From cwsiv at juno.com  Wed Nov  3 07:55:26 2021
From: cwsiv at juno.com (Carl Spitzer {C Juno})
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2021 06:55:26 -0700
Subject: [Rushtalk] Hurray Virginia has turned
Message-ID: <1635947726.16273.10.camel@linux-7k5b.site>

The ridiculous commies are crying for their mommies.

CWSIV

____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Get Norton 360 with LifeLock starting at $9.95/month.*
https://store.netzero.net/account/showService.do?serviceId=nz-nLifeLock&utm_source=mktg&utm_medium=taglines&utm_campaign=nzlifelk_launch&utm_content=tag995&promoCode=A23457
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211103/12970183/attachment.html>

From cwsiv at juno.com  Thu Nov  4 09:08:05 2021
From: cwsiv at juno.com (Carl Spitzer {C Juno})
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2021 08:08:05 -0700
Subject: [Rushtalk] Time change Sunday Nov 7
Message-ID: <1636038485.31995.1.camel@linux-7k5b.site>

funny thing church missed announcing it this year.

CWSIV

____________________________________________________________
Sponsored by https://www.newser.com/?utm_source=part&utm_medium=uol&utm_campaign=rss_taglines_more

Girl, 9, Uses Unconscious Dad's Face to Save Her Family
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/6183f75ae6bbb775a6c10st01vuc1
Rescued 4-Year-Old Doing Well, With New Charges in Case
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/6183f75b115c4775a6c10st01vuc2
Video Shows Suspect Dive From 55-Foot Bridge
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/6183f75b3214a775a6c10st01vuc3

From quaylejohn at aol.com  Fri Nov  5 21:36:38 2021
From: quaylejohn at aol.com (John  A. Quayle)
Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2021 03:36:38 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Rushtalk] Hurray Virginia has turned
In-Reply-To: <1635947726.16273.10.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
References: <1635947726.16273.10.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
Message-ID: <1967482265.1026728.1636169798046@mail.yahoo.com>

 
 
Schlichter: The Majority of Virginians Are 'White Supremacists'
 Kurt Schlichter????READ MORE??? 
-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Spitzer {C Juno} via Rushtalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
To: RushTalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
Cc: Carl Spitzer {C Juno} <cwsiv at juno.com>; opensuse-offtopic <offtopic at lists.opensuse.org>
Sent: Wed, Nov 3, 2021 9:55 am
Subject: [Rushtalk] Hurray Virginia has turned

 The ridiculous commies are crying for their mommies.

CWSIV

____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Get Norton 360 with LifeLock starting at $9.95/month.*
 NetZero.com/NortonLifeLock_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://galene.csd.net/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211106/117b50c3/attachment.html>

From cwsiv at juno.com  Wed Nov 10 09:06:05 2021
From: cwsiv at juno.com (Carl Spitzer {C Juno})
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2021 08:06:05 -0800
Subject: [Rushtalk] [Fwd: The unvaccinated are looking smarter every week]
Message-ID: <1636560365.16691.8.camel@linux-7k5b.site>

 


Published: Oct 16, 2021
Author: Thomas T. Siler, M.D.

There is a massive propaganda push against those choosing not to
vaccinate against COVID-19 with the experimental mRNA vaccines.
Mainstream media, the big tech corporations, and our government have
combined efforts to reward compliance and to shame and marginalize
non-compliance. Their mantra says that this is a pandemic of the
unvaccinated. Persons who choose not to vaccinate are characterized as
unintelligent, selfish, paranoid people who don't read much and live in
a trailer park in Florida (or Alabama, or Texas, or name your state).
Never has there been such an effort to cajole, manipulate through fear,
and penalize people to take an experimental medical treatment.

However, as time has passed with this pandemic and more data accumulates
about the virus and the vaccine, the unvaccinated are looking smarter
and smarter with each passing week. It has been shown now that the
vaccinated equally catch and spread the virus. Vaccine side effect data
continues to accumulate that make the risk of taking the vaccine
prohibitive as the pandemic wanes. Oral and IV medications (flccc.net)
that work early in the treatment of COVID-19 are much more attractive to
take now as the vaccine risks are becoming known, especially because the
vaccinated will need endless boosters every six months.

First, let's address the intelligence of the unvaccinated. Vaccine
hesitancy is multi-factorial and has little to do with level of
education or intelligence. Carnegie Mellon University did a study
assessing vaccine hesitancy across educational levels. According to the
study, what's the educational level with the most vaccine hesitancy?
Ph.D. level! Those can all have been awarded to liberal arts majors.
Clearly, scientists who can read the data and assess risk are among the
least likely to take the mRNA vaccines.

The claim that there's a pandemic of the unvaccinated is, therefore,
patently untrue. As a retired nurse from California recently asked, "Why
do the protected need to be protected from the unprotected by forcing
the unprotected to use the protection that did not protect the protected
in the first place?" If the vaccine works to prevent infection, then the
vaccinated have nothing to worry about. If the vaccine does not prevent
infection, then the vaccinated remain at some risk, and the unvaccinated
would be less likely to choose a vaccine that does not work well.

The mRNA vaccine efficacy is very narrow and focused on the original
alpha strain of COVID-19. By targeting one antigen group on the spike
protein, it does help for the original alpha strain, but it is clear now
it does not protect against Delta strain and is likely not protective
against any future strains that might circulate. It also appears that
the efficacy wanes in 4-6 months, leading to discussions about boosters.
Top Articles By American Thinker

The Left's Psychiatric Weapon

Several authors have pointed out that vaccinating with a "leaky" vaccine
during a pandemic is driving the virus to escape by creating variants.
If the booster is just another iteration of the same vaccine, it likely
won't help against the new strain but will, instead, produce
evolutionary pressure on the virus to produce even more variants and
expose us to more side effects. Why, then, is this booster strategy for
everyone being pursued?

This vast Phase 3 clinical trial of mRNA vaccines in which Americans are
participating mostly out of fear is not going well. It is abundantly
clear for anyone advocating for public health that the vaccination
program should be stopped. Iceland has just stopped giving the Moderna
vaccine to anyone which is a good step in the right direction. Sweden,
Denmark, and Finland have banned the Moderna vaccine for anyone under
the age of 30.

VAERS, our vaccine adverse effect reporting system, showed at the
beginning of this week 16,000 deaths, 23,000 disabilities, 10,000
MI/myocarditis, 87,000 urgent care visits, 75,000 hospital stays, and
775,000 total adverse events. The VAERS system is widely known to
under-report events by 1-10%.

Eudravigilance, the European reporting system now associates 26,000
deaths in close proximity to administration of the vaccine.
Whistleblower data from the CMS system (Medicare charts) showed close to
50,000 deaths in the Medicare group shortly after the vaccine.

An AI-powered tracking program called Project Salus also follows the
Medicare population and shows vaccinated Medicare recipients are having
worse outcomes week by week of the type consistent with Antibody
Dependent Enhancement. This occurs when the vaccine antibodies actually
accelerate the infection leading to worsening COVID-19 infection
outcomes. Antibody Dependent Enhancement has occurred previously with
trials of other coronavirus vaccines in animals. The CDC and the FDA are
suppressing this data and no one who receives the vaccine has true
informed consent.

The Rome declaration has 6,700 medical signatories attesting that the
handling of the pandemic amounts to crimes against humanity for denying
the best medical treatment and continuing to advocate for harmful
vaccines. The evidence is right in front of Americans to end the
propaganda and mass mask psychosis.

The media narrative of perpetual fear is falling apart. Norway, Sweden,
and Denmark have ended all COVID restrictions and are doing much better
than the US, UK, and Israel, three countries that continue to vaccinate
into the pandemic. Mexico, Guatemala, Indonesia, almost all of Africa,
and parts of India have low vaccination rates and are doing much better
than the US, something attributed to their managing the pandemic by
using Ivermectin.

Over 500,000 people attended the Sturgis motorcycle rally in August and
there was no super spread of COVID-19. Football season started in August
and stadiums around the country are packed with 80,000 fans yelling and
screaming with no masks. There have been no superspreader events, yet
the students are forced to go back to masking in class. This makes no
sense.

If the vaccine is so important why do our government leaders and illegal
aliens not have to take it? Currently, 13 states that are Democratic
with high vaccination rates have the highest "case" rates (using a
faulty PCR test), while Republican states are all doing better. How does
this happen?

It should be clear that the government has manipulated COVID to create
perpetual fear, so we'll hand it our liberty. In this giant battle
between our government and the unvaccinated, I hope enough people will
refuse to comply so that we can unite to stop this madness.

I know this decision is very difficult for many people when it comes to
losing their job. To the vaccinated, please don't take any boosters for
you'll just be perpetuating the risk of side effects and new variants.

If we allow the government to decide this medical decision for us, it is
a short step for the government to say it can decide other medical
decisions for you, e.g., all persons over 75 never be resuscitated;
people may have only three children (or two or one) with mandatory
sterilization for women; or refusing the government's demands will see
you denied health care.

Is this the totalitarian state you want to live in? If you are proudly
vaccinated now and on the government side, what about the next
government mandate, when you're on the other side, coerced into a
decision you don't want, how will you feel then?

It is obvious that the government (with the Fauci subset), the media,
and big tech, are trying to divide us and take away the freedoms we have
enjoyed as Americans. I am praying that all who call themselves
Americans can unite to end this medical tyranny and regain a free
America before it is too late. Peacefully resist and do not comply. 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/10/the_unvacci
nated_are_looking_smarter_every_week.html

____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Get Norton 360 with LifeLock starting at $9.95/month.*
https://store.netzero.net/account/showService.do?serviceId=nz-nLifeLock&utm_source=mktg&utm_medium=taglines&utm_campaign=nzlifelk_launch&utm_content=tag995&promoCode=A23457
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211110/26c82020/attachment-0001.html>

From cwsiv at juno.com  Thu Nov 11 09:33:14 2021
From: cwsiv at juno.com (Carl Spitzer {C Juno})
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2021 08:33:14 -0800
Subject: [Rushtalk] Here Are the Arguments That Persuaded the 5th Circuit To
 Block OSHA's Vaccine Mandate for Private Employers
Message-ID: <1636648394.14652.0.camel@linux-7k5b.site>

Here Are the Arguments That Persuaded the 5th Circuit To Block OSHA's
Vaccine Mandate for Private Employers

The appeals court said the rule, which was published on Friday, raises
"grave statutory and constitutional issues."

Jacob Sullum | 11.7.2021 5:05 PM 


reason-vaccine3
( Felipe Caparros Cruz/Dreamstime.com) 
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit yesterday stayed the Biden
administration's brand-new COVID-19 vaccine mandate for private
employers, which took effect on Friday, when it was published in
the Federal Register. The appeals court said the arguments made by the
petitioners?a Louisiana supermarket chain and six employees of a Texas
company that makes kitchen ventilation systems?"give cause to believe
there are grave statutory and constitutional issues with the Mandate."

The vaccine rule, which was announced in early September but was not
unveiled until last Thursday, gives businesses with 100 or more
employees two options: They can adopt a "mandatory vaccination policy"
with limited exceptions, or they can require unvaccinated employees to
wear face masks and undergo weekly COVID-19 testing. The White House
described the mandate as part of a broader effort to boost the
nationwide vaccination rate. The aim, it said, is to "reduce the number
of unvaccinated Americans by using regulatory powers and other actions
to substantially increase the number of Americans covered by vaccination
requirements."

But the federal government has no general authority to protect public
health, control communicable diseases, or require vaccination, all of
which are primarily state responsibilities. The administration therefore
presented the vaccine mandate as an "emergency temporary standard" (ETS)
issued by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA),
which is charged specifically with protecting employees from workplace
hazards. As the 5th Circuit indicated, that legal strategy leaves the
mandate open to challenge on both statutory and constitutional grounds.

The plaintiffs in BST Holdings v. OSHA, who are represented by the
Chicago-based Liberty Justice Center and Louisiana's Pelican Institute
for Public Policy, argue that the ETS exceeds the agency's authority
under the Occupational Safety and Health Act. Even if it didn't, they
say, empowering OSHA to issue such a sweeping order would exceed the
federal government's power to regulate interstate commerce and violate
the nondelegation doctrine, which constrains lawmaking by executive
agencies.

The ETS option, which OSHA rarely uses, allows the agency to circumvent
the usual rule making process, which typically takes years, by imposing
regulations that take effect immediately upon publication. But to avoid
the public notice, comment, and hearing requirements that ordinarily
apply to OSHA rules, the agency has to identify a "grave danger" to
employees "from exposure to substances or agents determined to be toxic
or physically harmful or from new hazards." It also has to show the
emergency standard is "necessary to protect employees from such danger."

As a general matter, the plaintiffs in the 5th Circuit case argue, the
ETS goes beyond OSHA's mission to protect "occupational health and
safety" because "it is not related to the workplace." The agency "has
authority over workplace-related hazards," they say, "not any hazard one
might encounter anywhere in the world."

The plaintiffs' 5th Circuit brief notes that "OSHA has never attempted
to implement a rule this broad." Although the agency has been mulling an
"Infectious Diseases Regulatory Framework" covering "airborne infectious
diseases" since 2010, it "has repeatedly shelved the suggestion, leaving
it to languish on the agency's no-action agenda." The only previous OSHA
standard dealing with vaccination was much narrower, requiring that
"employers whose workers could be exposed to blood or other potentially
infectious materials at work offer free Hepatitis B vaccination to
employees." Even that standard did not require vaccination, and it did
not deal with a general, population-wide threat from a communicable
disease.

More specifically, the plaintiffs argue that "COVID-19 is not a toxic
substance or agent," adding that "OSHA cannot attempt to shoehorn this
disease into the phrase 'new hazards.'" That phrase, they say, should be
understood in context to exclude airborne viruses: "Because Congress
expressly allowed for an ETS to be issued for 'substances or agents
determined to be toxic or physically harmful,' the catch-all phrase to
encompass other hazards must be read in light of, and limited to, items
similar to those that come before it."

