Shooter/Assassin details coming to light

BobRyan said:

Thomas Matthew Crooks -- the assassin that killed one man, wounded two other people at the venue and also shot former President Trump - has been the subject of some inquiry.

Snopes did some research to find that the shooter in fact did make a contribution to a democratic political action group -

Fact Check: Yes, Trump Rally Shooter Once Donated Money to a Democratic Cause

Some social media users claimed a 69-year-old man with the same name as Trump's would-be assassin actually made the donation.

www.yahoo.com

Snopes said that Crooks "donated money to a political action committee aligned with the Democratic Party"

Snopes research concludes this way --

"Considering that address match, and the fact that the location on the in-question FEC filing does not exist in Pittsburgh, evidence favors the conclusion that the shooter (Crooks) made the donation — not someone else with the same name."

So then Penn has closed primaries so you have to be registered as dem or rep to vote in the primary. If someone was a Democrat and felt that their nominee was going to be selected no-matter-what so their vote is not needed - and if they wanted to derail the Republican primary a bit - they might consider "registering as a Republican" to vote for a non-Trump candidate and hope to have some impact on the Primary outcome using that strategy.

But their "contribution" to the democratic political action pac would still be "noticed" ( so also their attempt to assassinate the former President - as it turns out)

====================

There is a criminal investigation as well as an independent investigation (or as part of) being sponsored by Mayorkus (DHS Secretary) . The question is "what went wrong" with secret service, FBI and local law enforcement that such a direct-line-of-sight threat so obvious at the venue -- had no coverage.

A number of people were cited as saying that high levels of violent language regarding Trump being a "threat to democracy" and we all know of cases where they were calling Trump an "Existential threat" and key democratic sound bites saying they are "Terrified of a Trump presidency" - all fueling the fires for such a violent event.

Interesting that there is now general agreement that that sort of rhetoric is totally irresponsible. We need to do better as a nation.

====================

MSN: flashback-dems-pushed-bill-to-take-away-trump-s-secret-service-detail


How "odd" that the same congressman promoting that "remove security from Trump" bill - now has a staffer calling for the next shooter "not to miss -- next time".

MSN: bennie-thompson-staffer-no-longer-employed-after-trump-shooting-post

So yeah -- they fire that staffer.

But is it merely "a coincidence" that the same office that promotes a bill to revoke security for Trump - also has a staffer telling would be assassins "not to miss next time"??? Maybe there was a "culture of violent rhetoric and thinking" going on .. is that possible?

I see that as an example of the kind of thinking, the kind of actions - that everyone needs to avoid., It is horribly irresponsible.

Click to expand...

BobRyan said:

Thomas Matthew Crooks -- the assassin that killed one man, wounded two other people at the venue and also shot former President Trump - has been the subject of some inquiry.

Snopes did some research to find that the shooter in fact did make a contribution to a democratic political action group -

Fact Check: Yes, Trump Rally Shooter Once Donated Money to a Democratic Cause

Some social media users claimed a 69-year-old man with the same name as Trump's would-be assassin actually made the donation.

www.yahoo.com

Snopes said that Crooks "donated money to a political action committee aligned with the Democratic Party"

Snopes research concludes this way --

"Considering that address match, and the fact that the location on the in-question FEC filing does not exist in Pittsburgh, evidence favors the conclusion that the shooter (Crooks) made the donation — not someone else with the same name."

So then Penn has closed primaries so you have to be registered as dem or rep to vote in the primary. If someone was a Democrat and felt that their nominee was going to be selected no-matter-what so their vote is not needed - and if they wanted to derail the Republican primary a bit - they might consider "registering as a Republican" to vote for a non-Trump candidate and hope to have some impact on the Primary outcome using that strategy.

But their "contribution" to the democratic political action pac would still be "noticed" ( so also their attempt to assassinate the former President - as it turns out)

====================

There is a criminal investigation as well as an independent investigation (or as part of) being sponsored by Mayorkus (DHS Secretary) . The question is "what went wrong" with secret service, FBI and local law enforcement that such a direct-line-of-sight threat so obvious at the venue -- had no coverage.

A number of people were cited as saying that high levels of violent language regarding Trump being a "threat to democracy" and we all know of cases where they were calling Trump an "Existential threat" and key democratic sound bites saying they are "Terrified of a Trump presidency" - all fueling the fires for such a violent event.

Interesting that there is now general agreement that that sort of rhetoric is totally irresponsible. We need to do better as a nation.

====================

MSN: flashback-dems-pushed-bill-to-take-away-trump-s-secret-service-detail


How "odd" that the same congressman promoting that "remove security from Trump" bill - now has a staffer calling for the next shooter "not to miss -- next time".

MSN: bennie-thompson-staffer-no-longer-employed-after-trump-shooting-post

So yeah -- they fire that staffer.

But is it merely "a coincidence" that the same office that promotes a bill to revoke security for Trump - also has a staffer telling would be assassins "not to miss next time"??? Maybe there was a "culture of violent rhetoric and thinking" going on .. is that possible?

I see that as an example of the kind of thinking, the kind of actions - that everyone needs to avoid., It is horribly irresponsible.

