I don't rule it out, so I agree with you.

But I think the kinds of reasoning people go through that leads them to even speculate such a specific thing happened absent evidence is flawed due to a lack of considering Bayesian priors.

Take the fist pump. People see that as evidence that Trump wanted a photo-op. But my Bayesian priors are that (1) Trump will always fist pump, and (2) If someone on a stage falls down and is ok, they will signal to the crowd that they are ok. Given these priors, this 'fact' gives NO weight to the theory.

Take the flag in the photo. People see the flag in the image as evidence Trump wanted a photo-op. But my Bayesian priors are that Trump rallys are so heavily plastered in flags, that it is hard to point a camera in any direction and not have a flag in the shot. Given this prior, this fact gives NO weight to the theory.

As for explaining the 'blunder' of missing, when good snipers never miss at 100 yards, you can consider that people were calling out the sniper to the security, yelling about him, and he probably felt rushed.  And anyone would be nervous knowing this might be their last few moments.  So while a calm sniper can take that shot, a nervous 20 year old who is being called out probably doesn't have the nerves of steel required to make the shot.  Also Trump turned his head at the last minute (that mattered by half-an-inch, it wouldn't have mattered if it was a good shot though).