"this is clearly a Clinton smear job using snopes as a vehicle."

Which statements in particular are incorrect?

On the contrary, from what I read they go out of their way to note that criminal defendants have the right to a vigorous defense, and that there was nothing unethical about Hillary providing one.

"Now, as I explained here, there was nothing wrong, unethical or hypocritical about Clinton’s work in this case. Her laughter in the interview is a little unsettling, but Hillary’s laughter is often unsettling. She did her job as a defense lawyer. The accusation that what she did was unethical is ignorant..."

They are objecting to the Snopes spin, not the actions of Clinton herself.

Edit to include the salient point:

The original assertion was that "Hillary Clinton successfully defended an accused child rapist and later laughed about the case".

Snopes rates this "mostly false", when it appears to actually be 100% true.