Every entry is two of their own statements, side by side. No spin, just the contradiction.
Piers Morgan says that he would gladly trade an Englishman for a weekly Tikka Masala, yet calls someone a “disgusting prick” for daring to say that they would choose their own dog over a Muslim that they don’t know.
Piers Morgan exhibits a double standard regarding dehumanizing statements. In one instance, he says he would 'happily trade' white English people for chicken tikka masala, a statement that devalues a group of people in exchange for a food item. In another post, he calls a politician a 'disgusting pr*ck' for making a statement prioritizing dogs over Muslims. Morgan vociferously condemns another person for making a dehumanizing comment, a standard he himself appears to violate.
The same voices that branded the removal of sexually explicit material from school libraries as fascist book-banning had, two years earlier, cheered the discontinuation of six Dr. Seuss titles over offensive imagery. Either pulling books is censorship or it is not — the principle cannot depend on which books and whose politics.
An illustrative entry of the classic pattern: a concern is dismissed as a debunked conspiracy, only for it to later be acknowledged as true. Replace with real, sourced examples via the admin panel.