deservingly so.

Another reason to hate FOX NEWS.

The right wing noise machine echoes the crap claims, then the Republicans hold hearings and the rest of the media assumes if their are hearings there must be something to the crap claims.

They do this every time a Democrat is in office.

Hell, both the Republicans AND their shills in the media think it's their JOB to prosecute Democrats.

have they been investigated yet? It wouldn't have cost that much to stage the attack, finance that stupid "movie", or to even coordinate massive riots. Romney even tried to use it in his failure of a campaign, and I've been thinking about it since then.

ahem. not that I can prove anything of course.

I had some suspicions that there was more to Benghazi than we know.

I forget the specific details, but there were some murky connections the person who financed the movie had that I remember seeing reported in passing.

And with the attack's timing (not far from the election) and Romney giving that bizarre press conference (that fortunately backfired on his grinning ass), it was just something that made me go "hmmmm".

If the Republicans want to impeach Obama, I can think of some reasons, but they won't do it because the same reasons where just as good reasons to impeach the Frat Boy.

evidence to support it.)

This all has to do with the fact that Petraeus was outed for having had an affair just two months after Benghazi.

Fox News wanted to back Petraeus for 2016. But that will be impossible because Petraeus had to resign or was fired due to his extramarital relationship. (He was serving in the military and that is not allowed.)

Petraeus was not outed until November 9, 2012, almost two months after Benghazi, but my instincts tell me there is some connection.

Petraeus had this relationship with Broadwell for some time before being outed. As we now know, the NSA would most likely have been moderating Petraeus' communications intentionally or inadvertently and could have known about the affair for quite some time.

Fox News is just nutty enough to try to avenge Petraeus' outing by exaggerating the importance of the confusion about Benghazi.

And by the way we still don't know what the two ambassadors were doing meeting in Benghazi on that night when the capitol is in Tripoli, Libya. That's the question that intrigues me.

Anyway, my theory is crazy and not very well developed, but I just thought I would mention it. I don't claim it has any relationship to the truth, but then neither does Fox News' version of why Benghazi is important. The tapes and the Rose Garden speeches suggested terrorism to me. But terrorism had not been confirmed. Naturally, the White House tried to be cautious.

I have no idea, but I wonder whether there was some rivalry between the State Dept. under Hillary Clinton and the CIA under Petraeus. It is a way-out-there idea, no more than a very poorly thought-out conspiracy theory, but I have my questions.

Petraeus' exit was said to be for infidelity, but Petraeus must have known that his communications, whereabouts and conduct would be monitored.

What really happened behind the scenes? We will never know. But Fox News had offered to back Petraeus in a presidential race. Remember? I think they are disappointed that their favorite fell out of favor with the White House. And Petraeus' exit was just about 2 months after Benghazi. It's my meandering mind. Someone may know details that would completely shoot my crazy theory down or affirm it.

Until then we are free to exercise our imagination to the fullest extent.

I hope you are feeling well.

are the natural response to secrecy, to a lack of openness to the public.

"Wouldn't we love to know the truth of it?

Until then we are free to exercise our imagination to the fullest extent."

Until I know the truth of it, I will try to put two and two together as well as I can. That's freedom of thought. Surely they can't make that illegal since freedom of speech is protected.