CJS wrote:Well his team have started as they mean to go on by claiming that the crowds last Friday were the largest for an inauguration, "period".
One assumes the press secretary who is quoted was somewhere else on Friday and hasn't looked at the evidence that seems to be quite starkly to the contrary.
Pen Pusher wrote:From the BBC web site. Trump crowds on the left and Obama on the right.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38707722
Brian
phreakf4 wrote:Pen Pusher wrote:From the BBC web site. Trump crowds on the left and Obama on the right.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38707722
Brian
What is not stated in that item (or the same in any news site I have accessed) is at what time of day the two photos were taken. I am no fan of President Trump. In my opinion extreme nationalism is usually a bad thing whether it is of the right or left, but I ask that question in the interests of accuracy. If, as the shadows, especially noticeable on the Capitol building, seem to indicate, the two were taken at different times of day that might explain the apparent difference in crowd numbers. It would not be the first time that the media have twisted the facts to suit their agenda as we aviation enthusiasts are well aware.
THE FACTS: Trump is wrong. Photos of the National Mall from his inauguration make clear that the crowd did not extend to the Washington Monument. Large swaths of empty space are visible on the Mall.
Thin crowds and partially empty bleachers also dotted the inaugural parade route. Hotels across the District of Columbia reported vacancies, a rarity for an event as large as a presidential inauguration.
And ridership on the Washington's Metro system didn't match that of recent inaugurations. As of 11 a.m. that day, there were 193,000 trips taken, according to the transit service's Twitter account. At the same hour eight years ago, there had been 513,000 trips. Four years later, there were 317,000 for Obama's second inauguration.
We do know a few things so let's go through the facts. We know that from the platform where the President was sworn in to 4th Street holds about 250,000 people. From 4th Street to the media tent is about another 220,000. And from the media tent to the Washington Monument, another 250,000 people. All of this space was full when the President took the oath of office.
Brevet Cable wrote:Does it really matter ?
Obama was supposedly a novelty, hence the turnout.
There could have been a grand total of three tramps & a talking dog watching Trump's inauguration, it doesn't make him any less the POTUS.
At least - unlike Obama - he's unlikely to be in the ridiculous situation of being awarded a Nobel Peace Prize after only a few months in office for doing absolutely nothing.
TKK 140 wrote:
Having watched the Whitehouse press conference I think it does matter. One thing challenging the press, who often gild the lily. What is worrying is getting into a totally unnecessary argument about it. One thing for us to do itFor a President of the USA it smacks of a bully and we have enough of those already.
CJS wrote:Brevet, if Obama was a novelty then what the hell is Trump meant to be?
CJS wrote:What he certainly can't keep doing is pretending the press are making up stuff he is on record as having said.
I think the REM song Bad Day would be appropriate here...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Hyk-Vdd_Qrk
His team are so far showing themselves to be just as cretinous as the POTUS himself.
Users browsing this forum: AlexC, Brevet Cable, ericbee123, FlankerPhoto, parsley and 13 guests