Looks pretty damning to me.
Why? To whom? Certainly not Hillary or Obama, they would point to this memo and say, in effect, " I am entitled to rely on what the open source document recapitulation tells me."
If one wants to make an argument that the agency responsible for creating this memo is at fault, that is an entirely different matter. Then we have an argument that Obama and Clinton were negligent in their supervision of the State Department. We have already seen openly published travel advisory issued by the State Department itself which says:
...violent crime continues to be a problem in Tripoli, Benghazi, and other parts of the country. In particular, armed carjacking and robbery are on the rise. In addition, political violence, including car bombings in Tripoli and assassinations of military officers and alleged former regime officials in Benghazi, has increased. Inter-militia conflict can erupt at any time or any place in the country. Seven Iranian Red Crescent officials were kidnapped July 31 in Benghazi by local militia members, and as of the date of this warning, they have not been released. There have also been several reports of militias briefly apprehending and detaining foreigners....
(Hat tip to not2worry for providing this information here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2930218/posts). There have been, of course, other revelations about knowledge of the danger which can be imputed to Clinton and Obama.
One could rightly point to the State Department's own state of information as expressed in this travel warning to fault Hillary, and by extension, Obama for failing to draw the obvious conclusions. The memorandum which this article cites, on the other hand, would no doubt be cited by Hillary and Obama to the effect that they were not warned of danger in Benghazi but quite reasonably relied on contrary intelligence. Recall when George Bush was criticized for accepting faulty intelligence from the head of the CIA who stood in front of the president in the Oval Office and said, referring to the alleged existence of weapons of mass distraction in Iraq, "it is a slam dunk." We conservatives said that Bush was entitled to rely on that representation.