By Tony Bruce | Monday, September 2, 2024 | 4 min read
During his political career, Donald Trump has often taken aim at his opponents in unconventional ways. One memorable instance occurred at a rally in Arkansas, where Trump mocked Senator Marco Rubio, making fun of his ears among other things. This playful rivalry has now resurfaced in a new context, with recent comparisons being drawn between Trump’s ears and those of other political figures, including Rubio.
Observers have noted that Trump appears to have larger ears than many of his political counterparts, sparking an unusual debate about a recent injury he sustained when a gunman fired 6 to 8 rounds from a semiautomatic AR-style rifle, positioned roughly 400 feet from the podium in Butler, Pennsylvania. This discussion intensified after Trump allegedly suffered an ear injury, with FBI Director Christopher Wray stating that the bureau is uncertain whether Trump’s ear was struck by a bullet or shrapnel. Some have speculated that a bullet may have grazed his ear; however, given the size and prominence of his ears, many are questioning whether such an injury could have occurred without causing more significant or visible damage.
The idea that an AR-15 could have caused an injury as minor as a graze to former President Donald Trump’s ear invites skepticism. AR-15 rifles, known for their powerful caliber and high-velocity rounds, are capable of inflicting significant damage. Even a glancing blow from such a weapon would likely result in far more serious injuries than a simple graze, especially when it involves a sensitive area like the ear.
Given the high velocity of the rounds fired from an AR-15, a direct hit—even a graze—could cause severe trauma, potentially shattering bone, rupturing the eardrum, or leading to substantial tissue damage. In fact, injuries caused by AR-15s are often catastrophic, with doctors frequently describing the effects of such weapons as far more destructive than typical gunshot wounds from smaller caliber firearms.
If an AR-15 were involved in any injury scenario, it would be reasonable to expect visible signs of severe damage, not only to the ear but possibly extending to the head and surrounding areas. This raises doubts about any claims that Trump’s injury was caused by a bullet from an AR-15 simply grazing his ear.
This also further supports the idea that if there were an injury, it may have been caused by something less severe—perhaps bruising or impact from physical contact during a protective maneuver, such as being rushed offstage by Secret Service agents, rather than from a direct interaction with a bullet from such a powerful firearm.
For clarity on this situation, it would be helpful if official medical reports were released, detailing the nature and extent of the injury.
The larger ear size has led to doubts about the “grazing bullet” theory. If a bullet had indeed grazed his ear, the injury would likely have been more substantial, given the sensitivity and complexity of the ear’s structure. Instead, this speculation has led some to propose an alternative theory—that Trump’s injury may have been caused by blunt force trauma, such as bruising, rather than a bullet wound.
Blunt Force Trauma Theory
The idea of blunt force trauma is gaining traction among those who believe that the injury might have been caused by Trump’s ear or head hitting an object, perhaps during a protective maneuver by the Secret Service. In such a scenario, the injury could result from an accidental impact with the lectern or another solid surface, which would explain the bruising without the presence of an actual bullet wound.
This theory suggests that during a sudden and chaotic moment, such as when security personnel rush to protect a public figure, the chance of accidental contact with nearby objects is high. If Trump’s ear had been struck or pressed against something solid, it could have resulted in noticeable bruising, leading to the reports of an ear injury.
Given the ongoing speculation, some have called for transparency regarding the nature of Trump’s injury. Releasing an official medical report could help clarify whether the injury was caused by a bullet graze, blunt force trauma, or another factor entirely. Doing so would provide the public with a clearer understanding of what transpired and help dispel the growing number of theories surrounding the incident.
In the absence of such transparency, the debate continues. For now, Trump’s ear size and the associated theories remain an odd but intriguing footnote in the broader conversation about his recent public appearances and the mysterious injury.
