Well, it was a dishonest search about campaign promises kept. I guess they where looking for something they agreed with.
Sound familiar?
Both sides play the same game, one side gets called out for it.
It is the next step of discrediting the person's character and therefore anything they say should be ignored because "they are not grounded with the facts and down right ignore them".
That's lame. Just because you disagree with someone does not make you right all the time and them wrong.
I moved the goal posts? No, it would kill you to admit that I made a valid point in response to accusations that I am the one who ignores the facts.