Alessandro Machi's Daily PUMA. Over 400 RSS feeds instantly updating
News, Science, Political, Sports sites. Plus commentary by Alessandro Machi.
Apparently there have been remote reports of excessive temperature readings because of climate change that were falsely reported.
I feel as if the California weather over the past year has mirrored weather from 40 years ago, with the weather producing record rains and maybe slightly colder weather during the winter.
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
There's something about a flash mob of 50 to 75 taking what they want from a Seven Eleven Store, and then when they leave the store they conscientiously pick out their own bicycle out of dozens strewn in front of the store, that gives us hope for the future.
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
The problem is there are so many distinctions with meaningful differences between the two cases Daily PUMA is somewhat surprised no one is digging deeper to explain the distinctions and the differences, therefore Daily PUMA will.
In the case of not being photographed at a public event, I think the Supreme Court was right in ruling 30 years ago that the couple's rights were violated. This was a public event, publicly sanctioned, and the members who were denied their photo had standing since one of the two was directly connected to the event. For the photographer to have the right to not film them, the photographer would have needed to print a warning ON EVERY SINGLE piece of company related printing that they do not film gay couples under any circumstance. This would give the photographer standing, but most likely, would have resulted in a significant drop in overall business and most likely they would NOT have landed this particular gig.
In the case of the web designer not wanting to design a web space for a gay couple, this is electronic work, it is not work in the physical world, and that is a distinction with a difference. In what universe do we allow someone to be FORCED to do work in THEIR OWN WORK SPACE that goes against their beliefs? The answer is, we don't.
What about the wedding cake designer who refused to design a cake for a gay couple? Again, in a person's own private work space, they have the right to refuse service of their own personal work skills if they choose to do so, to anyone. However, they should make such a notice presently visible in their work space, or, at the very least, be required to make such a posting upon their first enforcement of their rule.
When it comes to the sale of refrigerators, appliances, food, I do not think the provider of those goods can discriminate against someone who has different beliefs because this goes beyond the scope of their own work space. What about a repair shop, can they discriminate? ONLY IF they have it visibly posted on their site and also on all of their advertisements. The prevailing hope would while a small percentage would support this decision, the vast majority would be disgusted and the loss of business would allow competing businesses who do not discriminate, to thrive.
Both Progressive and Conservatives have tried to own the "303 Creative vs Elenis Ruling" for their own political gain, and lost in all of this political gain posturing is the Supreme Court has ruled correctly in all three instances. Those accusing the Supreme Court of politicizing gay rights issues based on these three cases are the ones who are politicizing the issue for their own agenda.
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
Apparently this is fake news. "We're here, we're queer, we're not just shoppers", is what is actually being sung. The very first stanza either the camera person or someone near the camera microphone says "we're coming for your children", but each verse after that, it sounds like the word shoppers is being used, as in, "we're not just your shoppers".
The sound byte clip seemed
so perfect when I first heard and saw it it I was suspicious, but the
woman with her breasts showing influenced me, she
seemed so in your face that along with the caption below the thumbnail I
fell for it. I was reviewing Twitter comments under the original Tweet and a Twitter commenter explained the word shoppers was being used. I
reviewed the video clip and I agree...."We're here, we're Queer, we're not just your shoppers."
This level of frenzied self righteousness will continue to go unchallenged by the mainstream media, remember that the next time the mainstream media is all in on the next Trump Hunt.
Sometimes the Washington Swamp loves to convolute the law so they can force their intended target into a court of law, which now includes the former President of the United States.
Allegedly Trump has denied, stalled, ignored and avoided dealing with repeated requests to return classified documents to the FBI and the present Government.
It
appears the FBI, knowing how Trump would respond to being forced to do
something, entrapped Trump for the purpose of arresting and indicting
him when all they had to do was show up and take what they felt was
theirs. Yes, it's really that simple.
What if the FBI had just appeared one day at Mar Lago and said they were there to retrieve all the classified documents Trump had in his possession? If Trump lets the FBI in and the FBI retrieves all the Classified Documents, then has Trump committed an indictable crime? If the answer is no, then once the FBI showed up and as long as they were allowed in to remove classified documents, then Trump did not violate any laws.
