Do you think there is or should be a USPS record of the employee who handed Oswald the rifle when he picked it up?
Do you think there is or should be a record of the REA employee who handed Oswald the revolver when he came to pick it up?
If you answer yes to either question, where do you suppose such records should be stored?
Why do you think it matters who handed Oswald the mail order weapons
when he came to pick them up?
Fish Part Messiah isn't going to answer this, or at least answer it in any substantive way. Fish Part is once again guilty of something called presentism, which is the idea that the standards and practices of the past can be judged retrospectively onthe standards and practices of today. It's possible that in today's world, there might be records for some of the questions Fish Part brings up, irrelevant as his concerns are, but not in 1963 America.
On Wednesday, November 1, 2023 at 11:17:31 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:the standards and practices of today. It's possible that in today's world, there might be records for some of the questions Fish Part brings up, irrelevant as his concerns are, but not in 1963 America.
Fish Part Messiah isn't going to answer this, or at least answer it in any substantive way. Fish Part is once again guilty of something called presentism, which is the idea that the standards and practices of the past can be judged retrospectively on
No, just like you, I'm sure there weren't any such things in 1963 as work schedules or records of assignments, like we have today.
No, like you, I'm sure there were no records at the USPS or REA Express on who worked their counters that week between 3/20 and 3/27, like we have today.
No, like you, I'm sure the same FBI that was willing to fingerprint every employee in the TSBD, didn't have the time to interview the employees of the USPS or REA, like they would today.
When you're talking a chain of custody, it's important to know who had custody of the weapons.
The tracking of the weapons must have been done by you, because it was done half-assed.
And no employee of either establishment ever came forward to identify himself as the one who gave Oswald the weapons.
Even after Oswald became world famous, and his face was plastered in every newspaper and all over every TV set in the world, you mean to say no one recognized him ?
No one remembered his box # 2915 ?
No one remembered him coming to the counter with a notice ?
No one remembered a 40" package ?
No one at REA Express remembered handing him a package that was noted as, "1 crtn pistol"?
Why wasn't anyone from REA Express ever called to give testimony, Chuckles ?
Why was all the REA documentation autheticated by Heinz Michaelis, the manager at Seaport Traders,
who wasn't even employed by them when the transaction occurred ?
Why didn't the FBI interview the employees at the USPS branch where Box 2915 was located ?
They interviewed all kinds of people who had no knowledge of the crime.
They interviewed a woman who knew a woman who babysat Oswald when he was 2 1/2 years old.
They interviewed Dean Rusk.
They accepted as an exhibit the bite pattern of Jack Ruby's mother.
They took 18 pages of testimony from the emcee at Jack Ruby's club.
But the guy who brought two rifles into the building that the President was allegedly shot from only got two pages of testimony ?
What do all these deficiencies have to do with standards between 1963 and today ? These weren't prehistoric times, this was 1963.
Why did they waste their time and manpower on shit that had NOTHING to do with this crime,
while at the same time neglecting to pursue leads and tie up loose ends ?
Enlighten us, Chuckles.
Do you think there is or should be a USPS record of the employee who handed >Oswald the rifle when he picked it up?
Do you think there is or should be a record of the REA employee who handed >Oswald the revolver when he came to pick it up?
If you answer yes to either question, where do you suppose such records >should be stored?
Why do you think it matters who handed Oswald the mail order weapons
when he came to pick them up?
On Wednesday, November 1, 2023 at 5:03:23?PM UTC-5, John Corbett wrote:
Do you think there is or should be a USPS record of the employee who handed >> Oswald the rifle when he picked it up?
Do you think there is or should be a record of the REA employee who handed >> Oswald the revolver when he came to pick it up?
If you answer yes to either question, where do you suppose such records
should be stored?
Why do you think it matters who handed Oswald the mail order weapons
when he came to pick them up?
On Wednesday, November 1, 2023 at 11:17:31?PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:the standards and practices of today. It's possible that in today's world, there might be records for some of the questions Fish Part brings up, irrelevant as his concerns are, but not in 1963 America.
