More lies getting halfway around the world

The New Neo Posted on by

The minute I read that six men (and then more) had been arrested for allegedly plotting against Michigan’s Governor Whitmer and other officials, I strongly suspected that no matter what their actual identities and political leanings, they would be called Trump supporters and described as inspired by him.

And that’s exactly what has happened. I’m not going to bother with the details, because you can just go here and here.

This particular group seems to me to conform more to the Timothy McVeigh type of anti-government thinking than anything else. At least one is apparently an anarchist who hates Trump:

Trump is not your friend, dude. It amazes me that people actually, like, believe that when he’s shown over and over and over again that he’s a tyrant. Every single person that works for government is your enemy, dude.

I suspect that’s the basic sentiment of the entire group.

Doesn’t matter. The blame-Trump narrative is set for most people. Biden himself said it, as did Whitmer, and although I’ve not done an exhaustive search (I’ll leave that to you this time), I don’t imagine that the MSM is keen to get the truth out and counter the impression.

This is the way we’ve seen it work, over and over. A public that’s been exposed to this for many many years doesn’t read this particular story in a vacuum, either. It’s a building block that’s piled on top of the many many other building blocks that have been put in place over many years, to create and then to strengthen an edifice of lies that’s sturdy and nearly impervious to attack.

Making election prognostications

The New Neo Posted on by

I have a natural tendency to be pessimistic about elections. This has been accentuated in recent years by the closeness of so many recent ones, and a growing distrust of polling. But that doesn’t mean I don’t take polls into consideration – I do. An when every poll predicts a Biden win, it’s hard not to be disheartened.

I don’t think the polls are necessarily wrong, either, although I just don’t know – and neither does anyone else. One can argue back and forth about it for a long, long time. There are points made about “shy Trump voters” and the like, but we don’t know the extent of that phenomenon. What we do know is that the polls are telling a bad story.

It’s even a frightening story. For a host of reasons, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are probably the two worst national candidates I’ve ever seen in my lifetime. They’re also tremendously unappealing, and their voters don’t even like them, for the most part. And yet at least half of Americans and maybe more are prepared to vote for them or have already done so.

And that’s because they hate Trump even more.

I’m not going to spend a lot of time now talking about why, because we’ve discussed it already so many times before. Let’s just say it’s a combination of the media, celebrities, the educational system, social media, and the naturally abrasive and rather unconventional personality of Donald Trump himself.

Let us not forget, either, that if the Democrats don’t win fair and square in the voting, I believe they are fully prepared to game the mail-in voting system which they insisted on setting up. That might include dead registrants, as well as this sort of thing.

I have thought for quite some time now that the continued drumming up of COVID panic even as the number of deaths and serious cases falls, is partly in order to expand the use of mail-in voting and therefore of fraud.

Ordinarily there’s a limit to how much fraud can be committed, but the sky’s the limit now in mail-in states. Report of people getting multiple ballots, and of people who no longer live at a certain address getting ballots there, seem rampant. The states that ordinarily have this method of automatically sending ballots to everyone on the voter rolls, whether requested or not (dead or alive) are: Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, and Utah. Utah is the only one that’s Republican, and in the others I don’t think Trump has any kind of chance at all to win. Belatedly joining their ranks this year are California, New Jersey, Vermont, DC (not a state – yet) and Nevada. The first three are deep deep blue, but although in 2016 Nevada went to Hillary Clinton, it was only by a couple of points. So Nevada could be a state where this method of voting and the potential for fraud ends up mattering a great deal. And they all matter if the Democrats use the method to pump up the popular vote, so that even if Trump somehow manages to win they can complain as they did in 2016 that he lost the popular vote and the Electoral College has got to go.

Mailing unrequested ballots to all voters is the most dangerous method of voting in terms of potential fraud, but some other states have applications for a ballot mailed to all registered voters, who then may apply for a ballot to be sent to them. The issue is not just how the applications are sent, but also how the ballot requests and ballot submissions are authenticated (or whether there’s an effort to authenticate them at all), and when.

I know that things can change. I know that the polls favoring Biden might be wrong. But my level of anxiety is very high. I wish I could write something that wasn’t such a downer, but honestly I can’t.

