More Fake News: Media Contrived Photos to Diminish Trump’s Inauguration Crowd

Knave Dave's picture

The following article by David Haggith was first published on The Great Recession Blog:

trump inauguration crowd photo shows sparse audience

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Last week the mainstream media devoted huge resources of time and space to comparing photos of President Obama’s inauguration audience to photos of President Trump’s inauguration audience. Apparently audience size matters because major news media all over the US wouldn’t let go of the subject for an entire week. Their claims that Trump had a comparatively tiny audience became so important to the newly elected president that his press secretary, Sean Spicer, devoted his first press meeting to attacking the media he will have to work with for the next four years over what he claimed were false representations.

The press fought back by saying the story was important because Donald Trump lied when he said through Spicer and his own tweets that his audience was as big as Obama’s — that it was, in fact, the biggest ever — and that it stretched all the way from where he stood to the Washington Monument. Many in the media claimed the president was lying and that the president was clearly obsessed with himself for making such a big deal out of this and spending his nights tweeting about it. They said the president was attacking the media for simply reporting the truth that it is obliged to tell.

The following photos will show who was really obsessed and who was driving this story to the undeserved importance that it got:

 

Can honest photos lie?

 

Sometimes it is not the lie you tell but the truth that you manipulate that creates the lie. Here is the photo comparison that went around the world last week where it is perfectly obvious which president had the larger inauguration crowd:

 

Fake news comparison of photos of Trump's inauguration crowd and Obama's inauguration crowd

 

Oh my gosh, who cannot possibly tell from looking at these photos that Trump’s small hands clearly also translate into small audiences? The Obama crowd has packed the place, but Trump’s minuscule clusters almost look like they’re huddling for mutual support. Both photos are completely true. Both were taken at essentially the same time. There is no photoshopping. So, clearly the dozens, if not hundreds, of mainstream media outlets that ran the comparison photos or other photos very much like them, were telling the truth! The new presidents audience is practically nonexistent.

 

Oh, but wait a minute …

 

… and scroll down …

 

 

 

 

Here is another photo taken of Trump’s audience at the time of his inauguration:

 

 

 

 

Trump's inauguration crowd fills the National Mall

 

Well, no wonder President Trump said that, from where he stood on the capital steps as he gave his inaugural address, his audience packed the mall from the capital building all the way to the Washington Monument. Is this even the same event as the one shown around the world by many major media corporations?

As it turns out, the only thing the fakestream media’s comparison photos actually reveal is whose audience — Trump’s or Obama’s — arrived first!

The comparison photos were each taken about an hour before the inauguration speech began. The third photo of the huge Trump audience was taken at the time of the inauguration. It was all a matter of timing. To explain why Obama’s crowd surged into the mall an hour or so earlier than Trump’s, consider the following likely explanations:

 

  • Obama’s crowd gathered on a bright and sunny day. Trump’s crowd attended on a rainy day. People don’t like to stand in the rain, so perhaps Trump’s supporters have enough sense come in out of the rain for as long as they can until the event is ready to begin.
  • Obama’s audience had more reason to arrive early. They were attending a unique historic event — the inauguration of America’s first Black president — in which position of the audience on the lawns of the mall is on a first-come-first-serve basis. People wanting to attend might reasonably think they would not even find standing room at a first-of-its-kind event and so would go extra early to make sure they reserved a space for themselves.
  • Nearly a hundred protest groups, made up largely of Democrats who said they refused to accept the election results (after castigating Donald Trump for not being willing to say before the election that he would accept the results no matter what) said they were coming with the intentions of diminishing the event. Many of those groups said they would do all they could to block streets and block access points to try to make sure the inauguration couldn’t even happen. With such determination and planning, might they have actually managed to slow down people’s ability to get to the mall … just a little?
  • With so many protests going on, Trump’s supporters might have lallygagged in route to watch some of the action.
  • Because of the numerous threats of violence, the security fences set up around the mall had fewer access points onto the mall, through which everyone had to be screened. Couldn’t fewer access points have caused it to take longer for the crowds to get through?

