Since I was watching CNN, most of the people there (who weren't pro Trump) said it was the White Nationalist's fault for having one of their own plowing into people as well as being "intimidating" due to their makeshift shields and weapons (and those with guns as well) which seems like they raring to fight (so they were most likely to be the instigators) and/or trying to intimidate the opposition (the photos show the shields), not go out and protest like a normal crowd. They are also W.N, and their particular brand of politics has been associated with violence towards others (KKK / neo nazis aren't the most peaceful bunch), so that increases the odds a tad bit.
I'm not totally sure where to side on this. On both days I haven't seen any sources actually INDICATE who started the riot, so I can't really put blame solely on one side in that regard.
However, the W.N were definitely armed with makeshift weapons to protect against attack so it seems like they were expecting violence.
On the other hand, we definitely have seen how pro-Trump crowds go when anti-Trumpers get involved
so that may be why they had weapons, to be safe against instigators.
And lets not forget that the leftist side wasn't completely unarmed, either (though not to the same degree at the pictures)
So at this point I decided to consider the information too inconclusive to derive any conclusion. All we have are pictures of people with and without weapons on both sides (one side more than the other [or so it may seem. There aren't any NUMBERS to that. so don't just assume the pictures paint an accurate picture]), video showing heated protests and anti-protests, and chaotic violence. We can only make a bunch of hypotheses of what is MOST LIKELY the root cause from that, not the definitive cause.
As for the car, he PROBABLY did commit domestic terrorism. It could've been road rage or something like that, buuut considering just how often I see leftists get hit by cars and what actually took place in the video, he likely did domestic terrorism. I can condemn him but I can't say he represents the totality of those sharing his ideology but instead see if there is a stemming problem in his ideology/crowd which may foster his decision, just as I would a Muslim.
So when I hear just about every CNN person ACTIVELY trash the protesters as if they were the sole instigators involved with undeniable proof, either they have some hidden spin objectives or they know things that I don't, in which case I would really like to see it. Sure, they can say bad about the car guy, but I would like that to be treated like they would Muslim terrorism and say "hey, until there is a clear cut linkage to this guy and the majority of people's opinion's there, we will focus on the bad THIS ONE GUY DID.
This brings us to Trump's statements/tweet. I feel like that is a statement I would've given (though for different reasons). Instead of just saying both sides are wrong, I would've said the only reason why I'm not harder on one side is because I don't know who instigated it. I would also make clear that my political views would be separate from my views on who did the wrong thing. Also, instead of tweeting, I would've just given what I'm writing now.