Fish Part Messiah isn't going to answer this, or at least answer it in any substantive way. Fish Part is once again guilty of something called presentism, which is the idea that the standards and practices of the past can be judged retrospectively on
No, just like you, I'm sure there weren't any such things in 1963 as work schedules or records of assignments, like we have today.
No, like you, I'm sure there were no records at the USPS or REA Express on who worked their counters that week between 3/20 and 3/27, like we have today.
No, like you, I'm sure the same FBI that was willing to fingerprint every employee in the TSBD, didn't have the time to interview the employees of the USPS or REA, like they would today.
When you're talking a chain of custody, it's important to know who had custody of the weapons.
The tracking of the weapons must have been done by you, because it was done half-assed.
And no employee of either establishment ever came forward to identify himself as the one who gave Oswald the weapons.
Even after Oswald became world famous, and his face was plastered in every newspaper and all over every TV set in the world, you mean to say no one recognized him ?
No one remembered his box # 2915 ?
No one remembered him coming to the counter with a notice ?
No one remembered a 40" package ?
No one at REA Express remembered handing him a package that was noted as, "1 crtn pistol" ?
Why wasn't anyone from REA Express ever called to give testimony, Chuckles ? >Why was all the REA documentation autheticated by Heinz Michaelis, the manager at Seaport Traders,
who wasn't even employed by them when the transaction occurred ?
Why didn't the FBI interview the employees at the USPS branch where Box 2915 was located ?
They interviewed all kinds of people who had no knowledge of the crime.
They interviewed a woman who knew a woman who babysat Oswald when he was 2 1/2 years old.
They interviewed Dean Rusk.
They accepted as an exhibit the bite pattern of Jack Ruby's mother.
They took 18 pages of testimony from the emcee at Jack Ruby's club.
But the guy who brought two rifles into the building that the President was allegedly shot from only got two pages of testimony ?
What do all these deficiencies have to do with standards between 1963 and today ? These weren't prehistoric times, this was 1963.
Why did they waste their time and manpower on shit that had NOTHING to do with this crime, while at the same time neglecting to pursue leads and tie up loose ends ?
Enlighten us, Chuckles.
On Thursday, November 2, 2023 at 6:04:31?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:on the standards and practices of today. It's possible that in today's world, there might be records for some of the questions Fish Part brings up, irrelevant as his concerns are, but not in 1963 America.
On Wednesday, November 1, 2023 at 11:17:31?PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote: >> > Fish Part Messiah isn't going to answer this, or at least answer it in any substantive way. Fish Part is once again guilty of something called presentism, which is the idea that the standards and practices of the past can be judged retrospectively
No, just like you, I'm sure there weren't any such things in 1963 as work schedules or records of assignments, like we have today.
No, like you, I'm sure there were no records at the USPS or REA Express on who worked their counters that week between 3/20 and 3/27, like we have today.
Your question...
No, like you, I'm sure the same FBI that was willing to fingerprint every employee in the TSBD, didn't have the time to interview the employees of the USPS or REA, like they would today.
Why would they bother?
When you're talking a chain of custody, it's important to know who had custody of the weapons.
The evidence that Oswald had taken possession of the weapons is firmly established by the
evidence. That is all that is necessary.
The tracking of the weapons must have been done by you, because it was done half-assed.
No, Gil, it was very thorough.
And no employee of either establishment ever came forward to identify himself as the one who gave Oswald the weapons.
Why would you expect them to? Why would you expect them to remember handing a package
to Oswald six months earlier?
Even after Oswald became world famous, and his face was plastered in every newspaper and all over every TV set in the world, you mean to say no one recognized him ?
No one remembered his box # 2915 ?
No one remembered him coming to the counter with a notice ?
No one remembered a 40" package ?
No one at REA Express remembered handing him a package that was noted as, "1 crtn pistol"?
