was and still is embarrassing?
"what difference does it make?"
the difference between being a liberal dullard in the white house
or a retired liberal dullard.
So in conclusion, there was no cover-up, no stand down order, and no smoking gun, Clinton acknowledged the extent of her responsibility and made sure the Accountibility Board's recommendations were acted on. As far as I can tell the recollection of Benghazi in the mind's of conservatives bears no resemblance to the facts. And that is just the way the right wing media wants it. Add it to the growing list (ACORN, IRS, Black Panthers) of right wing smears leaving an indelible false impression in the memories of its consumers.
No cover up -- What was Susan Rice doing on national television? When the father of one of the dead said he knew Hillary was lying to him at the casket reception what was he referring to? When Obama was telling the UN about youtube flicks what was he up to? When it is on record that Hillary's staff did not want information damaging to the department issued on the Sunday journals what was that about?
No stand down order--- Panetta said in the hearings they withheld military action because a basic rule is to stay out of unknown situations. How close to a stand down order do you need? Unknown situations? Britain pulled its people out because it accurately assessed the situation, it knew what was going on.. Obama, Hillary, Panetta, the US military did not know what the situation was?
So the rule of unknown situations is to let the Ambassador and other operatives stay, reduce security protection and keep the military out.
If you are a Democrat hack this is all good and well. What Difference at This Point does it Make?
Your post is based on the false supposition that there was a lack of response, which we know to be a lie. I think you are just frustrated that after all the intense focus on what happened, even after congressional hearings directed by Repubs intent on smearing the admin and especially Sec. Clinton, there is no smoking gun. The notion of a WH "cover-up" was defused as soon as Gen. Petraeus reveled it was the intelligence community that directed the establishment of the talking points used in public following the event.
Investigations of the matter from a Repub perspective have never been about getting to the truth so future events can be prevented. They have been about attempts to compromise a potential Dem presidential candidate with half truths and lies.
What I think is rather pathetic is that we have this terrible incident and what do we get out of Hillary?
We get a panel that examines the issue and makes recommendations for improvements. Hillary accepts the recommendations, takes responsibility for the incident then tells us to forget what happened and move forward. Easy for her to say after she and her staff, Obama and his staff, and all others involved (at the risk of making themselves look bad and crossing the white house) spent weeks lying about it to the families of the dead, the American people and the world.
Our Secretary of State needs an (independent?) panel to examine the incident for her. She and her staff could not handle this situation themselves; could not protect our ambassador and others from a deadly situation that was brewing for weeks in plain sight of all involved. She could not accurately examine the unstable situation in Libya. She is very good at glad handing, eating, drinking, and talking blue sky nonsense, like the reset button with Russia. She is the classic Democrat political hack.
Toast is correct to say it is a lie to state there was no response in Benghazi. The response was:
1) From Obama...."'I'going to bed. I have some campaign stuff tomorow in Vegas. Think I can get in some golf?"
2) From Obama's military, "STAND DOWN!"
3) From Hillary......What can we do now and WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE AT THIS POOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOINT!!!!!!!!!!!"
The only thing to come out of the congressional hearings is a quote from Hillary that has purposely been taken out of context to make it appear she was being callous about what happened. Ordinarily that would be dismissed as a pathetic, transparent effort to unjustifiably tarnish her reputation but the numbers of gullible nitwits prepared to believe anything the right wing media says count in the millions. These are the kinds of things former Repub operatives like Roger Ailes work for all they are worth.
That statement was Hillary's effort to blow you off. She does not want you privy to what she does and why she does it because it would reveal her as the political hack that she is. No different than Bill or Obama. The whole system is set up to blow you off these days.