i guess if someone kills another person by shooting him, she would say he died of internal injuries... or if someone died because he was shot in the head, she would say he died of brain trauma...
yes--physically, those things are true--along with the smoke inhalation... but that has nothing to do with whether or not he was murdered... there are numerous ways to be murdered... why doesn't anybody point this out to her?
IOW—NO ONE should be held accountable for ANYTHING bad that happens, especially if they belong to the Dim party!
I think she is narrowing her definition to the extent someone had to deliberately plot and execute the death. In her mind the way Benghazi played out does not rise to that level. The problem is, it’s in her mind and we do not have all the facts. Those seem to be hard to come by with this administration.
Oh . . . and there are two levels we need to look at: The ones who actually killed our brave Americans, and the ones whose negligence allowed it to happen. But . . . in order to avoid doing what the left does, namely saying, “Stupid!” when someone says something objectionable, we should at least listen to Clift as if to comprehend where she is coming from. I tend to operate with a fairly narrow definition of murder.
i guess if someone kills another person by shooting him, she would say he died of internal injuries... or if someone died because he was shot in the head, she would say he died of brain trauma...
Most likely she would say they were killed by the evil gun.