Can somebody explain to me the logic that no statement however ridiculous that is made can have it's deficiencies, errors and inaccuracies pointed out without the person pointing out those errors being accused of defending, or supporting the subject of those deficiencies, errors and inaccuracies?

Stu if you, or anybody else for that matter, come out with anything, on any topic that I know to be incorrect, I will point the error out and I will correct it. So far absolutely nothing of any substance has been turned up by all those scrambling about trying to prove that Donald Trump and the Republicans sought Russian help to influence the last US Presidential election. Evidence has been found however, of Hilary Clinton's campaign team and the Democrats, doing precisely that. Now I think that fact should be brought to light in the interests of truth, don't you Stu?