I was thinking the other evening about Thomas Sowell. How many lucid and brilliant books has he written over the years? A great many; a remarkable achievement. How many columns has he written? Likewise. And yet, although he has indeed influenced a lot of people – including me – in the end, did he just have his finger in the dike all that time? And are the waters about to rush in? There are forces much stronger than logic, and there always have been.

One thing I tell myself is that, even if this election goes the way I’m dreading, it doesn’t necessarily mean the country won’t or can’t wake up in a few years. I think the Democrats will fix things so that they entrench their own power (new states, court packing, and the like) and a reversal might be difficult or impossible. But perhaps the backlash will be so strong it will overcome whatever they do.

Another thing I believe is that, even if Trump is somehow able to pull this one out and win four more years, the forces allied against him are formidable and they will be angrier than ever. Whoever wins, I don’t see this settling down. Not at all.

I remember back in the fall of 2012 before the election, I went to my book group – which, except for me, consists of women from left to liberal who are predictable Democratic voters. I wondered what they’d say about Romney, who seemed to me to be the sort of person they wouldn’t be able to work up much of a head of steam against. Wrong, wrong, wrong. They had swallowed, and were bent on regurgitating, all the stupid memes they’d been fed. I recall in particular all the angry dissing about “binders of women,” and how it meant that Romney hated women and if elected would be harming them in some way or other.

It taught me just how very susceptible almost everyone I know is to propaganda. To see it get spread in real time that way was an education. Now, of course, the situation is far worse. To almost everyone I know, Trump is a sort of secular devil, and anything he says or does must be opposed with every fiber of a person’s being. And that is true not just of people who don’t follow politics, or who aren’t especially intelligent, but of people whose intellect and reasoning power I ordinarily respect.

And although I have never heard anyone say a single good thing about Joe Biden, he is truly irrelevant in their equation. He’s simply the un-Trump, and that will do.

Awww! Poor lil’ Kamala got mansplained by the big bad Pence

The New Neo Posted on by

A despicable but all-too-predictable accusation/excuse:

[from various tweets] ABC’s George Stephanopoulos:

“A lot of people were noticing some mansplaining going on tonight.”

Jamira Burley

“Every woman I know has given this look when some man attempts to mansplain or present an idea that isn’t theirs.”

Andrea Mitchell

“I asked a man I know what he thought of the debate. He said: ‘The debate was over when she said Mr. Vice President you are interrupting me.'”

So feminists who believe women are fully qualified to be president or vice president nevertheless also believe – when it suits their purposes, which is to say when the woman is a Democrat and the man a Republican – that a woman running for office should not be interrupted or argued with by a man.

Can we call that “womanthink” or “womanlogic”? No? Well, then, don’t call it “mansplaining” when a male opponent treats a female opponent normally.

In other words:

[NOTE: Also, among Kamala Harris’ many lies was this one about “Honest Abe.”]

The vice presidential debate is tonight

The New Neo Posted on by

You can discuss it here.

I don’t think I’ve got the stomach to watch.

UPDATE 11:30 PM:

Looking at comments around the right side of the blogosphere, the consensus is that Pence acquitted himself well, Kamala was incredibly annoying, the moderator was biased but not to quite the same extreme degree as Chris Wallace, and the fly stole the show.

No one has a clue what effect, if any, this will have on the polls, so I won’t even speculate.

It did occur to me prior to the debate that Pence might be able to set a good tone for debating Harris. He had to walk a fine line between assertiveness and bullying – I suspect it wouldn’t play well if he appeared to be doing the latter to a female. Pence is no pushover and yet has an almost unfailingly polite and calm demeanor.

Spider in waiting

The New Neo Posted on by

A couple of days ago I went to take a shower, and there was a spider in the tub. A large one (this isn’t a photo of my spider, but it looked just like it):

I couldn’t decide what to do with it. It was too big to smash, but I just didn’t feel up to performing the old cup-and-cardboard routine. So I washed up in the sink with a washcloth, and then left the bathroom and tried to forget about it.

The next time I entered, I was delighted to find that the spider had disappeared. Maybe it had even climbed out of the tub – although I knew that was unlikely, and that the steep sides made it very difficult for spiders to get out that way once trapped inside. I tried not to think about the details of where the spider might be.

The next time I entered the bathroom I happened to glance at the bathtub drain. To my horror I saw two little dots at the edge of the chrome, near one of the little holes. Could that be – two little spider feet?

