Liberal media caught in another blatant lie: National Mall was FULL during Trump's inauguration

[Hutch Starskey]

Aside from one being a sunny day while the other was overcast, the one of Trump's was taken while Trump was giving his speech; which would presumably be when that crowd was at its largest.

Oh well, better luck next time.

Wrong, stupid. The photo on the left shows the sun hitting the Capitol from the right side. Even on an overcast day, there would be a shadow on the photo on the right if it were taken at the same hour, day, and time of year. And since you can't see any faces, you can't say Trump is giving his inaugural speech. You have no idea when the photo was taken or at what event but don't let that get in the way of spewing your propaganda.

Yes, google changed all of the photos from Obama's inauguration just to fit your dopey narrative.

I never claimed they did anything with the photos from Obama's inauguration, dumbshit.

Wrong, stupid. The photo on the left shows the sun hitting the Capitol from the right side. Even on an overcast day, there would be a shadow on the photo on the right if it were taken at the same hour, day, and time of year. And since you can't see any faces, you can't say Trump is giving his inaugural speech. You have no idea when the photo was taken or at what event but don't let that get in the way of spewing your propaganda.

I guess in some world somewhere you could say you weren't denying that was a picture of Obama's inauguration. I guess you didn't bother to google it or you would have seen that was indeed a photo of Obama's inauguration.

Basically you're just talking out of your ass.

No, you stupid shit, I'm saying the one on the RIGHT is the one that isn't accurate. It may be from Trump's inauguration or it may not be, but one thing for sure is that it does not reflect the same crowd that we see on the CNN interactive photo, where Trump is giving his inaugural speech. Try to pay attention, moron.

It's the same picture as the rest , dope.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Are RWnuts STILL in denial about this? Jeepers.

 

[S.J.]

Wrong, stupid. The photo on the left shows the sun hitting the Capitol from the right side. Even on an overcast day, there would be a shadow on the photo on the right if it were taken at the same hour, day, and time of year. And since you can't see any faces, you can't say Trump is giving his inaugural speech. You have no idea when the photo was taken or at what event but don't let that get in the way of spewing your propaganda.

Yes, google changed all of the photos from Obama's inauguration just to fit your dopey narrative.

I never claimed they did anything with the photos from Obama's inauguration, dumbshit.

Wrong, stupid. The photo on the left shows the sun hitting the Capitol from the right side. Even on an overcast day, there would be a shadow on the photo on the right if it were taken at the same hour, day, and time of year. And since you can't see any faces, you can't say Trump is giving his inaugural speech. You have no idea when the photo was taken or at what event but don't let that get in the way of spewing your propaganda.

I guess in some world somewhere you could say you weren't denying that was a picture of Obama's inauguration. I guess you didn't bother to google it or you would have seen that was indeed a photo of Obama's inauguration.

Basically you're just talking out of your ass.

No, you stupid shit, I'm saying the one on the RIGHT is the one that isn't accurate. It may be from Trump's inauguration or it may not be, but one thing for sure is that it does not reflect the same crowd that we see on the CNN interactive photo, where Trump is giving his inaugural speech. Try to pay attention, moron.

It's the same picture as the rest , dope.

It's not the same picture as the one that is verifiably taken during Trump's speech. The only reliable one is the interactive one, where everything is in one shot and cannot be photoshopped.

 

[S.J.]

Are RWnuts STILL in denial about this? Jeepers.

Translation: Why can't they just take our word for it?

 

[bendog]

Lots of liberals have been stridently insisting .

The Dictionary Trolls Kellyanne Conway By Tweeting Out The Definition Of Fact

"A fact is a piece of information presented as having objective reality," Merriam-Webster Dictionary tweeted after Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway tried to rebrand the Trump administration's false statements as "alternative facts."…

Okay.

What is your opinion of the photo?
.

What is your opinion of the live tv coverage that showed "the small" crowd in real time?

 

[easyt65]

Arguing over how many people attended Donald Trump's Inauguration is like Feminists being mad at Taylor Swift for not showing up at their march....

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Arguing over how many people attended Donald Trump's Inauguration is like Feminists being mad at Taylor Swift for not showing up at their march....

Its Like Donald and Spicer

 

[easyt65]

Arguing over how many people attended Donald Trump's Inauguration is like Feminists being mad at Taylor Swift for not showing up at their march....

