All this makes me think these "anomalies" were meant to be spotted, especially the women in pink & white appearing, disappearing & reappearing. One would think no expense was spared so therefore there would be at least one continuity person working on this job. If this isn't intentional the continuity people are totally incompetent, I highly doubt it. We are not watching a film made by the inexperienced.
For those not familiar with the role of continuity people: Its their job to ensure everything in the current take matches that of the previous... Is the glass filled to the same level, the cigarette has burnt down to the same degree, is the hair behind, or over the ear etc etc.
P.S. Pink & white stand out amongst the crowd who are generally wearing far more blues & greys etc, even Kamarla's purple kind of blends in. Another sign that this could be intentional.
Or they could have had a breakdown - the one on the right looks like the niece that Hunter was indecent with, possibly made pregnant, at a very young age.
I am not totally convinced of this. The shoe change could just be a shoe change. His granddaughters disappearing from the shot could be easily explained by change of angle/focal length. Not ruling this out but I feel like we are reaching with these theories of fake inauguration and fake oval office.
No, you are reaching by trying to claim the first lady changed her shoes on a direct and televized live walk from the car to the inauguration. The burden of proof is on you now.
Live walk? She is wearing tan shoes when she first walks into the Capitol. We see her again about 45 minutes later walking out to the ceremony in different colored shoes.
Check out the laying of the wreath at the tomb of the unknown soldier 2017, performed on Jan 19th - BEFORE Trump was inaugurated - he was saluted by EVERYBODY.
The audio quality isn't good enough to say either possibility is "fact." Both sentences have the same number of syllables and his masked slurring muddies the waters further. For example I don't hear a concrete "G" or "S" at the beginning of that sentence. It sounds like he said: "ooo loo ta marines."
In another video, there was a young boy standing behind Biden that disappears when they switch camera angles. It seems like they did this several times and pieced the videos together, but no one was standing in the same places.
I'm not convinced yet about the people in different angles being there or not. I went over the video again this morning and noticed that there is a large distance between the podium and the seats.
When viewed from the front it all looks pretty close together, but the side angles could just be exposing the parallax effect.
Not saying there isn't a continuity issue, just saying I would need to map all the people into their places and then check the camera angles to see if it could look like they just disappeared.
If there is a shot of the Korean SS guy without the girls in it then that might be convincing, because they were stood close to each other, but the guy in the surgical mask with glasses/grey hair off to the side is clearly way off to the side in one of the shots I saw, so if he's in frame then the people 'behind' Biden wouldn't be, because of the distance.
Oh okay. It didn't look like the camera angle shifted that much, but I could be mistaken. I knew the girl in pink might be out of frame, but I figured the boy still would be.
I put it on .25x playback rate and while I wasn't certain using the white/pink girls because of angles, I thought watching who was next to and around sen blunt was more convincing of two scenes/not just angles.
I thought so as well, except the guy in a dark jacket with his phone up in the air is visible on the first cuts, with his arm out and then starts to lower it and is lowering it on the cut to Nancy. The girls are on either side of him, so one of them should have been visible on the pelosi view.
Sometimes I wonder how many times Q team has waited for us to find something but then had to give up and post something as an "anon." Not saying this is one of those times, I just wonder. Like a Mom or Dad leading kids to the last hidden Easter Egg, LOL. Kind of an affectionate "These People Are Stupid!!"
I’m a total Q fag but the shoe thing doesn’t really have standing. I change heels frequently during long events (like weddings) since they start hurting in different areas of my feet. There are certain shoes I need at the beginning and end of events.
The women in pink and white are still there. It just the angle change. It goes back to the profile view a few moments later and the two women in question are still there.
There was a break in between. There's a good change she changed her shoes in the car. She went from a high heel to a less high heel. I can imagine her wanting to wear heels on a day like this and it would've looked weird if she went from a heel to a balletflat. I need more proof.
but i saw senator ted cruz in the crowd. and if the inauguration didn't happen in real time, it means he knows about the plan of the fake video broadcast and he's on the side of the good guys?
Nailed it.
All this makes me think these "anomalies" were meant to be spotted, especially the women in pink & white appearing, disappearing & reappearing. One would think no expense was spared so therefore there would be at least one continuity person working on this job. If this isn't intentional the continuity people are totally incompetent, I highly doubt it. We are not watching a film made by the inexperienced.
For those not familiar with the role of continuity people: Its their job to ensure everything in the current take matches that of the previous... Is the glass filled to the same level, the cigarette has burnt down to the same degree, is the hair behind, or over the ear etc etc.
P.S. Pink & white stand out amongst the crowd who are generally wearing far more blues & greys etc, even Kamarla's purple kind of blends in. Another sign that this could be intentional.
Or they could have had a breakdown - the one on the right looks like the niece that Hunter was indecent with, possibly made pregnant, at a very young age.
