No, it's just what you choose to hear because it suits your purpose.
Someone had just been killed and people were looking for justice, and his response was "There are fine people on both sides." It was a weak, flaccid, prevarication when people were looking for actual leadership.
He was too cowardly to say anything more forceful because he knew it would cause him to lose standing with some of his supporters, so he tried to weasel out of it. It was a moment that spoke volumes about what he truly values, and THAT is why people were angry.
Exactly that has been repeatedly claimed, even by the current President.
> But as usual, his response to a hate crime was to paint it as: there were violent people on both sides and good people on both sides. Which implicitly means, there is blame to go around and I am not going to condemn any one side more than the other.
That’s not what he said at all. He was referring to the debate on unilaterally tearing down statues without any process or forum.
And after what happened in 2020 with nut jobs tearing down statues of Lincoln I’d say he was right.