That's false. Whataboutism, in its traditional and non-negative sense, is the long-standing assurance of equal-enough application of the law as a defense agains

That's false. Whataboutism, in its traditional and non-negative sense, is the long-standing assurance of equal-enough application of the law as a defense against Bananaism. See, I can make up truly stupid neologisms as well. But at least mine isn't an effort to subvert foundational democratic norms. Because unequal application of the law isn't law. Whataboutism's necessity increases as the parties and potential charges under scrutiny are ever more alike. In Whataboutism's novel sense, it is a brain-dead effort to try to get away using the law as a politicized cudgel. You can tell by the need to invent a new word in order to describe an old concept. Insofar as their is not any legal jeopardy involved, my explanation still applies however adjusted.