I am so fucking impressed right now. That's not my twitter account but for you to actually hunt through twitter to find a dog twitter account that posted a picture of a faux Clinton inauguration is seriously amazing. Props!
I'm asking you to compare apples to apples (same vantage point showing a larger crowd) and you keep throwing in oranges and plums. I never said anything about Clinton.
I agree with one thing of the OP. America has been in decline for as long as I've been alive in terms of trusting government/media. Won't change until people stop pointing fingers at one another.
>Democracy causes too many know it all's to think they do know it all. Conversely, dictatorships have a leadership that does not allow anyone to know anything at all.
You show me pictures taken hours before the event or hours after the event. I show you pictures taken with the candidates on stage that clearly show dense crowd where your pictures show empty space. Or with screens showing the candidate but different pictures on each screen (you know, they're warming up the crowd showing other speeches he made, but I digress). I show you pictures of the same angle taken at Trump's and Clinton's inauguration and you refuse to comment. Thus you're still trolling. No thanks, I'm done playing. The press is lying, you're posting what they're using to lie.
Are we a select wealthy group promoting a self serving enterprise benefitting the one percent of the entire population?
Study finds Clinton may have received 835,000 votes from illegal immigrants. https://www.wired.com/2017/01/author-trumps-favorite-voter-fraud-study-says-everyones-wrong/ Richman himself is not backing down from his initial findings. He says that even if some people did check the wrong citizenship box, enough respondents repeatedly reported voting as noncitizens to indicate that some noncitizens do in fact vote. Even some of Richman’s detractors, such as Rick Hasen, author of the Election Law Blog, acknowledge that “noncitizen voting is a real, if relatively small, problem.” Richman says those on the left are just as wrong to reflexively claim that voter fraud doesn’t exist at all as Trump is to continue insisting voter fraud is a national conspiracy. But Richman is unequivocal that even if his findings are correct, Clinton would have still handily won the popular vote in November, despite the new president’s claims. “I can’t quite account for the math being so badly wrong in their analyses,” he says of the Trump administration’s interpretation of his report. Here’s what the math should look like (that is, if Richman’s initial study was accurate—which many researchers doubt). If 6.4 percent of the estimated 20.3 million noncitizens in the US voted, and if just 81.8 percent of them voted for Clinton (the percentage who voted for Obama in his 2008 study), that’s an added margin of a little more than 835,000 votes. In other words: Even with all of those supposedly fraudulent ballots, Clinton still would have won the popular vote by more than 2 million votes.