 

Here is a another comparison photo taken of Obama’s inauguration during his speech from the same direction as the Trump inauguration speech photo.

 

Fake news through photos - Obama inauguration audience photos that is used for comparison is from much further back

 

 

Holy smokes! Obama’s first inauguration audience is still massively bigger, erupting clear out onto the streets.

Oh, wait a second. That photo, used by many media outlets for comparison with Trump’s audience, was taken from the balcony of the Capital Building. The photo taken for Trump’s audience was shot from much closer to ground level and was taken from approximately the center of the Obama inauguration photo. Thus, it misses all the audience gathered on the bleachers and is narrower so it doesn’t even include the side streets.

Was Obama’s audience bigger? Probably, but it’s hard to tell from the photos. I think I can see a hint of white space still showing among Trump’s crowd in the far distance of the third photo … if I put a jeweler’s loop in one eye. I would imagine Obama’s inauguration was better attended because many people waited all their lives to see a Black president, and it took place on a beautiful sunny day. In fact, I would hope it was bigger because it was a major historical milestone. I find it impressive, therefore, that the crowd that gathered to watch the 44th White man to get inaugurated was almost as large as the nation’s first Black presidential inauguration in a city with a large Black population.

If you want to compare Trump to another very popular White president, let’s look at William Jefferson Clinton’s second inauguration:

 

 

Now I can see all kinds of wide-open lawn out on the mall. So, it turns out that, when judged against popular liberal presidents, Trump’s audience was quite large after all!

 

And that’s how you create fake news through true photos.

 

First, pick a time of day where photos from the same timeframe happen to work well for diminishing the apparent audience of the president whose inauguration you want to diminish. People will naturally think that taking the photos at almost the same time must surely makes them the fairest possible comparison, never mind that it was before the event was actually happening and that many things about the day were different. Second, pick comparison photos that appear to be from the same angle but that are really narrower and closer in for the president whose inauguration you wish to minimize. Third, present it all as fact … because it is! Carefully chosen facts to present the story you want to create.

Here’s a more important question: Was there even enough difference between Trump’s inauguration audience and Obama’s to merit making a story out of it, much less spreading the story all over the globe, much less going on about it for a week, much less grilling the president’s spokespeople about why the president lied about his audience size as Chuck Todd did on NBC for an entire thirteen minutes, during which he referred to Kellyanne Conway’s statements as “ridiculous” and claimed that her “alternative facts” were “falsehoods?”

 

 

Todd claims, “I’m curious why President Trump chose to send out his press secretary to essentially litigate a small and petty thing like inaugural crowd size.”

Indeed, the difference in audience size (visually anyway) was a very small and petty thing. So, why did the mainstream media make such an endlessly repeated story out of photos that don’t even present a true picture? What was their purpose in presenting a non-story as if it were a big story? If I would give them the benefit of the doubt, I’d say that they genuinely believed that photos taken at the same time actually revealed the real difference in audience size, but that they also didn’t take any time to check out other times as I did because they were so eager to join those who wanted to diminish Trump’s inauguration. After all, this extra research only took me seconds.

I cannot give them that benefit of the doubt though because I found all these photos on a site that playing up the difference in crowd size, but the accurate photo was buried a few photos deep in a slide show, while the false comparison was at the top of each story. So, they could have easily seen that Trump’s crowd was larger than Clinton’s, larger than Bush’s, and very nearly as large as the first Black presidents, but they shoved that onto the back page.

Trump is essentially saying, “I’m not going to let you guys continue to get away with this fake news you keep creating. Every time you do it, I’m going to knock your heads together so that your audiences can start to see how unfairly biased you really are.”

