jump to last post 1-6 of 6 discussions (35 posts)

Facts about the inauguration

  1. Don W profile image83
    Don Wposted 2 months ago

    The thread this was in seems to have disappeared. Not sure why.

    Anyway, for the benefit of those who seem to be in denial, I've outlined some facts about the inauguration..

    I've deliberately excluded anything that cannot be objectively determined, and I've contrasted each fact with the claim made by the Trump administration.

    __________________________________

    Trump spokesperson: "This was the first time in our nation's history that floor coverings have been used to protect the grass on the Mall. That had the effect of highlighting any areas where people were not standing, while in years past the grass eliminated this visual".

    Fact: the same floor covering was usd in 2013: Here is a news report from that time: "With just four days to go before the Inauguration, caretakers of the National Mall are rushing to preserve the grass. Huge crowds four years ago virtually destroyed the grounds. Starting Friday morning, crews will put down thousands of plastic sheets over six-and-a-half acres of new grass on the Mall. The terraplas, as it's called, sits inches above the grass, allowing light and water to pass through. This multi-million dollar project will take two days to complete".

    http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local … 01631.html

    In fact a combination of teraplas, arena panels and LD panels were used.

    Here is the online company that sells the protective covering, confirming it is white: http://www.covermaster.com/News/Nationa … aplas.html

    And here is a photo from their online catalog showing it laid down for the "57th  Presidential Inauguration", i.e. Obama's second inauguration which happened in 2013.

    http://www.covermaster.com/core/media/media.nl?id=201248&c=943463&h=f7d3509ca41e7035e398

    And here is the company that installed it in 2013.
    http://www.eps.net/en-us/event/news-and … monies-20/

    And here is another photo of the ground protection installed in 2013, from the company that installed it:
    http://www.eps.net/assets/en_US/event/NewsPage/fifty-seventh-inaugural-ceremonies.../gallery-images/_resampled/croppedResizeWyIzNDAiLCIyNTAiXQ/MarkWyIyMCJd/eps_america_ground_cover.JPG

    The caption for this photo reads: "100,000 square feet of ground cover from eps america protected the National Mall during President Obama’s second inauguration in January."

    And here is the National Park Servcice permit for the 2013 innauguration event which authorizes the use of ground protection, specifically teraplas:
    https://www.nps.gov/aboutus/foia/upload … s-2012.pdf

    Trump spokesperson: "420,000" used the D.C. Metro on Jan. 20, 2017

    Fact: On Jan 20 2017: 570,557 trips were taken between 4 a.m - midnight. In 2013, 782,000 trips were taken.

    Trump spokesperson: 317,000 trips were taken in 2013.

    Fact: that figure is for trips as of 11 a.m.  Using the same timeframe, 193,000 trips were taken for the Trump inauguration in 2017.

    Here is the Tweet from the official feed of DC Metro: https://twitter.com/wmata/status/822482330346487810

    Breakdown of rider figures for previous inaugurations (trips between 4 a.m - midnight on top, trips as of 11am on bottom):

    Jan. 20, 2017 (Trump inaugural)
    570,557
    193,000
    Jan. 21, 2013* (Obama inaugural)
    782,000
    317,000
    Jan. 20, 2009 (Obama inaugural)
    1,100,000
    513,000
    Jan. 20, 2005 (Bush inaugural)
    583,803
    197,000

    So which of these specific facts do you dispute?

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      Why dispute any of them?  What makes it worth the effort - why do any of them matter at all?

      1. Don W profile image83
        Don Wposted 2 months ago in reply to this

        You tell me. Trump supporters on this forum, and the Trump administration, raised the issue. It was deemed so important that Trump's spokesperson made a special statement in the White House.

        Seeing as it has been raised, I'd like to establish the facts.

        When Rep. John Lewis said he'd never boycotted an inauguration before, Trump said he was "wrong (or lying)" because he had in fact boycotted a previous inauguration.

        So do you accept that the Trump administration is wrong (or lying) when it says that ground protection has never been used before at an inauguration?

        And do you accept that the Trump administration is wrong (or lying) when it says more people used the metro during the Trump inaugural than the Obama inaugural?

