those complaining about citizenjournalist
(media.greatawakening.win)
Comments (194)
sorted by:
am i missing something? looks the same to me if you take in lighting and quality of pictures
look up at the top and see the buildings behind this....buhahahaha
There are many here that are having a problem understanding how camera angles are at play in these two photos.
It's a pretty crude sketch but it will explain why the 2nd floor can't be seen in one of the pictures.
https://i.maga.host/M6mJZjn.png
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.
LMAO to your post script.
i was getting pretty frustrated over this issue because i knew what was happening with the pictures, but i lack writing skills. i struggle to put the right words together to form a solid argument... thats why i drew the picture lol.
i made a video trying to explain what i was getting at, its uploading now
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.
This might help
https://i.maga.host/M6mJZjn.png
I saw that already, what I am saying is that you have the photographers positions swapped. The top is taken from further back (note the relative size of the windows in the background and the wider field of view). Thus the top photograph SHOULD have the better angle to see the 2nd floor.
i may have their position swapped, but the argument still applies
i went back and looked at the picture, i was right the first time. the top photo is from the photographer closest to the whitehouse.
Also have to consider that the further one back has to zoom in
Bruh if they were further away but had to zoom, the windows still wouldn't be smaller.
did you not see my drawing
The trim on the bottom pic is more complicated the top one has no embellishments-I don't know what they are called but the real WH has em...
Lol I did see your drawing. I am leaving this post because you are driving me crazy lol
You're missing Mike Rothschild trying to shill you lol
the decorative pieces above the columns are there in both pictures. look again.
I voted you up for telling me to look again I opened the image in it's own page they're definitely there.
God bless you. This is what I was noticing. All the crap about the second story was just noise. You posting this, made me look closer. They are there. Moving on! Thanks.
I did, they're there in some form or other. But there's no windows, there's air conditioning equipment and open sky.
https://media.greatawakening.win/post/Fx9BvSGN.jpeg
In light of this photograph from another thread I agree it's the perspectives,
I was wrong you're right about it not being in Culver City but it's the real white house.
im having a hard time explaining what i mean, so i made a video. its uploading now. il share when its up
I found this photo from another thread, I think you're right, and I'm wrong.
https://media.greatawakening.win/post/Fx9BvSGN.jpeg
https://media.greatawakening.win/post/Fx9BvSGN.jpeg
I was wrong.
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.
The corbels are there in both pictures, it's just hard to see in top one because there is no shadows. Go look again, you'll see.
Here's a picture from 2009 where the corbels are also very hard to see because of a lack of angled sunlight.
https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/the-west-wing-white-house-washington-dc-usa-royalty-free-image/157479121
Yeah this is the only thing I see that doesnt make sense.
Edit: the Biden one is taken at a lower angle and farther away. It’s catching the top of the building rather than the windows. Biden is in the real whitehouse. People need to stop with this
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.
The corbels are there they just aren't as visible. What interests me more is the second story in the lower picture. Of course, that could have been shopped in upper photo.
the corbels are harder to see because the lack of shadows from a cloudy day.
above the roof line... what we are seeing is a difference of perspective from the photographers. one was taken up close, while the other photo was taken from further back but zoomed in. the further you are from the building, the more will be visible above the roof line. https://i.maga.host/M6mJZjn.png
look at the tree on the left, its the same size and shape and location in both photos.
conclusion: Richard was worked up and made a mistake. it happens to the best of us.
Perspective doesn't matter. The top image doesn't have the 2nd floor windows
i dont think you understand what perspective means
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 lower photo with potus Trump clearly indicates a second story with windows. There's even a ladder visible. The upper photo shows no such second story. Why? Was it shopped? I have no idea, but I don't think the perspectives are that different when you look at the relative shape of objects like the glass doors, columns, etc. If there's a second story, it should be clearly visible.
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
https://www.google.com/search?q=culver+city+white+house+rose+garden&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwjP4K_HlK7vAhUOAlMKHa57CgkQ2-cCegQIABAA&oq=culver+city+white+house+rose+garden&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQAzoCCAA6BAgAEB46BggAEAUQHjoGCAAQCBAeUMr4AVj0lgJgn5sCaABwAHgAgAGRAogB5g6SAQU0LjQuNJgBAKABAaoBC2d3cy13aXotaW1nwAEB&sclient=img&ei=jydNYI_dOI6EzAKu96lI&bih=663&biw=1280&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS751US760#imgrc=1_EeHO3xx5TiiM&imgdii=EMjo39STAQksjM
This angle of things makes it seem like it could just be a camera elevation eye trick...