It’s not petty for the simple reason that Trump and his team know the media will continue to create such fake news throughout the entire four years of his presidency unless he doesn’t take them to task as brusquely as possible (his style anyway) to make it clear they will never simply “get away with it.” He’s going to do his best to make sure they damage themselves every time they go fake.

In fact, the mainstream media must be obsessed with taking down Trump because several of their anchors nearly broke down in tears when Trump won, and Chuck Todd couldn’t let go of it for the entire thirteen minutes of the above interview. Conway kept trying to talk about other things Trump did, and Todd kept clinging like a dog on a pork chop to this one fake-news story in order to make his claim that the president and his spokespeople were lying when they said the crowd was enormous.

As Conway summarizes, “As for this issue of crowd size, I think it is a symbol of the unfair and incomplete treatment that this president often receives.”

She notes that Nielsen ratings showed fifty percent more people watching Trump’s inauguration than watched Obama’s second inauguration (when being the first Black president was no longer a unique historic event that would hugely skew popularity). The combined estimate could be the basis for Trump saying that both the audience present at the event and the viewer audience were the largest in history (“both,” not “each;” in other words, when added together). Trump’s Nielsen count was above average for inaugurations, but the Nielsen ratings were not mentioned in any of the many mainstream stories about audience size and not a fact that Todd was even willing to acknowledge … because it didn’t fit into his agenda.

Todd responds by merely going back to drilling Conway as to why Trump sent Spencer out on his first press conference to “utter a provable falsehood.”

Some of Todd’s statements:

 

  • “The first time he confronts the public, it’s a falsehood.”
  • “It undermines the credibility of the entire White House press office on day one.”
  • “Alternative facts are not facts; they’re falsehoods.”
  • “You sent the press secretary out there to utter a falsehood on the smallest, pettiest thing!”
  • “What was the motive to have this ridiculous litigation of crowd size?”
  • “Why a provable falsehood … that now calls into question everything the secretary states?”

 

If it’s such a petty topic to litigate publicly, why does Todd spend almost all of the thirteen minutes going back to it? Why did major media spread the misrepresentative photos all over the nation and make a huge deal out of them? Just as Conway states, Todd wants his audience to hear that Trump’s estimate of audience size is a falsehood. He particularly wants them to hear that such a falsehood “calls into question everything the administration will say from this point on.” That seems to be his goal in drilling into this.

The mainstream media focused obsessively on this petty topic because it hopes to diminish and discredit Trump from the onset. (If you repeat fake news long enough, it becomes a fact in people’s minds.) Todd says what he wants people to think just like an attorney argues a point before the jury that he knows will be ruled out by the judge because all that matters is that the seed is planted in the minds of the jury.

Todd even laughs at Conway, as if scoffing at her response, when she says crowds are hard to quantify, and she retorts that the way he laughed at her is symbolic of the way Trump’s people are treated by the press. Clearly, the comparison pictures that numerous major networks, websites and newspapers chose to focus on do not present a fair or balanced view of Trump’s audience size, and it was THEY, not Trump, who whipped up this petty controversy in the first place.

As Conway says at the end, the only reason Trump and his press secretary responded as they did is because of comments like Todd’s when he concluded that Trump’s statement about the size of the crowd calls into question everything he will ever say from this point on. When the press tries to stake out that much political ground from such a petty difference in opinion by claiming a brand-new president is uttering falsehoods, you have to think they are desperate to bring him down. They’re used to presidents who don’t want to make enemies of the press and don’t want to get into arguments, so they are accustomed to sliding such fake news through as unquestioned fact. Trump isn’t going to let that happen.

 

 

What are “alternative facts,” and when is false, false and fake, fake?

 

Here was Trump’s reply to the mainstream media’s misconstrued photos that set them off to calling him a liar on many of major networks and websites:

 

We had the biggest audience in the history of inaugural speeches. I won’t allow you or other people like you to demean that crowd and to demean the people that came to Washington, D.C., from faraway places because they like me.

