Now that's a surprise ... attack those who highlight your habitual lying.![]()
I said Joe Wilson knows nothing and you keep arguing that means I was talking about him, by saying he didn't know anything. You're an eight year old
You said you never mentioned Wilson
That's a lie, another lie from the liar, you, I never said that. I said I said nothing about him, he's irrelevant. I never analyzed his argument, he's a nobody. I did not say I didn't mention him, I said I'm saying nothing about him or what he said because he's irrelevant.
Once again- your actual words:
No I am pointing out just another flat out lie of yours
Kaz:
OK, liar, I already pointed out to you, I DID NOT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT JOE WISON.
and before that:
Kaz:
and you call the British PM and British intelligence liars when you like Wilson have zero knowledge
As shown in red- you did say something about Wilson- and then lied about not saying anything.
Just part of a pattern.
I did not say I did not "mention" him, your quote. I said nothing about him or his claims because I pointed out he is irrelevant to this. Does word parsing actually give you the woody that it seems to give you?
It doesn't get much more specific than I DID NOT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT JOE WISON
But clearly you did say something about Joe Wilson- why did you deny it?
Kaz:
OK, liar, I already pointed out to you, I DID NOT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT JOE WISON.
and before that:
Kaz:
and you call the British PM and British intelligence liars when you like Wilson have zero knowledge
As shown in red- you did say something about Wilson- and then lied about not saying anything.
Just part of a pattern. As you continue with each denial.