The Dam Breaks on Thomas Crooks Social Mediahttps://hotair.com/david-strom/2025/11/17/the-dam-breaks-on-thomas-crooks-social-media-n3808973It's no surprise that Crooks was a disturbed young man, because assassins are almost always, by definition, disturbed. Sane people don't go on suicide missions to kill political candidates. Still, it's essential to understand how someone like Crooks becomes radicalized, especially in a case of such high profile, where the public has a strong and legitimate desire to know the facts.
The FBI has been remarkably close-mouthed about Crooks. What little they did say suggested he was a radical right-winger who hated Jews and immigrants, suggesting that he was very right-wing.
WE were also led to believe that he was not very active on social media. In fact, he had a not-insubstantial social media presence for much of his life, only dropping off the radar late in his short life. And that profile tells us a lot about Crooks, including that he started as a rabid supporter of Trump, and later soured on him late in his first term, eventually calling for terrorist attacks.
...
Thanks to an enterprising source who uncovered Crooks’ hidden digital footprint, we can see that (Wray's deputy) Abbate misled Congress by omission, because he left out an entire section of Crooks’ online interactions from January to August 2020 when he did an ideological backflip and went from rabidly pro-Trump to rabidly anti-Trump and then went dark, never seeming to post again.
Among the 17 accounts uncovered by our source were ones on YouTube, Snapchat, Venmo, Zelle, GroupMe, Discord, Google Play, Quizlet, Chess.com and Quora.
The online interactions from when Crooks was ages 15 to 17 give us a better understanding of his evolution into an assassin, and invite more questions about what — or who — reversed his ideology.
“The danger Crooks posed was visible for years in public online spaces,” says the source. “His radicalization, violent rhetoric and obsession with political violence were all documented under his real name. The threat wasn’t hidden.”
This suggests two scenarios, IMO:
* Did the FBI that some believe hides shooters' online activity to obscure the shooters' ideas fail or choose not to hide Crook's?
* Was the investigation of the assassination attempt by LIEden's FBI so sloppy, cursory, and incurious that the FBI did not find all this?