In his statements, he came a hair’s width from condemning his grandfather. He actively refused to support him.
The fact that he stood with those who want to rewrite history and did not correct them in any way demonstrates that he is at a minimum a political pawn for their ends (which is what the article says).
Opinions and posteriors, you know the drill.
A hair’s width when viewed with a different view looks like a power pole.
By not addressing the issue by all sides the assumption is that the one not there has something to hide or is embarrassed to be there, in such prolonging all of the perceived things those in attendance use to justify their opinion.