Actually in this case I was referring to the style of propaganda. It's got a similar feel to the infamous Russian reverse cargo cult method. Kind of like, "authoritatively say that the sky is yellow, not blue, and ridicule anyone who claims it is blue". With the goal of removing the idea of an objective reality from the debate, so that in future they can say whatever they want unchallenged.

Worst case the whole thing becomes a distraction, arguing about whatever absurdity the person has claimed. And since it's easy to just make up new absurdities, they can keep their opponent distracted while they throw in jabs against their true enemies (Democrats...It's always Democrats).

It's kind of a win-win style of propaganda, but it probably needs rapid follow-up to keep the opponent off balance.

So yeah, not insulting that person at the moment, just musing on the rhetorical aspects of the lie they told.