‘The Most Dangerous Threat Environment That I’ve Seen in 40 Years’

Almost as soon as former President Donald Trump was safe and the man who allegedly shot him was dead, federal law enforcement moved into a new phase: the investigation of how it happened.

John Cohen is well aware of what that would entail, having previously served as the acting undersecretary for intelligence and analysis at the Department of Homeland Security under President Joe Biden.

In an interview with POLITICO Magazine, Cohen discussed how his former agency identifies intelligence to ward off threats posed by domestic violent extremists and said it is likely coordinating closely with the FBI and Secret Service, including sending them intelligence to ward off further threats.

The United States has suffered from a sharp rise in domestic violent extremism in recent years, with domestic terrorism investigations increasing by more than 350 percent from 2013 to 2023 .

And even as the precise motive in the assassination attempt against Trump remains unclear, Cohen also acknowledged that the alleged shooter, 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks, has a profile that reflects those of many other domestic violent extremists.

“It's not that these people are not on the radar,” he said. “It is that very often, federal authorities are looking at the wrong radar screen.”

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

As someone who has worked on domestic violent extremism issues at the top of government, what surprised you the most about the shooting and its aftermath?

I wasn't surprised it occurred. And my second thought was if things do not change, there's more to come. I've been working with state and local law enforcement and election officials across the country over the past year to ensure that communities are better prepared to deal with election-related threats. And I'll say to you what I've said to police chiefs and sheriffs and election officials across the country: The country is experiencing the most dangerous threat environment that I've seen in 40 years.

How does the government monitor these kinds of people if they aren’t active online? Is it possible to stop such an attack?

You often hear after an incident such as this that the person who conducted the attack wasn't on the radar — I have found that over the past five, six years, to be mostly untrue. It's not that these people are not on the radar. It is that very often, federal authorities are looking at the wrong radar screen.

We are already learning today that this individual exhibited certain behavioral characteristics that are consistent with those involved in targeted acts of violence in the past. He appears to be an individual who was disaffected — that he felt disconnected from others in the community. He was bullied. He purchased a large quantity of ammunition.

Not everyone who eats lunch by themselves is a mass shooter. But we have learned mass casualty attacks or acts of targeted violence are very often people who feel that they've been victimized by society,

Would you have predicted an assassination attempt on a presidential candidate was going to happen when you were in government? Were there any such analyses done?

The shooting was tragic. It was scary, but it's not surprising. We've for several years now been experiencing significant levels of violent activity as well as other destructive and legal activity that's been fueled by the online and media ecosystem that is saturated with conspiracy theories and other content that's purposely put there by foreign intelligence services, terrorist groups, violent extremists, criminal organizations.

I've been providing briefings to law enforcement and election officials over the last year. The potential for targeted attacks directed at candidates was certainly a possibility that we've raised.

It seems a lot of domestic violent extremists are young white men and have similar profiles to the Trump rally shooter. Why is that?

If you look back at the attacks that have taken place over the last 10 years, these are individuals who operate alone or independently of terrorist or extremist organizations. They spend a large quantity of time online. They tend to be male. They tend to be Caucasian. They tend to adopt a blend of ideological beliefs and personal grievances. Their ability to engage in interpersonal relationships is difficult. And they often exhibit signs of misogyny or dislike toward women.

What are law enforcement agencies doing right now to investigate this attack?  What would you have been doing at the DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis?

There are two parallel lines of activity that will converge and inform what we do in the future. First is that investigators will want to learn as much as possible about the attack itself. They will look at the behavior of the individual. They will try to determine their motive. They will try to determine whether the individual operated as a lone wolf or whether they were operating in conjunction with others.

They will want to nail down those facts because those facts will then help to inform additional security measures or adaptations to operational planning. The second thing that they're going to be doing is they're going to look at this incident and its response. They'll look at the operational posture at the event — the physical security — to see whether the security bubble was sufficient.

How would you conduct the investigation in partnership with the FBI?

DHS I&A should be providing intelligence support, meaning they should be evaluating domestic and foreign intelligence in an effort to pick up any threats regarding this event. They work closely with the FBI, the intelligence community, but also with the Secret Service so that any threat-related information is conveyed to those who have operational responsibility for threat mitigation activities.

What can be done to combat domestic violent extremism in America?

We need to do a much better job of understanding the threat and gathering information and intelligence regarding emerging threats and sharing that information between federal, state, local authorities.

DHS and FBI are great organizations. They do a number of things each and every day that help to make this nation safer. But at the end of the day, in the current threat environment, responsibility for protecting our communities, protecting our elections, protecting those running for office — it is going to fall upon the shoulders of state, county and local authorities.