Why wasn't anyone from REA Express ever called to give testimony, Chuckles ?
Why was all the REA documentation autheticated by Heinz Michaelis, the manager at Seaport Traders,
who wasn't even employed by them when the transaction occurred ?
Why didn't the FBI interview the employees at the USPS branch where Box 2915 was located ?
What could they be expected to know that would add to the body of knowledge?
They interviewed all kinds of people who had no knowledge of the crime.
They interviewed a woman who knew a woman who babysat Oswald when he was 2 1/2 years old.
They interviewed Dean Rusk.
They accepted as an exhibit the bite pattern of Jack Ruby's mother.
Gathering evidence is like panning for gold. You sift through a lot of worthless stuff to find the
occasional nugget.
They took 18 pages of testimony from the emcee at Jack Ruby's club.
But the guy who brought two rifles into the building that the President was allegedly shot from only got two pages of testimony ?
What do all these deficiencies have to do with standards between 1963 and today ? These weren't prehistoric times, this was 1963.
The deficiencies are imaginary. The investigation was thorough. It gathered overwhelming
evidence that Oswald was an assassin and a cop killer. Far more evidence than would be
required in most any other murder case.
Why did they waste their time and manpower on shit that had NOTHING to do with this crime,
while at the same time neglecting to pursue leads and tie up loose ends ?
Enlighten us, Chuckles.
On Wednesday, November 1, 2023 at 11:17:31 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:the standards and practices of today. It's possible that in today's world, there might be records for some of the questions Fish Part brings up, irrelevant as his concerns are, but not in 1963 America.
Fish Part Messiah isn't going to answer this, or at least answer it in any substantive way. Fish Part is once again guilty of something called presentism, which is the idea that the standards and practices of the past can be judged retrospectively on
No, just like you, I'm sure there weren't any such things in 1963 as work schedules or records of assignments, like we have today.
No, like you, I'm sure there were no records at the USPS or REA Express on who worked their counters that week between 3/20 and 3/27, like we have today.
No, like you, I'm sure the same FBI that was willing to fingerprint every employee in the TSBD, didn't have the time to interview the employees of the USPS or REA, like they would today.
When you're talking a chain of custody, it's important to know who had custody of the weapons.
The tracking of the weapons must have been done by you, because it was done half-assed.
And no employee of either establishment ever came forward to identify himself as the one who gave Oswald the weapons.
Even after Oswald became world famous, and his face was plastered in every newspaper and all over every TV set in the world, you mean to say no one recognized him ?
No one remembered his box # 2915 ?
No one remembered him coming to the counter with a notice ?
No one remembered a 40" package ?
No one at REA Express remembered handing him a package that was noted as, "1 crtn pistol" ?
Why wasn't anyone from REA Express ever called to give testimony, Chuckles ?
Why was all the REA documentation autheticated by Heinz Michaelis, the manager at Seaport Traders,
who wasn't even employed by them when the transaction occurred ?
Why didn't the FBI interview the employees at the USPS branch where Box 2915 was located ?
They interviewed all kinds of people who had no knowledge of the crime.
They interviewed a woman who knew a woman who babysat Oswald when he was 2 1/2 years old.
They interviewed Dean Rusk.
They accepted as an exhibit the bite pattern of Jack Ruby's mother.
They took 18 pages of testimony from the emcee at Jack Ruby's club.
But the guy who brought two rifles into the building that the President was allegedly shot from only got two pages of testimony ?
What do all these deficiencies have to do with standards between 1963 and today ? These weren't prehistoric times, this was 1963.
Why did they waste their time and manpower on shit that had NOTHING to do with this crime, while at the same time neglecting to pursue leads and tie up loose ends ?
Enlighten us, Chuckles.
Or, you know, sit on your ass in your cluttered little home and bitch about the Warren Commission Report.
Get busy, Lazy Bones.
LAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Decades spent sitting on your ass and bitching.
