Posted on 01/22/2017 11:07:18 AM PST by Rockitz
Sunday on NBC’s “Meet The Press,” during a very contentious interview, President Donald Trump aide Kellyanne Conway told host Chuck Todd, “We’re going to have to rethink our relationship here,” if he continued to ask why press secretary Sean Spicer told a “falsehood,” about Trump’s inaugural crowd size.
Todd asked, “I’m curious why president trump chose yesterday to send out his press secretary to essentially litigate a provable falsehood when it comes to a small and petty thing like inaugural crowd size. my question to you is why do that?
After her answer Todd again said, “You did not answer the question. ..."
Conway said “Chuck, if we’re going to keep referring to our press secretary in those types of terms, I think we are going to have to rethink our relationship here. I want a great open relationship with our press.”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Why did they use a picture taken an hour before it started? Would anyone be surprised if they enhanced the Obama crowds?
There is no difference between Fox Snooze and CNN with the way they attack President Trump.
I for one was at the largest event ever in the national mall. Promisekeepers Stand in the Gap”
I think the idea is to call them every time they do this.
What’s with the Guy with the split face, three rows behind the Joint Chiefs of Staff?
A better response would have been, "Todd, we are establishing minimum standards for civility by the media. Either you apologize right now for calling the press secretary a liar, or this interview is over, and no more representatives of this Administration will appear with you on the air.
you are just foolish
You spout the dogma
“Should be timestamps on the pictures of the inauguration crowd, no?”
Exactly what I’ve been saying. Almost every image these days has date and time on it. Compare similar camera angles at high noon on 1/20/09 and 1/20/17, quit tap-dancing around the issue, be done with it, and move on.
I was there too! A great day. Cheers, fellow Tea Partier!
And another factor is how CLEAN and peaceful it was!
If the press wants to do a comparison, they should compare the aftermath of the 0vomit inauguration to the aftermath of the 9/12/2009 demonstration. After 9/12, the streets were pristine. After 0vomit, the streets looked like a garbage dump.
Brit Hume says that inauguration crowd pic was intentionally taken early
Brit Hume says that inauguration crowd pic was intentionally taken early
Bingo! NEVER. EVER. BACK DOWN from a fight!!!
So were the Clinton photoshopped crowd sizes real Chucky?
That’s right. The best was the CNN interactive - can clearly see President Trump giving his speech.
Spicer was being dishonest, and Todd was simply calling him on it. Spicer should have said, “Yes, our crowd was smaller because our supporters are back at home trying to put food on their tables rather than coming as Soros hirelings.”
Large panoramic pictures like this involve moving the camera all over while taking lots of pictures. While a shot like this is being taken, time continues its inexorable march. That guys face happens to be on a boundary of two of the pictures that made up this giant composite, and in between the shots taken of that part of the image, he moved his head.
You can likely find quite a few more such anomalies in this image.
I was just to the left of the stage about a dozen rows back.
Well I think the actual crowd size is not relevant. This is a signal that the press has zero room for continued misrepresentations. Trump et al will absolutely call them on it.
Separately, they DID show the crowd at differing times before the swearing in and put forth that the pics are evidence of crowd differences. Beyond that, security purposely slowed attendees down and train workers did too.
The press is still trying to lie.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.