Media Lied again. Showed a pic from 830am. Misrepresented the crowd size. Fucking lying scum

A

achilles28

Fake news#1 (pic taken at 830am....when they first allowed crowd to enter the grounds)
9d28ee5d80a9c186f10c690131972afb



Fake news#2
27b4f9e27e2cd0a7a8fa93d013c15629




Time index 3:30. Watch the video. They have a panoramic lense. Goes all the way to the back. Media lied to you again. You believed it......Again.

That's why Trump talks "Shit". Because you are fools don't know the truth when it bites you in the ass.


Now you gunna go run off to Jake Tapper and Chris Cuomo like a little bitch???? Prolly..
 
I watched the entire inauguration . Many people commented live about the lack of crowd.

There were many many more people at the women's march than at the inauguration.
 
There was an article from Reuters saying it was their camera that took the pic in question. The same article says that Reuters was the only camera up there, at that angle. If so, they could say anything they want about what time the infamous picture was taken. If Reuters was the only camera up at that angle, then the following time lapse video must also have been from Reuters:


This video does not help much because it is zooming in and/or out at the beginning and end. In any case, it does indicate that the infamous picture we have seen was not taken at peak capacity.

Even so, it does look like the crowd could be 50-70% of what Obama had in 2009. If we go by metro ridership, yes, the crowd could have been 50%.

But there are mitigating factors year over year.

1) Obama got some overflow from Martin Luther King day held THE DAY BEFORE his SYMBOLIC inauguration.

2) This year there was more security, putting a fence around the whole area, opening at only three places, according to Jones. At those places were protesters trying to keep people out, going so far as to beat up women.
 
Last edited:
As for Spicer/Trump comments, the main stream bleedia are themselves EXAGGERATING. Spicer only got it wrong with his sources for the metro ridership. But if you want to talk about the size of the viewing audience in total, counting all angles (crowd size, T.V., online streaming), it's probable that Trump had the highest numbers.

The biggest variable is online streaming. The biggest question is, how many people availed themselves of online streaming eight years ago compared to this year? Given the pace of tech and tech acceptance, i'd say the difference could be considerable.

Personally, i preferred to watch online steaming. When i went to search for streaming sources, i was pleased to find many choices. I specifically avoided CNN and went straight to a FOX stream.

Now, CNN tells us they had some 13 million watching through streaming? Numbers from other sources have not been forthcoming, but the following report from Bill Still indicates that FOX far out-did CNN and MSNBC in online streaming.


If so, this could have been the "most watched" inaugural.

That said, most of the voices questioning the crowd size, including Pres. Trump, saw what they saw FROM THE FRONT, LOOKING BACK.

Trump ESTIMATED it was full all the way to the back, which if so, would put the number at 1 to 1.5 million people. That's what he repeated to the CIA, but did not hold to that number as a fact, just an estimate base on what he could see and estimate.

The main stream bleedia has themselves exaggerated Trump's estimate, calling it a "lie", instead of an estimate of what he could see.

Given a high pixel picture from Trump's view (which would also be Spicer and Conway view), can anyone blame him for estimating the mall was packed full?

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/01/politics/trump-inauguration-gigapixel/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top