In other words, had the spider crawled into a drain hole, and was it hanging there upside down, like a little trapeze artist?

My drain is of this type, by the way:

As I watched in horror, those small black dots withdrew downward into the drain. It was now unmistakable that the spider had taken up residence there. I suppose at that point I could (and should?) have run a stream of hot water, but that horrified me as well.

Maybe the thing would just crawl down and out, somehow – out into the wild beyond. Meanwhile, I left the bathroom again.

Next time – you guessed it – the spider was back in the tub, staring at me, looking bright and chipper and not at all the worse for wear. Refreshed, even.

And so I called in the troops, in the person of a friend who bravely removed it. And I finally took a shower.

Jews can demonstrate, too

The New Neo Posted on by

I wonder whether they will get a dispensation from the rules against large gatherings, too, because it’s a protest march:

Hundreds of members of the Borough Park Orthodox community took to the streets Tuesday night, defying orders to disperse and lighting a fire in protest of new state-mandated restrictions imposed on area synagogues, schools and non-essential businesses over a COVID-19 surge.

One large crowd huddled closely together at the corner of 50th Street and 15th Avenue at about 9 p.m. as community activist Heshy Tischler ripped Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Mayor Bill de Blasio over the order that shuts down schools completely and limits houses of worship to 10 people in certain COVID-19 hot spots.

One complaint was that they had not even been consulted or informed prior to Governor Cuomo’s press conference. And the crowd also chanted “Jewish Lives Matter!”

Cuomo’s presentation was especially offensive to the demonstrators:

“His language was dangerous and divisive, and left the implication that Orthodox Jews alone are responsible for rising COVID cases in New York State,” the elected officials said.

Exactly.

There is a long and terrible history of scapegoating Jews for pestilence. I am going to assume that Cuomo is aware of it. If he isn’t, he should be.

[NOTE: By the way, those who read yesterday’s thread on Cuomo’s presentation probably have noticed that the exact community and sect involved isn’t named here, either.]

COVID as Katrina: fear and blame is useful to the left

The New Neo Posted on by

I went to the hospital today for an upper abdominal sonogram. They’re trying to decide whether my weary old gallbladder will be allowed to stay with me for the duration of the journey, or if it needs to disembark at a station soon.

Sonograms are easy tests. The most that was required of me for this one was to fast, and then to lie down, hold my breath now and then, and turn this way and that.

My task was made even easier by the fact that the hospital parking lot, ordinarily so full at that time of day, was largely empty. The hospital waiting room likewise, and they took me right away. I was in and out, start to finish including check-in, obligatory hand-sanitizing and answering COVID symptom questions, in twenty-five minutes flat.

That got me to thinking once again of the missed screening tests, diagnostic tests, and treatment that enhanced COVID-fear hath wrought. And, strangely enough, as deaths have dropped, the fear doesn’t seem to be abating.

Among other things, the Democrats have labeled it politically useful. And it is. Biden has fastened on it as the hallmark of his campaign. Trump has now come to symbolize the opposite approach, which the opposition calls reckless and foolhardy, tantamount to murder, and which we on the right call reasonable caution combined with courage and guarded optimism.

You pays your money and you takes your choice. The parties have decided on their respective approaches, and those approaches also happen to play to psychological characteristics of their respective bases. The MSM does the rest – which from the start has been to place a heavy heavy thumb on the scale of “This is Trump’s fault,” in hopes that Biden and company win as a result.

I read today that polls show that most people think Trump is to blame and that Biden would do better:

Democrats have planned to leverage the twin crises of COVID-19 and the economic shutdowns to win in November. Biden’s message, not surprisingly, is all over the place, at once condemning the president for not doing enough to stop the spread then condemning the president for the economic and societal consequences of the lockdown that was intended to stop the spread.

Polls consistently show low approval ratings for the president on his handling of the disease; most respondents believe Biden would do a better job even though his plans do not differ from the president’s. Biden continues to flip-flop on a national mask mandate but has publicly said he would authorize another economic lockdown.

It’s increasingly likely the election will be a referendum on Coronavirus and its after-effects, which means Trump’s new tack [of “Fear not!”] is a risky, but necessary, one.

It’s only risky because the public has been told over and over that COVID is a killer far out of proportion to its actual menace (which is bad enough, but not catastrophic) and that Trump’s approach has led to further death and destruction. I’ve noticed that, as the danger slowly recedes, the fear has not – at least, among most people I know. Their anger at Trump and contempt for him has only increased.

