In response to Clinton's charge that Obama is distorting her position on NAFTA, he said
"The truth is that Sen. Clinton supported NAFTA before she ran for president. That is indisupatable. She called it 'a victory' in her book. She told people it has proved its worth. T hose are facts."
She did call it a victory. But that doesn't mean she supported the trade deal. Sure, for most people, claims of victory are associated with support for the outcome, but if you parse the language very carefully, that's not a guaranteed conclusion. In the narrowest reading, "victory" simply means that the legislation passed (presumably against some opposition) and nothing more.
Salespeople take advantage of presumed inference all the time. Why not Hillary as well?