Its Like Donald and Spicer

No

 

[bendog]

Arguing over how many people attended Donald Trump's Inauguration is like Feminists being mad at Taylor Swift for not showing up at their march....

Well ... I'd be mad too if Taylor Swift showed up at my thing (-:

 

[Mac1958]

Lots of liberals have been stridently insisting .

The Dictionary Trolls Kellyanne Conway By Tweeting Out The Definition Of Fact

"A fact is a piece of information presented as having objective reality," Merriam-Webster Dictionary tweeted after Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway tried to rebrand the Trump administration's false statements as "alternative facts."…

Okay.

What is your opinion of the photo?
.

What is your opinion of the live tv coverage that showed "the small" crowd in real time?

I was in meetings and missed the whole thing, of course, and haven't bothered to watch it in full.

If I had to bet my last dollar, I'd guess the shots you're talking about were accurate and that it was a relatively weak crowd. And, while I shouldn't be surprised at this point about Trump's behaviors, I'm still amazed that he chose to keep this story alive when talking to the CIA. So far, he has been everything I voted against. But looking at that Google photo, it does make me curious. It does look like one shot and that the crowd looks pretty good.

So, as I've said, I dunno. I'm worried about more important things he may do.
.

 

[Faun]

Why is it so important to snowflakes to win the attendance versus Obama?

So they can change the subject away from the media's deliberate lies about "Trump had a miniscule turnout at his inauguration"... when photos prove that the National Mall was FULL. A million or more people.

Snowflakes are all optics with no content.

This photo issue is just so much buillshit. Just noise that dupes lefties every time.

How about the TV ratings? And when you add in those who watched online, it had to be the most watched inaugural of all time.
Trump inauguration draws nearly 31 million U.S. television viewers

Yeah, how about TV ratings...?

A near record low for a new president...

GHW Bush ........... 20.0
Trump ................... 20.1
Bush ..................... 20.8
Clinton .................. 24.5
Obama .................. 25.5
Carter .................... 31.5
Nixon ..................... 33.5
Reagan .................. 37.4

I suppose this means Neilson is in on the conspiracy too, huh?

 

[Faun]

Picture taken almost an hour before the inauguration, that the NY Times claims is the inauguration:

.

Picture taken by CNN an hour later:

.

Clearly the mall was completely full when Trump was actually inaugurated.

It's a hoot to see the liberals desperately lying, pretending there are the same number of people in both shots.

And they're even doing it here, with both pictures in front of them (and everyone else), revealing their lie.

The liberals have nothing left but lies and pretension.

The NY Times does not claim that picture was taken during Trump being sworn in or after. The NY Times clearly identified that photo from being about 45 minutes before taking his oath.

If truth and reality were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like this.

 

[ColonelAngus]

Why is it so important to snowflakes to win the attendance versus Obama?

So they can change the subject away from the media's deliberate lies about "Trump had a miniscule turnout at his inauguration"... when photos prove that the National Mall was FULL. A million or more people.

Snowflakes are all optics with no content.

This photo issue is just so much buillshit. Just noise that dupes lefties every time.

How about the TV ratings? And when you add in those who watched online, it had to be the most watched inaugural of all time.
Trump inauguration draws nearly 31 million U.S. television viewers

Yeah, how about TV ratings...?

A near record low for a new president...

GHW Bush ........... 20.0
Trump ................... 20.1
Bush ..................... 20.8
Clinton .................. 24.5
Obama .................. 25.5
Carter .................... 31.5
Nixon ..................... 33.5
Reagan .................. 37.4

I suppose this means Neilson is in on the conspiracy too, huh?

Snowflakes and their meaningless victories. Man, what pathetic cvnts.

 

[ColonelAngus]

Picture taken almost an hour before the inauguration, that the NY Times claims is the inauguration:

.

Picture taken by CNN an hour later:

.

Clearly the mall was completely full when Trump was actually inaugurated.

It's a hoot to see the liberals desperately lying, pretending there are the same number of people in both shots.

And they're even doing it here, with both pictures in front of them (and everyone else), revealing their lie.

The liberals have nothing left but lies and pretension.

Of course that first photo WAS NOT TAKEN while Trump was being sworn in. The NEW YORK TIMES is lying. BIG SHOCK. They are the real fake news.

Where are the photos of Bush's and Clinton's inaugurations to also compare those?

