Maybe you should have read it before you linked to it?
"Findings
I. In assessing military posture in anticipation of the September 11 anniversary, White
House officials failed to comprehend or ignored the dramatically deteriorating security
situation in Libya and the growing threat to U.S. interests in the region. Official public
statements seem to have exaggerated the extent and rigor of the security assessment
conducted at the time.
II. U.S. personnel in Benghazi were woefully vulnerable in September 2012 because a.) the
administration did not direct a change in military force posture, b.) there was no
intelligence of a specific “imminent” threat in Libya, and c.) the Department of State,
which has primary responsibility for diplomatic security, favored a reduction of
Department of Defense security personnel in Libya before the attack.
III. Defense Department officials believed nearly from the outset of violence in Benghazi
that it was a terrorist attack rather than a protest gone awry, and the President
subsequently permitted the military to respond with minimal direction...."