How have Reiner's comments on the Trump assassination attempt been received by politicians and media?

1. What Reiner supposedly said — and what reporting shows

A viral assertion that Rob Reiner had earlier said he “wished the assassin hadn’t missed” when Trump was shot in Pennsylvania in 2024 could not be substantiated by reporters and fact‑checkers; Snopes reviewed the claim and could not find evidence supporting it, concluding the claim was unfounded ^[1]. Multiple opinion and local pieces echo that Reiner consistently condemned political violence and there is reporting that he publicly denounced other politically motivated attacks, undercutting the social‑media meme that he praised or encouraged an assassination (The Independent; CNN) ^{[7] [8]}.

2. Political reaction to Trump’s attack invoking Reiner

Lawmakers from across the aisle swiftly criticized President Trump’s decision to blame Reiner’s political views for his murder; prominent GOP voices such as Representatives Mike Lawler and Don Bacon, and Republican Thomas Massie, rejected Trump’s framing as “wrong” or “inappropriate,” while Democrats seized on the remarks to underscore what they called a pattern of cruel rhetoric from the president (TIME; Reuters; PBS) ^{[5] [2] [9]}. Former Trump advisers and allies also publicly broke with the president: David Urban called the comments “indefensible” and warned they could hurt the party, signaling internal concern about political cost and decorum (The Hill) ^[10].

3. Media framing: condemnation, context and analysis

Major news outlets framed Trump’s post as an unfounded and politically charged attack made while the matter was still under investigation, describing it as “shocking,” “vile,” or “indefensible” and placing it in a pattern of his second‑term rhetoric; outlets that reported both the lack of evidence and the bipartisan rebuke included AP, Reuters, BBC, New York Times and CNN ^{[3] [2] [6] [4] [8]}. Analysis pieces emphasized how Trump’s comments undercut earlier conservative calls for unity after other political killings and noted the dissonance between his reaction and Reiner’s own public condemnations of political violence (CNN; The Independent) ^{[8] [7]}.

4. The misinformation angle and partisan incentives

Alongside fact‑checking of the claim about Reiner’s alleged comment, partisan outlets and commentators advanced competing narratives: some conservative opinion writers reiterated that Reiner had been a harsh critic of Trump and argued the president’s reaction was predictable or justified, while other commentators and mainstream outlets highlighted the absence of evidence and the dangers of politicizing a family tragedy — a split that reflects broader incentives to amplify either defensiveness toward the president or moral outrage at his rhetoric (Creators Syndicate; Townhall; The Guardian) ^{[11] [12] [13]}. Fact‑checkers and newsrooms served as correcting forces, but social feeds continued to circulate the unauthenticated claim, demonstrating how quickly false or unverified assertions can shape the initial political response (Snopes; The Guardian) ^{[1] [13]}.

5. Bottom line: bipartisan rebuke, fact‑checking of the alleged Reiner remark

The dominant reception combined two strands: bipartisan political condemnation of Trump’s timing and tone — including notable Republican pushback — and journalistic debunking of the viral claim that Reiner had supported the 2024 assassination attempt, with reputable fact‑checking and reporting finding no evidence Reiner said he “wished the assassin hadn’t missed” and plenty suggesting he had condemned political violence ^{[2] [1] [8]}. Where disagreements persist, they tend to track partisan loyalties and media ecosystems more than new factual revelations; reporting to date supports the conclusion that Trump’s comments were widely criticized and that the accusation about Reiner’s prior comments is unfounded.