I am not totally convinced of this. The shoe change could just be a shoe change. His granddaughters disappearing from the shot could be easily explained by change of angle/focal length. Not ruling this out but I feel like we are reaching with these theories of fake inauguration and fake oval office.
No, you are reaching by trying to claim the first lady changed her shoes on a direct and televized live walk from the car to the inauguration. The burden of proof is on you now.
Live walk? She is wearing tan shoes when she first walks into the Capitol. We see her again about 45 minutes later walking out to the ceremony in different colored shoes.
Watch again focused on Sen. Blunt. Sure looks like two scenes to me...not just angles.
https://mobile.twitter.com/saul_osantana/status/1351879647659782146
I’m simply pointing out the CGI possibilities that’s all. My German friend told me exactly what it was all about. Appreciate your insult gracias.
You are correct. It was not live.
We already won. Mil is in full control. Everything is a show. Pain incoming is the lesson we must ALL EXPERIENCE to fully awaken.
Ten days. Jan 31.
Yea this is fucking strange.
Can confirm the white and pink lady, they were teleporting in and out of frame the whole time. No way this was live.
Unfortunately, he says “Good lookin’ Marines”
He likes little kids not fully grown men.
Can’t argue that, but can argue what he said
You’re worse than a democrat
Just because you want it to be real you have to be a toxic pos. You sir, are the shill
Literally turn your volume up and slow the video, I hate the fucking piece of shit but it’s a fact that he didn’t say salute the marines
but whats clear is he DID NOT salute Marines, which is fucked up in itself as "CIC"
Check out the laying of the wreath at the tomb of the unknown soldier 2017, performed on Jan 19th - BEFORE Trump was inaugurated - he was saluted by EVERYBODY.
The audio quality isn't good enough to say either possibility is "fact." Both sentences have the same number of syllables and his masked slurring muddies the waters further. For example I don't hear a concrete "G" or "S" at the beginning of that sentence. It sounds like he said: "ooo loo ta marines."
the sun light changes too, on the one with the missing girls in pink and white
In another video, there was a young boy standing behind Biden that disappears when they switch camera angles. It seems like they did this several times and pieced the videos together, but no one was standing in the same places.
This is so bizarre.
I'm not convinced yet about the people in different angles being there or not. I went over the video again this morning and noticed that there is a large distance between the podium and the seats.
When viewed from the front it all looks pretty close together, but the side angles could just be exposing the parallax effect.
Not saying there isn't a continuity issue, just saying I would need to map all the people into their places and then check the camera angles to see if it could look like they just disappeared.
If there is a shot of the Korean SS guy without the girls in it then that might be convincing, because they were stood close to each other, but the guy in the surgical mask with glasses/grey hair off to the side is clearly way off to the side in one of the shots I saw, so if he's in frame then the people 'behind' Biden wouldn't be, because of the distance.
Oh okay. It didn't look like the camera angle shifted that much, but I could be mistaken. I knew the girl in pink might be out of frame, but I figured the boy still would be.
watch again looking around sen. blunt
I will do more analysis later, stuck working now :)
I put it on .25x playback rate and while I wasn't certain using the white/pink girls because of angles, I thought watching who was next to and around sen blunt was more convincing of two scenes/not just angles.
Good luck with work
I thought so as well, except the guy in a dark jacket with his phone up in the air is visible on the first cuts, with his arm out and then starts to lower it and is lowering it on the cut to Nancy. The girls are on either side of him, so one of them should have been visible on the pelosi view.
Sometimes I wonder how many times Q team has waited for us to find something but then had to give up and post something as an "anon." Not saying this is one of those times, I just wonder. Like a Mom or Dad leading kids to the last hidden Easter Egg, LOL. Kind of an affectionate "These People Are Stupid!!"
I’m a total Q fag but the shoe thing doesn’t really have standing. I change heels frequently during long events (like weddings) since they start hurting in different areas of my feet. There are certain shoes I need at the beginning and end of events.
They may have done it so we could see it.
The women in pink and white are still there. It just the angle change. It goes back to the profile view a few moments later and the two women in question are still there.
But at the end of the oath when everyone is hugging, they're nowhere around.
There was a break in between. There's a good change she changed her shoes in the car. She went from a high heel to a less high heel. I can imagine her wanting to wear heels on a day like this and it would've looked weird if she went from a heel to a balletflat. I need more proof.
Dont use wayback, use archive.is if you can, less likely for yeeting
i believe many were doubles like the clintons:
https://twitter.com/TTrumpSJapan/status/1352582180594040832
but i saw senator ted cruz in the crowd. and if the inauguration didn't happen in real time, it means he knows about the plan of the fake video broadcast and he's on the side of the good guys?
She gets out of the car in tan shoes and walks in, then enters the inauguration in teal shoes.
There's no reason to do that though.