as caught on tape. Caught on tape. Now what do you imagine is true of somebody who was caught on tape? Well they're guilty. What does it mean to be on a recording if you were caught? There they're signaling that he's guilty before they've even told you what the content is. That's a primer. That's brainwashing, right? So we use caught on tape. No it wasn't caught on tape. There was simply an audio tape which has been available to the public in which not much of anything happened. That's not even close to being caught. And by the way I prefer presidents who don't get caught on audio.

Here's another sentence directly out of CNN's coverage. That the tape, quote, exposes the depth of his corruption. Suppose you knew there was a long tape. You only heard one part of it which was something about finding votes. And then you read CNN saying that this tape exposes the depth of his corruption. Wouldn't you kind of think that the parts you didn't hear were more confirming the depth of his corruption? Nothing like that on the tape. Not even close. Nothing even in that general category of corruption. Not even close. It's just him asking for data to be looked at because they've got some claims. They would like some data to be released by the state to make sure the claims are true or false. Just nothing like exposing the depth of corruption. He literally just asked questions. That's it.

They said it was a smoking gun. Anytime you hear any of these phrases you're being brainwashed. These ar