Miranda Devine: Unpacking Trump Shooting Mystery

The Lingering Questions After the Trump Assassination Attempt

Thomas Crooks' attack on former President Donald Trump at a Pennsylvania rally last July sent shockwaves across the nation. While the FBI has concluded the 20-year-old acted alone, lingering questions about his motives and online radicalization continue to fuel public debate. New York Post columnist Miranda Devine recently joined "America Reports" to examine these unsettling gaps in the official narrative.

"His radicalization, violent rhetoric and obsession with political violence were all documented under his real name. The threat wasn’t hidden."

According to Devine's analysis, which draws on digital records obtained by investigators, Crooks underwent a significant ideological shift over several years. His online posts evolved from pro-Trump sentiment to increasingly anti-Trump rhetoric, with documented expressions of rage targeting both political parties. This digital trail, discovered across over 25 social media and forum accounts, contradicts the FBI's initial assessment that Crooks followed "no particular ideology."

Official Findings vs. Digital Evidence

The FBI's exhaustive investigation involved 480 agents, 1,000+ interviews, and analysis of half a million digital files. Director Kash Patel confirmed their conclusion: Crooks planned and executed the attack alone, with no accomplices or prior discussions of his intentions. Yet discrepancies persist between this official stance and the digital evidence uncovered by Devine's sources.

"The internet is too big of a place," former Secret Service agent Bill Gage noted, suggesting Crooks was a "mentally ill loner that slipped through the cracks." While authorities found no criminal history or documented mental illness, Crooks had legally purchased the murder weapon (registered to his father in 2013) and left a chilling message on the gaming platform Steam: "July 13 will be my premiere, watch as it unfolds."

Transparency Concerns and Conspiracy Theories

Devine's commentary highlights a critical issue: the lack of transparency has allowed conspiracy theories to flourish. While the FBI found no evidence of foreign involvement or coordinated plots, unanswered questions about Crooks' rapid ideological shift and specific targeting remain. His online searches before the attack included "Trump," "Biden," "when is DNC convention," and "July 13 Trump rally"—suggesting political intent despite the lone wolf conclusion.

The attack left Corey Comperatore dead and two others critically injured, while Trump himself was grazed by a bullet. Devine argues that releasing more information could quell speculation and provide closure to the victims' families. Without it, the vacuum is filled with unverified theories that obscure the real issues of online radicalization and security failures.

Moving Forward: Lessons from the Butler Rally

As the nation processes this near-catastrophic event, Devine's analysis underscores the need for greater scrutiny of digital spaces. The documented visibility of Crooks' violent rhetoric challenges the notion that such threats remain hidden. "The danger Crooks posed was visible for years," her source emphasized, raising urgent questions about social media monitoring and early intervention protocols.

While the FBI maintains Crooks acted alone, Devine's reporting suggests a more complex picture—one that demands further investigation into the intersection of online radicalization and political violence. Only with complete transparency can authorities address the vulnerabilities that allowed this tragedy to unfold.