Propaganda works. It really really really does.

And this was the plan from the very start. It was back in March that the drumbeat began: this would be Trump’s Katrina. You can do a search yourself and find all the articles, but for now I’ll give a link to just one of them from mid-March.

The media and the left care nothing about what this tactic of theirs has done to people’s health, both physcial (in the sense of missed medical interventions for other problems) and mental (for example depression and anxiety). Doesn’t matter. It’s like the riots in blue cities – the damage is extraordinary, even to the left’s own constituents, but that doesn’t matter either because it’s all part of the drive to defeat Trump, sow chaos, and turn this country into a permanent leftist fiefdom and its people into docile and obedient citizens who do what they’re told.

[NOTE: And of course Biden is now saying no more debates if Trump has COVID.]

Andrew Cuomo, who had no problem with mass demonstrations for BLM…

The New Neo Posted on by

…has very different rules for ultra-Orthodox Jews.

Also please see this article for a very full discussion of Cuomo’s press conference. During it, Cuomo used an old photo and said it was new (he used others that purportedly really are new, as well), but it’s the substance of his remarks that interests me more.

I am struck by something I haven’t seen mentioned elsewhere – which is that Cuomo keeps referring to the accused communities as “Orthodox.” Although that it true, it is like referring to them as “Jews.” “Orthodox” describes a large group of Jews, but there are many many divisions within that group. The ones in question are not just Orthodox, they are ultra Orthodox. And actually, they are not just Orthodox, they are ultra-ultra-Orthodox. Calling them simply “Orthodox” has the effect of expanding the accusation in the eye of the general public to all Orthodox Jews.

I have written previously on related topics, in regard to ultra-Orthodox views and accusations and misconceptions that they are anti-vaccers. Please read. Please also read this post of mine about accusations similar to the present ones regarding the group’s COVID behavior. An excerpt:

The genesis of de Blasio’s admonition to “the Jewish community” – a pretty diverse group, and in NYC a fairly large one – was apparently a funeral for a rabbi held in Brooklyn by an ultra-Orthodox sect called the Satmar. Not only are they not “the Jewish community” at large, they’re not even “the Orthodox Jewish community.” The NY Satmar are based in Willliamsburg, and they are such an extreme sect that they could correctly be called not just ultra-Orthodox but ultra-ultra-Orthodox. They are so Orthodox they are radical, if that makes any sense (among other things, they don’t recognize the state of Israel). It’s hard to get a bead on their numbers in Brooklyn, but let’s just say that although it’s in the thousands, it’s a miniscule percectage of the Jews of New York City. They no more represent the Jewish community than the Branch Davidians represented the “Christian community.”

But that didn’t stop de Blasio from referring to them that way. It is no accident, either, although he tried to backtrack somewhat when howls of protest ensued regarding his addressing Jews in general. De Blasio may be mayor of New York, but he’s a leftist of the Corbynesque variety, and anti-Semitism is part of the genre.

Oh, and by the way, the Satmar said they had a police permit for the event and tried to make the crowd conform to social distancing rules:

“Neither de Blasio nor his police commissioner, Dermot Shea, addressed reports that the funeral procession had actually been coordinated with the New York Police Department and the knowledge of City Hall. Shea said that 12 summonses had been issued for refusal to disperse and for violating social distancing. ‘That event last night never should have happened,’ he said. ‘It will never happen again.’

“The mourning event in the Williamsburg neighborhood Tuesday night was organized by followers of the late Rabbi Chaim Mertz. Organizers said that they thought the procession would conform with social distancing guidelines because they asked everyone to stay six feet away from each other. The police department cooperated by barricading streets and putting up street lights, according to David Greenfield, the CEO of a Jewish anti-poverty organization and a former city councilman.

“Video of the event showed that funeral marchers were also guided by members of Shomrim, the Jewish community security organization. A Hasidic source who is familiar with the Shomrim’s preparations for the funeral, but not authorized to speak publicly, told the Forward that the Shomrim and NYPD had worked together in planning the funeral.

“‘The plan was to have a specific number of people who could go into one street, then close it down, and have the car go to the next street,’ the source explained. The source added that in addition to lights and barricades, the police had also approved having a sound system so that attendees could hear eulogies, but that at the last minute, officers ordered organizers not to use the speaker system.