 

The capital crowd might have been smaller, but it was still huge (especially when you consider the wet weather and the attempt made to prevent the inauguration from happening at all); and if it’s true, as Conway states, that the television audience (always vastly greater than the on-scene crowd) was fifty percent greater than the television audience for Obama’s second inauguration, then Trump may have actually had the largest inaugural audience in history. It is, at least, an arguable opinion, far from a clear falsehood. There is room for someone feeling good about the envy to think it just might have been the biggest in history if you add up all web streaming, television and the on-site crowd.

I can see where someone like Todd might think that “alternative facts” sounds like a euphemism for “falsehoods” because things are either facts or they’re not, right? Well, look at the photos above. Every one of them is a fact, but the conclusion the press drew was a blatant misrepresentation of the event’s actual crowd size.

Kellyanne Conway meant that Sean Spicer was presenting some additional facts — like the Trump inauguration photo I’ve presented above — that provide an alternative perspective. As it turns out, maybe taking photos at the same time of day for comparison, when that time is not the actual time of the inaugural address, presents a false impression. (I mean, why not use photos from four hours before the event when the only people there were the set-up crews?) What matters is not how big the audience was an hour or two before the event but how big it was when the new president was actually inaugurated and then gave his speech.

Since Todd ends by claiming Conway and Trump were attacking him with some “weird Twitter feed you guys are obsessed with,” you be the judge as to who was obsessed and who was doing the attacking throughout the television interview.

Is it any wonder the media’s approval rating is worse than Trump’s, though they harp about his approval rating all the time? (By the way Rasmussen Reports says Trump’s approval rating is 59%, not the roughly 30% that the mainstream media keeps quoting. Rasmussen is a conservative organization, but their polling for this election put Clinton ahead by 2% the day before the election, which is about where most had it.)

The attempts to forge fake news into accepted fact by frequent repetition are enough to make me think seriously about spending half as much time on economics and starting a new website dedicated to filleting fake news wherever I find it. I have no problem with the media attacking Trump if he does lie because fair is fair, and I hate lying politicians. But fake is also fake; and I hate lying news even more. I expect lies from politicians. They’ve been doing it for centuries; but the news back in the days of Walter Cronkite made some attempt not to simply run smear campaigns based on misconstrued facts and attempted to overcome their own personal biases in order to be objective.

This week, the biggest fake news was from the mainstream media via a true photo that showed the National Mall more than half empty. The lie came by indicating that photo provided evidence of audience size for Trump’s inauguration — fake news that was made much worse when they followed it up by accusing the president of lying when he claimed his audience was huge.

That’s my opinion. Please state yours below.

 

Still need more evidence of the media faking it with true photos?

 

Here’s a video shot by an attendee. You can see Trump speaking in the video, so you know the timing. Notice the end of the video when the photographer zooms up on the far end of the mall. You can see only a thin white space that is clear of people near the media tent that was set up under the Washington Monument. Pretty much PACKED OUT!

 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
roadhazard's picture

Bull Shit. Unfortunately for you I watched the Inauguration and The C-SPAN cameras played over the whole area.  What the fuck is wrong with Trump and you people. How fucking petty can you clowns be. HE WON... no one but you bitches gives a fuck abut crowd size. Get a fucking life.

Knave Dave's picture

The media created the crowd-size controversy when they all jumped on Trump and instantly proclaimed him a liar for stating that his crowd was huge and that it stretched all the way to the Washington Monument. (A pretty substantial accomplishment, given all the protest groups that CLAIMED they were going to shut the inauguration down completely.) The mainstream media challenged his view with a photo that went around the world (I've seen it published in ALL of the major UK newspapers as if it was the fact about Trump's audience), which hugely misrepresents his crowd size. All the mainstream media's cherry-picked photo proves is that Obama's audience arrived earlier. (No surprise for the many reasons I gave. My point is that it was a needless attack on their part.

