I don't think they are having trouble understanding the perspective angles, I think they are assuming the wrong things about the architecture. ...along with wanting to believe Biden is anywhere but the Shite House. (Holy shit, that's a legit typo! But I'm leaving it because that's what it is with a turd inside. Kekity kek!)

The 2nd story architecture of the actual White House West Wing from the Garden Entrance is NOT a full 2nd story. This is what everyone is assuming/remembering. From the street it is a full 2 stories (maybe a bit more), but from the Garden side, it is 1 + 1/4 stories (or 1 full story & a 2nd story that is terraced). In other words, the 2nd story that most are assuming looks the same as the street side is actually a quarter-story/raised ceiling with normal-width but short-height windows. The whole second story is very short. It is also significantly inset off the edge of the 1st story wall by quite a distance, moreso than I thought--At least by a whole hallway or room's width.

The whole 2nd story from the garden side is short & inset enough to get cut off by perspective if viewed from a close enough camera placement.

Knowing & comparing to the actual Garden-Side West Wing White House structure (use photo references from aerial & other angles, not just the two given & your memory), the camera placements, FOVs, & angles of both photos actually work out & the argument that the buildings in both photos are the same is plausible.

I know because I made the same assumption about the 2nd story, and when I went to verify whether my memory of the architecture was correct, I found that I was mistaken. I actually agreed with Mike overall (that the Biden House looks the same as the White House from Trump's term), but I thought these could be two different entrances at different wing areas instead of two different perspectives. I had to be sure of the architecture to verify my own theory, though, and I ended up proving him right when I set out to correct him.

Fucking Kek.

Internet culture at it's finest! I'm sorry I doubted you, senpai.

P.S.

You know that INTJ meme where they always sit in front of the computer writing & constructing complex arguments that prove people wrong because they cannot allow a comment with false information to exist unopposed on the internet? I feel like I've been out-INTJed. I'll be damned. Kek.

Spez: Here are better photos for the multitudes who are too lazy to google good angles for themselves:

Overall Aerial: https://c8.alamy.com/comp/W7FY7B/aerial-view-of-the-white-house-washington-dc-W7FY7B.jpg

West Wing Aerial Garden-Side Close-Up: https://www.jfklibrary.org/sites/default/files/archives/JFKWHP/1962/Month%2007/Day%2008/JFKWHP-1962-07-08-A/JFKWHP-KN-C22687.jpg

West Wing Garden Grounds View (from a bit further back than the Biden photo was taken, which allows you to see more of the short/inset 2nd story): https://dynaimage.cdn.cnn.com/cnn/c_fill,g_auto,w_1200,h_675,ar_16:9/https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.cnn.com%2Fcnnnext%2Fdam%2Fassets%2F200510173815-02-white-house-west-wing-file.jpg

West Wing Street View (where you see the full 2+ stories): https://assets.realclear.com/images/42/422707_5_.jpg

P.S. I am only making my conclusions based on the cropped & edited pictures OP gave us. I don't know where to find the originals, (or feel like looking them up, to be frank), which would allow me to see the full picture & background uncropped/edited (not necessary, but helpful to keep things more in context).

P.P.S. For Keks' sake, I dare you all to downvote me. I get that we don't want to believe Biden is really president, but we shouldn't stick our heads up our asses regarding things mathematically verifiable. I estimated the math in my head. I did exactly this sort of shit for my master's thesis in optics, and I can do the math on paper to work it out. IF I AM WRONG, TAKE AWAY MY FUCKING DEGREE, lol.

Also, Please note, this does not prove that Biden is not in an exceptionally accurate model White House, but unless the background is 'shopped in from a very similar angle (possible, but less likely than the theory that Biden is in the literal gilded cage surrounded by literal guards), it is unlikely.

What am I missing here, because from what I can see the first photographer seems to be standing further back. Compare number of columns and window heights.

The first photographer should be able to see the 2nd floor better.

Bruh! As others stated below, the first one is further away and the windows are smaller, so it isn't zoom.

My first thought bt was that maybe to was the angle but your drawing proved to me that that isn't it. Thanks for the drawing.

Look at the fucking building's facade. You can't fake missing pieces, anon.

Look at the architecture... There are 4 Corbels and what appears to be a second floor to the structure, on the top there are no corbels and buildings behind it, no second story to the building.

Those were not taken at the same place. Those are not the same buildings.

I’m w you. If you look at other photos the tree to the left has the exact same branch structure as the one seen photographed w Trump. These posts are all over telegram which is so annoying.

There's a lot of people who have trouble understanding how the camera angles are working against you.

This is a crude sketch but it should definitely explain what you are seeing.

https://i.maga.host/M6mJZjn.png

lets do an experiment!

if you live in a two story home and you walk onto your front lawn and look back at your house. look up! do you see the shingles on your roof? no, of course not.

now walk across the street and look back at your house. look up!, do you see the shingles on your house? Yes!

this is perspective. one photo was taken up close, while the other photo was taken from further away but zoomed in. this is what you are seeing

The 2nd floor windows do not match

"Corbels" thanks MikeWho, I've learned something today. Considering how much I forget every day, it might be a net zero gain but I appreciate it. :)

https://media.greatawakening.win/post/Fx9BvSGN.jpeg

I found this on another thread and I'm pretty sure in indicates I was very wrong, and MikeWho was right.