Do you even know the DIFFERENCE between FACTs and ASSUMPTIONs, Stiff? And to use a quote from Sean Spicer, of all people, good gawd man! Do you think I'm THAT STUPID? First of all, when Trump initially told Sean to go out and brag about Trump's inauguration attendance being larger than Obama's, Trump was specifically referring to the crowd size OUTSIDE. It was only later that Sean tried to justify/explain Trump's comment regarding the crowd that all this crap about TV viewers, etc even came up.
Why don't you start SMELLING the crap you're shoveling out, here, STIFF?
IF, IF, IF .... .... if a bullfrog had wings he wouldn't bust his ass every time he jumped. Give us some SLACK in here. Don't you have something in your house that needs fixing ... or bills to pay ... or go warm up your dinner ... take a shower ... just quit the *******, ok?
Let me give you MY ASSUMPTION, Stiff .... I'll assume that the TV viewing for both inaugurations were equivalent to the actual attendance at both the inaugurations. That's LOGICAL although not necessarily FACTUAL ... but, it sure makes a lot more sense than the BS you keep posting HERE. You have no proof of your comments yet you keep challenging us to "basically" a DICK MEASURING CONTEST.
Man, I gotta go ... its my turn to rake the cat's litter box and pull the trashcans down to the curb for pick up tomorrow. Those are FACTS!
It was a fact
@MacNfries cleared through factcheck.org here:
(
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/01/the-facts-on-crowd-size/ )
The site is non-partisan where even our pal
@subhub174014 agrees here:
(
https://www.blacktowhite.net/threads/wake-up-america-wake-up-please.131760/page-316#post-2500791 )
So I fail to see why you are so upset
@MacNfries? It is a fact. If you can prove it wrong and if you are so offended by this error I recommend that you appeal to factcheck.org to issue a retraction for this mistake provided that you can prove it to them?
In addition to my original post here (
) if you strongly understand that factcheck.org is in err it also cites techcrunch.com where it also states:
"Though some cried while others cheered, both sides tuned into to watch President Trump’s inauguration in sizable numbers – record-breaking numbers, in fact. The event has broken new ground, becoming the largest, single live news event that content delivery network Akamai has ever hosted, the company says, following an analysis of its live video data.
According to Akamai, live video streaming of the inauguration peaked at 8.7 Tbps at 12:04 ET during the opening of President Trump’s speech, up from 7.9 Tbps at the start of the inaugural oath. This surpassed the previous record of 7.5 Tbps, which was achieved on Election Day (Nov. 8, 2016) during the evening."
(
https://techcrunch.com/2017/01/23/trumps-inauguration-broke-live-video-streaming-records/ )
By the way if you are curious who Akamai is
@MacNfries they happen to be "an American content delivery network (CDN) and cloud service provider headquartered in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in the United States. Akamai's content delivery network is one of the world's largest distributed computing platforms, responsible for serving between 15% and 30% of all web traffic.[3] ".
(
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akamai_Technologies )
So I think they would be qualified to know about web traffic
@MacNfries. But seeing that they are wrong right after you get that retraction from factcheck.org you should go after techcrunch.com and Akamai Technologies too. Good luck with that
@MacNfries. Perhaps you have quantifiable evidence to the contrary? If so where is it
@MacNfries?
And how will you prove a non-partisan organization like factcheck.org incorrect, techcrunch.com incorrect, and Akamai Technologies incorrect? Perhaps you also have your own content delivery network that was tracking Trump's inauguration Internet traffic that has different numbers?
