It could also just be a poor choice of words, for which the charitable interpretation is that he's explaining. Let's say, hypothetically, that he uses the word

It could also just be a poor choice of words, for which the charitable interpretation is that he's explaining. Let's say, hypothetically, that he uses the word "understandably" instead. Would you consider that explaining or rationalizing? If you would consider that explaining, then maybe he just chose his adverb poorly. If you would consider that rationalizing, then I don't think there's a charitable framing of the point that you would accept as just explaining. People here clearly disagree, which is fine. However, I'm seeing a lot of the unnecessary habit of discourse where people are trying to frame a disagreement as moral high/low ground.