Click to expand...

BobRyan said:

Thomas Matthew Crooks -- the assassin that killed one man, wounded two other people at the venue and also shot former President Trump - has been the subject of some inquiry.

Snopes did some research to find that the shooter in fact did make a contribution to a democratic political action group -

Fact Check: Yes, Trump Rally Shooter Once Donated Money to a Democratic Cause

Some social media users claimed a 69-year-old man with the same name as Trump's would-be assassin actually made the donation.

www.yahoo.com

Snopes said that Crooks "donated money to a political action committee aligned with the Democratic Party"

Snopes research concludes this way --

"Considering that address match, and the fact that the location on the in-question FEC filing does not exist in Pittsburgh, evidence favors the conclusion that the shooter (Crooks) made the donation — not someone else with the same name."

So then Penn has closed primaries so you have to be registered as dem or rep to vote in the primary. If someone was a Democrat and felt that their nominee was going to be selected no-matter-what so their vote is not needed - and if they wanted to derail the Republican primary a bit - they might consider "registering as a Republican" to vote for a non-Trump candidate and hope to have some impact on the Primary outcome using that strategy.

But their "contribution" to the democratic political action pac would still be "noticed" ( so also their attempt to assassinate the former President - as it turns out)

====================

There is a criminal investigation as well as an independent investigation (or as part of) being sponsored by Mayorkus (DHS Secretary) . The question is "what went wrong" with secret service, FBI and local law enforcement that such a direct-line-of-sight threat so obvious at the venue -- had no coverage.

A number of people were cited as saying that high levels of violent language regarding Trump being a "threat to democracy" and we all know of cases where they were calling Trump an "Existential threat" and key democratic sound bites saying they are "Terrified of a Trump presidency" - all fueling the fires for such a violent event.

Interesting that there is now general agreement that that sort of rhetoric is totally irresponsible. We need to do better as a nation.

====================

MSN: flashback-dems-pushed-bill-to-take-away-trump-s-secret-service-detail


How "odd" that the same congressman promoting that "remove security from Trump" bill - now has a staffer calling for the next shooter "not to miss -- next time".

MSN: bennie-thompson-staffer-no-longer-employed-after-trump-shooting-post

So yeah -- they fire that staffer.

But is it merely "a coincidence" that the same office that promotes a bill to revoke security for Trump - also has a staffer telling would be assassins "not to miss next time"??? Maybe there was a "culture of violent rhetoric and thinking" going on .. is that possible?

I see that as an example of the kind of thinking, the kind of actions - that everyone needs to avoid., It is horribly irresponsible.

Click to expand...

BobRyan said:

Good point - how is it that someone able to illegally assassinate someone -- is also able to contribute to a political group claiming a false age for himself while entering the correct address.

As Snopes notes --

"Based on a search of public records, it is true that several individuals, including a 69-year-old man, named "Thomas Crooks" have or have had a connection to Pittsburgh. However, there was no evidence connecting these individuals to the in-question $15 donation to the Democratic-leaning PAC; the FEC filing lists a street address and ZIP code that don't exist in Pittsburgh.

However, when looking at the FEC filing for the donation, nearly every field was an exact match to the other Thomas Crooks — Trump's would-be assassin. In particular, that Thomas Crooks lived in Bethel Park, a Pittsburgh suburb. Authorities confirmed that the shooter was from Bethel Park, and voter registration records, among other things, provide his specific address.

Click to expand...

JimR-OCDS said:

What's interesting to me is how they reported that the shooter was a registered republican,
the very next day after the assassination attempt. Yet, they didn't know anything else.
It seems strange that they would release his political affiliation before they had other information
about him.

Click to expand...

Super Kal said:

Seeing all of this information, do you think it may be possible that Crooks had an obsession with Trump?

Click to expand...

Would-be assassin looked up photos of Trump, Biden and a British royal, FBI tells senators

An FBI official tells senators there was no indication gunman Thomas Matthew Crooks had any strong political views or any co-conspirators, as agents work to piece together what led him to try to kill Donald Trump.

www.abc.net.au

JimR-OCDS said:

What's interesting to me is how they reported that the shooter was a registered republican,
the very next day after the assassination attempt. Yet, they didn't know anything else.
It seems strange that they would release his political affiliation before they had other information
about him.

Click to expand...

markef said:

Crooks or someone close to him has been connected by data to visits to FBI headquarters in DC as well as to firing ranges associated with the training of government snipers. There is evidence that he may be connected to overseas bank accounts bloated with cash. He is in a Black Rock promotional video that has since been taken down. Black Rock is a major financial donor to the democrat party and was involved in the infamous unusual selloff of shares in Trump TV stock the day before the assassination attempt.

Click to expand...

Maria Billingsley said:

Still need to figure out how a 17 year old was able to donate.

(Mar. 27, 2002) (“BCRA”), amended the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended, 2 U.S.C. 431 et seq. (the “Act”), to prohibit individuals aged 17 years or younger (“Minors”) from contributing to candidates, and from contributing or donating to political party committees.

Click to expand...