Saying that a speech was the “most watched ever” is not the same thing as saying a speech had the “highest live TV viewership level ever”.
There has never been a formal Executive Branch address that I have missed since 1984, at one time this was extremely difficult because I had to find a TV or Radio station with clear reception at a specific time.
Not so today, the day after the State of the Union address by Trump I simply said “Alexa, play yesterday’s State of the Union address” from my living room chair and my wife, my youngest son and I listened to it together.
The amount of news that I consume has never decreased but I get almost none of it from television anymore, according to every study I have seen I am not unique in this; the internet and the radio are my main sources for news now and many are doing the same.
You have not “exposed a lie” by citing Nielsen ratings because Trumps claim had nothing to do with live TV viewership, your “facts” don’t address his claim and your assumption that Trump ignoring your accusation instead of refuting it must mean he was lying is ridiculous; Trump mocks his enemies he doesn’t lend them credibility.
I often write posts that are argumentative, but I don’t respond to every post that opposes my argument; only those that actually address what I wrote or that appear to credibly refute what I wrote.
All the responses that ignore my content and context in an attempt to misdirect or move the goalposts have no credibility on their own so I don’t lend them any credibility by pretending they were offered in good conscience with good motives.
The absence of a response is not evidence that an accusation is credible, it is evidence that the accuser has offered no credible or relevant criticism.