 

[edthecynic]

Remember to zoom the CNN picture in and out so you can see Trump giving his speech (which pinpoints what time it was taken), and you can also see that the entire Mall is jammed to the rafters.

The gigapixel photo is at probably the worst angle and position to see the crowd in the back, thus giving the Right the most room to deceive, which is why they use rather than an overhead shot from the rear like this one below on the right:

 

[gipper]

Why is it so important to snowflakes to win the attendance versus Obama?

So they can change the subject away from the media's deliberate lies about "Trump had a miniscule turnout at his inauguration"... when photos prove that the National Mall was FULL. A million or more people.

Snowflakes are all optics with no content.

This photo issue is just so much buillshit. Just noise that dupes lefties every time.

How about the TV ratings? And when you add in those who watched online, it had to be the most watched inaugural of all time.
Trump inauguration draws nearly 31 million U.S. television viewers

Yeah, how about TV ratings...?

A near record low for a new president...

GHW Bush ........... 20.0
Trump ................... 20.1
Bush ..................... 20.8
Clinton .................. 24.5
Obama .................. 25.5
Carter .................... 31.5
Nixon ..................... 33.5
Reagan .................. 37.4

I suppose this means Neilson is in on the conspiracy too, huh?

Well then somebody is lying because Reuters has it very different. Posted again for your pleasure.
Trump inauguration draws nearly 31 million U.S. television viewers

(Second only to Reagan)

Trump inauguration draws nearly 31 million U.S. television viewers

 

[ColonelAngus]

Why is it so important to snowflakes to win the attendance versus Obama?

So they can change the subject away from the media's deliberate lies about "Trump had a miniscule turnout at his inauguration"... when photos prove that the National Mall was FULL. A million or more people.

Snowflakes are all optics with no content.

This photo issue is just so much buillshit. Just noise that dupes lefties every time.

How about the TV ratings? And when you add in those who watched online, it had to be the most watched inaugural of all time.
Trump inauguration draws nearly 31 million U.S. television viewers

Yeah, how about TV ratings...?

A near record low for a new president...

GHW Bush ........... 20.0
Trump ................... 20.1
Bush ..................... 20.8
Clinton .................. 24.5
Obama .................. 25.5
Carter .................... 31.5
Nixon ..................... 33.5
Reagan .................. 37.4

I suppose this means Neilson is in on the conspiracy too, huh?

Well then somebody is lying because Reuters has it very different. Posted again for your pleasure.
Trump inauguration draws nearly 31 million U.S. television viewers

(Second only to Reagan)

Trump inauguration draws nearly 31 million U.S. television viewers

You mean the snowflake media LIED?!!!!!!!

 

[edthecynic]

Outside of the claims of the photographers, I can't know for sure when those photos were taken.

I'm not saying Trump is right. I'm saying that no honest person can say for sure.

I do know that partisans are going to believe anything that supports their political agendas.

Actually, some people are more observant than others and CAN tell for sure when the photo was taken!!!
Look at the screens on the right in the right hand photo below after you click on it to make it full size and tell me who you see speaking at the time. It is Tramp so the photo was not taken 3 hours before Tramp started to speak, but while he was speaking meaning at peak audience time. That photo shows just how completely worthless the gigapixel photo is for anything but to deceive, which is why it is the go to photo for the dishonest Right.

 

[edthecynic]

Yes, from the front.
Not from the angle in question.

You can clearly see that is not the case in this overhead shot.

Wow, I didn't see your post when I posted my photo, I like the way you have the screens circled so the Right can't miss them. The redeeming factor on my photo is if you click on it it enlarges enough that even the blindest of Trumpists can see their fearless liar on the screens.

 

[Faun]

Picture taken almost an hour before the inauguration, that the NY Times claims is the inauguration:

.

Picture taken by CNN an hour later:

.

Clearly the mall was completely full when Trump was actually inaugurated.

It's a hoot to see the liberals desperately lying, pretending there are the same number of people in both shots.

And they're even doing it here, with both pictures in front of them (and everyone else), revealing their lie.

The liberals have nothing left but lies and pretension.

Of course that first photo WAS NOT TAKEN while Trump was being sworn in. The NEW YORK TIMES is lying. BIG SHOCK. They are the real fake news.

Where are the photos of Bush's and Clinton's inaugurations to also compare those?

The NY Times never said that photo was taken while Trump was being sworn in. It's adorable how important it is to you righties to call the MSM, fake news, even though there's nothing fake about it.