What is the specific term for this (please read details)

Deflecting?

Redirect. Red herring?

Thanks, @SQUEEKY2, but no. I think it is some kind of Fallacy, I just don’t remember the official term.

From Wiki, I found this:

Fallacy of quoting out of context (contextomy) – refers to the selective excerpting of words from their original context in a way that distorts the source’s intended meaning.

Could it be that?

@Sneki95, I think that term means something more like this: person A says, “The candidate thinks he’s brilliant because he evaded paying taxes,” and person B writes, “Person A says, ‘He’s brilliant’.”

Subterfuge. Deception.

Deflection by symantics.

Argument from fallacy? I’m not sure that’s right. I think it’s also said in Latin. It might not be exactly what you are trying to describe. Some of the answers above sound good too.

“Clouding the issue” or “changing the subject”. The “accused” has shifted the topic from his obvious culpability in the matter to your errors in stating the facts. I’m not sure that he shouldn’t be allowed to get away with it. In an argument the facts matter. If the date is wrong on that speeding ticket, the charge SHOULD be dismissed.

@stanleybmanly: Yes, but I know there is an official term for it that I can’t remember, not the colloquial ones you mention.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy

I found this list of types of fallacies in arguments. I think the one that comes closest to what you are looking for is “red herring” as @RedDeerGuy1 suggested but maybe it is somewhere else on this list.

Straw man argument ...happens here hourly.

“A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent’s argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent.”

It’s not necessarily a deflection, obfuscation or any kind of logical fallacy.

When a speaker makes a point about when he heard someone say a thing, and that someone can prove that the thing was never said at that time, then it calls into question the rest of the speaker’s claim: was the thing said at a different time, or by a different person? Was the statement also in error, as well as the temporal claim about when it was uttered? It’s a courtroom strategy, less suited to debate.

Details can be important, and one detail is always temporal: “when did the thing happen?” or “when was it said?”

That’s why, if you look at Facebook posts and click into the links, then you’ll often see that the story dateline (in tiny, non-bolded font, dwarfed by the story’s headline) is years in the past – or you won’t see at all that it’s totally missing. Omitted or falsified date, as well as outdated or non-chronological stories are often false “in that way.”

I presume that you’re making some kind of reference to tonight’s VP debate, but that’s just a guess, because I don’t have time or patience for that horseshit, so I’m not watching.

Presidential Debate?

Sorry, I had to work that in somehow.

Thank you, @Cruiser, classic straw man/informal fallacy indeed! I couldn’t remember that and it was driving me nuts.

No, @CWOTUS, I wasn’t referring to the VP debate at all. It was a very generalized analogy, it could have been the color of a shirt or the brand of a pen. Something of no relevance whatsoever to the discussion.

As I think about it more, it’s also possible that this is a form of gaslighting. That is, A says to B that “You told me the sky was blue on Tuesday.”

B’s response is that “We never spoke on Tuesday, A. I worked overtime on Tuesday, then came home and went straight to bed. We never talked on that day.” (Lying about the fact by omitting that he called A on Tuesday while A was half-asleep to say that very thing.)

Gaslighting is a good term, if it applies here: a vicious way to make someone doubt his or her own reality if it’s done to a person.

I know what gaslighting is, yes, but that was not my example. My example was “straw man argument” as @Cruiser pointed out. I simply couldn’t remember the term.

@Jeruba
You’re right, it is as you described it.