly lied in a public setting, putting dozens of others in danger?"

"No".

"Isn't this an image of you going into an Italian Restaurant without a mask?"

"Yes".

"Were you asked if you had been vaccinated?" (a rhetorical question since a restaurant can be shut down if they don't ask).

"Yes".

"And what did you say?"

"I said I had been vaccinated".

"Which was a lie?"

"I was hungry".  (court room erupts in laughter, including the jury).

(Judge pounds gavel). 

Order in the court!

"Infecting others who could then die, because you lied, is that funny to you?"

"No".

"So you lied about being vaccinated, endangering everyone in the restaurant, just so you could eat?"

"Yes".

The Jury grimaces in unison.

End of scene.

That's going to look pretty bad, but this could be in your future if you have not been vaccinated and don't wear a mask in ANY indoor setting, whether or not you were asked if you were vaccinated.

As time goes on this could change if enough people develop health problems from being vaxxed, however even that can be spun by the mainstream media into "they would have been worse off without the vax, so they are still ahead".

What makes the "did you get the vaccine shot" question even more ghastly is people who got sick from COVID-19, or were infected and fought if off, cannot get their own COVID-19 card that states, "have been sick from COVID-19, have recovered and now have COVID-19 antibodies as a result."

DailyPUMA suggests people who did not get vaxxed but have tested positive for the COVID-19 antibodies DEMAND their own type of COVID-19 verification / immunity card that states they have COVID-19 antibodies. 

Or, Are we to believe a vaccine creates superior antibodies than the human body naturally creates when the body successfully fights off COVID-19 without any additional assistance from a vaccine?

Lets say the person who is on the witness stand is not being sued by someone who allegedly got COVID-19 from them. Let's say the person is a character witness. The same evidence is shown, the person has to admit they were lying, and the suddenly their character is called into question because they lied so flippantly over whether or not they had received the vaccine "just because they were hungry."

If a person lies about getting the vaccine and they are to appear in court to give testimony the opposing attorney can assassinate their character by proving the person has lied in the past because they were hungry. 

Consider the five following scenarios:

1. Those who have not gotten sick and have no antibodies, 
2. Those who have not gotten sick but have the antibodies and are considered     asymptomatic, 
3. Those who have gotten sick, recovered, and have antibodies, 
4. Those have gotten the vaccine, 
5. Those who gotten the vaccine and also have natural anti-bodies prior to getting the vaccine.

There probably are a couple more scenarios I have not presented here, but the point is it appears that only vaccine related scenarios will have legal immunity, that is disconcerting and may become an unfair and inaccurate litmus for deciding if a person is a liar or not.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Is Kamala Harris a closet Republican making a desperate plea through her Guatemala Trip to change parties?

It is difficult to isolate the most satisfying moment of Kamala Harris's recent trip to Guatemala to discuss the massive exodus of people to the U.S. since Joe Biden became President a few months earlier.                   

Was Harris's most satisfying moment when she channeled Donald Trump and told Guatemala "do NOT leave your country, I forbid it". 

Or, was it Harris refusing to go to the border so she could be ambushed by hundreds of News Photographers who could then retire reselling their photos of Harris at the Border to salivating Conservative news sites, not to mention Biden supporting news sites, heck, even Anarchists wanting to burn it all down sites would love to have Harris posing with Children in cages at the border. 

Perhaps even Progressive sites using the Border photos with Harris and friends could hold power over Harris's political future. Imagine a child holding the children's book Harris wrote asking her to  autograph it to further propagate the false story about Harris having the government purchase her book to give out as part of gift bags to Undocumented Children at the border.

Or, was it Harris giving herself a high grade, just as Donald Trump would have done if he had made the same trek to Guatemala and said the same things as Harris said.

If ever there was a Politician needing to switch sides, it is Kamala Harris. Harris is a former Prosecuting Attorney, how can this not be obvious to everyone that the Republican Party needs to lure and rescue Harris away from the Democrat Party so we can watch the Dem Party implode, and rather quickly.

Trump / Harris, 2024, here we come!

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

The obvious solution to the Jon Rahm Premature Disqualification.

The media is sometimes too quick to report what has happened, and to slow to report on the solution. The Media has become Wash, Rinse, Repeat, with no Agitation.

The PGA should allow Jon Rahm to play, Sunday, June 06, 2021 AFTER all other Players and Fans have gone through first. 

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.