Why
didn't the FBI send a couple of agents over to review and discern which
documents had to be returned, and which ones did not need to be
returned? Unless Trump physically denied access to the FBI agents, Trump
has not done anything worthy of any indictments.
Doesn't Trump have his own Secret Service in his presence? Seems like the Classified Documents could have been picked up by verified FBI Agents at any time with no threat to the FBI's safety, and no need to indict Trump.
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
There is something about the perpetual attacks against Donald Trump going back to 2015 that I find perplexing.
Whenever there has been a breaking news story about something Donald Trump has "done", it seems to involve something Donald Trump allegedly said, not something Trump actually did.
I recall when Donald Trump wanted to find out if a private citizen named Joe Biden who had not yet announced his plans to run for President, had any financial ties to Ukraine, Trump was laughably accused of "digging for dirt".
Possibly the moment we lost our democracy was when the mainstream media actually claimed that "digging for dirt" was a legal term to be taken seriously, and that Trump was in violation and thus should be impeached.
Ever since "Digging for Dirt" gate was concocted, we have all been taken down a rabbit hole in which everything Trump says is illegal, and therefore subject to an investigation and now prosecution, when the reality is, if it is not a written order, IT DID NOT HAPPEN because the person receiving the verbal command has the right of refusal until the order is put in writing.
As Trump is repeatedly tried on a multitude of alleged violations of the law, remember this, ASKING, or TELLING, someone to do something, is NOT ordering them to do it, unless it is in writing, or a threat of being fired actually becomes a firing, I don't think Trump has broken any laws.
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
More sky is melting rhetoric from Juan Cole. Cole shows charts that reveal CO2 is allegedly at record levels. Then Cole begins discussing what CO2 levels were 200 years ago, and also what CO2 levels were millions of years ago. Cole never explains how he knows what CO2 levels were 200 years ago, nor how CO2 levels were known from millions of years ago, but we should just believe him anyways.
Even if Cole is correct, Cole's article avoids discussing if there are any ways to convert excessive CO2 to something else. Are we to believe that over the next 10 years all of civilization cannot figure out how to tame and safely convert CO2?
Are any billionaires offering a reward for the first CO2 "invention" that allows "excessive" CO2 to be converted to something more environmentally safer?
If the end of the world is upon us because of excessive CO2 already in the upper atmosphere, and not one reward is being offered by a billionaire to incentivize a way to reduce CO2 that is already in the atmosphere, then, I can't come up with a then, can you?
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
Having been a former life long Democrat for several decades, I can see why I now usually loath present Democrat Progressive policies, when the Policies don't work, we are lied to and told they do work. However, it appears that Republican Politicians have an inability to innovate better options and solutions to Societal and Environmental Issues Democrat Politician seem to be bungling.
While Democrat Politicians want their first place trophy for attempting to bring feel good solutions that do not work, they manage to so offend Republican Politicians who know the Progressive ideas are not working that the Republican Politicians walk away without offering a better solution other than to fall back on the "Constitution" or the country is a "Republic, not a Democracy".
I cannot do all the topics stated in the title, Abortion, Gun Rights, Global Warming, Caregiving, and Popular Vote, justice in one article. Instead all I can ask anyone who reads this article is to question why each Political Party seems reluctant to outdo each other with great ideas, and instead are comfortable simply jousting against each other at every turn.
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
While MSNBC attempts to discredit the four year Durham investigation regarding the conspiracy to connect Donald Trump with Russia, MSNBC creates a new there there without realizing it.
Quoting from the MSNBC biased editorial masked as news analysis...
"All of the substantiated claims that he (Durham) makes were likewise previously acknowledged in a 2019 report from the department’s inspector general that found that despite some serious concerning mistakes, the Russia investigation was justified."end quote.
51 Former Government Intelligence Officials signed a letter less than 2 weeks before the 2020 Presidential Election claiming the Hunter Biden lap top was a ruse and most likely Russian disinformation. This last minute fraudulent claim of fraud concocted by the Biden Presidential Campaign helped put Joe Biden over the top in 2020, yet MSNBC not only ignores this reality, but attempts to gaslight the Durham Investigation by claiming a report released a year before the 51 signature fraud somehow negates everything in the Durham investigation that has been ongoing for the past 4 years.