        1. Credence2 profile image83
          Credence2posted 2 months ago in reply to this

          I have also heard that the women's march attendance rather than 200,000, was closer to 500,000 in DC alone. The participants are not just coming out for a powwow to just return home without action plans for the future.

          The "Resurgent Left" is the equivalent of the Tea Party and has been created as an organization in response to Donald Trump and the arrogant and strident Right wing. So, while the Empire Strikes Back, the resistance will be in full force, you can count on it.

        2. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

          OK.  But you do recognize that you can work a lifetime checking and disproving just one years worth of lies from politicians and not cover a tenth of them?  Wouldn't the time be better spent proving those things that actually matter?  Things like global warming, or the ACA saving money? 

          I couldn't possibly care less that a ground cover was used before 2017.  But I DO care, a great deal, about the costs of the ACA.  About the roots of the depression.  About global warming.

          1. Don W profile image83
            Don Wposted 2 months ago in reply to this

            I'm sure there are many who share your lack of caring about metro figures and ground covering, but that isn't the issue.

            The White House has no business insinuating that any fact critical or unflattering to Trump is wrong. Neither does it have any business creating "alternative facts" and suggesting the White House can sometimes "disagree with facts". Facts are facts. You can't create your own just because you don't like reality.

            The size of the inauguration crowd is what it is. Every indication suggests the crowd was smaller than in 2013 and 2009, and smaller than the number of people attending the women's march. The fact that the White House spokesperson had to defend Trumps fragile ego, by giving false information is extremely concerning.

            And as Credence suggests, this does not bode well for the reliability of more important information the administration will be disclosing in the future.

            Now I wonder which of the vocal Trump supporters is willing to accept that the Trump administration got its facts wrong here.

      2. Credence2 profile image83
        Credence2posted 2 months ago in reply to this

        If the Trump administration propaganda ministers can'tspin this without facts getting in the way, what other mechanisms do they have in store to muzzle information that is not flattering?

        It is a harbinger, that is why it matters.

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

          LOL  This is harbinger of recognizing that politicians lie.  And they make mistakes as well.  And that they will exaggerate whenever they feel it makes them look good. 

          And that others will instantly declare those mistakes and exaggerations as intentional lies.

          Nothing, then, that isn't already known and expected.

          1. Gemini Fox profile image91
            Gemini Foxposted 2 months ago in reply to this

            Deleted

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

              No, he's not a normal politician; he doesn't fit the mold very well at all.

              But that has nothing to do with politicians in general, including Trump lying.  Nor with wasting time in minutia, on lies that just...don't...matter.

              Nor with people making statements that just aren't true, either.  Such as "His followers think he's environmentalist b/c, by golly,".  Or was that just another "alternative fact", no better or different than the exaggerations and tall tales Trump and other politicians put out?

              1. Gemini Fox profile image91
                Gemini Foxposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                LOL - messed up that whole post!

                Was trying to put in pic that was on front of Yahoo (yeah, they're a joke) but it was the WH trying to explain away Trump's absurd version of the above issue.  Course, the WH trying to explain Trump will soon be a daily exercise. The point is his lies are so constant and so blatant and combined with him threatening the media (whose role it is to dig out corruption, etc. in government) we're headed into very dangerous territory - one I don't think most Americans are even thinking about.

                This link explains it far better than I do - why Trump's lying IS so dangerous:

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wYlUuyftN0

                (yes, it's tyt but that doesn't change the facts and the guy bashes Ds and Rs)

                1. wilderness profile image95
                  wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                  Yeah, yeah.  Trump has a psychological condition that makes his lies more dangerous than those of other politicians.  He's also flat out insane and must be committed if you search the internet long enough.

                  But maybe I get it after all.  Until now I haven't understood the massive furor over something that just doesn't matter, but it isn't about correcting lies or even errors, is it?  It's about demonizing someone you don't like - someone you wish to cause harm to.  I'd hoped the mud slinging was over after the election, but here it is, just by the citizenry rather than the political opponent.  At least HP gives you the option of deleting your own misstatements, doesn't it?

