On Bullshit, but that other guy is a professor, so go and read him instead

Spokesweasel McClellan:

That's the difference between us and others. When it comes to human rights, there is no greater leader than the United States of America, and we show that by holding people accountable when they break the law or they violate human rights. [...] And no one has done more when it comes to human rights than the United States of America.

Wrongful Imprisonment: Anatomy of a CIA Mistake

[U.S. Ambassador] Coats informed the German minister that the CIA had wrongfully imprisoned one of its citizens, Khaled Masri, for five months, and would soon release him...

Is it possible to have less than zero credibility? Is zero the lowest number, or is it possible to have a negative credibility rating?

What are the rules that would be applied to a person, or administration, with a negative credibility rating? The easy answer would be to say that the opposite of any given statement is a true statement. But that doesn't take into account all of the irrelevancies and straw man arguments. You could assume the opposite of those kinds of statements, but that wouldn't get you anywhere. You wouldn't have the truth, you would just have the mirror image of the rhetorical vomit.

It's all too confusing to me.