He's made it clear he thinks birthers are “whackjobs”. He equates them with truthers. He was using the “long form” birther argument to illustrate the absurdity of the defense Gibbs was using to justify their foreign money accusations against the Chamber of Commerce. Tapper was suggesting neither was supported by evidence, and both were equally nutty. Consistent in his point...nothing hypocritical about it.
Tapper has made it clear he is not a birther, and wants nothing to do with them.
Only in birtherville is this seen as a validation of their quest.
Were there words I used you don't understand?? He asked for a clarification he shouldn't have needed if he really think this is a 'whackjob' issue. You offered a rather dumb explanation in his defense.