It's been 1 year since Trump was shot in Butler, Pa. Did the assassination attempt 'change' him?
'I didn't know exactly what was going on,' the president recalled last week in an interview with his daughter-in-law, Lara Trump. 'I got whacked. There's no question about that. And fortunately, I got down quickly.'
A lot has changed since Trump managed to get back up that day.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk endorsed him within the hour, then donated more than $250 million to a super-PAC supporting his candidacy. A week later, Trump's Democratic opponent, Joe Biden, ended his reelection campaign, becoming the only president in U.S. history to surrender his party's nomination after winning its primary. Four months later, Trump defeated Biden's replacement, Vice President Kamala Harris, by about 2 million votes.
Now, in the spot where an official portrait of former President Barack Obama once hung, every visitor to the Grand Foyer of the White House passes a painting of Trump rising to his feet in Butler and imploring the crowd to 'fight, fight, fight.' A similar image adorned Trump's recent limited-edition sneaker drop ($299), and those three words double as the name of one of his new fragrances ($199).
'It was a scary time, and it changed everything for us,' White House chief of staff Susie Wiles recently told the New York Post.
But has Trump himself changed since the shooting? And if so, how?
In the aftermath of last year's assassination attempt, the president and his allies repeatedly promised a new Trump.
'Getting shot in the face changes a man,' conservative pundit Tucker Carlson insisted at the time.
'He's changed and we're all freaking out,' a source close to Trump told Vanity Fair. 'He was like, 'Holy shit, that was close.' He feels blessed.' At the time, GOP officials described him as 'emotional,' 'serene,' 'existential' — even 'spiritual.'
With the Republican National Convention just days away, Trump 'put the word out that he [didn't] want any talk of revenge or retaliation in speeches or anywhere else,' a Republican close to the campaign told VF. Trump then went on to claim, in an interview with the New York Post, that 'I had all prepared an extremely tough speech, really good, all about the corrupt, horrible [Biden] administration. But I threw it away.
'I want to try to unite our country,' Trump continued. 'But I don't know if that's possible. People are very divided.'
Yet when he took the stage in Milwaukee to accept his party's nomination, Trump couldn't help but stray from his new script to complain about 'crazy Nancy Pelosi ... destroying our country' and Democrats 'cheating on elections.'
Finally — about halfway through the nearly 100-minute speech, after lengthy digressions on the border 'invasion' and Hungary's Viktor Orbán — Trump attacked his opponent by name.
'If you took the 10 worst presidents in the history of the United States and added them up, they will not have done the damage that Biden has done,' he said. 'I will only use the name once... Biden.'
Trump's convention speech was an early sign that his tone, at least, wouldn't be changing. And true to form, the president has continued to blame Biden and demonize Democrats well into his second term. He has also continued to commemorate national holidays by attacking his perceived enemies on Truth Social.
'Happy Memorial Day to all, including the scum that spent the last four years trying to destroy our country through warped radical left minds,' Trump wrote in May. 'Hopefully the United States Supreme Court, and other good and compassionate judges throughout the land, will save us from the decisions of the monsters who want our country to go to hell,' he added.
Revenge and retaliation still seem to be on the table as well. To pick just one example, the New York Times reported last week that the Secret Service had former FBI Director James Comey followed by law enforcement officers in unmarked cars and street clothes after Trump recently accused Comey of threatening his life with an Instagram photo of seashells.
Finally, and most consequentially, Trump's actual politics don't seem to have shifted either.
Before Butler, for instance, Trump confirmed in an interview with Time magazine that he was planning 'a massive deportation of people' using 'local law enforcement' and the National Guard — and 'if they weren't able to,' he added, 'then I'd use [other parts of] the military.'
His inspiration, he said at the time, was the 'Eisenhower model' — a reference to President Dwight D. Eisenhower's 1954 campaign, known by the ethnic slur 'Operation Wetback,' to round up and expel Mexican immigrants in what amounted to a nationwide 'show me your papers' rule.
Trump has since done just that in Los Angeles — even though far more Americans say they disapprove (50%) than approve (36%) of his actions there, according to the latest Yahoo/YouGov poll.
One of the only major policy areas where Trump has changed his mind since the shooting is cryptocurrency. 'I am not a fan of Bitcoin and other Cryptocurrencies, which are not money, and whose value is highly volatile and based on thin air,' he said in a series of social media posts in 2019. 'Unregulated Crypto Assets can facilitate unlawful behavior, including drug trade and other illegal activity.'
Bitcoin 'just seems like a scam,' Trump added in 2021; cryptocurrencies are a 'disaster waiting to happen.'
'I think they should regulate them very, very high,' he concluded.
But the fact that Trump has done the opposite since returning to office probably has less to do with last year's brush with mortality than with his family's new $1 billion crypto empire.
Last summer, Vanity Fair asked whether Trump's 'chastening' was a 'short-term response to a near-death experience' or 'smart politics?'
