It’s been more than six weeks since the near-assassination of Donald Trump, and all we seemingly know about the 20-year-old son of two social workers is what we learned just a few hours after the attempted assassination: that he’s “a registered Republican” who happened to donate $15 to a Democrat political action committee.

Does anyone really believe that’s all investigators know about this guy? And does anyone really believe that the Secret Service is being entirely forthcoming about its many catastrophic failures that day? Further, and more importantly, does anyone believe that the Federal Bureau of Investigation is moving with a sense of urgency to determine what motivated the would-be assassin and why a “registered Republican” might want to murder the most popular and effective Republican president since Ronald Reagan?

Those are rhetorical questions. Other questions, though, are not so rhetorical. Take this one from Florida Congressman Cory Mills: “Why was the Secret Service setting this up for failure by not going forward and utilizing all the available assets and resources it had to protect the safety and security of Donald J. Trump?”

Mills was referring to the revelations of a Secret Service whistleblower, which Missouri Senator Josh Hawley outlined in an X post and spelled out in a letter to Acting Secret Service Director Ronald Rowe. As Hawley wrote:

I have received new whistleblower allegations that again call into question your recent testimony before the Senate. One whistleblower with knowledge of Secret Service planning for former President Trump’s trip to Butler, Pennsylvania, alleges that officials at Secret Service headquarters encouraged agents in charge of the trip not to request any additional security assets in its formal manpower request — effectively denying these assets through informal means. Yet you have repeatedly suggested that no security assets had been denied for the Butler event. You must explain this apparent contradiction immediately.

As Hawley’s whistleblower adds, counter-sniper teams were ultimately approved just a day prior to the event, “leaving them an insufficient amount of time to conduct a proper site assessment.”

Further, the Secret Service turned down the use of surveillance drones that were readily available on July 13, and it failed to properly communicate with local law enforcement during the crucial hours and minutes before the assassination attempt when Thomas Matthew Crooks was seen walking around suspiciously and using a rangefinder. Why?

Asked by Fox News’s Jesse Watters what might explain the Secret Service’s refusal to use all the protective means at its disposal, Congressman Mills said, “It is a culture issue. It is DEI at heart. But this is either criminal gross negligence or purposeful intent.”

Another Florida congressman, former Green Beret Mike Waltz, isn’t buying the assessment that the assassin didn’t have any help, especially in light of the encrypted and foreign-based communications he used.

“I find that hard to believe, and I want to see where’s the proof,” said Waltz. “How did he learn to build those IEDs? How did he learn to install remote detonators? How did he conduct those searches and not get popped? I still have a lot of questions.”

Mills and Waltz aren’t the only lawmakers who smell a rat. “All I can really tell you is the Secret Service and FBI are dragging their feet,” said a frustrated Republican Senator Ron Johnson on Sunday. “They’re stonewalling us. And we’ve gotten some transcribed interviews, but the documents we request are heavily redacted. They’re delivered the day of the interview, so we really can’t use the documents to conduct the interviews effectively. We’re not getting squat from my standpoint from the Secret Service or the FBI.”

Why would Joe Biden’s Secret Service and FBI be so resistant to helping the American people understand what happened that day, and how we can keep it from happening again? How hard could it be for the FBI, with its awesome investigative resources, to develop and share with the citizenry a comprehensive profile of a 20-year-old American citizen?

Remember: This is the same FBI that quickly tracked down and rounded up hundreds of often nonviolent January 6 attendees from all across the country in the days after the Capitol riot.

Of course, on the other hand, this is also the same FBI that still won’t tell us how many undercover agents and operatives were involved in the events of January 6, or what, precisely, they were doing there in their undercover capacity. And this is also the same FBI that inexplicably hasn’t been able to tell us who planted those pipe bombs in front of the Democratic and Republican National Committee headquarters on January 6, and who constructed that gallows right out there in the open in the most heavily surveilled city in the world. And this is the same FBI that targets “radical-traditionalist Catholics” and peaceful pro-life activists. And the same FBI that interfered in the 2020 election by colluding with Facebook to censor the New York Post’s bombshell investigative report on Hunter Biden’s laptop and his influence-peddling operations while his dad was Barack Obama’s vice president.

Why, it’s almost as if the FBI were a highly politicized Trump-hating enforcement arm of the Democrat Party.

Asked by TV personality Phil McGraw whose fault all this is, Donald Trump didn’t mince words. “I think to a certain extent it’s Biden’s fault and Harris’s fault,” he said. “And I’m the opponent. Look, they were weaponizing government against me, they brought in the whole DOJ to try and get me, they weren’t too interested in my health and safety.”

But as the always-helpful Washington Post points out, Trump is saying these things “without evidence.” Uh-huh.

I warned about an FBI whitewash just five days after the events of July 13, and I’m shocked — SHOCKED — to see that the once-proud bureau has lived down to my worst expectations.

In a recent Fox News interview, Colorado Democrat Jason Crow says a bipartisan congressional task force will have a report out by December 13, more than a month after the election. Thanks a lot. Crow is also making it clear that his foot-dragging task force is the only one with jurisdiction in this matter.

Earlier this week, we learned that Thomas Crooks’s parents have retained some very high-powered — and, we’d assume, very expensive — legal representation. Perhaps the combined salaries of a couple of social workers is higher than we thought.

In any case, my sense is that the FBI is running out the clock until after the presidential election so as not to make Donald Trump appear more sympathetic, or to reveal any political connections of the would-be assassin that might be embarrassing to the Democrats.

Think about it: The FBI helped rig the 2020 election. What’s to stop them from trying to rig this one?