I read it the other way, as "THIS CLAIM fucked his credibility", for this specific theme.

West's credibility was super in question before, that's obvious and no argument there.

But that won't get a lot of weight with respect to a specific court case where he's suing for royalties.

"Your honor, the plaintiff's generally not credible" isn't a starting argument.

But if instead it's "Your honor, we can specifically demonstrate where the plaintiff had made misleading claims about ownership and creation of the concept that is the theme of their frivolous lawsuit" (or however a decent lawyer would put it), suddenly it's really relevant.