not sure how you could confuse the video of a bus journey and the speaker as being the same person. I never once concluded that. It was clear to me that the voice was not taped while on that bus. The speaker is on the phone or something. It seems pretty clear to me. So the basis for the rebuke revolves predominately around the bus journey video.

Delphi for sure. Attempt to cast doubt on one aspect and then the rest is suspect. How does it work in court? Prove your adversary a liar on any one point and all of their "evidence" can be rejected. Seems to be the MO here.