MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:They still don't know much about the young man. A BBC article mentions he was a loner that sometimes wore camo to school and was frequently bullied. He was successful academically and considered nice and well-liked by his teachers. Otherwise quiet.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3gw58wv4e9o
He was a member of a local shooting club, so it wouldn't surprise me that his father bought him the rifle. 18 years of age appears to be the minimum age to purchase, but I could see it being easier for his father to make the purchase. It's possible the motivation to let his son get into shooting was similar to that of Kipland Kinkel (Thurston High School shooter). I don't know if or to what extent Crooks was troubled, but Kinkel was very much so; his father I'm sure was desperate to find something to relate to him. Mr. Crooks was not aware of his son's intentions. Crooks' motivations are not yet known and may never be.
As for the security lapse, it appears that was at the feet of local law enforcement. They were tasked with the outer perimeter and failed to heed warnings of attendees that someone had climbed up on and was crawling around on the roof with a rifle. DEI has its faults, but that's not at fault on this one. SS was relying on local law enforcement to identify a threat like this so they could take action. Local LE failed here.
Trump brings a lot on himself, but I can't ignore the fact that he's constantly being called an existential threat to democracy, a dictator with comparisons to Hitler, and one who's going to take our rights away. It's possible that's enough to flip the switch on someone. Did that happen here? Who knows, but it's adding ammunition to fire at the Democrats.
I don't particularly like what's coming from both sides. I have seen plenty of Biden supporters wishing Crooks had aimed better. I have also seen plenty of Trump supporters proclaiming that, since Trump survived, he's anointed by God. I neither want a portion of the populace wishing for the murder of presidential candidate nor do I want anyone deifying the same. A sad state of affairs all around.
F.B.I. officials told members of Congress on Wednesday that the gunman who tried to kill former President Donald J. Trump used his cellphone and other devices to search for images of Mr. Trump and President Biden, along with an array of public figures.
The 20-year-old gunman, Thomas Matthew Crooks of Bethel Park, Pa., also looked up dates of Mr. Trump’s appearances and the Democratic National Convention, according to people on two conference calls held to answer lawmakers’ questions.
And, at least once, his browsing history signaled concerns about his own mental state. He also seems to have previewed his attack on Steam, a gaming platform he frequented, telling fellow gamers he planned to make his “premiere” on July 13, the day of the shooting.
The disclosures, made during private briefings to lawmakers by the F.B.I. and the head of the embattled Secret Service, offered the most complete portrait so far of a would-be assassin with no criminal history, or even clearly discernible political beliefs, who came close to killing Mr. Trump. Still, no clear motive for the attack has emerged.
The official assessment aligned with recollections of people who knew him. Several former classmates have said they never heard the gunman express any particular political ideology. But Vincent Taormina, a former classmate who said he attended middle school and high school with the gunman, said in an interview that Mr. Crooks showed a general disdain for politicians in both parties.
He recalled one instance when the two were in seventh grade. During a classroom political debate, Mr. Taormina voiced his support for Mr. Trump. Mr. Crooks seemed incredulous.
“He says, ‘Aren’t you Hispanic? And you like Trump?’” Mr. Taormina said. “He said, ‘That’s a little stupid.’”
Mr. Taormina brushed off the encounter, and had few other interactions with Mr. Crooks. But he disputed other classmates’ accounts that the gunman had been bullied or had been a loner, saying that he was intelligent and had his own small group of friends.
“I did not know him personally or as a friend, but he was not bullied, he was not a recluse,” Mr. Taormina said.
The F.B.I. has been scouring Mr. Crooks’s possessions since the shooting on Saturday — including two phones and at least one laptop — for clues about his motive. So far, they have found no indication that Mr. Crooks, who was a registered Republican, had strong partisan political views one way or another, bureau officials told lawmakers.
Nor have they uncovered any evidence of co-conspirators or connections to foreign actors, two top bureau officials said during the tense calls in which members of the House and Senate demanded answers about a nearly catastrophic failure to safeguard Mr. Trump.
The officials told lawmakers that there was some indication that the gunman, who led a quiet life and worked at a nursing home near his house, might have been struggling with depression.
Officials singled out some of the searches on one of his cellphones, saying that he had looked up “major depressive disorder,” according to a person on the calls and another briefed on its contents.
Mr. Crooks seems to have been on good terms with his parents, who are both counselors, but they were not closely involved in the day-to-day details of his life, officials said.
Over the last several months, the gunman received multiple packages, including several that were marked “hazardous material,” according to a federal law enforcement memo obtained by The New York Times. Federal officials reviewed his shipping history after they discovered three explosive devices connected to him, the memo said. One device was found in his home, and two others were found in his car parked near the rally.
Investigators discovered two improvised explosive devices in the would-be assassin’s car that used a radio-controlled initiation system intended for commercial fireworks demonstrations.
While the briefing on Wednesday filled in some blanks, it left many questions unanswered. Federal law enforcement officials are puzzled and exasperated by the lack of evidence on the gunman’s two phones, one found by his body on the roof of a warehouse outside the security perimeter of the rally, the other discovered during a search of his house.