Forget the corbels. Try to match the 2nd floor windows
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
Shut up, Mike! lol
Ikr
There are many here that are having a problem understanding how camera angles are at play in these two photos.
It's a pretty crude sketch but it will explain why the 2nd floor can't be seen in one of the pictures.
https://i.maga.host/M6mJZjn.png
https://www.google.com/search?q=culver+city+white+house+rose+garden&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwjP4K_HlK7vAhUOAlMKHa57CgkQ2-cCegQIABAA&oq=culver+city+white+house+rose+garden&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQAzoCCAA6BAgAEB46BggAEAUQHjoGCAAQCBAeUMr4AVj0lgJgn5sCaABwAHgAgAGRAogB5g6SAQU0LjQuNJgBAKABAaoBC2d3cy13aXotaW1nwAEB&sclient=img&ei=jydNYI_dOI6EzAKu96lI&bih=663&biw=1280&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS751US760#imgrc=1_EeHO3xx5TiiM&imgdii=EMjo39STAQksjM
From this angle it appears it might be real. I do believe its a camera elevation issue. I don't want them to be there, but it could be legit.
It’s taken from a different angle. Find an Ariel view of the same place and you will understand
Yup!
There are many here that are having a problem understanding how camera angles are at play in these two photos.
It's a pretty crude sketch but it will explain why the 2nd floor can't be seen in one of the pictures.
https://i.maga.host/M6mJZjn.png
I looked this up in Google Earth and measured the distances. The building Trump is standing in front of is actually a one-story building which is an extension/annexe to a taller main building. The so called "second story" windows belong to the main building further back, and are located 13 m behind the wall section with the corbels. This means that a small change of perspective, i.e. taking the photo a little bit closer to the podium, could make these windows disappear from the photo. That said, these images are too cropped to determine this either way with any certainty.
Those were not taken at the same place. Those are not the same buildings.
https://www.google.com/search?q=culver+city+white+house+rose+garden&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwjP4K_HlK7vAhUOAlMKHa57CgkQ2-cCegQIABAA&oq=culver+city+white+house+rose+garden&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQAzoCCAA6BAgAEB46BggAEAUQHjoGCAAQCBAeUMr4AVj0lgJgn5sCaABwAHgAgAGRAogB5g6SAQU0LjQuNJgBAKABAaoBC2d3cy13aXotaW1nwAEB&sclient=img&ei=jydNYI_dOI6EzAKu96lI&bih=663&biw=1280&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS751US760#imgrc=1_EeHO3xx5TiiM&imgdii=EMjo39STAQksjM
I wanted to say the same thing also, but this angle shows it might be camera manipulation.
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
You won't get through to them.
This place has become overrun by facebook boomer big brains who think everything is a fake movie.
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.
The top one that they gave their speeches at isn't 2 stories. Features are wrong above the columns also. Yep, fuckery going on big time.
hi, carpenter here, the decorative pieces directly above the columns are called corbels. The Corbels are visible in both photos, its harder to see them on the top photo because there are no shadows. the lack of shadows is probably because the sky was overcast.
The 2nd floor windows do not match
Not different windows, different perspective. The second floor can't been seen from one of the photographers.
https://i.maga.host/M6mJZjn.png
"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. :)
np, but youre wrong. the corbels exist in both pictures. theyre just harder to see because of the lack of shadows. if you look closely, youll see them.
I agree with you, on second look I see them there. I was emphasizing "Corbels" because I've never heard of them before. Guess that wasn't clear enough.
Along with the shadows, it also appears someone tried to photoshop them almost out. Seriously suspect
no, sorry. biden is at the real whitehouse, at least during the day.
the WH is definitely empty at night though.
EDITED 7:20 pm EST. i think it's legit Whitehouse. see this link and go to the last image before the video https://digg.com/2020/melania-trump-white-house-rose-garden-before-and-after
my original post before edit: eh not sure how i missed that. second story is dead give away
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
Details
https://media.greatawakening.win/post/Fx9BvSGN.jpeg
Edited due to this photo from another thread; I was wrong about what I was saying.
not sure if this matters to your research but the link i sent is all about the before and after pictures of the rose garden area. Melania had it renovated. some of the woodwork and such could be explained by this
all in all though i agree there's weird shit going on and it wouldn't surprise in the least that they held these recent events at a fake Whitehouse
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.
all good fren. I'm here not because everyone is always right but because we ask questions and MUCH more importantly, because we are able to admit when we're wrong
Try to match the 2nd floor windows
Trying to match windows that can't be seen?
https://i.maga.host/M6mJZjn.png
Nae you can see those inset squares, it's just the lighting is way different, casting shadows in the bottom one but top one has diffuse light making them harder to see, but they are there.
its the same.. you can see someone used the smudge tool
https://i.maga.host/NRXNNam.png
https://i.maga.host/M6mJZjn.png
Good eye, this image is faked
Why the down votes. ? This post is extremely fake and exaggerated. Why are people down voting the truth?