The Gaslighting of the Truth never seems to end with MSNBC.
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
I am not against what Daniel Penny initially did to ensure that Jordan Neely's verbal threats in an enclosed area were met with resistance. Unfortunately the news failed to mention if and when the train reached a stop during the 15 minute choke hold.
Was the Train in an actual Train Depot waiting for the Police to arrive? Was the train in between stops and there was no way off the train? Was the Train Moving?
My suggestion is in this type of situation, and assuming the train was not moving and the other passengers had a safe way to leave the specific train where the stranglehold was going on, the specific train should have been Immediately evacuated and Mr. Penny and the other people detaining Jordan Neely should have then left so Mr. Neely would be all alone inside the train cab, presumably still alive.
While it is easier to come to such a conclusion after the fact and from a distance, this was not an airplane where the passengers had no where to go. Maybe it is time for Subway services to make passengers aware of evacuation options when a situation is occurring involving a physical confrontation, and it is safe to leave the actual train cab.
I hope the New York Subway system begins to offer evacuation instructions when it is safe to do so since not doing anything might have created a problem, while doing something with no end in sight created a tragic outcome.
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
Every Detective Show I have ever watched asks one simple question, "Where were you on the night of", or "the afternoon of", etc. This allows the alleged suspect an opportunity to prove where they were at that specific date and time.
The E. Jean Carroll lawsuit against Donald Trump apparently has no specific time or day attached to it. How can anyone mount a defense if no specific date or time is attached to the accusation?
Appearing as a defendant under such loose guidelines would basically allow the plaintiff's attorney to ask any question about anything that might relate to proving that at some point in time Mr. Trump was at the location in question.
It's just such a silly premise under which to have a trial that it may be setting a dangerous precedent. Remember, these are two adults, so it is not as if this was a child who can't remember the exact time and date of an incident.
I wonder if a dangerous precedent has been set in which in the future, an allegation without an actual date attached to it will still be allowed to go forward.
I suppose there are cases where someone states..."On or about", but even in that scenario, the on or about I would presume is related to a specific date. If "On or about" is allowed to be used to describe something that happened during a specific year, or decade, it seems like that would both weaken the ability to mount a defense while placing the defendant in peril of having to answer all kinds of questions in an effort to pinpoint a time the defendant may have been at that location as if that would somehow prove something happened.
There seems to be a nefarious purpose to this lawsuit in which every American can now be accused and tried without attaching a specific moment in time to when the allegation actually occurred.
Carny was once explained to me as playing a game where the entry fee costs more than the most valuable prize a contestant can win in return. This E. Jean Carroll lawsuit sounds like a carny trial, and we are all the worse for it no matter what the verdict is.
If an appeal has to be filed by the defense, How about the Defendant was unable to mount a defense against an accusation that had no date attached to it?
Meanwhile, CNN makes no mention of the ginormous elephant in the room, the lack of a specific time and date attached to accusation. And the assertion that E. Jean Carroll no longer had a social life because of this alleged encounter, was this only brought up in the closing statement, because E. Jean Carroll co-founded a dating site called "Greatboyfriends.com"
Did the defense protest the statement made by plaintiff's attorney that E. Jean Carroll went decades without dates or being married and having children because of the Trump encounter, because this was easily refuted and I hope Trump's lawyer challenged the claim.
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
Before anyone can claim no "Credible Evidence" regarding the 2020 Presidential Election and possible vote tampering existed, one would presume that investigations would have been done. There were no credible investigations regarding the 2020 Elections by the mainstream media, not before, during, or after.
There was no follow up investigations from the mainstream media regarding the many complaints that were cited, depositioned, and then basically ignored by the Judicial system that began claiming no one had 'standing".
Postal employees ignored their subpoenas to appear for questioning.
Basic questions about how much "power" the vote uploaders had to change a vote, or to reupload the same ballots over and over, or why ballots existed with no folds, which if they were provisional in nature should have still been connected to an actual voter but may not have been, were all issues worthy of investigating.
Christopher Krebbs admitted during a 60 minutes interview that were problems on the ground, but dismissed them without mentioning what they were. What type of investigative journalism is this?
This constant MSM gaslighting about the 2020 Elections when no real investigations went on just creates more and more suspicion that there probably was something going on that needs to remain covered up or the news would be earth shattering.
