Whataboutism

I have been having discussions about Whataboutism mainly as it relares to Trump/Obama/HRC Some of my research refers to it as a version of Tu quoque or the Appeal to hypocrisy fallacy. It don't see these fallacies in a search. An example is

A: Trump is a narcissist
B: Obama and all other presidents were narcissists
A: so you agree he is a narcissist

A: I don't like Trump using Executive Orders it's not constitutional
B: look at all the EO' Obama used they were unconstitutional
A: Then you are Ok with Trump issuing EO even though they are unconstitutional.

Is Whataboutism a logical fallacy?

This is from my website,

Whataboutery. People are called out on their "whataboutery" when they point out hypocrisy. For example, if a father tells his child not to smoke, and the child says "what about you? You smoke several packs a day!" The argument is that one shouldn't smoke, not that the one making the argument is exempt from that rule. So a "what about you" response does not address the argument, thus, is fallacious. However, it is a valid question that does warrant a response. Perhaps the father would respond "I am an idiot with no self-control." But if the father simply responded "that's 'whataboutery,'" it would be akin to the fallacy fallacy, where the implication is that because the response is a fallacy, then it must be incorrect, unreasonable, or undeserving of a response. This is a deflection and an argumentative cop out. Feel free to point out the whataboutery, but respond to the accusation and don't stop dialog because you have your opponent on a technicality.