The latest perfect example being the Nunes memo, everything I said about it turned out to be true and accurate... Originally Posted by StandinStraightPerfect example, huh?
Let's see... beforehand you were jabbering about how it would recklessly damage national security to release the memo:
...the people talking about the Nunes fantasy memo being a threat to national security are democrats and republicans, anyone who has any allegiance to his country would be on the side of protecting this memo from being made public. Originally Posted by StandinStraight
Afterwards, you called it a big nothing-burger:
I wouldn’t waste my time reading it if I were you, it’s another nothing burger... Originally Posted by StandinStraight
Those two assertions are mutually exclusive. That means only one can be "true and accurate". Not both.
Lib-retards never fret about being inconsistent and contradicting themselves.
Maybe it's because they don't remember yesterday's talking points as they spout today's jibberish.