So, the petty ones are those who intentionally created a false narrative simply because Trump said his audience was huge, which it clearly was. The petty ones grill Kellyanne Conway for saying there are "alternative facts" here, by which she merely meant there are OTHER facts that need to be reckoned with, such as the photos that CLEARLY show Trump was not lying when he said he looked out and saw an audience that was a vast sea that stretched all the way to the Washington Monument. The photos I presented prove that is exactly what Trump saw from his angle, while the arial view the MSM showed misrepresents the event because it was clealry taken before his audience had fully arrived.

So, the real pettiness is in the press for attacking Trump on something that never merited an attack in the first place. His audience probably was NOT the biggest in history, as he claimed it was, but that claim didn't come out until the press made its completely undeserved attack against his statement that his audience was a "sea of love" that stretched all the way to the monument. It was, and it did!

Therefore, it was petty to attack him relentlessly for a statement that was actually true. From where Trump stood, he would not have been able to see ANY of the white space because of his lower angle, and the ariels I presented prove the amount of white space was minuscule anyway -- not even enough to have merited any comment at all by the press. So, it is the MSM that is being petty here for tearing Trump apart for his statement and for, then, cherry-picking the one photo that made it appear his crowd was pathetically small. Yet, that's the phot that became the new famous false fact all over the planet -- the pathetic little clusters of huddle masses.

I observed the mainstream media doing that throughout his campaign.

--David Haggith

iAmerican3's picture

America is Isaiah's prophesied "Israel Restored," God's "Promised Land," the foretold "Zion," from the beginning beset, as prophesied, by Gog and Babylon: the Anti-Christ's "good cop/bad cop" psychopathy comprised of the Risen Babylon's pedophile homosexual priesthood of Babylon, at Vatican Hill since its ejection from Jerusalem by Jehoshaphat - and its Khazar Vlad the Impaler "Count Dracula" satanic ruling false-elite families (see: "Secrets of the Gotha"), the 'ten horns of the seventh head of the Beast'; and, the sufferers of a demonstrable fake chimney at Auschwitz building satanic cult psychosis - which teaches its children all Black, White, Red, Yellow, and Brown Americans are "sub-human animals," "a mindless herd of cattle" their duty is "to lie to, cheat, rob, enslave, and kill, with impunity" - descended of Rome's Khazar cult impaler hirelings (Ashkenhazim - descended of Uz-ben-Shem, the biblically accursed and foredoomed "Damascus"), who for gold performed the "crucifixions" (Latin for "impalements") of tens of thousands of "Christs," and Christ Immanuel, for twice denying Caesar was God (viz. "sedition" under codified Roman law). See: Mr. Jefferson's (God's anointed Founder and Prophet of Zion) Homage to Reason letter to his nephew, Peter Carr.

Through this mass terror - the impaler sub-contractors to the Roman law court were paid in gold as a function of the period of time "on the stake" before which the Christ (viz. Anointed and conscious of the One God) expired - prompting their profit in learning human anatomy so as to avoid vital organs while "delicately" hammering a dulled stake up through an incision between the anus and genitals through the torso out an incision between the neck and shoulder - the Roman Empire rapidly expanded, and became, with the same families and cash-flow, the Roman Church after the masses came to the realization Caesar really wasn't God.

Satan's power in the world is opposed to God's Perfection, "Zion" in Hebrew.

Mr. Trump is anointed God's Harbinger of the Apocalypse, the Revelation of new truth and knowledge which leads to the casting down of the Beast of (((Gog))) and Babylon from atop the "Chosen of God," the "El-ectorate" here in "Israel Restored" "into which all nations of the world flow." Isa. 2:2.

Rome with its undercover Jesuit agents, assassins, bankers, and false-Jew Talmud Khazars' "Synagogue of Satan," followed us over to expand their "Wall Street of slavery" together they had run at Rome for over 2,000 years, headquartered at Newport in yet Roman Catholic Organized Crime-controlled Rhode Island and Providence Plantations (that is the actual name of the state of "RI."

