Four American men including Ambassador Chris Stevens were killed in Benghazi, Libya, during an assault on the American mission on Sept. 11, 2012. The Libyan group who planned and executed the killings and their motives are unknown.
That does not, however, stop conservatives from criticizing the president and secretary of state for failing to do everything they could to prevent the attack, and then failing to provide accurate information afterward.  Speculation has come up regarding who is responsible and why there was such a slow military response.
Fox News has grilled the Obama administration, making accusations of a cover-up in an outlandish conspiracy to hide the truth. It was first announced that the attack was a result of a protest surrounding an American-made video called “The Innocence of Muslims,” which crudely depicts Mohammed and mocks the religion. 
According to an interview by The New York Times, Abu Khattala, a suspected ringleader, confirms this claim. It is now believed there were no protests in Benghazi, leaving some to suspect a calculated misrepresentation of the violent act by our nation’s leaders. 
I make no excuses for our country’s failure of security and intelligence in this circumstance; although I don’t believe Obama’s administration intentionally mislead the American people. The fact remains we simply don’t know all the facts. 
On Jan. 23, Hillary Clinton made her long-awaited testimony regarding the Benghazi tragedy. She sat poised in front of Congress as she gave her opening statement. She spoke eloquently, answering each senator’s questions to the best of her ability, despite being aggressively challenged by them.
Not without many complaints from conservatives, Clinton had postponed the hearing until the end of January due to a concussion she suffered in December. Instead of appearing nervous before her peers, she wore a slight smile and nodded during many of their hostile inquiries.
She became emotional when describing her time with the victims’ families, showing her humility. During this tedious meeting, our secretary of state presented herself with class.
Without actually watching the testimony, a viewer may have found its essence insensitive and possibly offensive due to the sound bite repeatedly played on Fox News. After being excessively asked the reason for the attack, Clinton said, “What difference does it make?”
When I heard the sound bite for the first time, I cringed. By itself, it suggests investigating the cause of the attack would be pointless.
I have now heard the phrase numerous times followed by commentary including, “She appeared to indicate that it doesn’t matter who’s behind the attack,” from Sean Hannity.
Well, of course it makes a difference. The four victims’ families deserve to know who is responsible for the deaths, and the circumstances in which their lives were taken.
Looking at the bigger picture, it is essential to understand what happened and who was involved to prevent similar tragedies in the future.
We should certainly inquire about the events that left four American men dead and work to bring those to justice who acted so brutally.
If you listen to her entire response, you will hear what Clinton was really saying. “What difference, at this point, does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again.”
She said we should focus on finding the terrorists, discovering their motives in the process.
And that is exactly what the American people needed to hear, not a sound bite to be misconstrued for the conservative agenda.