There is a spectrum, for people with a certain belief, between 'hypocrisy' and 'principled', which describes how much their actions are in conflict with that belief.
There is a conservation of expected probability thing happening here, so if 'hypocrisy' is more trustworthy than not knowing how someone acts, then 'principled' must be less trustworthy.
But if you said someone was obviously being dishonest because their actions match their words, you'd make no sense.
I am almost completely certain your statement is similarly absurd.
Sure, maybe they're untrustworthy, but we don't need to trust them to believe what they say in this case. We can evaluate what they say independently of their trustworthiness, using logic and experience.
There is a conservation of expected probability thing happening here, so if 'hypocrisy' is more trustworthy than not knowing how someone acts, then 'principled' must be less trustworthy.
But if you said someone was obviously being dishonest because their actions match their words, you'd make no sense.
I am almost completely certain your statement is similarly absurd.