Otherwise, the brief says, OSHA "would have unbridled power to
promulgate any regulation that would have the arguable effect of
preventing the spread of a communicable disease." Such measures could
include "a shutdown of an entire
industry [such as meatpacking] that might harbor a high [incidence] of
COVID-19," "a nationwide shutdown of all employers engaged in interstate
commerce," "a nationwide mask mandate on all customers visiting
OSHA-regulated businesses," or even "a rule mandating [an] appropriate
regimen of vitamins" aimed at boosting employees' immune responses.

The Supreme Court has cautioned against assuming that Congress intended
to authorize executive actions with broad economic implications if it
did not explicitly say so. "When an agency claims to discover in a
long-extant statute an unheralded power to regulate a significant
portion of the American economy," the Court said in 2014, "we typically
greet its announcement with a measure of skepticism. We expect Congress
to speak clearly if it wishes to assign to an agency decisions of vast
'economic and political significance.'"

The plaintiffs' brief says OSHA's claim that it is responding to a
"grave danger" justifying an emergency standard is belied by the timing
of the ETS. The regulation was published nearly two years after the
beginning of the pandemic, nearly a year after the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) first approved COVID-19 vaccines for "emergency
use," and more than two months after the FDA gave the Pfizer vaccine its
full approval. "The extended timeframe for the ETS undermines any claim
of exigence," the plaintiffs say. "And the real kicker is the same day
the ETS was released, November 4, the White House also announced it was
delaying its federal contractor vaccination mandate from December 8 to
January 4, again undermining its assertion of exigency." That is also
the deadline for private employers to fully comply with the ETS
published on Friday. The plaintiffs suggest that "truly 'grave dangers'
do not wait to spread until after the holidays."

The brief also questions whether the ETS for private employers is
"necessary" to protect against the threat posed by COVID-19. When OSHA
issued a COVID-19 ETS for the health care industry in June, the rule did
not include a vaccination requirement. "The fact that OSHA's previous
ETS, issued just months ago, did not find the need for a vaccine mandate
even for healthcare workers, who treat COVID-19 patients, undermines
OSHA's assertion now that such a requirement is necessary," the
plaintiffs say. They also note that OSHA supported in-person instruction
of public school students even when the vast majority of them were not
vaccinated, which suggests that other safeguards may suffice.

The brief argues that the new ETS is "underinclusive" because weekly
testing can miss COVID-19 carriers, because employees who are vaccinated
can still carry the virus but don't have to be tested or wear masks, and
because the rule does not apply to customers or other visitors who may
transmit COVID-19 in the workplace. At the same time, the plaintiffs
say, the rule is "overinclusive" because it "does not account for
vulnerability related to age or preexisting health conditions," because
it does not accept naturally acquired immunity as a valid reason to
forgo vaccination, and because, while the ETS "excuses remote and
outdoor workers from its scope," it "covers every other employee even
while acknowledging employees in different roles face vastly different
risk levels."

The brief says several of the individual plaintiffs "rarely interact
with colleagues in person and should not be required to vaccinate or
show a negative COVID-19 test since they are highly unlikely to spread
COVID-19 to colleagues they may only see a few times a year." And since
the ETS "applies to every workplace of an employer of 100 or more
employees," the plaintiffs say, it "does not consider the different
degrees of risk associated with differing workplaces." Yet "it cannot be
considered 'necessary' as to all such workplaces."

Even if Congress wanted to give OSHA the authority it claims, the
plaintiffs say, doing so would run afoul of the nondelegation doctrine,
which aims to preserve the separation of powers by requiring an
"intelligible principle" to guide regulation by executive agencies.
Under OSHA's reading of the law, the brief argues, the agency has
"plenary power to establish whatever legal requirements [it] wishes,
regardless of how attenuated" their relationship to workplace safety may
be. According to the government, "OSHA's newfound authority empowers it
not simply to set safe levels of potential carcinogens in the workplace,
or require safety equipment and employee trainings, but to regulate the
off-site medical decisions of employees completely disconnected from
work." If OSHA "can require that companies mandate vaccines," the brief
asks, "what can it not require?"

The plaintiffs also argue that Congress itself does not have the
authority to demand that private-sector employees choose between
vaccination and testing plus masking. According to the Supreme Court's
understanding of the Commerce Clause, the federal government can
regulate "activities having a substantial relation to interstate
commerce," even when those activities themselves do not cross state
lines. In deciding whether a given regulation meets that test, courts
are supposed to consider "the economic character of the intrastate
activity"; whether the regulation contains a "jurisdictional element"
that may "establish whether the enactment is in pursuance of Congress'
regulation of interstate commerce"; congressional findings regarding the
regulated activity's impact on interstate commerce; and whether that
impact is too "attenuated" for the regulation to pass muster under the
Commerce Clause.

In this case, the regulated "activity"?the decision to forgo vaccination
?is not only not "economic"; it is not even an "activity." The
plaintiffs argue that forgoing vaccination is analogous to refraining
from purchasing government-approved medical insurance, a decision that a
majority of the Court agreed could not be reached under the Commerce
Clause in the 2012 Obamacare case National Federation of Independent
Business v. Sebelius. "If Congress can regulate employees' individual
health decisions under the Commerce Clause," the plaintiffs say, "then
it can mandate that employers require their workers to attend the gym
weekly or to eat broccoli"?a reference to a famous hypothetical in the
Obamacare case.

What about a "jurisdictional element"? The plaintiffs' brief notes that
"the mandate's limit to employers with 100 or more employees does not
actually limit its reach to interstate activities," since "some
employers with more than 100 employees do not engage in interstate
activities at all," while "some employers with fewer than 100 employees
engage in extensive interstate activity."

Nor did OSHA (or Congress) "make any findings regarding the effect of
COVID-19 vaccinations and testing on interstate commerce." The agency's
avowed aim is to protect unvaccinated employees from the risk posed by
their own choice to remain unvaccinated. If those choices can be said to
affect interstate commerce, the plaintiffs say, it is only by "pil[ing]
inference upon inference," which the Supreme Court has said is not
permissible as a justification for federal regulation, since it would
"bid fair to convert congressional authority under the Commerce Clause
to a general police power of the sort retained by the States."

At this early stage in the case, it is not clear which of these
arguments the 5th Circuit found most persuasive, although the wording of
its stay implies that it perceives both statutory and constitutional
reasons to doubt the legality of OSHA's rule. The court gave the
government until 5 p.m. on Monday to "respond to the petitioners' motion
for a permanent injunction." The petitioners, in turn, "shall file any
reply" by 5 p.m. on Tuesday. 

The vaccine mandate faces additional challenges, including lawsuits
backed by the attorneys general of 26 states, in the 5th, 6th, 8th, and
11th circuits. Last week The New York Times reported that "legal experts
say" OSHA "has the authority to introduce a vaccine mandate." Judging
from the 5th Circuit's stay and all the other litigation contesting
OSHA's authority, that assessment seems premature.

https://reason.com/2021/11/07/here-are-the-arguments-that-persuaded-the-5th-circuit-to-block-oshas-vaccine-mandate-for-private-employers/?utm_medium=email





____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Plans starting as low as $6.95 per month.*
https://store.netzero.net/account/showService.do?serviceId=nz-nLifeLock&utm_source=mktg&utm_medium=taglines&utm_campaign=nzlifelk_launch&utm_content=tag695&promoCode=A34454
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211111/63b16231/attachment-0001.html>

From cwsiv at juno.com  Tue Nov 16 07:38:08 2021
From: cwsiv at juno.com (Carl Spitzer {C Juno})
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 06:38:08 -0800
Subject: [Rushtalk] Republican Party of Wyoming votes to no longer recognize
 Rep. Liz Cheney as a Republican
Message-ID: <1637073488.26024.2.camel@linux-7k5b.site>


     1. Blaze Media / 
     2. News 

Republican Party of Wyoming votes to no longer recognize Rep. Liz Cheney
as a Republican 
News 
Carlos Garcia 
November 15, 2021


Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images 

Like Blaze News? Get the news that matters most delivered directly to
your inbox.



The Republican Party of Wyoming voted on Saturday to no longer recognize
Rep. Liz Cheney as a member of their party.

Cheney has been one of the most outspoken critics of former President
Donald Trump. She was among the 10 Republican members of Congress who
voted to impeach Trump the second time when Democrats brought up charges
of inciting an insurrection on Jan. 6.

The state party central committee voted 31-29 during a meeting in
Buffalo, Wyoming, to formally censure Cheney for the second time.

A spokesperson for Cheney responded to the vote in a statement to the
Associated Press.

"She is bound by her oath to the Constitution. Sadly a portion of the
Wyoming GOP leadership has abandoned that fundamental principle and
instead allowed themselves to be held hostage to the lies of a dangerous
and irrational man," said Jeremy Adler.

He added that it was "laughable" for the state party to suggest Cheney
was anything other than a "conservative Republican."

Don't miss out on content from Dave Rubin free of big tech censorship.
Listen to The Rubin Report now. 
The vote might have been at least in part a response to a scathing
speech Cheney gave on Tuesday excoriating the former president and his
claims about fraud in the 2020 election which he lost to President Joe
Biden.


"At this moment when it matters most, we are also confronting a domestic
threat that we've never faced before: a former president who's
attempting to unravel the foundations of our constitutional Republic,
aided by political leaders who have made themselves willing hostages to
this dangerous and irrational man," said Cheney during the speech.

She went on in the speech to rebuke the policies of Biden and the
Democratic Party and enumerate the principles of conservatism as she saw
them.

Cheney is facing a list of primary challengers for the at-large seat for
Wyoming. Trump has endorsed Cheyenne attorney Harriet Hageman.

"Liz Cheney stopped recognizing what Wyomingites care about a long time
ago," Hageman claimed. "When she launched her war against President
Trump, she completely broke with where we are as a state."

Cheney responded to the endorsement with a defiant message: "Bring it." 



Here's Cheney's comments on Trump: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2p_zYOcGLpI


 



https://www.theblaze.com/news/wyoming-gop-liz-cheney-vote?utm_source=theblaze-dailyAM&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily-Newsletter__AM%202021-11-16&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Daily%20AM




____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Plans starting as low as $6.95 per month.*
https://store.netzero.net/account/showService.do?serviceId=nz-nLifeLock&utm_source=mktg&utm_medium=taglines&utm_campaign=nzlifelk_launch&utm_content=tag695&promoCode=A34454
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211116/46e13290/attachment.html>

From cwsiv at juno.com  Tue Nov 16 07:40:07 2021
From: cwsiv at juno.com (Carl Spitzer {C Juno})
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 06:40:07 -0800
Subject: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit
 Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis
Message-ID: <1637073607.26024.4.camel@linux-7k5b.site>


Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit Spread of
Coronavirus: Analysis
By Zachary Stieber
November 15, 2021 Updated: November 15, 2021 
biggersmaller 
Print 
Cloth masks are of little use against COVID-19, according to a recently
published analysis.

Federal health authorities and a slew of jurisdictions require or
recommend wearing masks as a way to limit spread of the virus that
causes COVID-19.

But a trio of researchers pored over the studies often cited by the
officials and found they were poorly designed and offered scant evidence
supporting mask usage.

Many of the studies are observational, opening them up to confounding
variables, the researchers said in their analysis (pdf), which was
published on Nov. 8 by the Cato Institute.

Of 16 randomized controlled trials comparing mask effectiveness to
controls with no masks, 14 failed to find a statistically significant
benefit, the researchers said. And of 16 quantitative meta-analyses,
half showed weak evidence of mask effectiveness while the others ?were
equivocal or critical as to whether evidence supports a public
recommendation of masks,? they added.

?The biggest takeaway is that more than 100 years of attempts to prove
that masks are beneficial has produced a large volume of mostly
low-quality evidence that has generally failed to demonstrate their
value in most settings,? Dr. Jonathan Darrow, an assistant professor of
medicine at Harvard Medical School, told The Epoch Times in an email.

?Officials mulling mask recommendations should turn their attention to
interventions with larger and more certain benefits, such as vaccines.
Based on the evidence currently available, masks are mostly a
distraction from the important work of promoting the public health,? he
added.

One widely-cited study (pdf) by mask proponents, of rural villages in
Bangladesh, found that surgical masks appeared to be marginally
effective in reducing symptomatic COVID-19 but that cloth masks did not,
Darrow and his colleagues noted. The other real-world randomized
controlled trial examining mask effectiveness, conducted in Denmark, did
not find a statistically significant difference in infections between
the masked and unmasked groups.

?The remainder of the available clinical evidence is primarily limited
to non-randomized observational data, which are subject to confounding,?
the researchers said, including accounting for other differences in
behavior among those who don?t wear masks.

They did say that there is evidence masks reduce droplet dispersion,
though cloth masks are unlikely to capture the particles even if worn
properly.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, policymakers cannot wait for
higher-quality evidence to support masking, but from an ethical
standpoint, they should ?refrain from portraying the evidence as
stronger than it actually is,? the researchers concluded.

COVID-19 is the disease caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party)
virus. The CCP virus is also known as the coronavirus, or SARS-CoV-2.

Some outside experts? views align with the researchers, including Dr.
Martin Kulldorff, senior scientific director of the Brownstone
Institute.

?The truth is that there has been only two randomized trials of masks
for COVID. One was in Denmark, which showed that they might be slightly
beneficial, they might be slightly harmful, we don?t really know?the
confidence interval kind of crossed zero,? he said. ?And then there was
another study from Bangladesh where they randomized villagers to masks
or no masks. And the efficacy of the masks was for reduction of COVID
was something between zero and 18 percent. So either no effect or very
minuscule effect.?

Some experts, though, say the existing evidence does support masking
recommendations, and several reacted strongly to the new analysis.

The analysis drew some pushback, including from Kimberly Prather,
director of the National Science Foundation Center for Aerosol Impacts
on Chemistry of the Environment.

Prather noted on Twitter that researchers said masks reduce the amount
of virus in the air and believed that ran counter to their conclusions.

Darrow responded by saying the amount of virus in the air was a
surrogate, not a clinical endpoint.

?The amount of pathogen in air (to be inhaled) directly determines the
dose. This is directly linked to risk,? Prather added. ?Or can you
explain how less virus in the air could be higher risk? It?s equivalent
to saying that less pathogen in drinking water is higher risk so don?t
filter water.?

?If the theory diverges from what you see in real life, which one do you
believe?? Darrow said.

