Thanks for the nice "whataboutism" example. Bonus points for obviously being smart enough to get the point, but missing it on purpose just to do the whataboutism routine.
Not whataboutism, although I credit it may look that way if you tilt your head and squint.
If someone says, “Trump is a criminal,’ and I say, “Yes, but what about her emails,” that’s the canonical whataboutism. I’m trying to justify Mr. Trump’s wrongdoings and/or deflect from discussing them.
Now consider is someone says, “Mr. Trump is not up to the Ethical standard of US Presidents,’ and I reply, “What about Richard Nixon?”
That has the same words, but a different semantic meaning. I am not saying, “Mr. Trump is fine, because Nixon.’ Nor am I trying to have a long discussion about Nixon that deflects from a discussion about Trump. I’m saying, “Check your presumption that US Presidents have some kind of ethical standard, and here is a counterexample.”
If someone says, “Trump is a criminal,’ and I say, “Yes, but what about her emails,” that’s the canonical whataboutism. I’m trying to justify Mr. Trump’s wrongdoings and/or deflect from discussing them.
Now consider is someone says, “Mr. Trump is not up to the Ethical standard of US Presidents,’ and I reply, “What about Richard Nixon?”
That has the same words, but a different semantic meaning. I am not saying, “Mr. Trump is fine, because Nixon.’ Nor am I trying to have a long discussion about Nixon that deflects from a discussion about Trump. I’m saying, “Check your presumption that US Presidents have some kind of ethical standard, and here is a counterexample.”