“Only one of the statements can be accurate, which means that the other is a lie.”
1996 was the ‘lie’ which he explained and repudiated in 2001.
When will you live up to your documented lies in this thread, such as those about
- the timetable of Thompson’s support for Aristide
- the nature of Paul’s military service
- how or why Fred was fooled by Aristide
- your claims about what I’ve said or not said in this thread, which I rebutted several times, backed up by links to the posts?
Wideawake won’t answer you. When Fred lies about Aristide (and still continues to lie), it is okay with him. All for the cause, you know. I condemn Paul’s earlier lie but forgive him because the apologize. Wideawake neither acknowledges Fred’s lies.
DING! DING! DING!
We have finally gotten an answer to the very simple question.
It's now a total of two Ron Paul supporters who admit that Ron Paul lied.
Finally.
So, continuing on the topic of the thread, why hasn't he told the public who wrote them so his story can be corroborated?
Clearly he can no longer be taken at his word. What is his proof that the 2001 story is the real story?
menhrling, I'm just pinging you for your analysis of my new tagline.