Zachary Stieber
Zachary Stieber
Reporter
Follow
Zachary Stieber covers U.S. news, including politics and court cases. He
started at The Epoch Times as a New York City metro reporter.
zackstieberzackstieber



https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/little-evidence-supports-use-of-cloth-masks-to-limit-spread-of-coronavirus-analysis_4102824.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-11-16&mktids=d483a371845bb9b8e7c1698d6ad9e44b&est=iOtIgsGG8aYyXt3LmYFo8EZOb4fPuthcMZfC5hdqecbJkpxwtBDjYzdI%2BHiVQA%3D%3D



____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Plans starting as low as $6.95 per month.*
https://store.netzero.net/account/showService.do?serviceId=nz-nLifeLock&utm_source=mktg&utm_medium=taglines&utm_campaign=nzlifelk_launch&utm_content=tag695&promoCode=A34454
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211116/afb4e04a/attachment-0001.html>

From cwsiv at juno.com  Tue Nov 16 07:49:51 2021
From: cwsiv at juno.com (Carl Spitzer {C Juno})
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 06:49:51 -0800
Subject: [Rushtalk] Lix Cheaney and all collaborators with Biden
Message-ID: <1637074191.26024.15.camel@linux-7k5b.site>



____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Plans starting as low as $6.95 per month.*
https://store.netzero.net/account/showService.do?serviceId=nz-nLifeLock&utm_source=mktg&utm_medium=taglines&utm_campaign=nzlifelk_launch&utm_content=tag695&promoCode=A34454
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211116/e219e7db/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rhinoceros-republicans-name-represented-flag-colored-herd-73340562.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 133812 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211116/e219e7db/attachment-0001.jpg>

From quaylejohn at aol.com  Tue Nov 16 09:56:30 2021
From: quaylejohn at aol.com (John  A. Quayle)
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 16:56:30 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit
 Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis
In-Reply-To: <1637073607.26024.4.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
References: <1637073607.26024.4.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
Message-ID: <871588266.1186728.1637081790188@mail.yahoo.com>

 ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? My mother lived through the Spanish Flu and masks didn't stop that, either. People finally got fed up in 1922 when a cop shot a guy in San Francisco for not wearing a mask. 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Spitzer {C Juno} via Rushtalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
To: RushTalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
Cc: Carl Spitzer {C Juno} <cwsiv at juno.com>
Sent: Tue, Nov 16, 2021 9:40 am
Subject: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis

 

Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis
By Zachary StieberNovember 15, 2021 Updated: November 15, 2021 biggersmaller Print Cloth masks are of little use against COVID-19, according to a recently published analysis.

Federal health authorities and a slew of jurisdictions require or recommend wearing masks as a way to limit spread of the virus that causes COVID-19.

But a trio of researchers pored over the studies often cited by the officials and found they were poorly designed and offered scant evidence supporting mask usage.

Many of the studies are observational, opening them up to confounding variables, the researchers said in their analysis (pdf), which was published on Nov. 8 by the Cato Institute.

Of 16 randomized controlled trials comparing mask effectiveness to controls with no masks, 14 failed to find a statistically significant benefit, the researchers said. And of 16 quantitative meta-analyses, half showed weak evidence of mask effectiveness while the others ?were equivocal or critical as to whether evidence supports a public recommendation of masks,? they added.

?The biggest takeaway is that more than 100 years of attempts to prove that masks are beneficial has produced a large volume of mostly low-quality evidence that has generally failed to demonstrate their value in most settings,? Dr. Jonathan Darrow, an assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, told The Epoch Times in an email.

?Officials mulling mask recommendations should turn their attention to interventions with larger and more certain benefits, such as vaccines. Based on the evidence currently available, masks are mostly a distraction from the important work of promoting the public health,? he added.

One widely-cited study (pdf) by mask proponents, of rural villages in Bangladesh, found that surgical masks appeared to be marginally effective in reducing symptomatic COVID-19 but that cloth masks did not, Darrow and his colleagues noted. The other real-world randomized controlled trial examining mask effectiveness, conducted in Denmark, did not find a statistically significant difference in infections between the masked and unmasked groups.

?The remainder of the available clinical evidence is primarily limited to non-randomized observational data, which are subject to confounding,? the researchers said, including accounting for other differences in behavior among those who don?t wear masks.

They did say that there is evidence masks reduce droplet dispersion, though cloth masks are unlikely to capture the particles even if worn properly.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, policymakers cannot wait for higher-quality evidence to support masking, but from an ethical standpoint, they should ?refrain from portraying the evidence as stronger than it actually is,? the researchers concluded.

COVID-19 is the disease caused by the?CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus. The CCP virus is also known as the coronavirus, or SARS-CoV-2.

Some outside experts? views align with the researchers, including Dr. Martin Kulldorff, senior scientific director of the Brownstone Institute.

?The truth is that there has been only two randomized trials of masks for COVID. One was in Denmark, which showed that they might be slightly beneficial, they might be slightly harmful, we don?t really know?the confidence interval kind of crossed zero,? he said. ?And then there was another study from Bangladesh where they randomized villagers to masks or no masks. And the efficacy of the masks was for reduction of COVID was something between zero and 18 percent. So either no effect or very minuscule effect.?

Some experts, though, say the existing evidence does support masking recommendations, and several reacted strongly to the new analysis.

The analysis drew some pushback, including from Kimberly Prather, director?of the National Science Foundation Center for Aerosol Impacts on Chemistry of the Environment.

Prather noted on Twitter that researchers said masks reduce the amount of virus in the air and believed that ran counter to their conclusions.

Darrow responded by saying the amount of virus in the air was a surrogate, not a clinical endpoint.

?The amount of pathogen in air (to be inhaled) directly determines the dose. This is directly linked to risk,? Prather added. ?Or can you explain how less virus in the air could be higher risk? It?s equivalent to saying that less pathogen in drinking water is higher risk so don?t filter water.?

?If the theory diverges from what you see in real life, which one do you believe?? Darrow said.

Zachary StieberReporterFollowZachary Stieber covers U.S. news, including politics and court cases. He started at The Epoch Times as a New York City metro reporter.zackstieberzackstieber



https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/little-evidence-supports-use-of-cloth-masks-to-limit-spread-of-coronavirus-analysis_4102824.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-11-16&mktids=d483a371845bb9b8e7c1698d6ad9e44b&est=iOtIgsGG8aYyXt3LmYFo8EZOb4fPuthcMZfC5hdqecbJkpxwtBDjYzdI%2BHiVQA%3D%3D




____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Plans starting as low as $6.95 per month.*
 NetZero.com/NortonLifeLock_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://galene.csd.net/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211116/32c2a62d/attachment.html>

From stephen.frye at outlook.com  Tue Nov 16 10:01:55 2021
From: stephen.frye at outlook.com (Stephen Frye)
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 17:01:55 +0000
Subject: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit
 Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis
In-Reply-To: <871588266.1186728.1637081790188@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <1637073607.26024.4.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
 <871588266.1186728.1637081790188@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BYAPR05MB5704B60F8BA19E7E7BF2E7B68B999@BYAPR05MB5704.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>

This is nothing more than a political tactic. I?m on a local neighborhood newsgroup, and those that demand compliance are the same ones who use Facebook as their primary source.  If the leading dems believed masks are necessary, we wouldn?t be catching Nancy without one.  It?s a farce, and millions are falling for it - as planned.  Just like the Rittenhouse trial -  why rely on facts when we can convict on the BS propagated by main stream media?  Truth be damned, and when all else fails: call them racists.

Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
________________________________
From: Rushtalk <rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com> on behalf of John A. Quayle via Rushtalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2021 8:56:30 AM
To: rushtalk at csdco.com <rushtalk at csdco.com>
Cc: John A. Quayle <quaylejohn at aol.com>; cwsiv at juno.com <cwsiv at juno.com>
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis

                        My mother lived through the Spanish Flu and masks didn't stop that, either. People finally got fed up in 1922 when a cop shot a guy in San Francisco for not wearing a mask.


-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Spitzer {C Juno} via Rushtalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
To: RushTalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
Cc: Carl Spitzer {C Juno} <cwsiv at juno.com>
Sent: Tue, Nov 16, 2021 9:40 am
Subject: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis


Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis
By Zachary Stieber<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theepochtimes.com%2Fauthor-zachary-stieber&data=04%7C01%7C%7C82844e3cd9f448cdc8e708d9a9220f6e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726786229713070%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=6gyd7Jk9iPdJwVR7IHju59L%2BN3G9sV%2FBg5oIoSKk4Ug%3D&reserved=0> November 15, 2021 Updated: November 15, 2021 biggersmaller Print<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theepochtimes.com%2Fmkt_morningbrief%2Flittle-evidence-supports-use-of-cloth-masks-to-limit-spread-of-coronavirus-analysis_4102824.html%3Futm_source%3DMorningbrief%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_campaign%3Dmb-2021-11-16%26mktids%3Dd483a371845bb9b8e7c1698d6ad9e44b%26est%3DiOtIgsGG8aYyXt3LmYFo8EZOb4fPuthcMZfC5hdqecbJkpxwtBDjYzdI%252BHiVQA%253D%253D%23Print&data=04%7C01%7C%7C82844e3cd9f448cdc8e708d9a9220f6e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726786229723066%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=zJ6gv3hDI3qOkMI6RFlFrpcMWM2uZt2n0bKWKblrntQ%3D&reserved=0> Cloth masks are of little use against COVID-19<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theepochtimes.com%2Ft-covid-19&data=04%7C01%7C%7C82844e3cd9f448cdc8e708d9a9220f6e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726786229723066%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=3dW5lBcNX6ndZCC9UnkdeVm0DjvOVq9qhiIYhOxqTtQ%3D&reserved=0>, according to a recently published analysis.

Federal health authorities and a slew of jurisdictions require or recommend wearing masks as a way to limit spread of the virus that causes COVID-19.

But a trio of researchers pored over the studies often cited by the officials and found they were poorly designed and offered scant evidence supporting mask<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theepochtimes.com%2Ft-mask&data=04%7C01%7C%7C82844e3cd9f448cdc8e708d9a9220f6e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726786229733066%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=EqMMjFy8L%2BkwsNfZpl8MvjOYAWVJ5yFZbZRM7mY%2FNxw%3D&reserved=0> usage.

Many of the studies are observational, opening them up to confounding variables, the researchers said in their analysis (pdf<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cato.org%2Fsites%2Fcato.org%2Ffiles%2F2021-11%2Fworking-paper-64.pdf&data=04%7C01%7C%7C82844e3cd9f448cdc8e708d9a9220f6e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726786229872988%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=2jQUX93jT6EciZtXFeEVVLcggk8CjiXpWeGjeh5BYCg%3D&reserved=0>), which was published on Nov. 8 by the Cato Institute.

Of 16 randomized controlled trials comparing mask effectiveness to controls with no masks, 14 failed to find a statistically significant benefit, the researchers said. And of 16 quantitative meta-analyses, half showed weak evidence of mask effectiveness while the others ?were equivocal or critical as to whether evidence supports a public recommendation of masks,? they added.

?The biggest takeaway is that more than 100 years of attempts to prove that masks are beneficial has produced a large volume of mostly low-quality evidence that has generally failed to demonstrate their value in most settings,? Dr. Jonathan Darrow, an assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, told The Epoch Times in an email.

?Officials mulling mask recommendations should turn their attention to interventions with larger and more certain benefits, such as vaccines. Based on the evidence currently available, masks are mostly a distraction from the important work of promoting the public health,? he added.

One widely-cited study (pdf<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.poverty-action.org%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fpublications%2FMask_RCT____Symptomatic_Seropositivity_083121.pdf&data=04%7C01%7C%7C82844e3cd9f448cdc8e708d9a9220f6e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726786229882977%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=%2BuNGivvJlm3X4R155CQh3RXOp6nX9sBl7gKy3IldHow%3D&reserved=0>) by mask proponents, of rural villages in Bangladesh, found that surgical masks appeared to be marginally effective in reducing symptomatic COVID-19 but that cloth masks did not, Darrow and his colleagues noted. The other real-world randomized controlled trial examining mask effectiveness, conducted in Denmark<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.acpjournals.org%2Fdoi%2F10.7326%2FM20-6817&data=04%7C01%7C%7C82844e3cd9f448cdc8e708d9a9220f6e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726786229882977%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=FVBy6Sv%2BvcF2JamtyLaSHoVUdS03lBlKKwvveB6N4DA%3D&reserved=0>, did not find a statistically significant difference in infections between the masked and unmasked groups.

?The remainder of the available clinical evidence is primarily limited to non-randomized observational data, which are subject to confounding,? the researchers said, including accounting for other differences in behavior among those who don?t wear masks.

They did say that there is evidence masks reduce droplet dispersion, though cloth masks are unlikely to capture the particles even if worn properly.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, policymakers cannot wait for higher-quality evidence to support masking, but from an ethical standpoint, they should ?refrain from portraying the evidence as stronger than it actually is,? the researchers concluded.

COVID-19 is the disease caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theepochtimes.com%2Fgiving-the-right-name-to-the-virus-causing-a-worldwide-pandemic-2_3277200.html&data=04%7C01%7C%7C82844e3cd9f448cdc8e708d9a9220f6e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726786229892971%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=%2BhqK6q%2FGPXv5E68jJH2vMTHsOSRsSBVoglZxSTZPAKo%3D&reserved=0>. The CCP virus is also known as the coronavirus, or SARS-CoV-2.

Some outside experts? views align with the researchers, including Dr. Martin Kulldorff, senior scientific director of the Brownstone Institute.

?The truth is that there has been only two randomized trials of masks for COVID. One was in Denmark, which showed that they might be slightly beneficial, they might be slightly harmful, we don?t really know?the confidence interval kind of crossed zero,? he said. ?And then there was another study from Bangladesh where they randomized villagers to masks or no masks. And the efficacy of the masks was for reduction of COVID was something between zero and 18 percent. So either no effect or very minuscule effect.?

Some experts, though, say the existing evidence does support masking recommendations, and several reacted strongly to the new analysis.

The analysis drew some pushback, including from Kimberly Prather, director of the National Science Foundation Center for Aerosol Impacts on Chemistry of the Environment.

Prather noted on Twitter that researchers said masks reduce the amount of virus in the air and believed that ran counter to their conclusions.