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
The reply below from what appears to be a brainwashed MSM liberal.
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
DailyPUMA was surprised to discover that there such a thing as a Permanent Vote by Mail designation for Los Angeles City.
Above are yearly tallies showing the remarkable rise in vote by mail as the percentage of total votes. Sure seems odd that it takes a week to count mail in votes that are locally mailed in. Local mail is supposed to pretty much be overnight, maybe 2 nights max.
Please feel free to review the links and leave a comment regarding your observations.
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
According to Breit Bart discussing the Judicial Watch Lawsuit,
According to the Judicial Watch Lawsuit
What does all of this mean? It could mean that when the LA county registrar mandated that the Recall George Gascon Petition drive needed 566,857 votes to qualify, it was based on falsely inflated voter registration rolls of 5,668,570.
According to Breit Bart
If Los Angeles and California have been routinely not cleaning up voter rolls since the National Voter Registration Act was passed in 1993, the non compliance has helped insulate elected officials from voter recalls by artificially inflating the number of valid petition signatures needed to place a recall of an elected official on the ballot.
It seems plausible that a judge would prefer to rule in favor of a retroactive reduction in the number of valid petition signatures needed to recall George Gascon, or, it would incentivize non-compliance of Federal Law such as NVRA with the worst penalty being nothing but, compliance? How would that be fair to the Voters who were thwarted from being heard due to bloated petition signature requirements?
I am not sure how a lawyer for the recall George Gascon Petition would argue in court for a retroactively assessing a lower number of required signatures, but there may be an argument waiting to be made in court that would make the 2022 George Gascon Recall Effort instantly valid and whole.
If a judge did nothing more than agree that an instant reduction from 112% to 100% of all LA adult age voters as a way to establish a new, lower Gascon Valid Signature number, the 2022 George Gascon Recal petition would have passed! When we subtract 12% from 5,668,570 overinflated LA Voter Rolls it would decrease LA Voter Rolls by 680,228 voters. This would make the NEW 100% total voter rolls in LA 4,988,342. 10% of 4,988,342 equals 498,348 valid signatures needed for the Gascon Recall to go through. The "failed" 2022 Gascon Recall netted 520,00 valid signatures! The 2022 George Gascon Recall should be declared as having reached the proper signature total, AS IS!
The 2022 George Gascon Recall Petition netted 21,500 more valid signatures than were legally required based on 100% of all LA Adult Voters!
Put another way, the L.A. Registrar's Office required 68,000 additional valid signatures than were legally required for the George Gascon Recall Petition Drive to have been approved.
Wed. Mar 22, 2023 5:51 am, Update: This is a link to the LA Vote total Almanac pictured below.
According to Breit Bart discussing the Judicial Watch Lawsuit,
According to the Judicial Watch Lawsuit
What does all of this mean? It could mean that when the LA county registrar mandated that the Recall George Gascon Petition drive needed 566,857 votes to qualify, it was based on falsely inflated voter registration rolls of 5,668,570.
According to Breit Bart
If Los Angeles and California have been routinely not cleaning up voter rolls since the National Voter Registration Act was passed in 1993, the non compliance has helped insulate elected officials from voter recalls by artificially inflating the number of valid petition signatures needed to place a recall of an elected official on the ballot.
It seems plausible that a judge would prefer to rule in favor of a retroactive reduction in the number of valid petition signatures needed to recall George Gascon, or, it would incentivize non-compliance of Federal Law such as NVRA with the worst penalty being nothing but, compliance? How would that be fair to the Voters who were thwarted from being heard due to inaccurate petition signature requirements?
I am not sure how a lawyer for the recall George Gascon Petition would argue in court for a retroactively assessing a lower number of required signatures, but there may be an argument waiting to be made in court that would make the 2022 George Gascon Recall Effort instantly valid and whole.
If a judge did nothing more than agree that an instant reduction from 112% to 100% of all LA adult age voters as a way to establish a new, lower Gascon Valid Signature number, the 2022 George Gascon Recal petition would have passed! When we subtract 12% from 5,668,570 overinflated LA Voter Rolls it would decrease LA Voter Rolls by 680,228 voters. This would make the NEW 100% total voter rolls in LA 4,988,342. 10% of 4,988,342 equals 498,348 valid signatures needed for the Gascon Recall to go through. The "failed" 2022 Gascon Recall netted 520,00 valid signatures! The 2022 George Gascon Recall should be declared as having reached the proper signature total, AS IS!
