clipped from teh Google :
I agree with the position of Donald Trump Jr. (a surprise to me). The angry woman confronting her is not making a valid, rational argument "49 people died because of the rhetoric you put out there" is not true. It's to Clinton's credit that she shows restraint in the face of a direct personal attack. I believe she's doing all that can be done in that moment, to listen, absorb, be present, and importantly, not resist or defend or deflect the (unfair) criticism of the woman and others around her.
*****
When people are angry, that powerful emotion can swamp everything else, including the impetus to more effective responses to the original problem that fired the anger. I've been in the angry woman's shoes--IT SUCKS. I've responded inappropriately and ineffectively; sometimes those responses were uncontrollable and very, very satisfying. For getting shit done though, for solving the problem, it's the wrong approach. Sometimes you have to clear the fucking bench before you can make progress on building something better. Anger can do that. But anger doesn't build, it destroys.