U.S. President Donald Trump speaks as he attends a cabinet meeting at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., April 10, 2025. REUTERS/Nathan Howard
President Donald Trump's condemnation of an arson attack on Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro's residence on Monday earned no applause from an analyst at The Atlantic, who called his response "empty."
When asked about the attack, Trump referred to the suspect as "probably just a whack job" and stressed that "such incidents cannot be tolerated."
"The attacker was not a fan of Trump. I understand, just from what I read and from what I’ve been told, the attacker basically wasn’t a fan of anybody," Trump said. "Certainly a thing like that cannot be allowed to happen."
ALSO READ: 'Alarming': Small colleges bullied into silence as Trump poses 'existential threat'
Vice President JD Vance called the act "really disgusting violence" while Attorney General Pam Bondi expressed relief that Shapiro and his family were not harmed.
But Trump didn't initially comment on the attack over the weekend, only addressing it directly when questioned on Monday.
Ali Breland, staff writer at The Atlantic, wrote Monday night that the president may have been "quick to condemn political violence" — but that "it’s hard to take him at his word."
"These kinds of condemnations of political violence are good. They’re also meaningless—especially when taken in the broader context of Trump’s governing style," wrote Breland.
She questioned whether it was any coincidence that political violence has increased since Trump first ran for office. He praised violence when it was "useful," she noted, and "made leveraging the threat of it endemic to his style of politics." That includes the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol, where Trump "appeared okay with violence if it helped him maintain the presidency," she wrote.
"All of this is to say that when Trump condemns acts of political violence, it’s impossible to take him seriously. In this specific case, the attack on Shapiro served no clear benefit to Trump, which is why he was able to so quickly speak out against it," wrote Breland. "Compare that with how he’s talked about the [Paul] Pelosi hammer attack, which he has used as fodder to mock the Pelosis. Trump’s relationship to political violence is the same to anything and anyone else in his orbit: If something benefits him, it’s welcome. If not, he might dismiss it."