On Friday Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) sent a 10 page letter to President Obama asking him to clarify the role of the White House in the Benghazi attacks.
In the letter, Issa pointed pointed again to the refusals to increase security. He specifically cited a 16-man security that could have been sent in but was not, because Obama allegedly wanted to lessen the number of U.S. security personnel in country in order to "normalize relations" in Libya.
Democrats are disputing this claim, because they know it will do Obama in politically if it can be proven.
Yet Issa is asking Obama to explain this very point
[The American people] deserve a complete explanation about your administration's decision to accelerate a normalized presence in Libya at what now appears to be at the cost of endangering lives. These critical foreign policy decisions are not made by low or mid-level career officials -- they are typically made through a structured and well-reasoned process that includes the National Security Council at the White House.
During the 1972 Watergate break-in, no one was killed and President Nixon was not involved in the planning of the crime in any way. Rather, Republican operatives made their own choice to break-in to get access to files that would give them dirt on Nixon's political opponents. Nixon's only crime in the whole escapade was that he covered it up once he learned of it. For this, he had to resign to avoid impeachment.
But in Benghazi, someone lied and four Americans died. And Issa is suggesting that in the months leading up to the September 11 Benghazi attack, perhaps the President himself was making the calls: that all the low and mid-level State Dept, intelligence, and security personnel who have been thrown under the bus heretofore are just distractions. The guilt may lie where the responsibility ultimately does -- with President Obama.
If this is true, Watergate can't hold a candle to Benghazi.