On Wednesday, November 1, 2023 at 11:17:31 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:the standards and practices of today. It's possible that in today's world, there might be records for some of the questions Fish Part brings up, irrelevant as his concerns are, but not in 1963 America.
Fish Part Messiah isn't going to answer this, or at least answer it in any substantive way. Fish Part is once again guilty of something called presentism, which is the idea that the standards and practices of the past can be judged retrospectively on
No, just like you, I'm sure there weren't any such things in 1963 as work schedules or records of assignments, like we have today.
No, like you, I'm sure there were no records at the USPS or REA Express on who worked their counters that week between 3/20 and 3/27, like we have today.
No, like you, I'm sure the same FBI that was willing to fingerprint every employee in the TSBD, didn't have the time to interview the employees of the USPS or REA, like they would today.
When you're talking a chain of custody, it's important to know who had custody of the weapons.
The tracking of the weapons must have been done by you, because it was done half-assed.
And no employee of either establishment ever came forward to identify himself as the one who gave Oswald the weapons.
Even after Oswald became world famous, and his face was plastered in every newspaper and all over every TV set in the world, you mean to say no one recognized him ?
No one remembered his box # 2915 ?
No one remembered him coming to the counter with a notice ?
No one remembered a 40" package ?
No one at REA Express remembered handing him a package that was noted as, "1 crtn pistol" ?
Why wasn't anyone from REA Express ever called to give testimony, Chuckles ? Why was all the REA documentation autheticated by Heinz Michaelis, the manager at Seaport Traders,
who wasn't even employed by them when the transaction occurred ?
Why didn't the FBI interview the employees at the USPS branch where Box 2915 was located ?
They interviewed all kinds of people who had no knowledge of the crime.
They interviewed a woman who knew a woman who babysat Oswald when he was 2 1/2 years old.
They interviewed Dean Rusk.
They accepted as an exhibit the bite pattern of Jack Ruby's mother.
They took 18 pages of testimony from the emcee at Jack Ruby's club.
But the guy who brought two rifles into the building that the President was allegedly shot from only got two pages of testimony ?
What do all these deficiencies have to do with standards between 1963 and today ? These weren't prehistoric times, this was 1963.
Why did they waste their time and manpower on shit that had NOTHING to do with this crime, while at the same time neglecting to pursue leads and tie up loose ends ?
Enlighten us, Chuckles.
Only the authorities after the commission of a crime, stupid.
Do you think the need to track the Carcano Oswald killed Kennedy with back to the soldier who carried it in WWII?
On Thursday, November 2, 2023 at 5:04:31?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:on the standards and practices of today. It's possible that in today's world, there might be records for some of the questions Fish Part brings up, irrelevant as his concerns are, but not in 1963 America.
On Wednesday, November 1, 2023 at 11:17:31?PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote: >> > Fish Part Messiah isn't going to answer this, or at least answer it in any substantive way. Fish Part is once again guilty of something called presentism, which is the idea that the standards and practices of the past can be judged retrospectively
No, just like you, I'm sure there weren't any such things in 1963 as work schedules or records of assignments, like we have today.
Strawman.
No, like you, I'm sure there were no records at the USPS or REA Express on who worked their counters that week between 3/20 and 3/27, like we have today.
We know there were records...
No, like you, I'm sure the same FBI that was willing to fingerprint every employee in the TSBD, didn't have the time to interview the employees of the USPS or REA, like they would today.
When you're talking a chain of custody, it's important to know who had custody of the weapons.
The tracking of the weapons must have been done by you, because it was done half-assed.
And no employee of either establishment ever came forward to identify himself as the one who gave Oswald the weapons.
Even after Oswald became world famous, and his face was plastered in every newspaper and all over every TV set in the world, you mean to say no one recognized him ?
No one remembered his box # 2915 ?
No one remembered him coming to the counter with a notice ?
No one remembered a 40" package ?
No one at REA Express remembered handing him a package that was noted as, "1 crtn pistol" ?
Why wasn't anyone from REA Express ever called to give testimony, Chuckles ?
