Anti-Trump rally protests around the world.
- Thread starter Agricola
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I'm not sure it's comparing apples to oranges as it is comparing a honeycrisp and a red delicious (both apples). Children are still human beings (apples) just as adults are. I'm not saying it's better or worse to insult a child versus an adult... that isn't my point whatsoever. It deflects from my point that both are wrong and if one screams foul on one they can't be hypocritical and say it's okay to do it to the other.
Youre the one that made the comparison man. And calling a group of people and what they stand for ugly is a far cry from calling a ten year old boy who happens to be the presidents son and did absolutely nothing wrong a rapist or whatever and was beyond the pale. And stop attributing what someone else said to me. I know ugly when I see it and sometimes it has nothing to do with physical attributes.
Last edited:
This is something I doubt Liberals will ever understand.
They think it is fine for your taxes and mine to fund their every whimsy and desire. But they do not want to pay one red cent, themselves, to build back up our military that is totally necessary to keep them safe and to give them the privilege to do all those things they would quickly be brought before a firing squad (with no trial in many cases) for doing in many other countries they defend as being better than the USA.
They think it is fine for your taxes and mine to fund their every whimsy and desire. But they do not want to pay one red cent, themselves, to build back up our military that is totally necessary to keep them safe and to give them the privilege to do all those things they would quickly be brought before a firing squad (with no trial in many cases) for doing in many other countries they defend as being better than the USA.
Alternate Facts:
I realize the words that came out of Conway's mouth in a live interview sounded silly.
I get it.
Nonetheless, CNN DID LIE about inauguration attendance:
1. CNN posted a pic of the Washington Mall taken WAY BEFORE peak attendance.
2. CNN CLAIMED this pic was taken at peak attendance.
3. This pic which they CLAIMED was taken at peak attendance showed the Washington Mall was half empty.
4. It is provable, from OTHER PICS ON CNN'S OWN SITE, that CNN LIED, and the Washington Mall was FULL during peak attendance.
LINK:
Here is the link to a LATER, and DIFFERENT picture on CNN'S own site, which verifies the Washington Mall was FULL.
You can turn the view around, toward the Lincoln Memorial, and zoom in, and see it for yourself.
Gigapixel: The inauguration of Donald Trump
CNN actually posted a pic of Trump's inauguration, prior to peak attendance (when the Mall was only half full) and compared this pic SIDE-BY-SIDE to a pic of Obama's inauguration, during actual peak attendance (when the Mall WAS full) just to create a FALSE NARRATIVE and LIE to the public.
LINK:
Here is the link to an EARLIER PICTURES put up by CNN, attempting to claim the Washington Mall was half empty for Trumps inauguration.
The 2 pics comparing Obama and Trump attendance are at top of page; you can click back and forth between the two.
* The Obama pic IS from peak attendance; the Trump pic is SIGNIFICANTLY PRIOR TO peak attendance... CNN compares 2 different types of pictures in order to lie to the public.
Comparing Donald Trump and Barack Obama's inaugural crowd sizes - CNNPolitics.com
5. It is also provable from various video footage and interviews that many people were stuck at check points, and were never able to even enter the event.
Many people could never even get INTO the inauguration.
This is a well known fact, and there is much video footage to verify this, and no major media outlet even DISCUSSED this in the smallest way.
6. When Spicer claimed Trump's inauguration was the most "widely viewed" inauguration around the world, CNN and other media outlets immediately attacked these statements, without checking any facts at all.
A. Over 30 million people watched the inauguration on television in the U.S.
B. You can find at least 30 million ONLINE INTERNET VIEWERS of the inauguration just from sourcing a dozen major websites... without even digging.
C. Actual numbers are unknown, but I'm sure you could poke around and find many more millions of views coming from online sources, and from various international media outlets.
Therefore, at the very least, Trump's and Spicer's claims are perfectly within the realm of being "reasonable."
7. As far as Trump's live attendance, and comparing it to Obama's live attendance: we really don't know the exact numbers for either event, and that isn't the main point or the main problem.
A. The main point is CNN posted a FAKE picture, showing the Washington Mall HALF EMPTY, and claiming this was from PEAK ATTENDANCE... and they created this FAKE NEWS to imply nobody liked Trump enough to show up for his inauguration.
Foul journalism.
B. Both Trump and Spicer said the live attendance "looked like" it was probably 1 million or 1.5 million ... they did not claim it absolutely WAS this number, nor does anyone really have definite numbers anyway. Also, the Washington Mall actually WAS FULL during the Trump event... clearly giving anyone there the impression the attendance was some very large number.
You can see pictures from the podium angle, where Trump was, and see that from his vantage point, the entire Washington Mall did look completely full. Also, you can view the Mall from other angles and see the mall WAS INDEED FULL.
(This does NOT mean that during Obama's inauguration there couldn't have been more people in the area, either squeezed into the Mall, or nearby. I don't think anyone suggested this, nor is it relevant to the thesis here.)
C. I am NOT making the claim Trump's live attendance was greater than Obama's live attendance.
I would assert that as our first black president, Obama did have an enormous attendance... and rightly so.
My assertion is simply that the Washington Mall WAS full during Trump's inauguration, and that CNN intentionally lied to the public about this.
Conclusion:
A. The Washington Mall WAS FULL during Trump's inauguration, and CNN LIED about this, intentionally, in order to disparage our 45th president.
B. The media attacked everything Trump and Spicer said about this, without checking any facts, even though CNN's lies were provable.
C. We don't know actual attendance numbers, and it SHOULD be irrelevant... but CNN keeps attacking everything Trump does... every day... over and over... whether they have facts or not.