With their "Civil War" victory over the Black and White Cross of St. Andrew-waving Protestants (CBF), Rome's minions, parishioners at Capitol Hill's St. Paul's Roman Catholic church, assassinated President Lincoln for his charitable orders to Gen. Grant concerning the disposition of their defeated Southern brothers at Appomattox six days earlier.

Soon after the symbol of the power and authority of the Roman state, anathema to the Black and White "whig" Founders ("whig" means "anti-Roman Catholic") and the "whiggish" ideals upon which America was founded (our credal civil religion: each, ruled only by Truth and Justice, granted by God the divine right of armed Individual Sovereignty - Isaiah's "nation of priests"), the Fasces, were nailed to the front wall of the U.S. House by the Roman Catholic cannon-fodder which, like illegal immigrants today, the Anti-Christ had starved out of Ireland, Italy, and Germany, to come here as conquerors for Satan and their #Pizzagate pedophile homosexual Luciferians. 

Starting with Vatican catspaw Rothschilds' sexual deviant, blackmailable Freemasons and Rothschild agent Alexander Hamilton, an adulterer, first Secretary of the Treasury, and opposer of our Godly Founder; Rome's assaults on Our Land included the assassination of American Hero Meriwether Lewis on the Natchez Trace while he was fleeing to the Capitol to report of Rome's false culture at their St. Louis basecamp.

With their military victory at Appomattox and Organized Crime network in place, the Rockefeller-Bushes (Bush is of Count Dracula) built Big Oil on unredressed murder and arson in 1870's Cleveland.

It was then necessary for the Anti-Christ's rising Oligarchs to control the spread of information and knowledge provided by a vibrant newspaper industry across Our Land. This was accomplished by Rockefellers' and Rothschilds' CFR abetted by Roman Catholic Organized Crime and the Khazar Annenberg Gang during "The Circulation Wars" after their unconstitutional FedScam was implemented: the ownership and control of America's major "journalistic" outlets.

This led to the development, through purchased influence at our false-elite institutions of "higher learning" and co-opted pervert professors, of the influx of those ambitious young people hoping to rub elbows with the powerful, to join America's satanic ruling false-elite at whose core is Lucifer's #Pizzagate and worldly riches.

(((Chuch Todd))) is one of them. 

We, the sovereign People, the Chosen of God, and our president, are now battling the Anti-Christ's U.S. Fifth Column Beast of (((Gog))) and Babylon.

May God bless us; and our victory be sweet, only to the Glory of God.

Praise God and God's "Promised Land," our own dear America, Home of the Free and Brave.

Death for Treason 

blown income's picture

Great Saturday mornig read !!!!!!  flip the tv at work during lunch between cnn msnbc ..HAHAHAHAHA non stop whining crying !!!! Well he can't do this blah lah blah that and on and on and on!!! LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!

GREAT TO BE WHITE!

dearth vader's picture

On inauguration day CNN published a panoramic gigapixel photo of Trump's speech and the attending crowd. The link was posted on ZH and I bookmarked it for later reference. Here it is: http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2017/01/politics/trump-inauguration-g...

The resolution is so high, you can zoom in on the crowd and see their individual faces, or on the church tower on the horizon and read the time, 12:20 p.m.

There are two almost empty spaces, far in the background, in front of the Obelisk, the rest is packed from left to right as far as the eye can see.

The funniest part of the picture, however, are the rows behind Trump. Zoom in and watch the facial expressions of the invitees! From utter horror to dozing off. Who is that man in the fifth row, somewhat to the right, the one with the hat and the mustache and the fixed stare, between the young man with the MAGA cap and the old fatso in the yellow rain cape? He reminds me of inspector Clouseau.

overmedicatedundersexed's picture

nobody thinks the press is anything but dem propaganda..did the same shit to tea party crowds yrs ago..they must not show Trumps crowds during the election..the plot and desired outcome they seek demands they lie.