Darrow responded by saying the amount of virus in the air was a surrogate, not a clinical endpoint.

?The amount of pathogen in air (to be inhaled) directly determines the dose. This is directly linked to risk,? Prather added. ?Or can you explain how less virus in the air could be higher risk? It?s equivalent to saying that less pathogen in drinking water is higher risk so don?t filter water.?

?If the theory diverges from what you see in real life, which one do you believe?? Darrow said.

[Zachary Stieber] Zachary Stieber Reporter Follow Zachary Stieber covers U.S. news, including politics and court cases. He started at The Epoch Times as a New York City metro reporter. zackstieber<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fzackstieber&data=04%7C01%7C%7C82844e3cd9f448cdc8e708d9a9220f6e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726786229902960%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=xzqgiaEUScBvUWfgftwrQxg%2FuCsIzyHcfY3JebrG7%2BQ%3D&reserved=0>zackstieber<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fparler.com%2F%23%2Fuser%2Fzackstieber&data=04%7C01%7C%7C82844e3cd9f448cdc8e708d9a9220f6e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726786229902960%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=aXSt1qBqWOysRzUZwNSDEG6uHF0Iy7VdipgrXqw0J%2FQ%3D&reserved=0>



https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/little-evidence-supports-use-of-cloth-masks-to-limit-spread-of-coronavirus-analysis_4102824.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-11-16&mktids=d483a371845bb9b8e7c1698d6ad9e44b&est=iOtIgsGG8aYyXt3LmYFo8EZOb4fPuthcMZfC5hdqecbJkpxwtBDjYzdI%2BHiVQA%3D%3D<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theepochtimes.com%2Fmkt_morningbrief%2Flittle-evidence-supports-use-of-cloth-masks-to-limit-spread-of-coronavirus-analysis_4102824.html%3Futm_source%3DMorningbrief%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_campaign%3Dmb-2021-11-16%26mktids%3Dd483a371845bb9b8e7c1698d6ad9e44b%26est%3DiOtIgsGG8aYyXt3LmYFo8EZOb4fPuthcMZfC5hdqecbJkpxwtBDjYzdI%252BHiVQA%253D%253D&data=04%7C01%7C%7C82844e3cd9f448cdc8e708d9a9220f6e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726786229912960%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=Kmvc2%2BLJwUuknAVtYIY74uAkIa9iaveOakw70HC2FwI%3D&reserved=0>




____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Plans starting as low as $6.95 per month.*
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstore.netzero.net%2Faccount%2FshowService.do%3FserviceId%3Dnz-nLifeLock%26utm_source%3Dmktg%26utm_medium%3Dtaglines%26utm_campaign%3Dnzlifelk_launch%26utm_content%3Dtag695%26promoCode%3DA34454&data=04%7C01%7C%7C82844e3cd9f448cdc8e708d9a9220f6e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726786229912960%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=TIiUBsoRfMttj8XuEFmuYv21KXWVWaezPmpU%2B5662mo%3D&reserved=0>NetZero.com/NortonLifeLock<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstore.netzero.net%2Faccount%2FshowService.do%3FserviceId%3Dnz-nLifeLock%26utm_source%3Dmktg%26utm_medium%3Dtaglines%26utm_campaign%3Dnzlifelk_launch%26utm_content%3Dtag695%26promoCode%3DA34454&data=04%7C01%7C%7C82844e3cd9f448cdc8e708d9a9220f6e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726786229922952%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=2kkZZGt%2B97n4VXs3JNKqYg8stGPhvxRKkdaVLwS52m8%3D&reserved=0>
_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com<mailto:Rushtalk at csdco.com>
http://galene.csd.net/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fgalene.csd.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Frushtalk&data=04%7C01%7C%7C82844e3cd9f448cdc8e708d9a9220f6e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726786229922952%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=7nrcloZFV4gsH7iCQd9AxgXY88CQF79aldvJhJfw0rM%3D&reserved=0>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211116/be906db0/attachment-0001.html>

From quaylejohn at aol.com  Tue Nov 16 10:04:59 2021
From: quaylejohn at aol.com (John  A. Quayle)
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 17:04:59 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit
 Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis
In-Reply-To: <BYAPR05MB5704B60F8BA19E7E7BF2E7B68B999@BYAPR05MB5704.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
References: <1637073607.26024.4.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
 <871588266.1186728.1637081790188@mail.yahoo.com>
 <BYAPR05MB5704B60F8BA19E7E7BF2E7B68B999@BYAPR05MB5704.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <164350204.1189617.1637082299856@mail.yahoo.com>

??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? Stephen, you're absolutely correct. As I recall, Pelosi presided over a wedding recently of a member of the Getty family and NOBODY wore masks. 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Frye <stephen.frye at outlook.com>
To: rushtalk at csdco.com <rushtalk at csdco.com>
Cc: John A. Quayle <quaylejohn at aol.com>; cwsiv at juno.com <cwsiv at juno.com>
Sent: Tue, Nov 16, 2021 12:01 pm
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis

This is nothing more than a political tactic. I?m on a local neighborhood newsgroup, and those that demand compliance are the same ones who use Facebook as their primary source. ?If the leading dems believed masks are necessary, we wouldn?t be catching Nancy without one. ?It?s a farce, and millions are falling for it - as planned. ?Just like the Rittenhouse trial - ?why rely on facts when we can convict on the BS propagated by main stream media? ?Truth be damned, and when all else fails: call them racists.
Get Outlook for iOSFrom: Rushtalk <rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com> on behalf of John A. Quayle via Rushtalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2021 8:56:30 AM
To: rushtalk at csdco.com <rushtalk at csdco.com>
Cc: John A. Quayle <quaylejohn at aol.com>; cwsiv at juno.com <cwsiv at juno.com>
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis???? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? My mother lived through the Spanish Flu and masks didn't stop that, either. People finally got fed up in 1922 when a cop shot a guy in San Francisco for not wearing a mask. 


-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Spitzer {C Juno} via Rushtalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
To: RushTalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
Cc: Carl Spitzer {C Juno} <cwsiv at juno.com>
Sent: Tue, Nov 16, 2021 9:40 am
Subject: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis



Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis
By Zachary Stieber November 15, 2021 Updated: November 15, 2021 biggersmaller Print Cloth masks are of little use against COVID-19, according to a recently published analysis.

Federal health authorities and a slew of jurisdictions require or recommend wearing masks as a way to limit spread of the virus that causes COVID-19.

But a trio of researchers pored over the studies often cited by the officials and found they were poorly designed and offered scant evidence supportingmask usage.

Many of the studies are observational, opening them up to confounding variables, the researchers said in their analysis (pdf), which was published on Nov. 8 by the Cato Institute.

Of 16 randomized controlled trials comparing mask effectiveness to controls with no masks, 14 failed to find a statistically significant benefit, the researchers said. And of 16 quantitative meta-analyses, half showed weak evidence of mask effectiveness while the others ?were equivocal or critical as to whether evidence supports a public recommendation of masks,? they added.

?The biggest takeaway is that more than 100 years of attempts to prove that masks are beneficial has produced a large volume of mostly low-quality evidence that has generally failed to demonstrate their value in most settings,? Dr. Jonathan Darrow, an assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, told The Epoch Times in an email.

?Officials mulling mask recommendations should turn their attention to interventions with larger and more certain benefits, such as vaccines. Based on the evidence currently available, masks are mostly a distraction from the important work of promoting the public health,? he added.

One widely-cited study (pdf) by mask proponents, of rural villages in Bangladesh, found that surgical masks appeared to be marginally effective in reducing symptomatic COVID-19 but that cloth masks did not, Darrow and his colleagues noted. The other real-world randomized controlled trial examining mask effectiveness, conducted in Denmark, did not find a statistically significant difference in infections between the masked and unmasked groups.

?The remainder of the available clinical evidence is primarily limited to non-randomized observational data, which are subject to confounding,? the researchers said, including accounting for other differences in behavior among those who don?t wear masks.

They did say that there is evidence masks reduce droplet dispersion, though cloth masks are unlikely to capture the particles even if worn properly.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, policymakers cannot wait for higher-quality evidence to support masking, but from an ethical standpoint, they should ?refrain from portraying the evidence as stronger than it actually is,? the researchers concluded.

COVID-19 is the disease caused by the?CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus. The CCP virus is also known as the coronavirus, or SARS-CoV-2.

Some outside experts? views align with the researchers, including Dr. Martin Kulldorff, senior scientific director of the Brownstone Institute.

?The truth is that there has been only two randomized trials of masks for COVID. One was in Denmark, which showed that they might be slightly beneficial, they might be slightly harmful, we don?t really know?the confidence interval kind of crossed zero,? he said. ?And then there was another study from Bangladesh where they randomized villagers to masks or no masks. And the efficacy of the masks was for reduction of COVID was something between zero and 18 percent. So either no effect or very minuscule effect.?

Some experts, though, say the existing evidence does support masking recommendations, and several reacted strongly to the new analysis.

The analysis drew some pushback, including from Kimberly Prather, director?of the National Science Foundation Center for Aerosol Impacts on Chemistry of the Environment.

Prather noted on Twitter that researchers said masks reduce the amount of virus in the air and believed that ran counter to their conclusions.

Darrow responded by saying the amount of virus in the air was a surrogate, not a clinical endpoint.

?The amount of pathogen in air (to be inhaled) directly determines the dose. This is directly linked to risk,? Prather added. ?Or can you explain how less virus in the air could be higher risk? It?s equivalent to saying that less pathogen in drinking water is higher risk so don?t filter water.?

?If the theory diverges from what you see in real life, which one do you believe?? Darrow said.

 Zachary Stieber Reporter Follow Zachary Stieber covers U.S. news, including politics and court cases. He started at The Epoch Times as a New York City metro reporter. zackstieberzackstieber



https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/little-evidence-supports-use-of-cloth-masks-to-limit-spread-of-coronavirus-analysis_4102824.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-11-16&mktids=d483a371845bb9b8e7c1698d6ad9e44b&est=iOtIgsGG8aYyXt3LmYFo8EZOb4fPuthcMZfC5hdqecbJkpxwtBDjYzdI%2BHiVQA%3D%3D




____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Plans starting as low as $6.95 per month.*
NetZero.com/NortonLifeLock_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://galene.csd.net/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211116/e5ba8262/attachment-0001.html>

From stephen.frye at outlook.com  Tue Nov 16 10:09:34 2021
From: stephen.frye at outlook.com (Stephen Frye)
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 17:09:34 +0000
Subject: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit
 Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis
In-Reply-To: <164350204.1189617.1637082299856@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <1637073607.26024.4.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
 <871588266.1186728.1637081790188@mail.yahoo.com>
 <BYAPR05MB5704B60F8BA19E7E7BF2E7B68B999@BYAPR05MB5704.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
 <164350204.1189617.1637082299856@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BYAPR05MB57047BADB38BBD292062E7908B999@BYAPR05MB5704.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>

Of course they didn?t.  Do as I order, not as I do.

Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
________________________________
From: John A. Quayle <quaylejohn at aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2021 9:04:59 AM
To: stephen.frye at outlook.com <stephen.frye at outlook.com>; rushtalk at csdco.com <rushtalk at csdco.com>
Cc: cwsiv at juno.com <cwsiv at juno.com>
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis

                        Stephen, you're absolutely correct. As I recall, Pelosi presided over a wedding recently of a member of the Getty family and NOBODY wore masks.

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Frye <stephen.frye at outlook.com>
To: rushtalk at csdco.com <rushtalk at csdco.com>
Cc: John A. Quayle <quaylejohn at aol.com>; cwsiv at juno.com <cwsiv at juno.com>
Sent: Tue, Nov 16, 2021 12:01 pm
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis

This is nothing more than a political tactic. I?m on a local neighborhood newsgroup, and those that demand compliance are the same ones who use Facebook as their primary source.  If the leading dems believed masks are necessary, we wouldn?t be catching Nancy without one.  It?s a farce, and millions are falling for it - as planned.  Just like the Rittenhouse trial -  why rely on facts when we can convict on the BS propagated by main stream media?  Truth be damned, and when all else fails: call them racists.

Get Outlook for iOS<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2Fo0ukef&data=04%7C01%7C%7C712882a67dbf413ba82008d9a9233caf%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726791281354236%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=lbpPlPPZlfoXQJLdDDYTymW9%2Fe0y5XaFnACMUqo%2FRWE%3D&reserved=0>
________________________________
From: Rushtalk <rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com> on behalf of John A. Quayle via Rushtalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2021 8:56:30 AM
To: rushtalk at csdco.com <rushtalk at csdco.com>
Cc: John A. Quayle <quaylejohn at aol.com>; cwsiv at juno.com <cwsiv at juno.com>
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis

                        My mother lived through the Spanish Flu and masks didn't stop that, either. People finally got fed up in 1922 when a cop shot a guy in San Francisco for not wearing a mask.


-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Spitzer {C Juno} via Rushtalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
To: RushTalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
Cc: Carl Spitzer {C Juno} <cwsiv at juno.com>
Sent: Tue, Nov 16, 2021 9:40 am
Subject: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis


Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis
By Zachary Stieber<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theepochtimes.com%2Fauthor-zachary-stieber&data=04%7C01%7C%7C712882a67dbf413ba82008d9a9233caf%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726791281354236%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=vpz1FXBORkSEaic%2B52tmcQG29HCI8xpJrC7uNNTiCNM%3D&reserved=0> November 15, 2021 Updated: November 15, 2021 biggersmaller Print<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theepochtimes.com%2Fmkt_morningbrief%2Flittle-evidence-supports-use-of-cloth-masks-to-limit-spread-of-coronavirus-analysis_4102824.html%3Futm_source%3DMorningbrief%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_campaign%3Dmb-2021-11-16%26mktids%3Dd483a371845bb9b8e7c1698d6ad9e44b%26est%3DiOtIgsGG8aYyXt3LmYFo8EZOb4fPuthcMZfC5hdqecbJkpxwtBDjYzdI%252BHiVQA%253D%253D%23Print&data=04%7C01%7C%7C712882a67dbf413ba82008d9a9233caf%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726791281364242%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=mXbtLXS6i6bAhZW7M2kEx5MmDVNtigvg0BOP398CfeA%3D&reserved=0> Cloth masks are of little use against COVID-19<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theepochtimes.com%2Ft-covid-19&data=04%7C01%7C%7C712882a67dbf413ba82008d9a9233caf%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726791281374243%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=xsaLp9zgEYOUnYuQ%2FzGxMRLWC3AJx5DvlqjWvumG2ss%3D&reserved=0>, according to a recently published analysis.

