In Shmot 40:35, the text reads (via the Chabad site):
Moses could not enter the Tent of Meeting because the cloud rested upon it and the glory of the Lord filled the Mishkan.
לה.וְלֹא יָכֹל משֶׁה לָבוֹא אֶל אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד כִּי שָׁכַן עָלָיו הֶעָנָן וּכְבוֹד יְהֹוָה מָלֵא אֶת הַמִּשְׁכָּן
Rashi recognizes that this contradicts another pasuk and writes:
Moses could not enter the Tent of Meeting: But one [other] passage says: “And when Moses would enter the Tent of Meeting” (Num. 7:89), [which is an apparent contradiction]. The third passage [verse 35] came and reconciled them: “because the cloud rested upon it.” You may henceforth say that as long as the cloud was upon it, he could not enter, [but when] the cloud withdrew, he would enter and [God] would speak with him. -[from Torath Kohanim, Shalosh Esrei Middoth, Thirteen methods, Section 8]
But the next pasuk reads
36.When the cloud rose up from over the Mishkan, the children of Israel set out in all their journeys.
So when there was no cloud, Moshe could NOT have gone in to the tent because that was when the people traveled.
How exactly is Rashi reconciling the two statements (Moshe could not go in, and Moshe did go in) if what he cites flies in the face of another pasuk?