For what reason?
Why was all the REA documentation autheticated by Heinz Michaelis, the manager at Seaport Traders,
who wasn't even employed by them when the transaction occurred ?
Why didn't the FBI interview the employees at the USPS branch where Box 2915 was located ?
They interviewed all kinds of people who had no knowledge of the crime.
They interviewed a woman who knew a woman who babysat Oswald when he was 2 1/2 years old.
They interviewed Dean Rusk.
They accepted as an exhibit the bite pattern of Jack Ruby's mother.
They took 18 pages of testimony from the emcee at Jack Ruby's club.
But the guy who brought two rifles into the building that the President was allegedly shot from only got two pages of testimony ?
Life isn't fair.
What do all these deficiencies have to do with standards between 1963 and today ? These weren't prehistoric times, this was 1963.
Why did they waste their time and manpower on shit that had NOTHING to do with this crime, while at the same time neglecting to pursue leads and tie up loose ends ?
Enlighten us, Chuckles.
I'm not troubled by it.
On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 12:07:26?AM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
Or, you know, sit on your ass in your cluttered little home and bitch about the Warren Commission Report.
Get busy, Lazy Bones.
LAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Decades spent sitting on your ass and bitching.
Talk about lazy, when was the last time you posted any evidence ?
Once again, Charles Schuyler posts no evidence.
No citations
No documents
No testimony
No exhibits
No witness videos
No links
What Charles Schuyler DOES post are comments, speculation, opinion and insults.
Charles Schuyler acts like a 10 year old online.
You can gain NO KNOWLEDGE from his posts.
That's why we call Charles Schuyler, "Chuckles the Clown".
Charles Schuyler is a troll.
On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 6:29:30 AM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
Only the authorities after the commission of a crime, stupid.
Do you think the need to track the Carcano Oswald killed Kennedy with back to the soldier who carried it in WWII?
You haven't proven Oswald received the rifle, stupid.
On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 6:25:53 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 6:29:30 AM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
Only the authorities after the commission of a crime, stupid.
Do you think the need to track the Carcano Oswald killed Kennedy with back to the soldier who carried it in WWII?
You haven't proven Oswald received the rifle, stupid.I'll bet Mrs. Kennedy would've disagreed with that.
Eyewitnesses, photos of Oswald with the rifle, shipping receipts, ballistic evidence, etc. all prove Oswald received the rifle and fired it, killing JFK and wounding JBC.
It's called consilience in the evidence. Different types of evidence from different sources converging on an inescapable conclusion that your hero Oswald was the assassin, fanboy.
That it hasn't been proven to YOUR particular standard is an entirely different matter.
On Wednesday, November 1, 2023 at 11:17:31 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:the standards and practices of today. It's possible that in today's world, there might be records for some of the questions Fish Part brings up, irrelevant as his concerns are, but not in 1963 America.
Fish Part Messiah isn't going to answer this, or at least answer it in any substantive way. Fish Part is once again guilty of something called presentism, which is the idea that the standards and practices of the past can be judged retrospectively on
No, just like you, I'm sure there weren't any such things in 1963 as work schedules or records of assignments, like we have today.
No, like you, I'm sure there were no records at the USPS or REA Express on who worked their counters that week between 3/20 and 3/27, like we have today.
No, like you, I'm sure the same FBI that was willing to fingerprint every employee in the TSBD, didn't have the time to interview the employees of the USPS or REA, like they would today.
When you're talking a chain of custody, it's important to know who had custody of the weapons.
The tracking of the weapons must have been done by you, because it was done half-assed.
And no employee of either establishment ever came forward to identify himself as the one who gave Oswald the weapons.
Even after Oswald became world famous, and his face was plastered in every newspaper and all over every TV set in the world, you mean to say no one recognized him ?
No one remembered his box # 2915 ?
No one remembered him coming to the counter with a notice ?
No one remembered a 40" package ?
No one at REA Express remembered handing him a package that was noted as, "1 crtn pistol" ?