Federal health authorities and a slew of jurisdictions require or recommend wearing masks as a way to limit spread of the virus that causes COVID-19.

But a trio of researchers pored over the studies often cited by the officials and found they were poorly designed and offered scant evidence supporting mask<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theepochtimes.com%2Ft-mask&data=04%7C01%7C%7C712882a67dbf413ba82008d9a9233caf%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726791281374243%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=ljSugsy0jbYkoE%2BBA1b%2Baaeg44et6BuKMyFLZwvzaas%3D&reserved=0> usage.

Many of the studies are observational, opening them up to confounding variables, the researchers said in their analysis (pdf<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cato.org%2Fsites%2Fcato.org%2Ffiles%2F2021-11%2Fworking-paper-64.pdf&data=04%7C01%7C%7C712882a67dbf413ba82008d9a9233caf%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726791281384239%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=02cEJ7VGw60798gjYETPct8qCIJhQFWNTBIhSLebuUc%3D&reserved=0>), which was published on Nov. 8 by the Cato Institute.

Of 16 randomized controlled trials comparing mask effectiveness to controls with no masks, 14 failed to find a statistically significant benefit, the researchers said. And of 16 quantitative meta-analyses, half showed weak evidence of mask effectiveness while the others ?were equivocal or critical as to whether evidence supports a public recommendation of masks,? they added.

?The biggest takeaway is that more than 100 years of attempts to prove that masks are beneficial has produced a large volume of mostly low-quality evidence that has generally failed to demonstrate their value in most settings,? Dr. Jonathan Darrow, an assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, told The Epoch Times in an email.

?Officials mulling mask recommendations should turn their attention to interventions with larger and more certain benefits, such as vaccines. Based on the evidence currently available, masks are mostly a distraction from the important work of promoting the public health,? he added.

One widely-cited study (pdf<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.poverty-action.org%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fpublications%2FMask_RCT____Symptomatic_Seropositivity_083121.pdf&data=04%7C01%7C%7C712882a67dbf413ba82008d9a9233caf%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726791281394220%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=npgxLfPhxyHBKvJepwvf5fhQVHL9bF%2BejAA4EhxZAHo%3D&reserved=0>) by mask proponents, of rural villages in Bangladesh, found that surgical masks appeared to be marginally effective in reducing symptomatic COVID-19 but that cloth masks did not, Darrow and his colleagues noted. The other real-world randomized controlled trial examining mask effectiveness, conducted in Denmark<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.acpjournals.org%2Fdoi%2F10.7326%2FM20-6817&data=04%7C01%7C%7C712882a67dbf413ba82008d9a9233caf%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726791281394220%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=GbDw8cx0DIEgkWU%2Bmzm45SBhyC71%2FNqm4ukn2CaLq%2Bc%3D&reserved=0>, did not find a statistically significant difference in infections between the masked and unmasked groups.

?The remainder of the available clinical evidence is primarily limited to non-randomized observational data, which are subject to confounding,? the researchers said, including accounting for other differences in behavior among those who don?t wear masks.

They did say that there is evidence masks reduce droplet dispersion, though cloth masks are unlikely to capture the particles even if worn properly.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, policymakers cannot wait for higher-quality evidence to support masking, but from an ethical standpoint, they should ?refrain from portraying the evidence as stronger than it actually is,? the researchers concluded.

COVID-19 is the disease caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theepochtimes.com%2Fgiving-the-right-name-to-the-virus-causing-a-worldwide-pandemic-2_3277200.html&data=04%7C01%7C%7C712882a67dbf413ba82008d9a9233caf%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726791281404222%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=5zuHYL4OHs%2FHme56PwVAQK15nMwAE3Cbre69pY7uLgs%3D&reserved=0>. The CCP virus is also known as the coronavirus, or SARS-CoV-2.

Some outside experts? views align with the researchers, including Dr. Martin Kulldorff, senior scientific director of the Brownstone Institute.

?The truth is that there has been only two randomized trials of masks for COVID. One was in Denmark, which showed that they might be slightly beneficial, they might be slightly harmful, we don?t really know?the confidence interval kind of crossed zero,? he said. ?And then there was another study from Bangladesh where they randomized villagers to masks or no masks. And the efficacy of the masks was for reduction of COVID was something between zero and 18 percent. So either no effect or very minuscule effect.?

Some experts, though, say the existing evidence does support masking recommendations, and several reacted strongly to the new analysis.

The analysis drew some pushback, including from Kimberly Prather, director of the National Science Foundation Center for Aerosol Impacts on Chemistry of the Environment.

Prather noted on Twitter that researchers said masks reduce the amount of virus in the air and believed that ran counter to their conclusions.

Darrow responded by saying the amount of virus in the air was a surrogate, not a clinical endpoint.

?The amount of pathogen in air (to be inhaled) directly determines the dose. This is directly linked to risk,? Prather added. ?Or can you explain how less virus in the air could be higher risk? It?s equivalent to saying that less pathogen in drinking water is higher risk so don?t filter water.?

?If the theory diverges from what you see in real life, which one do you believe?? Darrow said.

[Zachary Stieber] Zachary Stieber Reporter Follow Zachary Stieber covers U.S. news, including politics and court cases. He started at The Epoch Times as a New York City metro reporter. zackstieber<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fzackstieber&data=04%7C01%7C%7C712882a67dbf413ba82008d9a9233caf%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726791281404222%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=nqZ71goHu3lR0VXpV1g8hMf5iI80%2Bs2qYqfhc7WD5zQ%3D&reserved=0>zackstieber<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fparler.com%2F%23%2Fuser%2Fzackstieber&data=04%7C01%7C%7C712882a67dbf413ba82008d9a9233caf%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726791281414209%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=vqnu4nRs59LlLVzDEbijd1cqI%2F%2BYiHwboqPqVx8nX98%3D&reserved=0>



https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/little-evidence-supports-use-of-cloth-masks-to-limit-spread-of-coronavirus-analysis_4102824.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-11-16&mktids=d483a371845bb9b8e7c1698d6ad9e44b&est=iOtIgsGG8aYyXt3LmYFo8EZOb4fPuthcMZfC5hdqecbJkpxwtBDjYzdI%2BHiVQA%3D%3D<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theepochtimes.com%2Fmkt_morningbrief%2Flittle-evidence-supports-use-of-cloth-masks-to-limit-spread-of-coronavirus-analysis_4102824.html%3Futm_source%3DMorningbrief%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_campaign%3Dmb-2021-11-16%26mktids%3Dd483a371845bb9b8e7c1698d6ad9e44b%26est%3DiOtIgsGG8aYyXt3LmYFo8EZOb4fPuthcMZfC5hdqecbJkpxwtBDjYzdI%252BHiVQA%253D%253D&data=04%7C01%7C%7C712882a67dbf413ba82008d9a9233caf%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726791281424190%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=SghVE0Qj8eEWU0%2BHX3jKEcHgGIl4iazXKVWzVpYzaD0%3D&reserved=0>




____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Plans starting as low as $6.95 per month.*
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstore.netzero.net%2Faccount%2FshowService.do%3FserviceId%3Dnz-nLifeLock%26utm_source%3Dmktg%26utm_medium%3Dtaglines%26utm_campaign%3Dnzlifelk_launch%26utm_content%3Dtag695%26promoCode%3DA34454&data=04%7C01%7C%7C712882a67dbf413ba82008d9a9233caf%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726791281424190%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=zOEoobWSjOCpPHR2arVBZLZ2V%2BU26mbebIUZg9rRWn4%3D&reserved=0>NetZero.com/NortonLifeLock<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstore.netzero.net%2Faccount%2FshowService.do%3FserviceId%3Dnz-nLifeLock%26utm_source%3Dmktg%26utm_medium%3Dtaglines%26utm_campaign%3Dnzlifelk_launch%26utm_content%3Dtag695%26promoCode%3DA34454&data=04%7C01%7C%7C712882a67dbf413ba82008d9a9233caf%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726791281434208%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=X%2FgacsaNCAdy43wLE3xeUxDDB2jWtEghzEaaoaZf88Q%3D&reserved=0>
_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com<mailto:Rushtalk at csdco.com>
http://galene.csd.net/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fgalene.csd.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Frushtalk&data=04%7C01%7C%7C712882a67dbf413ba82008d9a9233caf%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637726791281444213%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=iByDD1YIwes803SdVCfBCv8zRM2vA9Pk39bJTNLxlJs%3D&reserved=0>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211116/1179ccd9/attachment-0001.html>

From cwsiv at juno.com  Thu Nov 18 11:17:12 2021
From: cwsiv at juno.com (Carl Spitzer {C Juno})
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 10:17:12 -0800
Subject: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit
 Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis
In-Reply-To: <871588266.1186728.1637081790188@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <1637073607.26024.4.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
 <871588266.1186728.1637081790188@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1637259432.31651.11.camel@linux-7k5b.site>

On Tue, 2021-11-16 at 16:56 +0000, John A. Quayle wrote:
>                         My mother lived through the Spanish Flu and
> masks didn't stop that, either. People finally got fed up in 1922 when
> a cop shot a guy in San Francisco for not wearing a mask. 


Did the Pig get hung for murder under color of law??
Sounds a lot like New Jersey where a pig beat up a woman who took off
her mask to deal with a crying child.


-- 
Carl  Spitzer
  ___              _                                     
 / (_)            | |       ()      o                    
|      __,   ,_   | |       /\   _    _|_  __   _   ,_   
|     /  |  /  |  |/       /  \|/ \_|  |  / / _|/  /  |  
 \___/\_/|_/   |_/|__/    /(__/|__/ |_/|_/ /_/ |__/   |_/
                              /|            /|           
                              \|            \|   

Democrat is SIN and TREASON
____________________________________________________________
Sponsored by https://www.newser.com/?utm_source=part&utm_medium=uol&utm_campaign=rss_taglines_more

Kamala Harris: No, I Don't Feel 'Underused'
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/619698562fd3d18555e22st03vuc1
'I Think We're Making History,' Pilot Said. Then He Crashed
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/619698564eb4518555e22st03vuc2
Celebrities Urge Oklahoma to Halt Julius Jones Execution
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/619698566e21c18555e22st03vuc3
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211118/d49d4441/attachment.html>

From cwsiv at juno.com  Thu Nov 18 11:20:04 2021
From: cwsiv at juno.com (Carl Spitzer {C Juno})
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 10:20:04 -0800
Subject: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit
 Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis
In-Reply-To: <BYAPR05MB5704B60F8BA19E7E7BF2E7B68B999@BYAPR05MB5704.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
References: <1637073607.26024.4.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
 <871588266.1186728.1637081790188@mail.yahoo.com>
 <BYAPR05MB5704B60F8BA19E7E7BF2E7B68B999@BYAPR05MB5704.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <1637259604.31651.13.camel@linux-7k5b.site>

On Tue, 2021-11-16 at 17:01 +0000, Stephen Frye via Rushtalk wrote:
> This is nothing more than a political tactic. I?m on a local
> neighborhood newsgroup, and those that demand compliance are the same
> ones who use Facebook as their primary source.  If the leading dems
> believed masks are necessary, we wouldn?t be catching Nancy without
> one.  It?s a farce, and millions are falling for it - as planned.
> Just like the Rittenhouse trial -  why rely on facts when we can
> convict on the BS propagated by main stream media?  Truth be damned,
> and when all else fails: call them racists.



Sounds like a reason to pull off their mask and cough in their face and
watch them faint.


CWSIV


____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Plans starting as low as $6.95 per month.*
https://store.netzero.net/account/showService.do?serviceId=nz-nLifeLock&utm_source=mktg&utm_medium=taglines&utm_campaign=nzlifelk_launch&utm_content=tag695&promoCode=A34454
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211118/5109e48d/attachment.html>

From cwsiv at juno.com  Thu Nov 18 11:21:04 2021
From: cwsiv at juno.com (Carl Spitzer {C Juno})
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 10:21:04 -0800
Subject: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit
 Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis
In-Reply-To: <BYAPR05MB57047BADB38BBD292062E7908B999@BYAPR05MB5704.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
References: <1637073607.26024.4.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
 <871588266.1186728.1637081790188@mail.yahoo.com>
 <BYAPR05MB5704B60F8BA19E7E7BF2E7B68B999@BYAPR05MB5704.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
 <164350204.1189617.1637082299856@mail.yahoo.com>
 <BYAPR05MB57047BADB38BBD292062E7908B999@BYAPR05MB5704.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <1637259664.31651.14.camel@linux-7k5b.site>

On Tue, 2021-11-16 at 17:09 +0000, Stephen Frye via Rushtalk wrote:
> Of course they didn?t.  Do as I order, not as I do.


Hypocrisy is the only value of the left.




-- 
Carl  Spitzer
  ___              _                                     
 / (_)            | |       ()      o                    
|      __,   ,_   | |       /\   _    _|_  __   _   ,_   
|     /  |  /  |  |/       /  \|/ \_|  |  / / _|/  /  |  
 \___/\_/|_/   |_/|__/    /(__/|__/ |_/|_/ /_/ |__/   |_/
                              /|            /|           
                              \|            \|   

Democrat is SIN and TREASON
____________________________________________________________
Sponsored by https://www.newser.com/?utm_source=part&utm_medium=uol&utm_campaign=rss_taglines_more

Kamala Harris: No, I Don't Feel 'Underused'
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/6196993e1e49b193d4defst04vuc1
'I Think We're Making History,' Pilot Said. Then He Crashed
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/6196993e3d102193d4defst04vuc2
Celebrities Urge Oklahoma to Halt Julius Jones Execution
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/6196993e5bd37193d4defst04vuc3
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211118/a2c6a504/attachment.html>

From quaylejohn at aol.com  Thu Nov 18 12:50:57 2021
From: quaylejohn at aol.com (John  A. Quayle)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 19:50:57 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit
 Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis
In-Reply-To: <1637259432.31651.11.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
References: <1637073607.26024.4.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
 <871588266.1186728.1637081790188@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1637259432.31651.11.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
Message-ID: <502659108.1906048.1637265057604@mail.yahoo.com>

 ??? ??? ??? ??? ???????? I'm not sure what happened to the police officer, but you might be able to Google the story on-line. I just saw it for the first time in August.
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Spitzer {C Juno} via Rushtalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
To: rushtalk at csdco.com <rushtalk at csdco.com>
Cc: Carl Spitzer {C Juno} <cwsiv at juno.com>
Sent: Thu, Nov 18, 2021 1:17 pm
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Little Evidence Supports Use of Cloth Masks to Limit Spread of Coronavirus: Analysis

 On Tue, 2021-11-16 at 16:56 +0000, John A. Quayle wrote:
 ??????????????????????? My mother lived through the Spanish Flu and masks didn't stop that, either. People finally got fed up in 1922 when a cop shot a guy in San Francisco for not wearing a mask. 


