It finally occured to me what was going on. With Darrell Issa's refusal to accept the acceptance of his subpoena of John Kerry, the last puzzle piece clicked into place for me. We've been looking at this all wrong. We've been assuming that this was all a publicity stunt slash insane right wing conspiracy theory in the tradition of the Birthers and Solyndra that would somehow allow the GOP to overturn everything their least favorite president had done since inauguration, and pin the blame for everything bad that has happened ever squarely on the democrats. That is not the case. You see, we've been approaching the whole thing with faulty assumptions. These assumptions blind us to the truth. However, when you examine GOP's platform, you see that their non-acceptance of certain things that the rest of us assume science, logic, and basic human observation had already proven, allows them to see what's really going on.
These assumptions we have made, and need to discard, are as follows:
1) Time flows in one direction, from the past into future.
2) It is impossible to have knowledge of events that have not yet happened.
3) The laws of Cause and Effect cannot be circumvented.
If we discard these notions, the truth becomes immediately apparent. OBAMA KNEW THE ATTACKS WERE GOING TO OCCUR, DID NOTHING, AND THEN LIED ABOUT IT. He would've had knowledge that the attacks were going to occur, because they would occur in the future. With this knowledge, he could've moved US troops into position to defend against the attacks, but he did not. Worse, he would've had the futuresight to know that in hindsight, the attacks were not a spontaneous reaction to a video on the internet. By failing to pre-react to the event and failing to claim the results of the attack as a personal failing, he engaged in a cover-up, far worse then Watergate, and should be impeached.
But my friends, it doesn't stop there. You see, Darrell Issa's subpoena of John Kerry, and subsequent retraction of that subpoena let the cat out of the bag. By showing it was reasonable to believe that John Kerry, who would not become secretary of state till well after the Benghazi attacks, would have material information about this cover-up, Issa tipped his hand. For, you see, there has been only one other person as focused on the cover up as Obama, and that man is DARRELL ISSA.
Issa realized that when Kerry accepted the subpoena, Kerry must have known about all the documents outlining the attack in Benghazi that had been sent to Issa's committee. Since he would then have all this information about the attacks, the next question becomes 'Why didn't Darrell Issa act on this information before he received it?' He, more then any other person, would have an almost encyclopedic knowledge with which he could've acted to save the embassy. But why didn't he? Only one possible reason exists: He wanted the attacks to take place.
Think about it. Why did he wait till after the attacks took place to begin investigating them? If he hadn't known the attacks were going to occur, he wouldn't have waited until they became public knowledge to begin investigating them. He knew that of he acted to prevent them from having had occurred in the future, there wouldn't have not been no cover-up. If this wasn't the case, why would he have un-subpoenaed the one man to have known what Issa was going to have had known retroactively after the fact. John Kerry knew to much, and that is why he couldn't be allowed to testify, because then we would have known what Isaa had would've pre-known before he knew.
So there you have it. Now you understand what's really going on. Just sit down and ponder it, and I think you'll find you can't argue with logic like that.