So whoever leaked the inaccurate information earlier this month did so in a way that made it appear that the White House – specifically Rhodes – was more interested in the State Department’s concerns, and more focused on the talking points, that the email actually stated.
I couldn't resist commenting:
"...significance seems to be..."? Well, is it or isn't it?
"Insofar as we have firmed up assessments that don't compromise intel or the investigation, we need to have the capability to correct the record, as there are significant policy and messaging ramifications that would flow from a hardened mis-impression.
We can take this up tomorrow morning at deputies."
doesn't persuade me that the talking points weren't changed. The real question about that is still "Who had them changed?" State? CIA? Oval Office?
It's important we know. Go find out, and report back.I neglected to ask about the redacted part. Sorry.
His column here.
Major linkage about talking points at Pundette!