- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: CBS continues to lie about early Trump inauguration photo
Posted on 1/23/17 at 11:37 am to MightyYat
Posted on 1/23/17 at 11:37 am to MightyYat
quote:
They are trying to bait Trump.
Hopefully, he will show restraint.
Well, he already sent his fricking Press Secretary out the day after his election to cry about it like a child and then lie.. Donald J. needs to ignore shite like this and press on with his 100 days plan. frick the media right now.
Exactly. But what else are Spicer, Priebus, and Conway supposed to do? They get their marching orders from Trump.
This is exactly why Trump needs someone with the gravitas of a Gingrich in the White House, who can take him behind close doors and just slap the shite out of him. Metaphorically speaking, of course.
I want like hell for Trump to be successful. But shite like this is utter stupidity.
0
Posted on 1/23/17 at 11:38 am to buckeye_vol
quote:
Facts are facts. There are additional facts, but how can there be "alternative" facts about the same thing?
Well it's obvious the media chose facts they felt crafted the narrative they were intent on espousing. (Setting the lie about the photo aside)
Alternatively, there are other facts that can be selected that support a antithetical narrative.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 11:42 am to cajunangelle
Yeah, I saw george stupidnopolos grilling Conway for 10 minutes on this. I had to turn it off because he was being so ridiculous.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 11:47 am to Turbeauxdog
This crowd thing is insane to me for a couple of reasons.
Firstly, Trump shouldn't care. He shouldn't be sending out his press secretary to lecture the press on the comparison of crowd size. I mean, holy shite.
Secondly, he (and Spicer et al) are factually wrong. So, if they are going to make it a big deal, they should make sure that they're right before they go off about it. And guess what, they aren't.
Here's a time lapse of Trump's crowd:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8THdDHyfUTA
Care to point out where in that video that the crowd gets relatively larger than it looks on the rigth panel of this image that has made the rounds?
Because it's pretty obvious that Obama's 2009 crowd was significantly larger.
But again, I think it's hilarious that he's even making an issue out of this. He (or Spicer) could have easily said something to the extent of "We exceeded our attendance expectations and had a successful event. We're happy with the way the American public turned out to support their new president, particularly in a city and region that predominantly votes democratic."
Had they done that, guess what? Nobody would be talking about this. Instead, they keep inserting their own feet into their mouths. It's crazy to me.
Firstly, Trump shouldn't care. He shouldn't be sending out his press secretary to lecture the press on the comparison of crowd size. I mean, holy shite.
Secondly, he (and Spicer et al) are factually wrong. So, if they are going to make it a big deal, they should make sure that they're right before they go off about it. And guess what, they aren't.
Here's a time lapse of Trump's crowd:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8THdDHyfUTA
Care to point out where in that video that the crowd gets relatively larger than it looks on the rigth panel of this image that has made the rounds?
Because it's pretty obvious that Obama's 2009 crowd was significantly larger.
But again, I think it's hilarious that he's even making an issue out of this. He (or Spicer) could have easily said something to the extent of "We exceeded our attendance expectations and had a successful event. We're happy with the way the American public turned out to support their new president, particularly in a city and region that predominantly votes democratic."
Had they done that, guess what? Nobody would be talking about this. Instead, they keep inserting their own feet into their mouths. It's crazy to me.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 11:48 am to Strophie
quote:
Had they done that, guess what? Nobody would be talking about this. Instead, they keep inserting their own feet into their mouths. It's crazy to me.
this
its baffling that Trumpkins can't see this
Posted on 1/23/17 at 11:48 am to TBoy
quote:
So why the hell did they send the new White House Press Secretary out to start this ridiculous issue?
As a distraction
Look at all the things Trump has done since Fri, and what are the low IQ talking about. Numbers. Because that's what Trump wants them to talk about
Theyre so petty, and Trump knows this. Look at the CNN prez threatening Trump with global influence. Hes toying with them, while pulling back 75% of business regs
Its actually amazing to witness, firsthand. And not just a paragraph from a history book
IT . . . IS . . . GLORIOUS!!
Posted on 1/23/17 at 11:49 am to Turbeauxdog
quote:
Which is obviously not true
"Obviously?"
What makes you say this?
Posted on 1/23/17 at 11:50 am to RobbBobb
quote:
Look at all the things Trump has done since Fri, and what are the low IQ talking about. Numbers. Because that's what Trump wants them to talk about
Even you're not this stupid.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 11:52 am to BamaGradinTn
Also, I can't help but think that Laura Ingraham would have figured out a way to get the message out without sticking her foot in her mouth.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 11:52 am to DawgfaninCa
They should talk about Hillary's crowd...
Posted on 1/23/17 at 11:53 am to DawgfaninCa
quote:
Why are they continuing to lie?
It's CBS. All of the MSM are scrambling to try to stay relevant. If Trump and his cabinet don't talk to them, they might go out of business.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 11:53 am to DawgfaninCa
The photo was taken during trump's speech.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 11:54 am to kywildcatfanone
quote:
It's CBS.
Again, what "lie" are you all referencing?
Posted on 1/23/17 at 11:56 am to Strophie
Go look at the CNN gigapixel of the actual speech.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 12:02 pm to kywildcatfanone
quote:
Go look at the CNN gigapixel of the actual speech.
Um, that's from a fundamentally different angle. It's from the front of the crowd looking back. Of course it's going to "look" more full. How does that in any way refute the overhead shots that obviously show the turnout discrepancy?
Furthering this, Trump's turnout was historically good. By all measures, it beat both of Bush's turnouts. It beat Clinton's second inauguration and arguably his first. I don't see why he has to be so defensive about it.
Not beating the numbers for Obama's inaugurations (particularly the first one) shouldn't be a surprise; he was the first black president and was popular with the youth. The turnouts for his were crazy. And there's absolutely no shame in Trump not drawing as many people. But the fact that he continues to argue that his was as big (or bigger) is hilarious in light of the obvious - that it wasn't.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 12:05 pm to Strophie
quote:
Care to point out where in that video that the crowd gets relatively larger than it looks on the rigth panel of this image that has made the rounds
39 seconds
Posted on 1/23/17 at 12:08 pm to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
The photo was taken during trump's speech.
Brit Hume claims he was somewhere back there at that angle and that the photo was had to be taken before noon - that it was more crowded during the swearing in and speech.
LINK
Posted on 1/23/17 at 12:13 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:
39 seconds
Okay, so the portion circled in red qualifies as a big enough discrepancy to make the media into a bunch of "liars?" Because that's the only difference I note the crowd from the image I posted earlier.
That's a half million to 750k difference? Because that's how much Trump's team claims the numbers were off by.
This post was edited on 1/23/17 at 12:15 pm
Posted on 1/23/17 at 12:20 pm to Strophie
That and the density amongst all the other sections is much higher.
Enough to discredit the picture.
Enough to discredit the picture.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 12:21 pm to ChEgrad
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News