<------- This many people think the inauguration was fake
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (45)
sorted by:
Do you even realize this photo is from his previous inauguration as VP?
But the upside down crosses are appropriate. lol
They swore in on an upside down bible, if that's the it your talking about. Was it upside down the other day?
This year it was right side up looks like.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed the inverted cross on the latches, makes you wonder if it's even a Bible.
This is true.
Loves to use that "bible", doesn't he?
Biden swore on an UPSIDE DOWN CROSS.
The demons are in control right now but they will soon be exorcised. Round 'em up, arrest them all!
I have heard that Hunter Biden smells like sulfur just like Hillary and Obama
Yeah, umm, no. But I can understand your interpretation. Here’s the thing, you’re seeing a phenomena known as parallax and it’s related to the depth of field from the camera lenses. Take a look at the overhead shot in the scene prior, and you’ll see how the stage is laid out. Notice the distance involved between the eventual “swearing in” position and those who are gathered around and those who are seated further back. If you have a couple cameras (phone or otherwise) with lenses of different focal lengths, you’ll be able to see how the background can “collapse” and bring people closer in behind a subject vs pushing them further out with more depth. There are a thousand web pages on photography that will explain this stuff better than I can.
Now I did see something interesting though in looking at these scenes in slo mo. How about the creepy moment where Hunter stares at Roberts, just after he hands off the Bible to Jill. Ugggh.
Bingo Charlie you jus splained it
I think it’s just a matter of being blocked by someone.
So bigger picture, you have to ask “why” would there need to be multiple takes of a fake inauguration and then mix clips, etc., in order to support this concept. And I don’t see a plausible reason.
The best theory I could use to support a “fake” event is security, where they would choose to run a dress rehearsal, record that for the “real” broadcast, then sub body doubles on stage that only people saw at a distance. But all of that is still just unreasonable, because it would make sense just to tighten security. I’m not buying the whole “fake inauguration” thing at all. Now if Q posts today and says “It was all fake” or something, then yeah, let’s discuss.
I think it’s taking our energy and focus off the real story: where are all the people with the proof and when will it come to light? No more press conferences by Giuliani, Powell, Lindell, Flynn, etc.... I started a thread on it (“Where is Tony Bobulinksi” for discussion but little input so far.) Let’s talk about what we KNOW and what Q and Q+ have told us. We have it all. We caught them. NCSWIC