patrick.net

Compiling "Trumplies" and trying to read them would be about as boring as trying to read the Book of Mormon.

The problem is not regarding the occasional accidental truth as a lie as well.

T L Lipsovich says

Blurtman says

I'd like to see white supremacist quotes of Steve Bannon.

Or Milo, for that matter.

Dan8267 says

the media

You mean the same media that had everyone convinced, even themselves, that Hillary was going to win?

The original video itself is not credible because CNN's own Gigapixel shot shows that the audience clearly did fill the area the video shows it empty.

Here's the shot the video chose to show how empty Trump's inauguration was:

But here's CNN's gigapixel shot showing those same areas while Trump was actually being sworn in:

How can the video maker lie so blatantly? Is he just unaware that the photo he showed was definitely not taken during the actual inauguration?

Patrick--

Come on--open your eyes. Those two pictures aren't the same perspective and same views. If you zoom in on the top picture, you get the 2nd picture.

joeyjojojunior says

Come on--open your eyes. Those two pictures aren't the same perspective and same views. If you zoom in on the top picture, you get the 2nd picture.

Only if you actually WANT to use your brain to think. Please masta trump tell me what think, please, please suh.

JoeyJoJoJunior ( daddys little tranny fuck ) you're right for once!

joeyjojojunior says

Patrick--

Come on--open your eyes. Those two pictures aren't the same perspective and same views. If you zoom in on the top picture, you get the 2nd picture.

"JoeyJoJoJunior ( daddys little tranny fuck)"

Obviously not much of a Simpsons watcher.

Dan8267 says

How should the media cover a White House that isn't afraid to lie?

You have to be kidding, the media has had 8 years of experience with how to deal with this problem.

indigenous says

Dan8267 says

How should the media cover a White House that isn't afraid to lie?

You have to be kidding, the media has had 8 years of experience with how to deal with this problem.

Correction: 16 years

Fair enough, either way nothing new.

joeyjojojunior says

Come on--open your eyes. Those two pictures aren't the same perspective and same views. If you zoom in on the top picture, you get the 2nd picture.

I noticed that, too. However, I believe the second picture does still indicate a packed crowd, and here's why.

First, let's review what that section of D.C. looks like.

From west (left) to east (right), you have
1. The Lincoln Memorial
2. The Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool (the long rectangular pool)
3. The WWII memorial
4. A large rectangular field
5. The Washington Monument
6. 15th St NW
7. 14th St SW
8. The National Mall (that's the very large rectangular field where the people were gathered)
9. The Capital Reflecting Pool
10. The Ulysses Grant Memorial
11. The U.S. Capitol grounds
12. The U.S. Capitol (Congress)

[stupid comment limit]

I'm not 100% sure because of the grainy low-res photo, but I think the first picture (VOX still frame) takes place at (1) the Lincoln Memorial and looks east towards (3) the WWII memorial covering (2) the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool and the surrounding lawn. This would place it at the very back of the public gathering space and ignores the vast majority of the gathering space. And if it's not taken during the actual inauguration, there would be no reason to expect it to be full. People don't wait for hours to get a back seat where you can't see anything.

The second picture clearly shows (5) the Washington Monument behind a building, which has to be the one building next to the monument between the monument and (6) 15th St NW. This means the second picture is probably taken from 15th St NW facing west and covers the small area between that street and the Washington Monument, i.e. form (5) to (6). This area is much smaller and closer to the inauguration than the area in the first picture. However, it's still an area that would only get filled if the humongous area (8) the National Mall was already packed.

So, although the second picture implies a larger crowd then there was, it's still closer to the truth than the first picture, and it still demonstrates a substantial crowd. The whole National Mall would have been filled. This should not be surprising. Power always brings a crowd whether that power is on the side of good or evil. It certainly wasn't as packed as Obama's inauguration in 2008, but it wasn't sparse either.

Of course, why does any of this matter. We shouldn't care about the number of people who attend a president's inauguration. We should care about the policies of the president. This is all just politicking.

Two last things.

First, the Legendary home of the US legislator is way too cool of a name for that shit storm we call Congress.

Second, what the hell is Foggy Bottom, a gay Scottish nightclub?

Foggy Bottom is a neighborhood.

6 Things to See & Do in Foggy Bottom

Foggy Bottom takes its name from the morning mist that comes off of its southern boundary, the Potomac River.

I'm disappointed. I had a whole Groundskeeper Willie at the Blue Oyster scenario going in my head. Reality is so boring in contrast.

"I noticed that, too. However, I believe the second picture does still indicate a packed crowd, and here's why."

I agree with that too. I just wish people would stop with all the conspiracy theory nonsense implying that Vox purposely posted a fake picture and lied about it.