The 2022 George Gascon Recall Petition netted 21,500 more valid signatures than were legally required based on 100% of all LA Adult Voters!
Put another way, the L.A. Registrar's Office required 68,000 additional valid signatures than were legally required for the George Gascon Recall Petition Drive to have been approved.
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
All the Gas company had to do was take the hit themselves for one month of really high natural gas prices, and then be more frugal with their own executive bonuses in the upcoming year. All gas paying customers who normally have a 100 dollar or higher gas bill, are STILL OWED MONEY (in my opinion). The credit to their natural gass account should be equal to HALF of the record billing amount of their January 2023, bill.
Perhaps the Gas company is relying on someone filing a class action lawsuit so they can kick their problem down the road a few years by stalling the lawsuit. Call District 12 City Council Member John Lee's office and demand a 50% rebate from your January gas bill.
If the Gas company is not held accountable this time, and if their executives receive their normal bonuses going forward, then where is their incentive to do better the next time?
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
Please look at this LA country Nov. 8, 2022 thirteen Vote count update image, should not every vote update in the first column be linkable? Do not click on the image below. Click here for the link to the actual page this image appears on.
Here is the link to the above image.
If you click on the link, try clicking on any of the "updates" numbered 1 through 13 in the first column. The Updates numbered 1 through 13 don't link to anything! This seems to be an act of omission in which necessary data for transparency purposes, is omitted from the record. Those Update totals exist, and since I like statistics, I want to study the updates. Where are the linkable updates? I won't claim the omission is intentional, but the omission needs to be "updated" and linked to actual vote totals that match the time and date of the update.
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
Judicial Watch
has pulled the scab off of a very serious situation involving Registrars who do
not keep their voter rolls current. It becomes increasingly difficult
to remove an elected official through a recall petition drive because the 10% Petition
signature threshold fraudulently inflates as the number of no longer valid voters kept on the voter rolls keeps rising.
However, the 1.2 million L.A. voters being removed opens up a Pandora's box of issues related to what is the correct number of valid signatures needed for a Recall Petition campaign.
When the L.A. Registrar's office attempted to quantify how many total signatures the Recall Gascon Petition needed to gather, what L.A. Voter roll total were they using? Was the L.A. Registrar's office using a 2020 voters roll that had minimally removed voters from their voter's rolls going back a decade or longer, or were they using an updated 2020 voters roll that included subtracting a significant percentage of the 1.2 million voters that were recently removed from the LA voters roll?
When
the LA Registrar gave the Recall Gascon Committee a signature goal of
566,857 signatures they needed to collect, how many of the 1.2 million
no longer valid voters were still being counted to inaccurately inflate
the Petition Signature Requirement?
The difference in Recall signatures needed to remove an elected official before and after 1.2 million voters has been removed is statistically astounding. 5,668,570 total L.A. voters requires 10%, or 566,857 valid petition signatures for the recall to be approved. However, since we know that 600,000 L.A. voters had not voted in 10 years or longer as of 2022, we can at the very least remove 60,000 petition signatures from the total needed for the Gascon recall to have had enough signatures.
The properly updated number of petition signatures needed to qualify would have been at the most 10% of 5,068,570, or 506,857. The Gascon Recall Committee produced 520,000 valid signatures, also known as 13,143 signatures MORE than what should have been the 2020 Gascon Recall Petition minimum needed to qualify.
The 600,000 L.A. voter roll reduction is a VERY CONSERVATIVE AMOUNT. As of 2020 when Gascon ran for office, the actual number of L.A. voters who should have been removed from the L.A. voter's rolls was probably closer to 650,000 to 750,000, which would have meant 65,000 to 75,000 less valid petition signatures than the L.A. Registrar's office had mandated.