Did the Pig get hung for murder under color of law??
Sounds a lot like New Jersey where a pig beat up a woman who took off her mask to deal with a crying child.



| -- 
Carl? Spitzer
? ___????????????? _???????????????????????????????????? 
?/ (_)??????????? | |?????? ()????? o??????????????????? 
|????? __,?? ,_?? | |?????? /\?? _??? _|_? __?? _?? ,_?? 
|???? /? |? /? |? |/?????? /? \|/ \_|? |? / / _|/? /? |? 
?\___/\_/|_/?? |_/|__/??? /(__/|__/ |_/|_/ /_/ |__/?? |_/
????????????????????????????? /|??????????? /|?????????? 
????????????????????????????? \|??????????? \|?? 

Democrat is SIN and TREASON
 |



____________________________________________________________

Top News - Sponsored By Newser   
   - Kamala Harris: No, I Don't Feel 'Underused'
   - 'I Think We're Making History,' Pilot Said. Then He Crashed
   - Celebrities Urge Oklah oma to Halt Julius Jones Execution
_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://galene.csd.net/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211118/f4f937b6/attachment-0001.html>

From quaylejohn at aol.com  Thu Nov 18 13:17:42 2021
From: quaylejohn at aol.com (John  A. Quayle)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 20:17:42 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Rushtalk] I Can't Believe The Prosecution Is This Stupid!
References: <1283809673.1919735.1637266662734.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1283809673.1919735.1637266662734@mail.yahoo.com>


| 
| 
| ? |

 |

 |
| 
| 
| 
|  |
| ? |
| 
| 
| ? |
| Prosecution Closes Rittenhouse Case By Arguing He Should Have Just ?Taken? The ?Beating? |
| ? |
| 'Sometimes you get in a scuffle and maybe you do get hurt a little bit' |

 |

 |

 |

 |

 |
| ? |

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211118/5f53919e/attachment.html>

From cwsiv at juno.com  Sat Nov 20 10:19:14 2021
From: cwsiv at juno.com (Carl Spitzer {C Juno})
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2021 09:19:14 -0800
Subject: [Rushtalk] Kyle Rittenhouse Has Been Acquitted on All Charges
Message-ID: <1637428754.16580.6.camel@linux-7k5b.site>


Kyle Rittenhouse Has Been Acquitted on All Charges

The trial became an upside-down microcosm for the polarized debates
about the U.S. criminal justice system.

Billy Binion | 11.19.2021 1:15 PM 


zumaglobaleleven303376
Kyle Rittenhouse looks at evidence during his trial (Mark Hertzberg/ZUMA
Press Wire/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom) 
Kyle Rittenhouse, the teen who said he feared for his life when he
killed two men and wounded another during a night of unrest in Kenosha,
Wisconsin, has been found not guilty on all charges, including
first-degree reckless homicide, two counts of first-degree recklessly
endangering safety, first-degree intentional homicide, and attempted
first-degree intentional homicide.

The prosecution had hoped to convince the jury that a 17-year-old
Rittenhouse killed Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, and Anthony Huber, 26, without
just cause when he traveled to the riots on August 25, 2020, although
their case struggled to gain traction. Rosenbaum was described by a
witness for the state as "hyperaggressive," ultimately chasing
Rittenhouse down and trying to wrestle away his AR-15 before Rittenhouse
shot him. Video footage showed Huber striking Rittenhouse in the neck
with a skateboard before also trying to take his firearm. And Gaige
Grosskreutz, 27, the man who Rittenhouse shot in the bicep, testified
for the prosecution that he approached Rittenhouse that evening with his
own pistol raised, throwing cold water on characterizations that
Grosskreutz had his hands in the air.

The now-18-year-old Rittenhouse became the star witness in his own trial
when he took the stand in his defense last week. It was an unusual
gambit for a defendant. But it may have imperiled the prosecution, as
Judge Bruce Schroeder admonished Assistant District Attorney Thomas
Binger for opening his questioning with a commentary on Rittenhouse's
post-arrest silence?Binger seemed to suggest that such silence was
evidence of his guilt?and for attempting to show the jury evidence that
Schroeder had already ruled was likely inadmissible. "I don't know what
you're up to," the judge said last Wednesday in a testy exchange with
Binger. "When you say that you were acting in good faith, I don't
believe that."

The prosecutor was also roundly criticized for drawing a connection
between Rittenhouse's actions and his affection for Call of Duty, as
well as for his line of questioning on ammunition, which required the
judge to correct him while Rittenhouse was on the stand. Yet a nugget
from his closing arguments drew the loudest rebukes: "If you created the
danger," Binger said, "you forfeit the right to self-defense by bringing
that gun, aiming it at people, threatening people's lives."

No matter your feelings toward Rittenhouse, that statement by the
prosecutor was "legally wrong," says Clark Neily, who served as
co-counsel in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the landmark
Supreme Court decision recognizing an individual right to keep and bear
arms for self-defense. "The right to arm yourself and to protect
yourself?these are natural rights that are not granted by the
government, they're not granted by the Constitution. They're rights that
we all possess."

Rittenhouse's trial became somewhat of an upside-down microcosm for the
polarized debates about the U.S. criminal legal system as the loudest
voices effectively traded in their priors and reversed roles. Cries to
eschew due process and assign a lengthy prison term came from many on
the criminal-justice-reform left, while the back-the-blue right zeroed
in on prosecutorial overreach.

"Lock up Kyle Rittenhouse and throw away the key," said Rep. Hakeem
Jeffries (D?N.Y.), the chair of the House Democratic Caucus, who has
dedicated much of his career to fighting mass incarceration. Judge
Schroeder found himself at the center of similar reproach, coming under
fire for rulings that some described as biased and too pro-defendant. It
bears mentioning that his decisions were consistent with his
decades-long career and not exclusive to Rittenhouse. But perhaps more
significant is that judges have a reputation for being prosecutors in
robes: On the federal bench, for instance, there are four former
prosecutors for every one former defense attorney. Those concerned with
criminal justice reform would typically laud a judge with a history like
Schroeder's?when considering the deference that judges often give to the
prosecution.

And this time it was conservative pundits who railed against the
prosecutors, depicting Binger especially as a corrupt government agent
with a lust for blood and a desire to punish Rittenhouse to placate
social justice movements. One hopes they will continue to apply that
healthy skepticism to all prosecutors, who enjoy absolute immunity from
misconduct on the job and who are no strangers to seedy behavior.

As for Rittenhouse, despite the considerable amount of punditry devoted
to a binary narrative?that he was a hero or a murderer?Neily presents
another option: "I think he exhibited very poor judgement in arming
himself and then going into that environment with a very visible, modern
rifle. There's no question that there are people who perceive that to be
a provocative act," Neily says. Based on the evidence, however, "I think
he should be acquitted."

It appears the jury agrees.

 
https://reason.com/2021/11/19/kyle-rittenhouse-has-been-acquitted-on-all-charges/?utm_medium=email
https://reason.com/2021/11/19/kyle-rittenhouse-has-been-acquitted-on-all-charges/?utm_medium=email













____________________________________________________________
Sponsored by https://www.newser.com/?utm_source=part&utm_medium=uol&utm_campaign=rss_taglines_more

St. Jude's Has Billions, and ProPublica Isn't Sure It Should
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/61992dc56e7822dc56becst01vuc1
He Didn't Invent Toys, but He's the Genius We Can Thank for Them
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/61992dc58db472dc56becst01vuc2
At Elizabeth Holmes Trial, a 'Sudden,' Maybe Risky Move
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/61992dc5b15c62dc56becst01vuc3
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211120/4f7481e5/attachment-0001.html>

From cwsiv at juno.com  Sat Nov 20 10:20:01 2021
From: cwsiv at juno.com (Carl Spitzer {C Juno})
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2021 09:20:01 -0800
Subject: [Rushtalk] The ACLU Thinks Kyle Rittenhouse's Civil Liberties Got
 Too Much Protection
Message-ID: <1637428801.16580.7.camel@linux-7k5b.site>

The ACLU Thinks Kyle Rittenhouse's Civil Liberties Got Too Much
Protection

The American Civil Liberties Union should not cavalierly take the side
of prosecutors against the concept of self-defense.

Robby Soave | 11.19.2021 3:52 PM 


eyepress109040
(EyePress/Newscom) 
Kyle Rittenhouse, the 17-year-old who shot and killed two men during the
riots in Kenosha, Wisconsin, last summer, was acquitted on Friday.
Prosecutors had charged him with first-degree reckless homicide,
first-degree intentional homicide, attempted first-degree intentional
homicide, and two counts of first-degree recklessly endangering safety,
but the jury was persuaded by Rittenhouse's argument that he acted in
self-defense.

For anyone who had followed the trial closely, this outcome is
unsurprising. The prosecution simply did not meet its burden of proof,
and Rittenhouse's defense team presented considerable evidence that he
reasonably feared for his life each time he pulled the trigger. A
witness testified that Joseph Rosenbaum, the first man shot by
Rittenhouse, had threatened Rittenhouse's life and was attempting to
wrest control of Rittenhouse's AR-15. The second man, Anthony Huber,
struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard. And the third man?Gaige
Grosskreutz, who survived?admitted on the stand that he had first
pointed his own gun at Rittenhouse; Rittenhouse shot him in response to
this perceived threat. As former Rep. Justin Amash (L?Mich.) put it:
"The Rittenhouse case was a clear case of self-defense based on the
evidence presented. The initial media narrative was false. Justice
prevailed."

Indeed, people who did not follow the trial closely, and instead relied
on secondhand punditry from liberal media figures, probably missed some
very basic facts about the case, including that it had little to do with
race: Rittenhouse and all three of his victims were white. This is an
important point that some mainstream media coverage continues to miss.
At MSNBC, for instance, Ja'han Jones, a writer for show host Joy Reid's
blog, reacted to the verdict by explicitly saying Rittenhouse's
whiteness produced the acquittal:


        The case had the makings of an acquittal before the trial even
        began. The outcome seemed clear even before an almost
        exclusively white jury pool was selected, even before Judge
        Bruce Schroeder created an uproar by ruling that the slain
        protesters could be referred to as "rioters" and "looters" but
        not "victims," even before Schroeder refused to punish
        Rittenhouse for what prosecutors said amounted to a violation of
        his bond conditions. Rittenhouse is a white teen who abides by
        white rules, and white people empathetic to those rules seemed
        poised to insulate him from repercussions.
        


Rep. Cori Bush (D?Mo.) described the verdict as "white supremacy in
action":


        The judge. The jury. The defendant.
        
        It's white supremacy in action.
        
        This system isn't built to hold white supremacists accountable.
        It's why Black and brown folks are brutalized and put in cages
        while white supremacist murderers walk free.
        
        I'm hurt. I'm angry. I'm heartbroken.
        
        ? Cori Bush (@CoriBush) November 19, 2021
        


The accounts of former quarterback Colin Kaepernick and the Black Lives
Matter movement made similar statements. These remarks all reek of
ignorance: A jury acquitting a white defendant for killing three white
men is hardly an example of white supremacy.

Perhaps it's not surprising that activists and Democratic politicians
would reflexively cite white supremacy in a trial outcome that
disappoints Team Blue. More troubling is the response to the verdict
from an organization that should know better: the American Civil
Liberties Union (ACLU). In a statement reacting to the verdict,
ACLU-Wisconsin Interim Executive Director Shaadie Ali lamented the "deep
roots of white supremacy" in Kenosha that prevented Rittenhouse from
being "held responsible for his actions."

"Kyle Rittenhouse was a juvenile who traveled across state lines on a
vigilante mission, was allowed by police to roam the streets of Kenosha
with an assault rifle and ended up shooting three people and killing
two," said Brandon Buskey, director of the ACLU's Criminal Law Reform
Project. "These are the simple, tragic facts. His acquittal comes after
an ACLU investigation exposing how Kenosha law enforcement used violence
against protesters and drove them toward white militia groups, in ways
that escalated tensions and almost certainly led to these shootings."

In a Twitter thread, the ACLU complained that Rittenhouse was not held
accountable for his "conscious decision to travel across state lines and
injure one person and take the lives of two people protesting the
shooting of Jacob Blake by police."

Of course, it is not illegal to travel across state lines; the fact that
Rittenhouse wandered outside the boundaries of his home and entered a
neighboring municipality was irrelevant to the case. The jury did not
agree with?and the facts of the case did not support?the claim that his
decision to shoot three people was "conscious" in the sense that it was
premeditated. He argued that he rationally believed his life was in
imminent danger, and the surviving shooting victim provided testimony
that supported this argument.

One might have expected that an organization dedicated to the
preservation of civil liberties would not so cavalierly take the side of
prosecutors against the concept of self-defense. In the past, the ACLU
has done terrific work shining a light on prosecutorial misconduct?the
tremendous power the state has to stack the deck against defendants. The
ACLU purports to believe that all people, even the guilty, deserve due
process protections. The organization is evidently outraged by the
verdict: Is the ACLU outraged that the prosecutor tried to argue that
Rittenhouse exercising his Miranda rights was evidence of his guilt?

