The question that I don't see getting asked often enough* in the #Benghazi affair: Who gave the stand-down order to security forces who were prepared to aid those under attack in Benghazi? This goes beyond the lies about an internet video** -- regardless of the cause of the attack, ordering forces that were prepared to assist during an on-going attack to stand down is not an act of negligence, it borders on an act of treason.
The order for cross-border assistance, from special forces in Italy for example, can only come from the President, but there were assets in Tripoli that were prepared to give aid after the first attack, and were told to stand down. That authority did not require approval from the Commander in Chief -- but did that order come from the the top as well?
The whole story sounds an awful lot like the Biblical account of David and Bathsheba, where King David sent Bathsheba's husband Uriah into battle and gave his general orders to fall back once Uriah was on the front-lines. Uriah died, and David married Bathsheba.
Is this the core of the "it was a video" deception? Was "the video" deception a cover up of why Ambassador Stevens was abandoned?
I do not think we will get an answer unless Speaker Boehner appoints a Select Committee to do so.
* Not enough, until tonight -- RS Member kybo makes the same point: Where the Real Focus on Benghazi Should Be, and RS Member ausonius has an article with excellent detail: Our Focus Must Be This: WHO Ordered Our Forces To Stand Down?
** If anyone had cared to look for it, Libya Herald, a daily English newspaper in Tripoli, was reporting three days after #Benghazi that it was a preplanned attack.
[Edited to add link to Ausonius and refactor footnotes.]