Two things: first, I was drawing--or at least intending to draw--comparisons of these scandals based on the severity of the consequences rather than any material corroboration of the scandal stories. Benghazi was quite obviously much more serious than this discrepancy. My overall point was really that if Benghazi and any of the other myriad scandals which this administration has survived didn't amount to all that much then this Bin Laden story is not going to amount to anything at all because it is less of a big deal in the first place...because, you know, he's still maggot food.
Second, the administration continued to lie about the cause of the attack well after it had come to light. Your initial line of defense, i.e. " the best analysis that the intelligence community could provide at the time. It later came to light...." smacks very much of the whole Iraq War line "the intelligence at the time said...."
It may be true, but it doesn't smell very clean. Regardless of my personal feelings on that topic, the fact of the matter is that the administration DID continue to publicly lie about the cause of the attacks after it had come to light that they were not spontaneous. That is a scandal regardless. Sticking to a known lie? Come on.
Either way, it doesn't matter very much because this OBL scandal doesn't have legs.
Now, if he were alive and well eating peanut butter and banana sandwiches with the King somewhere then that would be a huuuuuuuge deal. But he's not, and it's not.