It is not necessary to elevate Rittenhouse to hero status, or to agree
with his very poor decision to involve himself in the Kenosha riots, to
accept that the prosecution failed to prove the charges against him.
Rittenhouse is now a free man?not because of white supremacy, or because
the criminal justice system failed. Activists, politicians, and media
figures who purport to care about civil liberties should work toward
empowering other defendants to avail themselves of due process, rather
than complain that in this one case, the prosecutors did not get its
way.


https://reason.com/2021/11/19/kyle-rittenhouse-verdict-acquitted-aclu-media-liberals/?utm_medium=email





____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Plans starting as low as $6.95 per month.*
https://store.netzero.net/account/showService.do?serviceId=nz-nLifeLock&utm_source=mktg&utm_medium=taglines&utm_campaign=nzlifelk_launch&utm_content=tag695&promoCode=A34454
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211120/a2161c7b/attachment.html>

From quaylejohn at aol.com  Sat Nov 20 11:27:32 2021
From: quaylejohn at aol.com (John  A. Quayle)
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2021 18:27:32 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Rushtalk] Kyle Rittenhouse Has Been Acquitted on All Charges
In-Reply-To: <1637428754.16580.6.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
References: <1637428754.16580.6.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
Message-ID: <330649543.2386806.1637432852751@mail.yahoo.com>

 ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? This young man should be gleefully rubbing his palms together.? I left media 25 years ago because I couldn't stomach the partisanship and the lying at that time. Today, it's exponentially worse than ever. I dare to say that we have no more media in this country. What we have is a bureau of propaganda. If any of you doubt me, just go on YouTube and see the montage of reactions from CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS (which ought to be called "see BS") and all of their braying jackasses. I can't fathom how Kyle Rittenhouse is a white supremacist when he shot three WHITE people - who all had criminal records! One of them kept yelling "nigger" this and that before Kyle shot him. And by the way, can we stop acting like using the word "nigger" is like blaspheming God? The word is used in 95% of rap songs today. Comedian Dave Chappelle, who is black, used it on his TV show. But, nobody is allowed to say it, except black people - like it's an affront to God or something. More people take the name of Jesus Christ in vain but don't dare say anything but the phrase, "the n-word". CNN didn't learn a damned thing after losing a libel suit to Nick Sandmann to the tune of a quarter billion (that's right, with a "B") dollars. Brandon Biden has a hand in this, too, and I'd love to see Rittenhouse reach into Brandon's pocket for a hundred mil, at least.  
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Spitzer {C Juno} via Rushtalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
To: RushTalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
Cc: Carl Spitzer {C Juno} <cwsiv at juno.com>
Sent: Sat, Nov 20, 2021 12:19 pm
Subject: [Rushtalk] Kyle Rittenhouse Has Been Acquitted on All Charges

 

Kyle Rittenhouse Has Been Acquitted on All Charges

The trial became an upside-down microcosm for the polarized debates about the U.S. criminal justice system.
Billy Binion | 11.19.2021 1:15 PM 


Kyle Rittenhouse looks at evidence during his trial (Mark Hertzberg/ZUMA Press Wire/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom) Kyle Rittenhouse, the teen who said he feared for his life when he killed two men and wounded another during a night of unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, has been found not guilty on all charges, including first-degree reckless homicide, two counts of first-degree recklessly endangering safety, first-degree intentional homicide, and attempted first-degree intentional homicide.

The prosecution had hoped to convince the jury that a 17-year-old Rittenhouse killed Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, and Anthony Huber, 26, without just cause when he traveled to the riots on August 25, 2020, although their case struggled to gain traction. Rosenbaum was described by a witness for the state as "hyperaggressive," ultimately chasing Rittenhouse down and trying to wrestle away his AR-15 before Rittenhouse shot him. Video footage showed Huber striking Rittenhouse in the neck with a skateboard before also trying to take his firearm. And Gaige Grosskreutz, 27, the man who Rittenhouse shot in the bicep, testified for the prosecution that he approached Rittenhouse that evening with his own pistol raised, throwing cold water on characterizations that Grosskreutz had his hands in the air.

The now-18-year-old Rittenhouse became the star witness in his own trial when he took the stand in his defense last week. It was an unusual gambit for a defendant. But it may have imperiled the prosecution, as Judge Bruce Schroeder admonished Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger for opening his questioning with a commentary on Rittenhouse's post-arrest silence?Binger seemed to suggest?that such silence was evidence of his guilt?and for attempting to show the jury evidence that Schroeder had already ruled was likely inadmissible. "I don't know what you're up to," the judge said last Wednesday in a testy exchange with Binger. "When you say that you were acting in good faith, I don't believe that."

The prosecutor was also roundly criticized for drawing a connection between Rittenhouse's actions and his affection for Call of Duty, as well as for his line of questioning on ammunition, which required the judge to correct him while Rittenhouse was on the stand. Yet a nugget from his closing arguments drew the loudest rebukes: "If you created the danger," Binger said, "you forfeit the right to self-defense by bringing that gun, aiming it at people, threatening people's lives."

No matter your feelings toward Rittenhouse, that statement by the prosecutor was "legally wrong," says Clark Neily, who served as co-counsel in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the landmark Supreme Court decision recognizing an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense. "The right to arm yourself and to protect yourself?these are natural rights that are not granted by the government, they're not granted by the Constitution. They're rights that we all possess."

Rittenhouse's trial became somewhat of an upside-down microcosm for the polarized debates about the U.S. criminal legal system as the loudest voices effectively traded in their priors and reversed roles. Cries to eschew due process and assign a lengthy prison term came from many on the criminal-justice-reform left, while the back-the-blue right zeroed in on prosecutorial overreach.

"Lock up Kyle Rittenhouse and throw away the key," said Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D?N.Y.), the chair of the House Democratic Caucus, who has dedicated much of his career to fighting mass incarceration. Judge Schroeder found himself at the center of similar reproach, coming under fire for rulings that some described as biased and too pro-defendant. It bears mentioning that his decisions were consistent with his decades-long career and not exclusive to Rittenhouse. But perhaps more significant is that judges have a reputation for being prosecutors in robes: On the federal bench, for instance, there are four former prosecutors for every one former defense attorney. Those concerned with criminal justice reform would typically laud a judge with a history like Schroeder's?when considering the deference that judges often give to the prosecution.

And this time it was conservative pundits who railed against the prosecutors, depicting Binger especially as a corrupt government agent with a lust for blood and a desire to punish Rittenhouse to placate social justice movements. One hopes they will continue to apply that healthy skepticism to all prosecutors, who enjoy absolute immunity from misconduct on the job and who are no strangers to seedy behavior.

As for Rittenhouse, despite the considerable amount of punditry devoted to a binary narrative?that he was a hero or a murderer?Neily presents another option: "I think he exhibited very poor judgement in arming himself and then going into that environment with a very visible, modern rifle. There's no question that there are people who perceive that to be a provocative act," Neily says. Based on the evidence, however, "I think he should be acquitted."

It appears the jury agrees.

 
https://reason.com/2021/11/19/kyle-rittenhouse-has-been-acquitted-on-all-charges/?utm_medium=email
https://reason.com/2021/11/19/kyle-rittenhouse-has-been-acquitted-on-all-charges/?utm_medium=email












 

____________________________________________________________

Top News - Sponsored By Newser   
   - St. Jude's Has Billions, and ProPublica Isn't Sure It Should
   - He Didn't Invent Toys, but He's the Genius We Can Thank for Them
   - At Elizabeth Holmes Trial, a 'Sudden,' Maybe Risky Move
_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://galene.csd.net/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211120/97847763/attachment-0001.html>

From cwsiv at juno.com  Sat Nov 20 18:53:15 2021
From: cwsiv at juno.com (Carl Spitzer {C Juno})
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2021 17:53:15 -0800
Subject: [Rushtalk] I Can't Believe The Prosecution Is This Stupid!
In-Reply-To: <1283809673.1919735.1637266662734@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <1283809673.1919735.1637266662734.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1283809673.1919735.1637266662734@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1637459595.28453.3.camel@linux-7k5b.site>

Related to AOC by blood???


CWSIV

____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Get Norton 360 with LifeLock starting at $9.95/month.*
https://store.netzero.net/account/showService.do?serviceId=nz-nLifeLock&utm_source=mktg&utm_medium=taglines&utm_campaign=nzlifelk_launch&utm_content=tag995&promoCode=A23457
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211120/0f6eceb9/attachment.html>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Sun Nov 21 08:20:36 2021
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 10:20:36 -0500
Subject: [Rushtalk] I Can't Believe The Prosecution Is This Stupid!
In-Reply-To: <1637459595.28453.3.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
References: <1283809673.1919735.1637266662734.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1283809673.1919735.1637266662734@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1637459595.28453.3.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
Message-ID: <aa4ea5c8-ff02-eef1-36aa-0135360a08b1@bellsouth.net>

Don't be so hard on the prosecution. The DA was under enormous political 
pressure to railroad Rittenhouse with a case he knew he couldn't win.


On 11/20/2021 8:53 PM, Carl Spitzer {C Juno} via Rushtalk wrote:
> Related to AOC by blood???
>
>
> CWSIV
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> *Choose to be safer online.*
> Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
> Get Norton 360 with LifeLock starting at $9.95/month.*
> <https://store.netzero.net/account/showService.do?serviceId=nz-nLifeLock&utm_source=mktg&utm_medium=taglines&utm_campaign=nzlifelk_launch&utm_content=tag995&promoCode=A23457>NetZero.com/NortonLifeLock 
> <https://store.netzero.net/account/showService.do?serviceId=nz-nLifeLock&utm_source=mktg&utm_medium=taglines&utm_campaign=nzlifelk_launch&utm_content=tag995&promoCode=A23457> 
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rushtalk mailing list
> Rushtalk at csdco.com
> http://galene.csd.net/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211121/10941207/attachment.html>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Sun Nov 21 08:21:36 2021
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 10:21:36 -0500
Subject: [Rushtalk] I Can't Believe The Prosecution Is This Stupid!
In-Reply-To: <1637459595.28453.3.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
References: <1283809673.1919735.1637266662734.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1283809673.1919735.1637266662734@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1637459595.28453.3.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
Message-ID: <fab3f302-9222-527a-632f-fae38733570f@bellsouth.net>

Don't be so hard on the prosecution. The DA was under enormous political 
pressure to railroad Rittenhouse with a case he knew he couldn't win. 
His only hope was to work for a mistrial so he could blame the judge.


On 11/20/2021 8:53 PM, Carl Spitzer {C Juno} via Rushtalk wrote:
> Related to AOC by blood???
>
>
> CWSIV
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> *Choose to be safer online.*
> Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
> Get Norton 360 with LifeLock starting at $9.95/month.*
> <https://store.netzero.net/account/showService.do?serviceId=nz-nLifeLock&utm_source=mktg&utm_medium=taglines&utm_campaign=nzlifelk_launch&utm_content=tag995&promoCode=A23457>NetZero.com/NortonLifeLock 
> <https://store.netzero.net/account/showService.do?serviceId=nz-nLifeLock&utm_source=mktg&utm_medium=taglines&utm_campaign=nzlifelk_launch&utm_content=tag995&promoCode=A23457> 
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rushtalk mailing list
> Rushtalk at csdco.com
> http://galene.csd.net/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211121/c753b805/attachment.html>

From quaylejohn at aol.com  Sun Nov 21 21:07:29 2021
From: quaylejohn at aol.com (John  A. Quayle)
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 04:07:29 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Rushtalk] Suing CNN?
References: <1126181562.2622106.1637554049189.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1126181562.2622106.1637554049189@mail.yahoo.com>

Alan Dershowitz Offers To Help Kyle Rittenhouse Sue CNN!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211122/0ee8d303/attachment-0001.html>

From john.nebel at csdco.com  Mon Nov 22 12:02:03 2021
From: john.nebel at csdco.com (John Nebel)
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 12:02:03 -0700
Subject: [Rushtalk] Suing CNN?
In-Reply-To: <1126181562.2622106.1637554049189@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <1126181562.2622106.1637554049189.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1126181562.2622106.1637554049189@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <319bfc99-529a-8d8e-cedc-59b21c34330d@csdco.com>

Meanwhile John Malone has gained control of CNN which will likely result in a 
change for the better.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._Malone>

<https://www.newsmax.com/politics/johnmalone-cnn-warnerbros-discovery/2021/11/21/id/1045596/?ns_mail_uid=813c4860-57da-4f77-8b55-066123bffe52&ns_mail_job=DM276542_11222021&s=acs&dkt_nbr=01010268rz4n>



On 11/21/2021 9:07 PM, John A. Quayle via Rushtalk wrote:
> Alan Dershowitz Offers To Help Kyle Rittenhouse Sue CNN! 
> <https://protrumpreport.lt.acemlnb.com/Prod/link-tracker?redirectUrl=aHR0cHMlM0ElMkYlMkZ3ZWxvdmV0cnVtcC5jb20lMkYyMDIxJTJGMTElMkYyMSUyRmFsYW4tZGVyc2hvd2l0ei1vZmZlcnMtdG8taGVscC1reWxlLXJpdHRlbmhvdXNlLXN1ZS1jbm4lMkYlM0Z1dG1fc291cmNlJTNEbmV3c2xldHRlcl9yYW5keSUyNnV0bV9tZWRpdW0lM0RtaXhlZCUyNnV0bV9jYW1wYWlnbiUzRG5ld3NsZXR0ZXJfcmFuZHk=&sig=96cQRn9aaFGsT9wTrbkh1TNHFi8j2jvZsK95ma7zqYmz&iat=1637540525&a=%7C%7C476675217%7C%7C&account=protrumpreport%2Eactivehosted%2Ecom&email=ELFAHxbdIxB45HGn8OZH84vy7T5YEJ8ohjC9vauJg30%3D&s=b72253ee555a20edcb255378b820bcb4&i=2132A2158A1A61864>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Rushtalk mailing list
> Rushtalk at csdco.com
> http://galene.csd.net/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
> 

From quaylejohn at aol.com  Mon Nov 22 12:20:11 2021
From: quaylejohn at aol.com (John  A. Quayle)
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 19:20:11 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Rushtalk] Suing CNN?
In-Reply-To: <319bfc99-529a-8d8e-cedc-59b21c34330d@csdco.com>
References: <1126181562.2622106.1637554049189.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1126181562.2622106.1637554049189@mail.yahoo.com>
 <319bfc99-529a-8d8e-cedc-59b21c34330d@csdco.com>
Message-ID: <1696942127.2814225.1637608811413@mail.yahoo.com>

 ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? Well, they can't get any worse. Brian Stelter had barely a 500,000 audience in recent ratings and was beaten by HGTV. I had about half of that per quarter hour 15 years ago, working on a 50kw radio station in Pittsburgh.
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: John Nebel via Rushtalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
To: rushtalk at csdco.com
Cc: John Nebel <john.nebel at csdco.com>
Sent: Mon, Nov 22, 2021 2:02 pm
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Suing CNN?

