Breaking: New Details on Trump Shooter Revealed

And right now, FBI Director Kash Patel is on Capitol Hill. So he is set to testify at the Senate Judiciary's annual oversight hearing. And senators certainly may question him about newly revealed FBI documents related to President Trump's would-be assassin, Thomas Crooks. James Galeano is on deck. But first, we go to David Spun. He's outside the hearing room with the latest details. Hi, David. Good morning. Hi, Dana. Hi, Bill. Good morning to you. The FBI director just sat down literally within the last three minutes. Today's a standard oversight hearing. It's going to be kind of a buffet of questions coming from senators both sides of the aisle. One topic we expect to hear is about weaponization. We'll get to the Thomas Crooks revelations in just a moment. But when it comes to weaponization, perceived weaponization, senators from each party are likely to blame the other party for this. For example, Republicans are expected to press Patel on the Biden administration and the perceived weaponization from the DOJ and FBI during investigations into President Trump. The two federal cases that were ultimately thrown out because of the Supreme Court and Democrats are likely, Dana, going to complain the FBI is reaching and doing whatever possible to go after the current president's perceived enemies, including former CIA Director John Brennan, former FBI Director James Comey, to name a few. Now, Brennan, we reported yesterday, has been subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury next month in Florida in a case being described, one that's investigating whether President Trump's civil rights were harmed during the Mar-a-Lago raid. Now, Comey has been charged twice by DOJ in the past year. It's also possible the director will be asked about some new information that's coming out this week about an anonymous donor that paid for the cremation of Thomas Crooks. The man, authorities say, shot and almost killed President Trump in 2024. Senator Chuck Grassley's team, he's the Senate judiciary chairman, is also learning that Crooks had packages of guns delivered to him under the pseudonym of Bob Dole. Now, Fox News is told more than two years later, family members were still surprised by his actions. And we are told that they are still no closer to finding an official motive in that case. Frustrating to many people who have questions two years later, but authorities still at this point do not have a motive at hand. Back to you. All right, David Spun, thank you so much. So let's bring in James Galeano, retired FBI agent, Fox News contributor. James, nice to see you again. I'll just read a couple of headlines from the New York Post. David was referring to some of them. It said, chilling new details about the Trump shooter Thomas Crooks revealed in the bombshell docs, emotionless since birth, it says screen left. On the right, it says cremation of would-be Trump assassin was paid for by an anonymous donor. Can you figure out some clues on this right now, two years later? Yeah, Bill and Dana, good to join you. First of all, we looked at this assassination attempt, which was just over two years ago in Butler, Pennsylvania, when Donald Trump was a presidential candidate. We looked at it as an ushering in an era of assassination culture, whether it's Luigi Mangione, the number of attempts on the president's life since then, as well as Tyler Robinson in the Charlie Kirk case. However, the documents that are being released right now to the Senate Judiciary Committee tell a different story. The FBI conducts interviews, testimonial evidence on a document called an FD-302. Two days after that ill-fated attempt to take out the president in Butler, where a firefighter lost his life tragically, we have learned that the parents have basically painted this chilling portrait of their son, basically emotionless since birth, lived in relative isolationism. And Bill, to your point, did some quirky things regarding privacy, had a huge obsession with weapons and had packages delivered to his home using the pseudonym of a former Senate majority leader who served in the Reagan administration and the Clinton administration. Really interesting new details. All right. One of the questions that David brought up at the end there is that we're two and a half, well, two and a bit years since that assassination attempt. And we have these new details, but we still don't have any sort of motive. What does it take for the FBI to find a motive? I understand that sometimes it might be very clear, like somebody leaves a note, somebody writes it. But at this point, what would it take for the FBI to say, aha, now we have a motive? Yeah, it's a great question, Dana. I mean, first of all, you know, for the viewers, you don't need a body, you don't need a weapon, and you don't need a motive to prove a crime. We know that Thomas Crooks is the one that took the shot that hit the president in the ear in Butler, Pennsylvania. A Secret Service counter-assault team member took him out with a sniper shot. And the clues in regards to his motive, his ideology, it's been long discussed. He did not appear to be somebody that was radicalized, didn't pay a lot of attention to politics or have an ideological bent. That's what makes this so disturbing. Do you need a motive? No, you don't. But it helps us understand to prevent the next one. I think that's what's so beguiling right now. Okay, you know, listening to all of this, it feels like a case that's gone cold. And when you think about a major assassination attempt against a leading presidential candidate, that just cannot be. I mean, you've got so much knowledge and history and experience, James. What would explain a case gone cold like this? Well, Bill, what you're describing right there is the fact that digital exhaust exists for all of us. We're on our phones, we're on our iPads, we're going past flock cameras, license plate readers. We use our easy passes. It's impossible to move around in the 21st century without giving off some type of digital exhaust. Now, Thomas Crooks did emit some digital exhaust, but the FBI to this date has not been able to determine that he was in some kind of radicalization mode, where he was in chat rooms or he was saying radicalized ideas or hanging out with individuals that had radicalized ideas. Remember, the family points out he was buried deep in isolationism. So you could still argue he could be online. You know, that's sometimes difficult to get to the bottom of with encryption and things like that. But, Bill, your point's well taken. How do we not know? We still don't know about the shooter out there in Las Vegas back in 2017, Stephen Paddock. Why did he kill all those people at a country concert? Still no motive. It's not always easy, and sometimes you just can't figure out why bad people do bad things. Can I just ask one last quick question? Regarding the anonymous donor to pay for the cremation, do you think that is suspicious or just perhaps somebody trying to do the family a good deed? Dana, it could be the latter. But I also think in today's day and age, people like to make political points. Somebody could be angry at President Trump and figure out this was a way to do something to stick it to him. But we don't have any details. Nothing I've heard suggests that this person who's anonymous did it for any other reason. They were just trying to be a benefactor to the family and help them out in a tough time. The family's not at fault here. Thomas Crooks is. Thank you, James. We'll see what else comes out, maybe in this hearing, maybe not. We'll stand by for that. Thank you for coming on, James. Thanks, guys.