The question that a court needs to decide is what is a fair estimate of the total L.A. voters roll as of 2020 when Gascon was elected. I doubt any court would claim the increasing numbers of L.A. voters who were no longer eligible in 2020 was zero, nor would the court agree that all 1.2 million voters should be subtracted from the L.A. Voters roll in 2020. Clearly a number in the middle would be a fair result, and if that number is 400,000 or higher out of 1.2 million, the Gascon Petition recall already has enough valid signatures. Considering that 600,000 voters had not voted since 2012, 650,000 to 750,000 sure seems like a conservative estimate, which is well above the 400,000 threshold needed for the Recall Gascon Petition to have been accepted, AS IS.
No matter how one slices it, it looks like the Gascon Recall petition already has enough Valid signatures with at the very least, 13,143 petition signatures to spare.
This is the follow up article to the 1.2 million voters removed from the L.A. Voters Roll could reverse the failed 2022 George Gascon recall.
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
The George Gascon recall drive may have been thwarted by bloated Los Angeles voter rolls that most likely inaccurately raised the recall signature threshold needed to recall George Gascon.
The recent removal of over 1 million, 2 hundred thousand voters from the LA voter Rolls may, or may not, have inflated the number of petition signatures required for the George Gascon recall vote. And, even if the argument is made that that was then, this is now, we would then have to ask how long was the voter roll reduction stalled before it came to be.
Voter Roll Removal could become a quid pro quo in which LA Officials were stalling before the voters were removed from the voter rolls, thus inflating the number of signatures needed to recall George Gascon.
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
What is the exact difference between Russian invading Ukraine and the U.S. possibly invading Mexico to curtail the Drug Cartel's influence? Daily PUMA has no answer.
Comparing Russia invading Ukraine for reasons I don't know, with the U.S. invading Mexico to reduce the footprint of the Mexican Drug Cartels are two scenarios that perplex Daily PUMA no end because maybe they have equivalence? If one is not allowed, then why allow the other one?
DailyPUMA wonders how deeply Russia is embroiled in both Central America and Mexico. By attacking Ukraine and having several nations oppose the move, did Russia also make it more difficult for the U.S. to go into at the very least, Northern Mexico to tamp down the drug cartel?
Besides the over one hundred local political candidates who are assassinated every election cycle in Mexico, apparently Avocado farmers have to have Police escorts to get their Avocado crops to market. Donald Trump had proposed the possibility of having to go into Mexico to stop the Cartel's undocumented safe passage charges, tamp down the fentanyl trade, and make it safe for Mexican citizens to run for local political office without being assassinated.
But if the U.S. were to intercede into Mexico, it would most likely be without support from Mexican Political leaders who would have no choice but to oppose such an intervention or risk being assassinated themselves.
What I don't understand about Russia's incursion is Russia is already the largest country on the planet by a 2 to 1 margin over the next largest country. Russia also had two budget surpluses in as row and were probably headed for a record high and third in a row budget surplus. Seems like Russia was already set up well with or without Ukraine under its control. Meanwhile, Europe is pretty much built out, there is not that much room left to grow. Ukraine makes an excellent buffer between Russia and Europe. Putin's unflinching willingness to destroy cities that have nothing to do with the military is pretty much proves Ukraine is needed as a bumper between Russia and Europe.
The Mexican Drug Cartel constant warring among each other is probably causing the smaller Cartels to try and take out the number one Cartel by growing laterally into other regions. The result is ever increasing U.S. fentanyl drug deaths and ever increasing Undocumented crossing into the U.S. who have to pay a hefty fee for safe passage through Cartel controlled land, and an ever increasing encroachment into the farming industry.
Is our entire Political Structure influenced by the Mexican Drug Cartel? I think in California, some politicians, possibly even our Governor and those around him, are influenced by the Drug Cartel. I have yet to hear Gavin Newsom ever call out the Cartels on any issue.
It makes one wonder if both the FBI and the CIA are freaked out about a second Trump Presidency because Donald Trump may actually pull the scab off of Mexico's Drug Cartel and their lethal influence on Americans through the Fentanyl trade and the Undocumented corridor they profit from. Maybe the FBI and CIA, are either compromised by the Mexican Drug Cartel, or have determined pulling the scab off is worse than letting things stay as they are.
Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.
91 year old Fortunata Machi was refused service for a Wheezing Chest by the E.R. even as her Caregiver Son Alessandro Machi begged th...