Why wasn't anyone from REA Express ever called to give testimony, Chuckles ?
Why was all the REA documentation autheticated by Heinz Michaelis, the manager at Seaport Traders,
who wasn't even employed by them when the transaction occurred ?
Why didn't the FBI interview the employees at the USPS branch where Box 2915 was located ?
They interviewed all kinds of people who had no knowledge of the crime.
They interviewed a woman who knew a woman who babysat Oswald when he was 2 1/2 years old.
They interviewed Dean Rusk.
They accepted as an exhibit the bite pattern of Jack Ruby's mother.
They took 18 pages of testimony from the emcee at Jack Ruby's club.
But the guy who brought two rifles into the building that the President was allegedly shot from only got two pages of testimony ?
What do all these deficiencies have to do with standards between 1963 and today ? These weren't prehistoric times, this was 1963.
Why did they waste their time and manpower on shit that had NOTHING to do with this crime, while at the same time neglecting to pursue leads and tie up loose ends ?
Enlighten us, Chuckles.
On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 6:29:30 AM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
Only the authorities after the commission of a crime, stupid.
Do you think the need to track the Carcano Oswald killed Kennedy with back to the soldier who carried it in WWII?You haven't proven Oswald received the rifle, stupid.
On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 6:25:53?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 6:29:30?AM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
Only the authorities after the commission of a crime, stupid.
Do you think the need to track the Carcano Oswald killed Kennedy with back to the soldier who carried it in WWII?
You haven't proven Oswald received the rifle, stupid.
I'll bet Mrs. Kennedy would've disagreed with that.
On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 12:52:13 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:no force or effect except to the extent, and with such amendments, as they may be expressly approved by Act of Congress”.......enacted the Federal Rules of Evidence proposed by the Supreme Court, with amendments made by Congress, to take effect on July
< a bunch of bullshit >
From your link:
"The Federal Rules of Evidence were adopted by order of the Supreme Court on Nov. 20, 1972, transmitted to Congress by the Chief Justice on Feb. 5, 1973, and to have become effective on July 1, 1973. .... provided that the proposed rules “shall have
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre
Federal Rules of Evidence that took effect on July 1, 1975, were not in effect in 1963.
Anything else, oh "more knowledgeable" One ?
Idiot.
On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 6:29:30 AM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
Only the authorities after the commission of a crime, stupid.
Do you think the need to track the Carcano Oswald killed Kennedy with back to the soldier who carried it in WWII?You haven't proven Oswald received the rifle, stupid.
On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 6:29:30 AM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
Only the authorities after the commission of a crime, stupid.
Do you think the need to track the Carcano Oswald killed Kennedy with back to the soldier who carried it in WWII?You haven't proven Oswald received the rifle, stupid.
On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 12:07:26 AM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
Or, you know, sit on your ass in your cluttered little home and bitch about the Warren Commission Report.
Get busy, Lazy Bones.
LAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Decades spent sitting on your ass and bitching.Talk about lazy, when was the last time you posted any evidence ?
Once again, Charles Schuyler posts no evidence.
No citations
No documents
No testimony
No exhibits
No witness videos
No links
What Charles Schuyler DOES post are comments, speculation, opinion and insults.
Charles Schuyler acts like a 10 year old online.
You can gain NO KNOWLEDGE from his posts.
That's why we call Charles Schuyler, "Chuckles the Clown".
Charles Schuyler is a troll.
On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 4:31:32?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 12:07:26?AM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
Or, you know, sit on your ass in your cluttered little home and bitch about the Warren Commission Report.Talk about lazy, when was the last time you posted any evidence ?
Get busy, Lazy Bones.
LAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Decades spent sitting on your ass and bitching.
Once again, Charles Schuyler posts no evidence.
No citations
No documents
No testimony
No exhibits
No witness videos
No links
What would you accept?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 123:17:43 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Files: | 12,212 |
| Messages: | 5,334,700 |