The probe of an attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump at a Pennsylvania rally is mired in controversy and skepticism, fueled by allegations about the investigation's integrity.

The FBI investigation into the attempted assassination of Donald Trump has reportedly been characterized by significant irregularities, including evidence tampering and questionable procedures in handling the assailant’s remains, as the Western Journal reports.

On July 13, during a public event, an assassination attempt on Trump took place, drawing national attention.

The incident resulted in injuries to Trump and the death of rally attendee Corey Comperatore. Thomas Matthew Crooks, identified as the assailant, was killed by return fire after firing eight shots.

Detailed Revelations by a SWAT Officer

Ben Shaffer, a counter-sniper with the Washington Regional SWAT, spoke publicly for the first time about the incident during a panel organized by the Heritage Foundation.

This event was not associated with the official bipartisan House task force that also visited the shooting site on the same day.

The panel included significant conservative figures such as former Secret Service agent Dan Bongino and former Navy SEAL Erik Prince. It was chaired by Republican Reps. Cory Mills, Eli Crane, Andy Biggs, Matt Gaetz, and Chip Roy.

Shaffer highlighted several inconsistencies in how the FBI managed the crime scene, specifically pointing out that the rooftop where Crooks was positioned had been prematurely cleaned, potentially tampering with crucial evidence.

Questions Over the Autopsy and Cremation Processes

Further controversies arose when Representative Clay Higgins revealed that Crooks' body had been hastily cremated without following standard autopsy protocols.

This occurred just 10 days after the shooting, a fact Higgins uncovered during his own investigative efforts.

"My effort to examine Crooks’ body on Monday, Aug. 5, caused quite a stir and revealed a disturbing fact … the FBI released the body for cremation 10 days after [July 13]," Higgins stated, raising serious questions about the procedural integrity following such high-profile incidents.

Implications for Congressional Oversight

Amid these revelations, Mills emphasized the importance of meritocracy in how congressional investigations are conducted.

He warned that the lack of rigorous selection based on merit might prompt more independent investigations by conservative lawmakers.

"This is a message to all of Congress that if we are not selecting people based on meritocracy, that independent investigations such as this will continue to move forward, that there are members who are conservatives who will not be silenced," Mills declared.

Broader Impact on Public Trust and Policy

The panel's findings and the concurrent House task force investigation highlight a deep divide in how such critical incidents are examined and discussed in the political sphere.

The presence of independent panels alongside official task forces may reflect broader issues of trust and transparency within federal investigative processes.

This case not only underscores the complexities involved in post-crisis investigations but also has significant implications for the oversight and accountability mechanisms in place to handle such sensitive national security matters.

As the investigations continue, both officially and independently, the call for clarity and accountability grows louder among public officials and the citizenry, underscoring the critical nature of maintaining integrity in both investigative processes and political discourse.