You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: 'Alternative Facts' and Threatening the Free Press. The Trump Presidency is Orwellian.
Watch the speech - they pan out to show that the mall did NOT look like the mainstream media pictures. Then today, Spicer brought up
Neilsen's numbers plus CNN's own numbers adding up to more than Reagan's inauguration. Nobody challenged him. Let's talk things being easily fact checked.
Don't trust my lying eyes right?
The pictures match up. Yes one angle is better than the other but the crowd did not extend all the way to the Washington monument. Make sure you are looking at the full picture and not the cropped version. Zoom in if you have to. The mall was not full.
Nielsen's numbers have Obama at 38 million, Reagan at 42 million and Trump at 31 million.
Those lawn covers were also used at Obama's last inauguration.
Metro ridership numbers delivered by Spicer were not the official numbers.
Easily checked indeed.
Edit: If you add livestreaming numbers to Obama like Spicer did for Trump it looks like Obama still comes out on top.
Do you have poor eyesight? Can you not see that white way in the background. Here is a better angle for you
Yes the crowd looks nicer from this angle but it doesn't change anything about what was reported. This photo and yours corroborates the others.
All the photos add up and tell the same story. Trump's inauguration was poorly attended in comparison to Obama. There are plenty of valid reasons why his crowd was smaller. Obama was the first black president and the DC area votes democrat. Those are two big reasons why Trump's crowd would be smaller.
Denying the objective reality that the crowd was in fact smaller than Obama's despite a mountain of evidence to the contrary is both sad and pathetic, especially since the disparity can be easily explained with perfectly valid reasons that do nothing to take away from Trump.
A ridiculous argument, but Spicer was able to pull all media into how the #fakenews picture was published, making all Americans count hats, turning everyone into armchair photo analysts and thus, diverting from the women's march, which was largely anti-trump.
Hook, line and sinker.
What was fake about the picture? Do you have any evidence that the photo was "fake"?
As far as it all being a distraction from the protests going on, I don't agree. I pondered that possibility but if it were true then Spicer deserves an Oscar. Spicer's demeanor told me this was a poorly thought out spur of the moment reaction.
As far as distracting from the protest coverage it appears their plan would have been a failure if that was the actual goal. The crowd size narrative was a perfect segue into the massive crowds the protests had accumulated.
@brains just posted the best evidence - good job. I was reading the twitter feed of that @BCAppelbaum guy. If I were him, I would delete my acct and restart.
Funny.
Yes, Thanks. If it's on CNN it's #fakenews (a reputation is a terrible thing to lose)
That time is Pacific so it would be 11:20AM in D.C. just 40 minutes prior to inauguration. Look at the timing on one his retweets
Here is the crowd tweet
https://twitter.com/BCAppelbaum/status/822478866035986435 8:20am
Here is a tweet he retweeted 40 minutes later just minutes after inauguration
https://twitter.com/TheStalwart/status/822489416455360512 9:02am