ummm... no. No we can not. I just pointed out how nearly everyone was against Clinton's pardons but the one term former president still holds power and his followers still believe he will be supreme leader yet again. Not even close to the same thing in any way, shape, or form.
At least Hillary had the cajones to take responsibility for Benghazi over and over and over and over and over and over and over and even under oath. Even when those Americans in Benghazi said they did not need any extra security. Hillary still took personal responsibility. But, yeah, totally the former one term golfer in chief is so much better......
I think you missed the point of the quote, which was the POTUS saying that the current treatment of the Uigyurs (which has been characterized as a genocide by many in the international community) could be chalked up to a "difference in cultural norms."
Speaking of Benghazi, wasn't a guy basically railroaded into prison under the lie that his film somehow caused the uproar, and the then current Administration waited for hours with forces staged and ready and deploy, but just didn't pull the trigger?
Well, we are back in the bombing business, again. Not that people don't need to be bombed, just pointing of the double standard.
In 2017, after strikes in Syria, a person tweeted, "What is the legal basis for these strikes? Assad is a brutal dictator, but Syria is a sovereign country."
In 2018, after strikes in Syria, another person tweeted, "...But I am deeply concerned about the legal rationale of last night’s strikes."
In 2019, after military action in Syria, still another person tweeted, "...discussing [the President's] recent actions in Syria and how his erratic, impulsive decisions endanger our troops and make us all less safe."