“In their joint news conference, de Blasio and Shea did not respond to the claims of NYPD involvement.”

That was written about five months ago.

Matt Taibbi on the news business and how it drives division

The New Neo Posted on by

Here’s a video of a very interesting talk by Matt Taibbi on the way that money drives news decisions that help polarize America further. I think it’s worth listening to, although I think he leaves out a lot, as well.

Taibbi is an unusual journalist – sort of on the left but a maverick who’s not afraid to call out the left and do a lot of critiquing of the press, as well. But here he seems to be ignoring some non-financial causes of the changes in news coverage, such as: (1) the erasure of the difference between opinion and fact journalism that started with Vietnam and does not appear to have been money-driven (2) the effect Watergate had on reporters’ egos and goals (3) the imbalance between the number of news outlets on the left and on the right, which is enormously skewed towards the left (4) the fact that the news is not just partisan on each side in terms of what topics they cover and how, but that – particularly on the left – a significant amount of their coverage consists of lies and/or substantial distortions (often featuring truncated quotes).

Here it is:

There is an especially revealing exchange that starts around minute 57:05. Taibbi’s monologue is over, and there is an interviewer asking him questions about covering the news. She says [emphasis mine]:

First there is the notion of treating both sides as equal, when they’re not. So, for example, I think it’s fairly clear that. you know, Donald Trump is prone to xenophobia, white nationalism, these types of things, so – you know, how do you kind of put that in context? Or, you know, how do you think about that, you know, covering him when there’s this – you have a chicken/egg problem with how you present his views?

So, in the context of being objective, she accepts (and expects Taibbi and every other supposedly neutral observer) to accept, that Trump is “xenophobic” and a “white nationalist.” Basically, she is saying that since it’s obviously true that Trump is an evil racist white supremacist who’s afraid of foreigners, is it okay to be fair to him, and what would “objectivity” even mean when covering a person such as that?

My answer would be to point out that she’s already made assumptions and believes her assumptions to be true, and might need to really dive deep, read some discussions on the right about those issues regarding Trump, and challenge herself and her assumptions. For example, I’ve written here about the use of the word “xenophobia” to label the right as evil, and why it’s just a buzzword that sometimes describes very logical reasoning and not a phobia at all. In addition, of course someone who is against illegal immigration would appeal to people who really are white supremacists, but that does not mean that person supports white supremacy nor that he/she has chosen such a position in order to appeal to white supremacists. There are enormous independent reasons to oppose illegal immigration, and by labeling the person “racist” “xenophobe” “white supremacist” or by pointing out that the person’s point of view happens to be attractive to such people is to use propagandist labels to deflect a serious discussion that we should be having about the merits of the case for opposing illegal immigration.

Taibbi says something curious during his answer to this particular question. He points out that during the 2016 campaign it was considered okay for reporters such as him to talk about the fact that Trump wasn’t just appealing to racists, but was also appealing to the disaffected Americans who felt they’d been left behind by government. Taibbi says that, after the election, that was no longer allowed (by the people who run the media outlets, I suppose), and that suddenly all that was considered acceptable by management was to say that Trump won by appealing to racists. Taibbi makes it clear that he thinks this appeal of Trump’s to the disaffected was insincere on Trump’s part; that of course he didn’t and doesn’t care about those people, but that still it needed to be reported that he was marketing his campaign towards them. In other words, Taibbi believes that he can read Trump’s mind, and that one of Trump’s most consistent messages is completely cynical and manipulative.

The sad thing is that Taibbi is one of the more objective reporters in the MSM.

Why the media makes Trump denounce white supremacy over and over

The New Neo Posted on by

From DocZero (hat tip: AseopFan):

The question with the many, many people in media like Acosta is: Are they shamelessly lying because they know damn well Trump has said it before, or have they actually convinced themselves to forget he said it, because they’re so utterly invested in this narrative?

I’m genuinely curious about this. I could believe either explanation.

I have two answers, and I think that although the answers are somewhat contradictory they co-exist in most of the MSM.

The first is that the media is employing the old LBJ “pig f***er” ploy. I think this is actually their main tactic:

…[There’s] a story about one of Lyndon Johnson’s early campaigns in Texas. The race was close and Johnson was getting worried. Finally he told his campaign manager to start a massive rumor campaign about his opponent’s life-long habit of enjoying carnal knowledge of his own barnyard sows.

