and if joe digenova was looking to change the narrative it worked. nes were all about the white house denying it sent private investigators on joe and his wife. ken starr started calling white house officials to testify about whether they were trying to intimidate people and the narrative became war between ken starr and the white house and everybody is using dirty tactics. my favorite was from "usa today" at the time. "clinton versus starr turning nasty." who can claim truth or objectivity anymore? who indeed? there are specific people who are called upon to play this particular role. in the d.cbusiness of partisan scandal making and scandal distracting. people who are called upon to muddy the waters, shift the focus, confuse the narrative. during the benghazi investigation, joe digenova was backpedaling claims the obama administration was intimidating witnesses. during the presidential campaign, joe digenova was back regularly citing supposed inside sources telling him that hillary clinton was definitely about to be indicted over her e-mails. she wa