'Would a reformed Trump replace his extreme policies with a moderate agenda?' the outlet continued. 'And would Trump, who has spoken ominously of seeking vengeance and retribution if elected, suddenly temper those dark impulses?'
One year later, it seems the answer is no.
Yet there is one thing about Trump that does seem to have changed, according to those around him: He now feels empowered to follow his own instincts in a way he didn't during his first term as president.
In a National Review interview published to coincide with the release of her new book, Butler: The Untold Story of the Near Assassination of Donald Trump and the Fight for America's Heartland, Washington Examiner reporter Salena Zito — who is often described as a 'Trump whisperer' of sorts — recalls how the president started attributing his survival to the 'hand of God' in their post-Butler conversations.
'He has this recognition that, in that moment and from that moment on, God was watching him, and that there was a reason that he didn't die,' Zito says. '[He's] very much the same person, but [he's changed] even in the way that he handles the urgency of what he wants to accomplish. ... He is on a mission to do as much as he can because he was saved in that moment.'
If true, nothing demonstrates this dynamic like Trump's second-term tariff strategy.
Import taxes aren't a new obsession for Trump. 'I believe very strongly in tariffs,' he told journalist Diane Sawyer in 1988, nearly 30 years before his first presidential run. 'America is being ripped off. We're a debtor nation, and we have to tax, we have to tariff, we have to protect this country.'
Trump has long insisted (contra nearly all mainstream economists) that universal tariffs will level the proverbial playing field by incentivizing companies to retain American workers and ramp up U.S. manufacturing — all while funneling 'trillions' of dollars in new revenue to the federal government.
But after fitfully pursuing these ideas during his first term — his advisers mostly objected — the president is now putting his pet theories fully into practice, launching trade wars with allies and adversaries alike.
Enabled by the loyalists he's surrounded himself with — and liberated by the fact that he isn't allowed to run again in 2028 — Trump has taken a similar you-only-live-once approach on deportation, Iran, the courts and the federal government itself.
Ultimately, the shooting has 'made [Trump] more aggressive,' Republican Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida told Time magazine last week. 'It actually did define him in the presidency.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
16 Red States Where Energy Costs Could Go Up the Most Under Trump's ‘One Big Beautiful Bill'
President Donald Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' (OBBB) was signed into law on July 4. The final legislation has significant repercussions for energy. It includes policies that will increase oil and gas leasing and repeal clean energy tax credits. Wholesale electricity prices are expected to increase 25% by 2030 and 74% by 2035. Electricity rates paid by consumers are expected to increase between 9% and 18% and household energy costs are anticipated to go up $170 annually by 2035. Find Out: Read Next: Red states could be hit harder by rising energy costs than blue states chiefly because Republican-led states generally don't have their own policies to develop renewable energy in the way that Democrat-led states do. A new analysis by the Energy Innovation Policy & Technology, LLC found the 16 red states that will see the biggest annual increases to household energy costs by 2035 as a result of the OBBB. 16. Wisconsin Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$300 Learn More: 12. Utah Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$320 12. Nevada Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$320 12. Michigan Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$320 12. Indiana Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$340 11. Iowa Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$350 10. Kansas Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$380 8. Florida Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$430 8. Arkansas Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$430 7. Louisiana Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$440 6. Texas Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$480 5. North Carolina Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$490 4. Oklahoma Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$540 2. South Carolina Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$630 2. Kentucky Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$630 1. Missouri Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$640 More From GOBankingRates 3 Luxury SUVs That Will Have Massive Price Drops in Summer 2025 The 10 Most Reliable SUVs of 2025 6 Popular SUVs That Aren't Worth the Cost -- and 6 Affordable Alternatives This article originally appeared on 16 Red States Where Energy Costs Could Go Up the Most Under Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill'
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Western aid cuts cede ground to China in Southeast Asia: study
China is set to expand its influence over Southeast Asia's development as the Trump administration and other Western donors slash aid, a study by an Australian think tank said Sunday. The region is in an "uncertain moment", facing cuts in official development finance from the West as well as "especially punitive" US trade tariffs, the Sydney-based Lowy Institute said. "Declining Western aid risks ceding a greater role to China, though other Asian donors will also gain in importance," it said. Total official development finance to Southeast Asia -- including grants, low-rate loans and other loans -- grew "modestly" to US$29 billion in 2023, the annual report said. But US President Donald Trump has since halted about US$60 billion in development assistance -- most of the United States' overseas aid programme. Seven European countries -- including France and Germany -- and the European Union have announced US$17.2 billion in aid cuts to be implemented between 2025 and 2029, it said. And the United Kingdom has said it is reducing annual aid by US$7.6 billion, redirecting government money towards defence. Based on recent