Stinkytofu's picture

my take on this?

obama's inauguration was attended by a zillion aferkan-merkans, cause he was promising MORE FREE STUFF!

trump's was attended by nearly a million deplorable rednecks, cause he was offereing JOBS AND DIGNITY.

 

SpongeBobWhoopAss's picture

Good article Dave!

 

Areas in the Mall that look white in photos were blocked off for security reasons:

Photo of the area showing barriers is here: http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/01/was-trump-right-about-his-...

Sid James's picture

I bet these photo's don't make it onto CNN.

AndSoItBegins's picture

I'm glad President Trump and his staff call out the press on every lie. I think many of us yell at our TV or radio when we hear the BS, so as far as I'm concerned, good job pointing out what dishonest liars they are.

It was so funny to hear Don lemon on cnn and the other goofs talking in outraged tones how disrespectful trip is of the press, blah blah blah. Let's talk about Donna brazillo and wolfie., along with the rest of their line up. Such liars, no shame or ownership of their bias and untruthful coverage.

JailBanksters's picture

Who cares about a Efing Popularity Contest.

If you wanted Popularity, should have gone with the Cardasians or Bouncey

 

Dormouse's picture

The Old "Press" are fucking liars. It's established fact; but to a small minority of brainwashed crybabies who's squeal is growing ever louder. You faggots and assholes invented the controversy so you could report on it. Very Hegelian but in a more pathological way. Maybe more like Münchausen Syndrome but you're actually trying to kill yourselves, not garner sympathy. Follow Bannon's advice and "shut [the fuck] up!"

Bavarian's picture

And of course the fucking MSM paid zero attention to crowd size during the entire election cycle - Bernie's, Trump's and of course, Hillary's based on such little turnout.  Never did they show wide panned shots when Hillary spoke.  And Tim Kaine?  Wow.  We're talking double digit crowds for him.

They're the tools that brought this up - 100% lying cycle beginning that day with the "missing" MLK bust.  Why the fuck should anyone believe one goddamn thing pulled out of their asses? 

Fuck the media!

SurfingUSA's picture

I heard that in Michigan, ** Eric ** Trump on his own was drawing 700, with Hillary of course nowhere near that number in other states and yes, Tim PedoFace Kaine getting maybe a half-dozen.

jomama's picture

You can't stop talking about it, either.

Isn't there something more important to write about?

Aussiekiwi's picture

I can see why the MSM would want to drop the story now that their manipulation of the public is being called out.

alexcojones's picture

Keep up your great work Dave.

Very Meticulous and hard for the faked MSM to debate the facts.

But the bastards will anyways

dexter_morgan's picture

Unfuckingbelievable.

He or Conway should hold a press conference or scheule something prime time, and lay this all out and then DEMAND they apologize to Spicer and Kellyanne for all of their bullshit. Essential force them to own up to this by doing it prime time. 

Knave Dave's picture

I'm trying to find avenues to make sure they see it. I hope one of them gets through.

--David Haggith

TeaClipper's picture

Trump keeps releasing squirrels to keep the fake press occupied, while getting on with real work.

alexcojones's picture

Dave- Kellyanne ABSOLUTELY owned Todd. 

And his real owners at Davos knew it.

Knave Dave's picture

She did an outstanding job.

alexcojones's picture

When George Sore Ass and his paid thugs said they would send two millions assholes to disrupt, harass and intimidate, fewer folks went.

Fuck Chuck Todd

Knave Dave's picture

And even with the biggest effort to shut down an inauguration with protests in history, the protests before the inauguration were hardly seen or heard, and inauguration still had a HUGE audience. So huge the fakestream media had to try to lie it back out of existence by using true photos to misrepresent the facts. Thus, alternative facts were needed.

Reaper's picture

Does a beach lose its popularity because less people are there in the rain?

