UKIP leader and parliamentary candidate admits to being a !ying git

[Nearly Sane]

You're acting as though politicians don't slip up like this ever. It's not as though he's killed anyone or taken a bribe. I have adequately responded to all the other points of your post.

Ah it's the old tu quoque fallacy dragged out. so he slipped up did he! Was that by being so incompetent to have a lie on his website, quoting himself? Was it claiming to have a PH.D and not having one? Or playing professional football and not? Or claiming to be living in Stoke and not doing so?

[Jack Knave]

Do they have Ph.Ds?

Only in your fake news world.

[Jack Knave]

oh and dies he want to privatise the NHS or not?

I can only tell you what UKIP's position on this is.

[Gordon]

He's the leader of UKIP - isn't "disingenuous and incompetent idiot" in the job description?

I'd imagine it is the primary qualification for the job - so he is clearly the ideal chap.

[Jack Knave]

Ah it's the old tu quoque fallacy dragged out. so he slipped up did he! Was that by being so incompetent to have a lie on his website, quoting himself? Was it claiming to have a PH.D and not having one? Or playing professional football and not? Or claiming to be living in Stoke and not doing so?

You're only doing this because you loathe UKIP and so want to make a mountain out of mole hill.

[Nearly Sane]

Only in your fake news world.

So that would be the Ph.D that was on his linkedin oage that he lied about being his linkedin page?

http://uk.businessinsider.com/paul-nuttall-claims-about-hillsborough-ukip-stoke-2017-2

[Nearly Sane]

You're only doing this because you loathe UKIP and so want to make a mountain out of mole hill.

and that's an ad hominem fallacy.

[Jack Knave]

So that would be the Ph.D that was on his linkedin oage that he lied about being his linkedin page?

http://uk.businessinsider.com/paul-nuttall-claims-about-hillsborough-ukip-stoke-2017-2

You mustn't believe everything you see and hear, NS.

[Anchorman]

I'd imagine it is the primary qualification for the job - so he is clearly the ideal chap.

Maybe the fake PhD he hasn't got is in total incompetency?

[Nearly Sane]

You mustn't believe everything you see and hear, NS.

So when Paul Nuttall lied it was a faked linkedin site, I shouldn't trust him because Paul Nuttall lies.

[Gordon]

You mustn't believe everything you see and hear, NS.

That is certainly the case when it involves Nuttall's personal information, since he has been exposed as a liar: an incompetent liar too since his claims were so easily checked and shown to be false.

[floo]

He's the leader of UKIP - isn't "disingenuous and incompetent idiot" in the job description?

Good one!

[Quizzimodo]

His press officer did it and resigned over it!!! Plain and simple.

But this is now a pattern:

Lie appears, often more than one source, Nuttall is found out, underling is thrown under the bus, rince & repeat 3 times now.

This either makes him a compulsive bullshitter or a man with woeful judgement of those he employs

[Quizzimodo]

Another day another Nuttall lie exposed

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/18/paul-nuttall-under-pressure-over-claims-he-served-on-charity-board

[Jack Knave]

That is certainly the case when it involves Nuttall's personal information, since he has been exposed as a liar: an incompetent liar too since his claims were so easily checked and shown to be false.

I bet the people you vote for have lied in a much bigger way.

[Nearly Sane]

I bet the people you vote for have lied in a much bigger way.

this is you trying your tu quoque again. Good to see that you have accepted he is a lying git though.

[Jack Knave]

But this is now a pattern:

Lie appears, often more than one source, Nuttall is found out, underling is thrown under the bus, rince & repeat 3 times now.

This either makes him a compulsive bullshitter or a man with woeful judgement of those he employs

And I suppose the people you vote for are all saints are they?

[Nearly Sane]

And I suppose the people you vote for are all saints are they?

and he tries the tu quoque for the 3rd time. House!

[Jack Knave]

this is you trying your tu quoque again. Good to see that you have accepted he is a lying git though.

No.

And taking the high ground, as you are doing, and hiding the fact about who you vote for looks duplicitous and two faced. One rule for your enemies and another for your friends, NS. Very EU!!!

So who have you voted for?

[Jack Knave]

and he tries the tu quoque for the 3rd time. House!

That is not tu quoque. How sad you are resorting to ad hominem now!!!

[Nearly Sane]

No.

And taking the high ground, as you are doing, and hiding the fact about who you vote for looks duplicitous and two faced. One rule for your enemies and another for your friends, NS. Very EU!!!

So who have you voted for?

Well that"s a strawman, I haven't specified any such rule as you refer to here,  and irrelevant to your use of the tu quoque fallacy which makes your current little outburst irrelevant to the case of the lies on Paul Nuttall's personal website and linkedin profile.

[Nearly Sane]

That is not tu quoque. How sad you are resorting to ad hominem now!!!

ERM it is precisely a tu quoque in that you are attempting to excuse the Paul Nuttall lies by talking about others. That others may or may not have lied is irrelevant to whether the Paul Nuttall lies are an issue.

Also there isn't an ad hominem in me pointing out that you are using a fallacy.

[Jack Knave]

Well that"s a strawman, I haven't specified any such rule as you refer to here,  and irrelevant to your use of the tu quoque fallacy which makes your current little outburst irrelevant to the case of the lies on Paul Nuttall's personal website and linkedin profile.

You're now just typing gibberish.

Your seeing things, there is no mountain there just a mole hill!!!

[Jack Knave]

ERM it is precisely a tu quoque in that you are attempting to excuse the Paul Nuttall lies by talking about others. That others may or may not have lied is irrelevant to whether the Paul Nuttall lies are an issue.

Also there isn't an ad hominem in me pointing out that you are using a fallacy.

That is not a tu quoque.

[Nearly Sane]

You're now just typing gibberish.

Your seeing things, there is no mountain there just a mole hill!!!

if you think lying consistently and frequently is OK then it will be a molehill to you.