Except ALL then EVIDENCE multiple investigations found show definitively that neither Hillary nor ANYONE in the WH had ANY input in the talking points.
I understand your entire position is based on ALL of these investigations being wrong, but you refuse to admit this fact.
Just because you need it to be so to justify months of rant doesn't mean your position has a shred of truth in it.
I don't mean to be mean-spirited or unnecessarily argumentative, but this is provably false. Provably. There isn't any conjecture, there is an authenticated email from Hillary's spokesman stating that "her building leadership" had issues with the original talking points, and a second email showing that the first round of revisions left "her building's leadership....unresolved." She then went on to explicitly state what those issues precisely were, namely, that the first talking points made it look like State Dept. ignored warnings and that if that perception were allowed to permeate the dialogue, it would reflect poorly on, inter alia, her building leadership.
So the talking points changed.
And changed.
And changed.
And changed.
And then it didn't look that way anymore.
Then Susan Rice told everyone who would listen the "new and improved" facts.
I will confess to enjoying the occasional troll, but you don't have to take my word for it. The WHITE HOUSE released those emails. We don't have to speculate or offer conjecture. All of that is in the public domain at this point.
Please ask for a link to any assertion I have made in this post. I will gladly assist in linking you to the original documents. Your post is
provably false. Provably and empirically.
I can say without fear of contradiction that I could disprove RJ's post. Easily. He's lying to himself or he's lying to us, or he's deliberately ignorant. If he can support his position that "all" of the evidence shows "definitively" that Hillary had nothing to do with it, I need to know who the State Department spokesman was referring to when she said "my building leadership." He should consider this a challenge.
RJ?