The contrast presented here between the OBL raid and Benghazi is illiuminating. As Schmitt points out, When it came to the OBL raid, President Obama was all I, me, me, my. He made it crystal clear who was in charge then. And for all of the shocking revelations that we have heard so far about the administration's behavior, Schmitt's right; this one hasn't been answered:
But the very fact that the White House and the administration have been reluctant to provide this information (and, indeed, seem to be passing the buck on who did what and when) raises another possibility: that the president was not carrying out his responsibilities as commander in chief. Yet whether distracted by the upcoming election, calls to the Israeli prime minister, or prepping for a fundraiser the next day in Las Vegas, presidents don’t get to delegate that power, even to a secretary of defense. So, the night of September 11 comes down to this: was the president in charge—or not? The Constitution makes it clear, he must be.
A familiar phrase comes in to play here; "what did the President know and when did he know it?" Obama's face tightened during one of the debates when Mitt Romney pointed out he flew the next day to a Las Vegas fundraiser. If the media was actually covering this story as the very real scandal it is, they might ask; was the President in charge? Or was he packing for Vegas?