My mistake, apparently. I'm about a week behind. According to this Guardian article, the FBI agents were able to recently gain access for a 24 hour window when the US Military airlifted them in.
Who said that there were monstrously wrong questions at the hearing?
I'm well aware of the human lives involved.
From the Politico article on Cummings letter to Issa:
In a letter to Issa Thursday, Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings criticized the California Republican’s handling of the probe into the September attacks that killed Christopher Stevens, the U.S. ambassador to Libya, and three diplomatic aides.
Specifically, Cummings complained that no classified briefing was held for lawmakers on the Oversight panel – giving them no guidance as to what information was classified and what was not. He also repeated an accusation that Issa withheld key documents from Democrats on the panel before Wednesday’s hearing – which Cummings called “premature, counter-productive and potentially damaging.”
“I have grave concerns about the way [Wednesday’s] hearing devolved into a disorganized, partisan, and absurd spectacle when it should have been a serious and responsible investigation of the attack in Benghazi that killed Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans,” Cummings wrote to Issa.
Still not buying that, Merc. Not for a second.
Technically, Ad Hominem attacks are covered under the rules of Etiquette - rule 5a.
On their own (providing they're not abusive or flame-baiting, etc.) - Etiquette violations are fairly minor.
As they're also a form of logical fallacy - for the purposes of debate - then I'm personally fine with just pointing out when they're being made against me.
That said - I think it's indicative that the conversation isn't going along particularly constructive lines.