F.B.I. officials, speaking on the calls, suggested that his search history indicated he was broadly interested in powerful and famous people, without any obvious ideological or partisan pattern.
Among the other prominent figures the gunman searched for using one of his phones, besides Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden, were the F.B.I. director, Christopher A. Wray; Attorney General Merrick B. Garland; and a member of the British royal family, according to two officials with knowledge of the situation, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the matter publicly.
Mr. Wray, who was also on the calls, went out of his way to caution that the investigation was still in its early stages.
But the absence of “any political or ideological information” at the house Mr. Crooks shared with his mother and father was “notable” because most people who carry out acts of political violence tend to leave a discernible trail of political views, a top bureau official told lawmakers.
Kimberly A. Cheatle, the director of the Secret Service, admitted that her agency made serious “mistakes” during one of the calls, and provided new information about Mr. Crooks’s movements during the shooting. She is scheduled to testify before the House Oversight Committee on Monday.
During the briefing with senators, officials ran through a timeline of events, noting that law enforcement officers had identified the gunman as suspicious about an hour before the shooting but then lost track of him, according to two people familiar with the contents of the briefing.
About 20 minutes before the shooting, a sniper spotted him again, the people said.
Some senators left their call angry with the Secret Service after learning that officers did not intervene before he opened fire.
“He had a rangefinder and a backpack. The Secret Service lost sight of him. No one has taken responsibility,” Senator John Barrasso, Republican of Wyoming, said in a statement, adding, “The head of the Secret Service needs to go.”
Senator Rick Scott, Republican of Florida, called on federal law enforcement agencies to publicly release the same details shared with lawmakers.
“The Biden administration has got to start being open with Americans about what happened, who is being held accountable and how we make sure it never happens again,” he said.
MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/17/us/trump-shooting-crooks-motive.html
Confirms what you posted, River.
River Dog wrote:Social media is going bonkers with Trump and that huge bandage that he's wearing on his ear, comparing it to a panty liner.
Donald Trump wearing a panty liner on his ear. This is the same man who refused to wear a mask because he thought it would make him look stupid.
River Dog wrote:Social media is going bonkers with Trump and that huge bandage that he's wearing on his ear, comparing it to a panty liner.
Donald Trump wearing a panty liner on his ear. This is the same man who refused to wear a mask because he thought it would make him look stupid.
Aseahawkfan wrote:Not his followers. I'm sure the left wingers on social media are having fun with it.
I see you ignored what that picture of a defiant Trump in front of the American flag is going to inspire. Sorry, bud, a very powerful image, far more than some left wingers making fun of his bandage after getting shot which shows what kind of people they are making fun of a guy who was almost assassinated. Low character people. Two sides of the same coin. You gotta be a bit scummy to make fun of a guy wearing a bandage after an assassination attempt.
But that's the era of political dialogue were in. Low character, divisive, and pathetic.
MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:I don’t really get the jab at his bandage. The man was just shot at and wounded in the ear in an assassination attempt. Unless he was deliberately wearing bandage overkill, I would assume it was medically necessary. I don’t see how it’s productive for the left to be upset the assassin didn’t succeed and bag on his recovery from the wound incurred.
The mask thing wasn’t as cut and dried. I had no problem wearing mask and thought it was ridiculous for people to be so against it, but it was a hugely divided issue. No one, on the other hand, would question putting a bandage on a gunshot wound. It’s a very poor equivalence.
It’s a shame this is what we’ve fostered amongst ourselves as a nation. Ripping into people over bandaging a gunshot wound and wishing an assassin hadn’t missed and, in Biden’s case, cognitive and physical decline. I’m not a fan of either.
MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:I’ve never been shot in the ear, so I won’t comment on how big a bandage should be and how long it should be worn. Yes, it’s entirely possible it was overdone for effect.
It’s a narrow comparison regardless of what was said about masking. It’s weak to call it out when the general consensus for a bleeding wound is you bandage it. There was substantial debate on mask wearing; there’s no such debate on bandaging a wound.
Yes, uninjured people wearing a bandage on their ear is beyond asinine.
MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:There was debate in that a substantial segment of the populace didn’t agree with wearing them and even medically it was hard to pin down the effectiveness of the measure which is why it is ridiculous to go after him over something everyone agrees you would have to do. For my part, masking made sense. A small measure with potentially big returns.
It is a weak link. Skewer him for any covid related issues regarding not masking. That’s well earned.
And questioning the medical necessity of the extent of bandaging a wound without knowing the severity of the wound or the recommendation the attending medical professional doesn’t help the case for making the statement.
River Dog wrote:I didn't 'ignore' anything. I simply posted something about Trump I thought was funny.
There's still quite a bit of time between now and November, over 3 months, so the effect of the assassination attempt will likely wear off by the time the election rolls around. That doesn't mean I think that Trump is going to lose, just that I don't think it's going to have the effect that all of us are assuming it will have. Americans have a very short memory.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest