Donald Trump’s campaign is suing Paramount’s national broadcast network CBS for up to $10 billion in damages, alleging it deliberately rigged an interview with his opponent to hurt his election chances.

Broadcast on October 6, the 60 minutes interview with Kamala Harris included a question about the Middle East to which Harris initially gave a meandering and wordy answer. The interview was edited to include a more succinct response that Harris gave later in the conversation – a routine practice in TV production.

Trump claims, however, that it was misleadingly edited with the express intention of helping her get elected next week by casting her in a more flattering light. The former president is seeking financial compensation to address the “immense harm” caused by CBS’ “illegal election acts and voter meddling.”

“While CBS is entitled to exercise reasonable judgment in editing, CBS crossed the line when its production went so far as to transform the interviewee’s response in such a way that it is fundamentally different,” the suit stated. claimsclaiming that the news program did “whatever it took to portray Kamala as intelligent, knowledgeable and confident, when in fact she is none of the above”.

After the broadcast, Trump immediately seized on the discrepancy between the longer version shared on social media and the shorter version that aired on national television as evidence of a media conspiracy to hurt his electoral chances. He asked CBS loses its broadcasting license.

CBS Senior Vice President of Legal Affairs Gayle Sproul argued that the interview was presented fairly to inform the public and was not done with the deliberate intent to mislead.

“You argue that 60 minutes acted haphazardly is completely unfounded,” she wrote in a letter responding to Trump’s legal request, warning that she would have to preserve all records for discovery in the event of a potential countersuit.

Harris criticized for ‘Word Salad City’

Long TV interviews are regularly edited for brevity to make them easier to consume while packing more information into limited airtime. Anyone in the public eye who has stood up for them as often as Trump has known this.

“When we edit any interview, whether it’s a politician, an athlete or a movie star, we strive to be clear, accurate and to the point,” statement released last month by 60 minutes said. “The portion of her response on 60 minutes was more succinct, which allows time for other topics in a broad 21-minute segment.”

However, this particular case is unique because it gets to the heart of a more obvious flaw in the Democratic nominee: Harris’ reputation for getting bogged down in flowery verbiage that doesn’t make sense when analyzed for substance.

Even a former senior adviser to Barack Obama criticized this as a weakness in her candidacy. “When she doesn’t want to answer a question, her habit is to go to Word Salad City,” said political strategist David Axelrod. said last week.

This penchant for rambling when speaking off-script hurts her more than Trump, whose often long and meandering answers have become part of his brand — something he proudly calls “weave.”

Seeking help from Trump-appointed Texas judge

Critics have argued that 60 minutes edited the interview to make Harris’ response sound more articulate than it actually was, feeding a misperception that the supposedly monolithic media landscape collectively supports Harris. Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos quoted this as the alleged justification of why he withdrew the approval from the newspaper of the vice president in the meeting.

A Harvard CAPS/Harris poll conducted last month found that 85% of voters wanted CBS to release the full transcript of the 60 Minutes interview.

Trump has long nursed a beef with the program following a combative interview four years ago when he he left suddenlypledging not to come back until the grid offered him an apology.

Trump, who has repeatedly accused his political opponents of making “law” through willful abuse of the judicial system, filed the lawsuit in the Northern District of Texas. This is a favorite federal court of conservatives, Trump personally appointed Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk.

The network could not be accessed wealth for further comment, but a spokesperson told CNN they view the allegations as “completely without merit” and pledged to “vigorously defend.”

This story was originally presented on Fortune.com