Benghazi,...Maybe We'll Find Out Some Answers Soon

....and maybe not. Hilary Clinton, soon to be the out going Sectetary of State, is scheduled next week to testify on what she knows about Benghazi. The questions are numerous, I'm afraid the answers will be few. While Clinton did brief congressional leaders behind closed doors shortly after the attack, many more questions have arisen as facts and assumptions become apparent following that initial briefing.

Such as:
1. Why did the Administration, for up to two weeks following the attack that left the U.S. Ambassador and three other Americans dead, continually refer to the terrorist attack as caused by a populat riot against a anti-muslim video?
2. Who pressured Susan Rice, Ambassador to the United Nations, to back up the Administration claims of a riot gone wild? Why is she unrepetent?
3. Why did the U.S. military assets in the region not respond, given the response time of one to two hours, when Americans held out against terrorists for up to seven hours?
4. Why did the President say on television that he ordered the military the respond, but no media has followed up to determine when did he order it, and/or ask for a written copy of the execute order?
5. Why were key military leaders removed , one frm AFRICOM, General Ham and the Naval Admiral, Rear Admiral Gaudette, in days following this failure to protect American citizens?
6. Former CIA Director David Petraeus testified behind closed doors before the Senate Intelligence Committee about the attack in November and told congressonal leaders that the intelligence report that went to the White House clearly dicatated a planned terrorist attack. If Ambassador Rice was given intelligence from the White House, who changed it from terrorist attack to "mob frenzy" and who ordered it?

Along with Clinton testifying, an "independent review" by the State Department on the findings concerning how the Libyan threats and consulate security were handled.