I don't know why we would expect the coverage of Trump's shadiness to be even remotely close to that of Clinton's emails. The email business was the focus of a protracted, carefully timed, very public and v. high-profile investigation, it was constantly used in Trump's attacks against Clinton, it was easy to package ("Clinton was careless with classified information") and it was linked to another high-profile matter ("Clinton's carelessness with classified information was exploited by terrorists to kill Americans"). Trump's shenanigans, in contrast, were the subject of investigative reporting from a few traditional news sources, were boring and difficult to explain, were not as recent and were not used in focused attacks nearly as frequently as his other shenanigans were. I'm not sure but I also got the impression news providers may have been hesitant to cover some of those stories out of fear of being exposed to legal action. The anti-Trump social media coverage focused on racism, misogyny, douchebaggery and Putinism but with all the other shit he was throwing out every individual lump of doodoo got pretty little coverage in comparison to Clinton's emails.
Obviously v limited but interesting nonetheless:
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politi...an-front-pages