announcements, overall official development finance to Southeast Asia will fall by more than US$2 billion by 2026, the study projected. "These cuts will hit Southeast Asia hard," it said. "Poorer countries and social sector priorities such as health, education, and civil society support that rely on bilateral aid funding are likely to lose out the most." Higher-income countries already capture most of the region's official development finance, said the institute's Southeast Asia Aid Map report. Poorer countries such as East Timor, Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar are being left behind, creating a deepening divide that could undermine long-term stability, equity and resilience, it warned. Despite substantial economic development across most of Southeast Asia, around 86 million people still live on less than US$3.65 a day, it said. - 'Global concern' - "The centre of gravity in Southeast Asia's development finance landscape looks set to drift East, notably to Beijing but also Tokyo and Seoul," the study said. As trade ties with the United States have weakened, Southeast Asian countries' development options could shrink, it said, leaving them with less leverage to negotiate favourable terms with Beijing. "China's relative importance as a development actor in the region will rise as Western development support recedes," it said. Beijing's development finance to the region rose by US$1.6 billion to US$4.9 billion in 2023 -- mostly through big infrastructure projects such as rail links in Indonesia and Malaysia, the report said. At the same time, China's infrastructure commitments to Southeast Asia surged fourfold to almost US$10 billion, largely due to the revival of the Kyaukphyu Deep Sea Port project in Myanmar. By contrast, Western alternative infrastructure projects had failed to materialise in recent years, the study said. "Similarly, Western promises to support the region's clean energy transition have yet to translate into more projects on the ground -- of global concern given coal-dependent Southeast Asia is a major source of rapidly growing carbon emissions." djw/dgi/dhw/rsc Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
New York Post
27 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump's party-splitting Epstein dilemma: Letters to the Editor — July 21, 2025
The Issue: President Trump's response to criticism of the Justice Department's Jeffrey Epstein findings. Take a breath, and consider these facts: The Biden administration had access to whatever Jeffrey Epstein documents existed for the entire time that it was in office (''Epstein hoax' not welcome in MAGA,' July 17). Don't you think that the team that invented 'lawfare' would have exposed anything reflecting negatively on President Trump or any Republicans? Epstein had a successful, high-level career in finance before anyone was aware of his sick perversion. He interacted with many well-known and well-heeled individuals in legitimate interactions. Given these facts, how could you release any names in Epstein's notes without context? If you met him with a group of people at a function, and he made a note of it, you'd be smeared by association. Thomas Smith Sarasota, Fla. Although I'm a lifelong Republican, I'm switching my voter registration, and I'll be supporting Democrats in the midterms; we all should. There's no excuse for not prosecuting pedophiles in the Epstein case, and there's even less excuse for attacking one's own supporters for thinking so. Harry Knopp Ripley, WV I honestly believe there is a major coverup. A high-profile inmate conveniently committed suicide and how convenient that all of a sudden there is no list. Prince Andrew was caught and booted out. Clinton was on the plane with Jeffrey Epstein several times and his prior actions speak volumes. Why don't they ask his partner, Ghislaine Maxwell? You're trying to say she doesn't know anything about who else was involved? I am just surprised Maxwell hasn't committed suicide while in jail. She has to have knowledge of this. Bring her before the Department of Justice. Robert Caprio Nutley, NJ The current controversy about releasing the Epstein files fails to consider the difficult choices related to First Amendment protections. While transparency is the current catchword, there are many instances where the public's right to know is secondary to a person's right to privacy and freedom from governmental interference. I want to assure your readers that I have many doubts about Epstein's death, and great curiosity about the alleged client list. But, at the same time, the fact that someone traveled with Epstein or stayed at his resort is not, in itself, a criminal act. On balance, I opt for not releasing any alleged list that may be in the possession of the DOJ. Sidney Baumgarten North Brunswick, NJ Usually, the easiest way to stop a rumor is to provide the public with access to the available information, unless there are issues with the information or names in it that could bias an audience or suggest guilt. Unfortunately, our president believes that the only truth is what he tells us, not what is factual. Alan Swartz Verona, NJ I bleed MAGA red, so I'm not sure who Miranda Devine is referring to when she writes that Trump's base wants the truth about Epstein ('MAGA base wants truth on Epstein,' July 17). I couldn't care less. Sure, I feel terrible for Epstein's victims and there are plenty of sick, depraved individuals out there who need to be arrested and thrown in jail. But Republicans have far greater things to worry about than a dead creep who hung out with Bill Clinton. If the Epstein scandal was so important to the Dems, why weren't they more transparent when they had the chance? Republicans need to stick together, support Trump and make sure as few Democrats as possible get elected to prevent them from wrecking our country. That's what the president's base wants. Michael D'Auria Bronxville The extremely wealthy have had privileges from the beginning of time. Kings, past presidents and dictators have mistresses without censure or open complaint; yet when a group of wealthy people cavort within their group it becomes a cause célèbre. Paul Alexander Ontario, Canada Want to weigh in on today's stories? Send your thoughts (along with your full name and city of residence) to letters@ Letters are subject to editing for clarity, length, accuracy, and style.