“Christ, we can’t get a way with calling him a pig-f***er,” the campaign manager protested. “Nobody’s going to believe a thing like that.”

“I know,” Johnson replied. “But let’s make the sonofabitch deny it.”

Of course, many people believe that Trump is a white supremacist, and one of the main reasons they believe that is that the left says it and the media insinuates it by bringing it up over and over, making the sonofabitch deny it, and then criticizing every aspect of his denial, as well as pretending later on that the denial never happened.

I said there were two answers, though, and the second is that some on the left and in the press do believe their own narrative: that Trump is indeed a secret white supremicist. This is an article of faith among some people (I have met and argued with such people). With those people, every time Trump denounces white supremacy they feel he is lying. So they keep asking, hoping he will refuse to do so, or do it “wrong” (not quite vigorously enough or giving them some other tonal or linguistic nit to pick). I cannot recall any other president being made to do this, particularly one who’s never been part of such a group and has never expressed support for such a group.

I guess I have a third answer, too, although I think it’s less of a driver for them. It’s just a bonus, really. It’s that they get to virtue-signal by asking the question in that earnest, searching tone they use. Anyone who asks the question is making it clear that he or she is most decidedly not a white supremacist.

But then again, the anti-racist trainers (Robin DiAngelo, Ibram Kendi, etc.) believe that our entire society and all white people in it are irredeemably white supremacist, and that even black people who are conservative are white supremacists, despite their race, because they are fostering the white supremacist system. So denial doesn’t matter to the anti-racist (critical race) theorists – and they are educating new generations to think that way, too.

The full Crowley

The New Neo Posted on by

Victor Davis Hanson has a new article (entitled “The Full Crowley”) that revisits the infamous debate in 2012 in which moderator Candy Crowley intervened on behalf of President Obama. It didn’t help her career at all, but it certainly helped Obama and hurt Romney, and that almost undoubtedly was the goal.

Hanson compares that to media bias today as exhibited – just to take two examples – by Chris Wallace and John Roberts. The entire article is well worth reading.

Those of you who’ve read this blog for many years may remember that I did some exhaustive analysis of what happened during that Crowley exchange. You may want to stroll down memory lane and revisit a few of those posts, this one and especially this one and this one (the latter has a video embedment that no longer works, but it’s a reference to the moments I highlighted in that second link, which contains a video of the debate cued up to start with the exchange in question).

Looking back on all of it – on the full Crowley treatment that was given Romney – I feel even more strongly now that the episode was at least somewhat pre-arranged between Obama and Crowley. When you study the details, it’s almost impossible to escape that conclusion.

Kayleigh McEnany tests positive for COVID

The New Neo Posted on by

Ever since the series of positive diagnoses of people on the political right, McEnany has been tested regularly and until now she was always negative. But now she has tested positive, although so far without symptoms.

She expects to quarantine and to work remotely. She’s 32 years old, and a lean mean fighting machine, and so although COVID can get really bad for anyone and no one runs zero risk, statistically speaking her prognosis is good.

I’m not a person given to conspiracy theories, although I know that the current rash of diagnoses on the right (and none on the left, as far as I know) have engendered a lot of speculation about a deliberate infection of this crew by political operatives on the left. I don’t think that’s what happened – although I think that it certainly would have been a clever move if the intent was to peg the right as ignoring common sense ways to protect themselves, and to have that tie into the narrative that they failed to protect the American people, as well as to drive home the left’s constant assertion that we need to have lots of mail-in voting because going to the polls in person is inherently dangerous.

Except I think that deliberate infection would be a difficult tactic to pull off. Difficult, but hardly impossible. And it would have the potential to backfire. If everyone in the current group manages to recover without serious complications – and I fervently hope that is the case – what message does that give? A more hopeful one.

At any rate, I doubt we’ll ever really know why so many people in government were suddenly infected at once. You can point to a certain occasion that may have qualified as a “superspreader event” (such as the Barrett celebration, or perhaps the debate), but we’ll probably never be able to identify it. Also, it’s impossible to distinguish any of those events from so many others that did not seem to lead to infections. The Barrett get-together was held outdoors, for example. And some people who got sick had worn masks there.

Please get well soon, Kayleigh and the others.