[philman_36]

stating CNN hadn’t heard the tape, and that all they had were “typed words”.

Isn't that all they had?

If you still want to kvetch over the fact that I specified what the book was about when the indictment didn’t, feel free.

You didn't specify what the book was about, you said that a specific book was called out in the indictment when it appears it isn't. That's on you.
You spinning it isn't going to change that.

If that makes you feel like you’ve won something, good for you ...

I wasn't trying to "win" anything. I'm trying to get the truth. It isn't in you, apparently.

[philman_36]

The tape was of a meeting with the publisher and author of a books being written about Mark Meadows. That is specified in the indictment.

Well, you did say it was about Meadows so I was wrong above.
My apologies.