It's not the pattern above the columns, it's the second floor that is wrong. Maybe OP thought wrong but the above still doesn't look right.
If that is the case, how did they masterfully place the tree branches in front and above the building? This tree is not in front of the real White House.
The photo is real, just not the real White House.
I dunno about your house, but here in winter, trees have leaves that fall off them.
It is not about the leaves. It is about erasing the top part of the White House as you said. It is extremely difficult to do that without messing up the tree branches or the background replaced behind them. You would have to go pixel by pixel to remove and replace the background. Even then it would not be perfect unless there are better Paint programs that would make it seamless.
That being said, the "rub marks" could be natural weathering on this building.
All I did was put the red circles around the parts of the top that they tried to make look like they were different.. Sorry, IMO its the same.
They are arguing about the second floor missing... They can't comprehend that the camera angles are at play. So I drew this for them.
https://i.maga.host/M6mJZjn.png
Leaves don't matter because the pictures were taken at different times of the year.
the trees look to be the same in both pics.
I'm referring to the background behind the tree. If the photo was messed with, the tree branches would not look right.
its the exact same tree because its the exact same building
I've seen other angles of this photo shared by George News on Telegram. Here's a link to one of the other angles of this shot.
https://ibb.co/D4jH5nn
I do think Biden was at the real White House when this was filmed, but I'm leaning more along the lines that this event was recorded ahead of time. I say this based on Richard Citizen Journalist recording where the real event should've been taking place at that particular time and there was nobody there at the Rose Garden. The more and more I watch the Biden White House material, the more convinced I am that they've filmed probably all of the content in advance and are releasing on a schedule. When they would've filmed this I haven't the clue.
if you watch both richards video and Bidens speech, you can hear the same ambulance at the same time, for the same amount of time.
And the fact the GN is pretty quick to defend their side of it. Still Not sure what to make of GN. They obviously have some “in the know” stuff but skeptical at same time
George doesnt want us to embarrass ourselves by spreading this nonsense, or at least thats the impression i got from their post
It’s too cut off to be sure, but it looks like in the bottom photo you can see the next floor windows. In dying Joe’s picture there is no 2nd floor. Too much is cut off to be absolutely sure though.
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
If you cannot see the differences between these two pictures then yes you do have two different perspectives. Some people see colors differently other people see things differently. I see a distinct difference between these two pictures. It doesn’t mean i’m right and you’re wrong, it just means we both have different perspectives. I see a clear difference between these two pictures. But that’s just my take on it. Your description is apples and oranges.
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
Yeah I know this was typed in two or three times. I disagree. Let’s do an experiment. I’m me and you are you. My perspective of life is different then your perspective of life probably in many ways. Just the same as it would be is if I looked at a picture and you looked at a picture. Both of us would have different perspectives based on our life experiences, how we see color shapes and sizes. I see differences, some that you may not see. That’s OK we can be different.
there are many ways "perspective" is used in the english language. when i used "perspective" i was referring to their location. from each photographers location in the rose garden would give them a different viewpoint, a different perspective.
the photographers life experiences, (or our own) has no play in this discussion.
Oh It completely does. I just agree with you it’s all there is to it. There’s been many studies that show if people see things differently, colors shapes sizes in perspective of things. Yes the perspective of the pictures are from two different locations, however that does not change my perspective of the pictures being different. To me personally they are different. To the to you maybe they are not I don’t know. There’s nothing that you can say that will change my mind about that. It’s a very relevant to this discussion. But I’m not gonna sit here and argue with you all day if you want to be right then you’re right. You’re right and I’m wrong. Is that what you wanted to hear do you feel better now?
sounds like you have a cognitive dissonance problem
This is exactly right. Sorry the retards are down voting you.
Wonder if there’s more footage where it’s not cut off?
For more pics of the Rose Garden. The pics seem consistent with Trump’s White House.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/people.com/politics/melania-trump-led-a-renovation-of-the-white-house-rose-garden-before-rnc-events-this-week/%3famp=true
its the same thing. this whole thing is making us look stupid.
the only differences people are seeing is caused by the lack of shadows in the first pic, and the different perspectives of the photographers. one picture was taken up close with no zoom, the other from farther away but zoomed in.
https://i.maga.host/M6mJZjn.png
Here's the problem with "digital soldiers". 99.9% of us have no fucking clue about anything we are "investigating".