                  For me, though, I'll stick to things like discussion of getting rid of the TPP or the requirement that young people refusing to purchase overpriced insurance not be fined or prosecuted any more.  A little more important, IMHO, than finding fault with silly statements that have nothing to do with anything I care about.  And it's something Trump actually did.

                  1. Gemini Fox profile image91
                    Gemini Foxposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                    Yeah, Trump does have numerous psychiatric problems - hilarious (or maybe it's scary) his cult-like followers seem to miss them.

                    Wrong.  Meant to edit b/c the pic was so messed up and ended up deleting b/c it just seemed easier to do so.  I don't venture into the forums very often and they've changed the way they are set up since I was last here.  But ASSUME whatever you please.  Bad habit you seem to have.

                    Wrong.  There was actually a time I was going to vote for Trump b/c I HATE Hillary . . . . but then he got Pence as his VP (another loon) and I began reading enough to realize Trump is a hardwired nut who will never change, whether the president or not - and that was it.  But there are still things I agree with him on - the TPP for example.  I just don't think he has Americans' best interests at heart - it's all about him (part of his psychoses).

                    Too bad the entire issue at stake here is obviously way beyond your sphere of comprehension.

    2. Don W profile image83
      Don Wposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      So where are all the Trump supporters who were so vocal about the media falsely reporting on the inauguration? I'd like to ask you two very simple questions. Based on the information in the opening comment:

      - Do you accept that the Trump administration is wrong (or lying) when it says that ground protection has never been used before at an inauguration?

      - Do you accept that the Trump administration is wrong (or lying) when it says more people used the metro during the Trump inaugural than the Obama inaugural?

      (credit to Wilderness, who's the only Trump supporter to respond in this thread, and acknowledge that this information even exists).

      Are facts really this scary?

  2. Aime F profile image83
    Aime Fposted 2 months ago

    Alternative facts:

    Obama didn't actually go, it was a guy dressed in an exact replica bodysuit

    Bill Clinton got drunk and hit on both of Trump's daughters, and one of the sons

    They got word that someone on Pluto was actually watching the livestream on YouTube

    Lots of people didn't show up to the concert on Thursday night because statistically speaking 97% of people who voted for Trump work on Thursday nights

    Any discrepancies in the numbers of people who attended the inauguration can be explained by the fact that Trump supporters are also statistically big Harry Potter fans and wore invisibility cloaks

    It wasn't raining, it was the sunniest day in 62 years, no one knows sunny days better than Donald Trump

    In Donald Trump's culture it's really impolite to walk alongside your wife into a building after getting out of a car, it's customary to walk away from her as quickly as possible and is a sign of love and respect

    Talking with your hands is not distracting at all and is actually a sign of tremendous, huge intelligence

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      lol

    2. Gemini Fox profile image91
      Gemini Foxposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      Excellent!

  3. Gemini Fox profile image91
    Gemini Foxposted 2 months ago

    Allegedly the real reason Sean Spicer was tossed cruelly from the comfortable realms of the Alternative World out to the hungry media wolves with his set of incredible Alternative Facts regarding inauguration numbers . . . President Snowflake was upset there were double the protesters in the Women's March:

    http://www.rawstory.com/2017/01/white-h … ch-report/

  4. Gemini Fox profile image91
    Gemini Foxposted 2 months ago

    And just because it's too hilarious to let get by:

    http://www.rawstory.com/2017/01/dem-sen … ks-bigger/

  5. ahorseback profile image47
    ahorsebackposted 2 months ago

    Everyone on the left should fess up to the fact that the new Plague of De-legitimization of Trump is the new religion of the left ! And NOT just the radical left-- but all of them !     Now it comes down to the turf ,   yesterday it was the crowds , tomorrow it will be the bathroom fixtures and the day after that  ,the  tires on the presidential limo ,   
    Some advice to the left -
    Alternate Facts -  are  the invention and new  religion of the left and  Not of Pres. Trumps .

    1. Gemini Fox profile image91
      Gemini Foxposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      Um, you seem to be confused . . . it was Kellyanne Conway who stated that it was the WH/Sean Spicer who was in possession of those "alternative facts."

  6. profile image59
    this okposted 2 months ago

    he is alive

 
working