D. If CNN would just choose to be HALFWAY honest, we could stop talking about all of these non-issue issues, like inauguration attendance.
I realize the words that came out of Conway's mouth in a live interview sounded silly.
I get it.
Nonetheless, CNN DID LIE about inauguration attendance:
1. CNN posted a pic of the Washington Mall taken WAY BEFORE peak attendance.
2. CNN CLAIMED this pic was taken at peak attendance.
3. This pic which they CLAIMED was taken at peak attendance showed the Washington Mall was half empty.
4. It is provable, from OTHER PICS ON CNN'S OWN SITE, that CNN LIED, and the Washington Mall was FULL during peak attendance.
LINK:
Here is the link to a LATER, and DIFFERENT picture on CNN'S own site, which verifies the Washington Mall was FULL.
You can turn the view around, toward the Lincoln Memorial, and zoom in, and see it for yourself.
Gigapixel: The inauguration of Donald Trump
CNN actually posted a pic of Trump's inauguration, prior to peak attendance (when the Mall was only half full) and compared this pic SIDE-BY-SIDE to a pic of Obama's inauguration, during actual peak attendance (when the Mall WAS full) just to create a FALSE NARRATIVE and LIE to the public.
LINK:
Here is the link to an EARLIER PICTURES put up by CNN, attempting to claim the Washington Mall was half empty for Trumps inauguration.
The 2 pics comparing Obama and Trump attendance are at top of page; you can click back and forth between the two.
* The Obama pic IS from peak attendance; the Trump pic is SIGNIFICANTLY PRIOR TO peak attendance... CNN compares 2 different types of pictures in order to lie to the public.
Comparing Donald Trump and Barack Obama's inaugural crowd sizes - CNNPolitics.com
5. It is also provable from various video footage and interviews that many people were stuck at check points, and were never able to even enter the event.
Many people could never even get INTO the inauguration.
This is a well known fact, and there is much video footage to verify this, and no major media outlet even DISCUSSED this in the smallest way.
6. When Spicer claimed Trump's inauguration was the most "widely viewed" inauguration around the world, CNN and other media outlets immediately attacked these statements, without checking any facts at all.
A. Over 30 million people watched the inauguration on television in the U.S.
B. You can find at least 30 million ONLINE INTERNET VIEWERS of the inauguration just from sourcing a dozen major websites... without even digging.
C. Actual numbers are unknown, but I'm sure you could poke around and find many more millions of views coming from online sources, and from various international media outlets.
Therefore, at the very least, Trump's and Spicer's claims are perfectly within the realm of being "reasonable."
7. As far as Trump's live attendance, and comparing it to Obama's live attendance: we really don't know the exact numbers for either event, and that isn't the main point or the main problem.
A. The main point is CNN posted a FAKE picture, showing the Washington Mall HALF EMPTY, and claiming this was from PEAK ATTENDANCE... and they created this FAKE NEWS to imply nobody liked Trump enough to show up for his inauguration.
Foul journalism.
B. Both Trump and Spicer said the live attendance "looked like" it was probably 1 million or 1.5 million ... they did not claim it absolutely WAS this number, nor does anyone really have definite numbers anyway. Also, the Washington Mall actually WAS FULL during the Trump event... clearly giving anyone there the impression the attendance was some very large number.
You can see pictures from the podium angle, where Trump was, and see that from his vantage point, the entire Washington Mall did look completely full. Also, you can view the Mall from other angles and see the mall WAS INDEED FULL.
(This does NOT mean that during Obama's inauguration there couldn't have been more people in the area, either squeezed into the Mall, or nearby. I don't think anyone suggested this, nor is it relevant to the thesis here.)
C. I am NOT making the claim Trump's live attendance was greater than Obama's live attendance.
I would assert that as our first black president, Obama did have an enormous attendance... and rightly so.
My assertion is simply that the Washington Mall WAS full during Trump's inauguration, and that CNN intentionally lied to the public about this.
Conclusion:
A. The Washington Mall WAS FULL during Trump's inauguration, and CNN LIED about this, intentionally, in order to disparage our 45th president.
B. The media attacked everything Trump and Spicer said about this, without checking any facts, even though CNN's lies were provable.
C. We don't know actual attendance numbers, and it SHOULD be irrelevant... but CNN keeps attacking everything Trump does... every day... over and over... whether they have facts or not.
D. If CNN would just choose to be HALFWAY honest, we could stop talking about all of these non-issue issues, like inauguration attendance.
K
To me this march is a non issue. Ignore them and perhaps they'll go away. I have no respect for these women,0 respect. I didn't see any of these fems dancing around in vagina costumes when Bill Clinton played his trick with a cigar and an intern. I didn't see women around the world marching when Bill bedded women from the Govs. mansion to the WH. As someone on my FB page said "Bill would hump a snake if it would hold still long enough". But no protest when Hillary was nominated to run with Bill in tow back to the WH.
Besides that fact is the fact that one of the organizers of the march is Muslim and supports Sharia Law! In case you don't know,or have forgotten, here is a little taste of Sharia,
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-20202686
The couple threw acid on their daughter for looking at a boy. They didn't take her for medical help till the next morning. She said it was her destiny to die that way. The girls siblings are crying no understanding why their sister had to die. Totally satanic religion.
So to me the march is full of silly women and should be ignored. They have nothing to say worth hearing. As far as the subject of fems being ugly I wouldnt tar all with the same brush.But many go out of their way to look as manly as possible, hiding any feminine attributes at all. For a man that is attracted to women who act like women then yes,they might find many fems ugly. To me I dont look at the face,I look at their hearts and from what I saw thats where the ugliness was coming from.