This is clearly just an issue of camera angles, elevation, camera lens, etc. But because we aren't experts in any of these fields we point at stuff we don't understand as "evidence".
Biden isn't in the photo, that would be good. Some fuckery there, no second floor, thankyou for posting - Oops indeed!!!!
The top image is the reproduction built at Tyler Perry Studios. It's located in Atlanta on the grounds of the former Fort McPherson army base. The major motion picture studio, one of the largest production facilities in the country, showcases forty buildings on the National Register of Historic Places, this being one of them.
Here's the link below.
[https://tylerperrystudios.com]
Except it's not. You can hear the same ambulance in Richards video and on Biden's speech.
https://i.maga.host/M6mJZjn.png
...this is click journalism
wow this one has really triggered the hell out of the shareblue XD for the perspective people.. why can we see the second floor on the bottom picture (trump picture) even though it is closer (doors appear larger) when it is the steeper perspective? you have your argument backwards, bu ti think you know that and you are just hoping to confuse people.
This MikeWho guy is either a shill or an idiot.
No he’s totally right and a lot more diligent than most around here, apparently.
Top shot is close up with a wide angle lens. Cloudy day so soft light with little to no shadow on the corbels (if they haven’t been edited to appear less visible).
Bottom shot is from much further away at a slightly higher altitude with a zoom lens. That’s why the windows appear larger and why the image is flatter, overall. It’s also why we no longer see the overhead lights in the corridor and why the door handles are significantly higher in respect to the podium.
One clearly has a second floor, and the other doesn’t.
Different perspectives don’t make floors disappear, nor do they triple the width of a window.
Standing on a hill would indeed give you the perspective to see what’s above. And the zoom lens is what would “triple” the width of the window.
What's the top pic from?
Details above columns not the same on facade. The width at top of columns not the same
The top one is taken at a lower angle and farther away. It’s catching the top of the building behind rather than the windows. Both pictures are at the whitehouse
correct! also, the columns and the corbels above the columns, only look different because of the lack of shadows in the top picture. probably taken aon a cloudy day
They are the same exact place taken at two angles, nothing is missing. One has less shadows but the details are still there. If you can't see them you need an eye exam. This is embarrassing.
The fact that there's no second story above the columns is the really suspicious part. But I wouldn't call this photo a smoking gun.
I also noticed that the bushes are completely different.
Yea I get the corbels shadow thing. It’s the second floor above that that is different. Basically lacking a 2nd floor
where the photographer is standing makes a HUGE difference in perspectivre.
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
Can you stop copy pasting this you moron. It’s pretty clear the 2nd floors are different. A further distance isn’t going to change the fucking windows.
the windows havent changed. theyre still there, but cant bee seen from the camera angle
They’re literally different lmao, get your eyes checked.
Second story, the door hardware is all blocked from view, and the stairs are different.
Has the photo above been edited?
WTF are all those flags for? Looks like a UN building.
Blocking reflections was my thought.
this link i think proves it's actually at the Whitehouse...go to the image that's just above the Melania video and you'll see both sets of windows
https://digg.com/2020/melania-trump-white-house-rose-garden-before-and-after
Fake President! Fake Whitehouse!
Look, pedes, I desperately want hopium and any confirmation that all is going According to Plan™ as much as the next fren but this is literally a perspective and shadow issue. I agree that nothing is as it seems and any shots involving Xiden and the WH are suspect but without the red line in the first pic you'd see the door frames matching clearly, and the lack of shadows make it appear without depth or that the architecture details were missing. If the top pic didn't have a shitty crop that's exactly what you'd see from that angle. Even a quick google search of the rose garden would shed light on this.
These kinds of posts are what make us look like nutjobs guys...
Think. A small group of elites, ruthless as they are, with the gonads to try to conquer the whole world would not be that careless if they were presenting Biden in a set.
Looks to me like the architectural details along the top is different.
LOL... they really have a fake WH for Xiden. Definitely has no square decor above the columns. And there are buildings behind Xiden WH.
Any idea where they are filming this fakery?
Aside from the facade, the dimensions are all off in the top pic, too.
Someone should've down their homework properly before showing Bai Den to the public.
The shrubbery sure is green in DC for the literal end of winter
Even w warmer temps weather wasnt right eother..old turkey neck Nancy was just in dress.....its windy in DC. Not where they were...
Smudge tool, as someone else pointed out. Concerning that 262 people upvoted this.
Someone photoshop the two pics aligned and on top of eachother.
2nd story windows look different...
The stage is set, er, this is a set.
Movie set.
Even the scale is different. Actual is much larger.
At this point I think it should become accepted logic that Biden being in the White House is part of the Plan. If Trump were there we would know by now.