Cynicles's picture

depends on who you ask

 

Whodathunkit's picture

Again I say that giant pussy like thing stuck to Todds face is sucking his brain out. He still acts like a five year old. Someone PLEASE put him out of his OWN misery

Whodathunkit's picture

I fucking HATE that guy. Like I hate Brent Musberger. THANK GAWD he announced his retirement

ISEEIT's picture

The photographic 'evidence' isn't apples for apples.

I'm inclined to believe that trumps physical crowd size was smaller in total, but some material out there suggest strongly that both combatants suffer a bit of over zealousness in search of sensationalism.

The goal should ALWAYS be pursuit of truth. Huge amounts of disinformation fly about as this shitshow rages on.

ISEEIT's picture

Lol...

This is a troll right?

Cynicles's picture

I like rhetotical questions too. Really.

Old Hippie Patriot's picture

Trump and company harped on the audience size because they had the media by the ... with this one.  They have slam dunk proof of their lies: time stamped photos.

Cloud9.5's picture

Moot point.  Trump won, end of story.  Your options for changing the outcome of the election are over.  Your only legal avenue now is to agitate for impeachment.  In as much as the last president was not impeached and most of us in our camp do not even think he was a legal citizen, I suspect the possibility of impeachment is infinitesimally small with the Republicans controlling both houses. Your final legal option is to clean the corrupt bosses out of your own party who stole the nomination from Bernie Sanders and mobilize the public to vote for a viable candidate of your choosing.

 

If you are thinking along the lines of assassination or revolution, prepare for spending a long time in prison under the first choice.  If you choose revolution as your second choice, prepare for your blood and the blood of your associates to be spilled in your effort to nourish the tree of liberty.

bh2's picture

Actually, most people by now see the press as impeached and wish the new prez to simply carry on as he did the first week.

Conservative Hippy's picture

PBS time lapse video http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/360-video-time-lapse-watch-donald-tr...

There is a cut at the time when then event started to when it stoped so RealityCheck slowed it down.

https://youtu.be/J3Am1WalVvU

From everything I am seeing its not Fake News. There was no where near the amount of people at this one compared to past inaugurations. Republicans have jobs and not a lot live around the captial. Now what I want to see is the live streeming #'s, because thats what all of the people in our office were doing.

 

Knave Dave's picture

I watched that one while putting together this article, but the PBS video appears to cut out the period during the actual event, and skips to when the crowd was already leaving. Comparing it to other pictures taken when Trump was speaking, even the area right around Trump is never as filled up in the PBS video as it clearly is when the inauguration is in process. The very fact that it is cut, indicates it is fake. You have to ask why would they put a cut in a timelapse video if they werent' trying to rig the news. Just speed up the time lapse if you think it runs too long. I think they cut a little more than just his speech.

worbsid's picture

There is so much fake in news.  For instance, when a reporter is standing in front of a green screen in a nice studio but the viewer sees him/her standing in front of the Fed building in NYC.  You can tell because there is a bit of a line all around his/her face or body.  "This is Blooper reporting for ABC news in front of the Fed building".  Bullshit!  Fake!

Knave Dave's picture

Indeed. Look at this other article I did on fake news where two reporters in a split screen are supposedly reporting from different areas, but the cars moving in the background of one, show up passing through in the background of the other as soon as they leave the first frame:

 

http://thegreatrecession.info/blog/fake-news-msm-devours-itself/

Cynicles's picture

the artice you did...?

'fraid to look after such a comment  

CheapBastard's picture

Soweeto bin Bama was a Fake president but all the damage he caused Americans is unfortunately real.

Dame Ednas Possum's picture

Accidentally deleted post I spent 45 mins typing... fucking 'smart' phone. Sorry. 

In short: 

Dave - please do set-up the fakes news outing website. Your writing is excellent, objective and well reasoned. 

Trump - drain the swamp. 

Gold. 

#pizzagate