If not legally, aka obama was morally duty-bound not to leave the Americans in Benghazi in the lurch (especially the four who lost their lives). He (or his string-pulling puppeteer, Jarrett of the face of bat) actively denied their rescue attempt, which was already automatically immediately underway. This flouts basic moral decency and all military tradition unless the lives of many more American citizens (at home or abroad) were immediately and directly at stake. There is absolutely no evidence of this or even the slightest reasonable supposition of any justifying circumstance of any kind.
An honest investigation would likely reveal that the Benghazi betrayal was done to enable our enemies to succeed in capturing ambassador Stevens, either to trade him later for the Blind Sheik or to kill him outright in order to cover aka obama’s tracks in supplying weapons to our enemies in Syria or elsewhere. While the simple act of denying a rescue attempt might not by itself be treason, when coupled with the reason behind the denial, it most certainly is.
Even the most addle-brained leftist Kool-Aid drinker can’t help but see that the rescue denial was an extreme act of self-serving cowardice in an attempt sweep under the carpet and hide that aka obama was “adhering to [the USA’s] Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort” (i.e., TREASON).
By the way, this kind of treason is normally punishable by the death, but I, for one, would be perfectly satisfied to see aka obama just sentenced to do five to ten years of really hard time in the electric chair (I’d even allow the power to be shut off during non-business hours out of deference to the loony leftist greenies).
so he didn’t plan it just to watch people die?
It's bigger. No way Obama, Clinton and Jarrett did what they did for a mere 'supplying weapons to our enemies' stint... Sorry, just not possible.