Staff Reports
Judicial Watch says new FBI records — produced only after a lawsuit — show the Butler, Pennsylvania shooter had an altercation with people described as Trump supporters and made hostile comments toward President Trump just before opening fire. The FBI has pushed back hard, calling Judicial Watch’s public take “click bait.” The truth matters here: Americans deserve a clear account of what warning signs were missed, and who is shading the facts.
What Judicial Watch Says About the FBI Records
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton says the FOIA fight forced the FBI to turn over 37 heavily redacted pages. According to Judicial Watch, the documents include witness notes and reports that a “suspicious person” was on site before the shooting. They claim the records also describe an altercation between the shooter, Thomas Matthew Crooks, and a group identified as Trump supporters, and that Crooks made hostile comments toward President Trump minutes before firing. Fitton’s statement was blunt: it shouldn’t have taken a federal lawsuit to learn this, and the documents are “disturbing and astonishing.”
FBI Pushback: “CLICK BAIT LIE,” Says the Bureau
The FBI did not sit quietly. Its Rapid Response account pushed back, saying Judicial Watch’s public claims mischaracterize what was produced. The bureau argues some of the pages are interviews conducted by college instructors, not contemporaneous law-enforcement reports. In plain English: both sides are pointing to the same redacted file and telling very different stories about what it actually proves. That means the dispute is active and far from settled.
What Is Verified and What Remains Unclear
Some facts are not in dispute. The rooftop attack at the Butler rally happened; Crooks opened fire, President Trump was grazed, a bystander died and others were injured, and law enforcement ultimately neutralized the shooter. Previous reporting and released bodycam and video footage show officers had points of contact with Crooks before the shooting. But whether these newly produced FBI pages show clear, contemporaneous warnings that were ignored — or whether they are secondhand recollections and instructor interviews — is the exact point of contention. We cannot treat an activist group’s reading of redacted pages as gospel without the full record.
Why This Matters: Transparency, Safety, and Accountability
This is about public safety and public trust. If there were actionable warnings that law enforcement missed, Americans need to know who dropped the ball and why. If the FBI’s characterization is correct and the records aren’t what Fitton claims, the bureau should say so and show the evidence. It’s not enough to hurl “click bait” accusations and leave citizens squinting at black boxes. Congress, the Justice Department, and local law enforcement should push for full, unredacted disclosure where possible, release relevant FD-302s, radio logs, and bodycam footage, and answer straightforward questions about the timeline.
Call it oversight or call it common sense: when an attempt on a President’s life happens and redacted files surface only after a lawsuit, Americans should expect clarity — fast. Until the full records are available and independently reviewed, this will remain a he-said, she-said fight where the public loses. Demand the documents. Demand answers. And demand that the agencies charged with keeping us safe stop playing hide-and-seek with the facts.