Meanwhile John Malone has gained control of CNN which will likely result in a 
change for the better.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._Malone>

<https://www.newsmax.com/politics/johnmalone-cnn-warnerbros-discovery/2021/11/21/id/1045596/?ns_mail_uid=813c4860-57da-4f77-8b55-066123bffe52&ns_mail_job=DM276542_11222021&s=acs&dkt_nbr=01010268rz4n>



On 11/21/2021 9:07 PM, John A. Quayle via Rushtalk wrote:
> Alan Dershowitz Offers To Help Kyle Rittenhouse Sue CNN! 
> <https://protrumpreport.lt.acemlnb.com/Prod/link-tracker?redirectUrl=aHR0cHMlM0ElMkYlMkZ3ZWxvdmV0cnVtcC5jb20lMkYyMDIxJTJGMTElMkYyMSUyRmFsYW4tZGVyc2hvd2l0ei1vZmZlcnMtdG8taGVscC1reWxlLXJpdHRlbmhvdXNlLXN1ZS1jbm4lMkYlM0Z1dG1fc291cmNlJTNEbmV3c2xldHRlcl9yYW5keSUyNnV0bV9tZWRpdW0lM0RtaXhlZCUyNnV0bV9jYW1wYWlnbiUzRG5ld3NsZXR0ZXJfcmFuZHk=&sig=96cQRn9aaFGsT9wTrbkh1TNHFi8j2jvZsK95ma7zqYmz&iat=1637540525&a=%7C%7C476675217%7C%7C&account=protrumpreport%2Eactivehosted%2Ecom&email=ELFAHxbdIxB45HGn8OZH84vy7T5YEJ8ohjC9vauJg30%3D&s=b72253ee555a20edcb255378b820bcb4&i=2132A2158A1A61864>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Rushtalk mailing list
> Rushtalk at csdco.com
> http://galene.csd.net/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
> 
_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://galene.csd.net/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211122/83e8e40f/attachment.html>

From cwsiv at juno.com  Mon Nov 22 12:45:06 2021
From: cwsiv at juno.com (Carl Spitzer {C Juno})
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 11:45:06 -0800
Subject: [Rushtalk] =?utf-8?q?The_Real_Anthony_Fauci=3A_Bill_Gates=2C_Big?=
 =?utf-8?q?_Pharma=2C_and_the_Global_War_on_Democracy_and_Public_Health_?=
 =?utf-8?q?=28Children=E2=80=99s_Health_Defense=29?=
Message-ID: <1637610306.15335.29.camel@linux-7k5b.site>

https://www.amazon.com/Real-Anthony-Fauci-Democracy-Childrens/dp/1510766804



____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Get Norton 360 with LifeLock starting at $9.95/month.*
https://store.netzero.net/account/showService.do?serviceId=nz-nLifeLock&utm_source=mktg&utm_medium=taglines&utm_campaign=nzlifelk_launch&utm_content=tag995&promoCode=A23457

From quaylejohn at aol.com  Mon Nov 22 12:49:38 2021
From: quaylejohn at aol.com (John  A. Quayle)
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 19:49:38 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Rushtalk] 
 =?utf-8?q?The_Real_Anthony_Fauci=3A_Bill_Gates=2C_Big?=
 =?utf-8?q?_Pharma=2C_and_the_Global_War_on_Democracy_and_Public_Health_?=
 =?utf-8?q?=28Children=E2=80=99s_Health_Defense=29?=
In-Reply-To: <1637610306.15335.29.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
References: <1637610306.15335.29.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
Message-ID: <221249954.2841155.1637610578951@mail.yahoo.com>

 ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? Fauci's just the tip of the iceberg. Take a look at this video below:
Subject: Fwd: Dr David Martin: Who THEY Are: The Names and Faces of the People Who Are Killing Humanity ? Forbidden Knowledge TV






?
Dr David Martin: Who THEY Are: The Names and Faces of the People Who Are Killing Humanity ? Forbidden Knowledge TV 

https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/dr-david-martin-who-they-are-the-names-and-faces-of-the-people-who-are-killing-humanity/Sent from Mail for Windows ?
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Spitzer {C Juno} via Rushtalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
To: RushTalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
Cc: Carl Spitzer {C Juno} <cwsiv at juno.com>
Sent: Mon, Nov 22, 2021 2:45 pm
Subject: [Rushtalk] The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health (Children?s Health Defense)

https://www.amazon.com/Real-Anthony-Fauci-Democracy-Childrens/dp/1510766804



____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Get Norton 360 with LifeLock starting at $9.95/month.*
https://store.netzero.net/account/showService.do?serviceId=nz-nLifeLock&utm_source=mktg&utm_medium=taglines&utm_campaign=nzlifelk_launch&utm_content=tag995&promoCode=A23457
_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://galene.csd.net/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211122/3f12e762/attachment-0001.html>

From cwsiv at juno.com  Tue Nov 23 08:46:34 2021
From: cwsiv at juno.com (Carl Spitzer {C Juno})
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 07:46:34 -0800
Subject: [Rushtalk] I Can't Believe The Prosecution Is This Stupid!
In-Reply-To: <fab3f302-9222-527a-632f-fae38733570f@bellsouth.net>
References: <1283809673.1919735.1637266662734.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1283809673.1919735.1637266662734@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1637459595.28453.3.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
 <fab3f302-9222-527a-632f-fae38733570f@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <1637682394.6733.2.camel@linux-7k5b.site>

Were their TV cameras in the court screwing things up like the OJ
trial??

CWSIV

On Sun, 2021-11-21 at 10:21 -0500, Dennis Putnam via Rushtalk wrote:
> Don't be so hard on the prosecution. The DA was under enormous
> political pressure to railroad Rittenhouse with a case he knew he
> couldn't win. His only hope was to work for a mistrial so he could
> blame the judge.

 


____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Plans starting as low as $6.95 per month.*
https://store.netzero.net/account/showService.do?serviceId=nz-nLifeLock&utm_source=mktg&utm_medium=taglines&utm_campaign=nzlifelk_launch&utm_content=tag695&promoCode=A34454
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211123/c0e66772/attachment.html>

From cwsiv at juno.com  Tue Nov 23 08:47:08 2021
From: cwsiv at juno.com (Carl Spitzer {C Juno})
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 07:47:08 -0800
Subject: [Rushtalk] Suing CNN?
In-Reply-To: <1126181562.2622106.1637554049189@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <1126181562.2622106.1637554049189.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1126181562.2622106.1637554049189@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1637682428.6733.3.camel@linux-7k5b.site>

On Mon, 2021-11-22 at 04:07 +0000, John A. Quayle via Rushtalk wrote:
> Alan Dershowitz Offers To Help Kyle Rittenhouse Sue CNN!

Would be the first time he helped an innocent person.

CWSIV
____________________________________________________________
Sponsored by https://www.newser.com/?utm_source=part&utm_medium=uol&utm_campaign=rss_taglines_more

Defense Lawyer's Remark on Arbery's Toenails Spurs Outrage
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/619d0caef3f42cae482bst02vuc1
Kyle Rittenhouse Has a Bone to Pick With Biden
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/619d0caf1fad4cae482bst02vuc2
5 Cops Indicted on Charges of Murdering Man
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/619d0caf3f3d5cae482bst02vuc3
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211123/aec57c42/attachment.html>

From quaylejohn at aol.com  Tue Nov 23 08:48:17 2021
From: quaylejohn at aol.com (John  A. Quayle)
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 15:48:17 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Rushtalk] Suing CNN?
In-Reply-To: <1637682428.6733.3.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
References: <1126181562.2622106.1637554049189.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1126181562.2622106.1637554049189@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1637682428.6733.3.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
Message-ID: <1515453182.576053.1637682497784@mail.yahoo.com>

 ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? Lin Wood is who helped Nick Sandmann get a quarter billion from CNN, but Kyle says that Wood kept Kyle in jail and used him to raise money. 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Spitzer {C Juno} via Rushtalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
To: rushtalk at csdco.com
Cc: Carl Spitzer {C Juno} <cwsiv at juno.com>
Sent: Tue, Nov 23, 2021 10:47 am
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Suing CNN?

 On Mon, 2021-11-22 at 04:07 +0000, John A. Quayle via Rushtalk wrote:
 Alan Dershowitz Offers To Help Kyle Rittenhouse Sue CNN!

Would be the first time he helped an innocent person.

CWSIV

____________________________________________________________

Top News - Sponsored By Newser   
   - Defense Lawyer's Remark on Arbery's Toenails Spurs Outrage
   - Kyle Rittenhouse Has a Bone to Pick With Biden
   - 5 Cops Indicted on Char ges of Murdering Man
_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://galene.csd.net/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211123/4b9fa3f1/attachment.html>

From cwsiv at juno.com  Wed Nov 24 20:14:45 2021
From: cwsiv at juno.com (Carl Spitzer {C Juno})
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2021 19:14:45 -0800
Subject: [Rushtalk] Suing CNN?
In-Reply-To: <319bfc99-529a-8d8e-cedc-59b21c34330d@csdco.com>
References: <1126181562.2622106.1637554049189.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1126181562.2622106.1637554049189@mail.yahoo.com>
 <319bfc99-529a-8d8e-cedc-59b21c34330d@csdco.com>
Message-ID: <1637810085.15395.5.camel@linux-7k5b.site>

On Mon, 2021-11-22 at 12:02 -0700, John Nebel via Rushtalk wrote:

> Meanwhile John Malone has gained control of CNN which will likely result in a 
> change for the better.
> 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._Malone>
> 
> <https://www.newsmax.com/politics/johnmalone-cnn-warnerbros-discovery/2021/11/21/id/1045596/?ns_mail_uid=813c4860-57da-4f77-8b55-066123bffe52&ns_mail_job=DM276542_11222021&s=acs&dkt_nbr=01010268rz4n>



That is the problem CNN is journalism incarnate.  What they need is
reporters what they have are followers of Joseph Goebbels.



-- 
Carl  Spitzer
  ___              _                                     
 / (_)            | |       ()      o                    
|      __,   ,_   | |       /\   _    _|_  __   _   ,_   
|     /  |  /  |  |/       /  \|/ \_|  |  / / _|/  /  |  
 \___/\_/|_/   |_/|__/    /(__/|__/ |_/|_/ /_/ |__/   |_/
                              /|            /|           
                              \|            \|   

Democrat is SIN and TREASON

____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Plans starting as low as $6.95 per month.*
https://store.netzero.net/account/showService.do?serviceId=nz-nLifeLock&utm_source=mktg&utm_medium=taglines&utm_campaign=nzlifelk_launch&utm_content=tag695&promoCode=A34454
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211124/f86ca7d7/attachment-0001.html>

From cwsiv at juno.com  Wed Nov 24 20:19:42 2021
From: cwsiv at juno.com (Carl Spitzer {C Juno})
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2021 19:19:42 -0800
Subject: [Rushtalk] Suing CNN?
In-Reply-To: <1515453182.576053.1637682497784@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <1126181562.2622106.1637554049189.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1126181562.2622106.1637554049189@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1637682428.6733.3.camel@linux-7k5b.site>
 <1515453182.576053.1637682497784@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1637810382.15395.7.camel@linux-7k5b.site>

On Tue, 2021-11-23 at 15:48 +0000, John A. Quayle wrote:
>                         Lin Wood is who helped Nick Sandmann get a
> quarter billion from CNN, but Kyle says that Wood kept Kyle in jail
> and used him to raise money. 


Money for the defense or protection from Kyle being murdered?
Certainly the pretrial publicity should be worth 10x what Richard Jewell
got from the Atlanta Urnal and Constipation and the FBI.




-- 
Carl  Spitzer
  ___              _                                     
 / (_)            | |       ()      o                    
|      __,   ,_   | |       /\   _    _|_  __   _   ,_   
|     /  |  /  |  |/       /  \|/ \_|  |  / / _|/  /  |  
 \___/\_/|_/   |_/|__/    /(__/|__/ |_/|_/ /_/ |__/   |_/
                              /|            /|           
                              \|            \|   

Democrat is SIN and TREASON

____________________________________________________________
Choose to be safer online.
Opt-in to Cyber Safety with NortonLifeLock.
Plans starting as low as $6.95 per month.*
https://store.netzero.net/account/showService.do?serviceId=nz-nLifeLock&utm_source=mktg&utm_medium=taglines&utm_campaign=nzlifelk_launch&utm_content=tag695&promoCode=A34454
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211124/582ebd60/attachment.html>

From quaylejohn at aol.com  Mon Nov 29 21:55:34 2021
From: quaylejohn at aol.com (John  A. Quayle)
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 04:55:34 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Rushtalk] Biden
References: <200418313.1323717.1638248134217.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200418313.1323717.1638248134217@mail.yahoo.com>

This is sooooooooooooooo true. Lying on a daily basis.? 
?  ?  ?   President Biden visits a remote Native American reservation.? With news crews following him around as they tour the place, the President asks the chief if there was anything they need. 

"Well," says the chief, "We have three very important needs. First, we have a medical clinic, but no doctor to man it.?? Biden whips out his cellphone, dials a number, talks to somebody for two minutes, and then hangs up. "I've pulled some strings. Your doctor will arrive in a few days."

"Now what was the second problem?"

"We have no way to get clean water. The local mining operation has poisoned the water our people have been drinking for thousands of years.? We've been flying bottled water in, and it's terribly expensive." 

Once again, Biden dials a number, yells into the phone for a few minutes, and then hangs up. "The mine has been shut down, and the owner is being billed for setting up a purification plant for your people."

"Now what was that third problem?"? The chief looks at him and says, "We have no cellphone reception up here!"     
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://galene.csd.net/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20211130/22b81ce8/attachment.html>