Who Is Thomas Crooks?
Segment #670
The FBI told us Thomas Crooks tried to kill Donald Trump last summer but somehow had no online footprint. The FBI lied, and we can prove it because we have his posts. The question is why?
Tucker Cralson created this 34 minute docmentary on Thomas Crooks. Its worth trying to understand why the FBI is lying.
Tucker Carlson's Documentary: "Who Is Thomas Crooks?"Tucker Carlson released a 34-minute investigative documentary titled Who Is Thomas Crooks? on November 14, 2025, via the Tucker Carlson Network (TCN) and YouTube. It focuses on Thomas Matthew Crooks, the 20-year-old who attempted to assassinate then-candidate Donald Trump at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, on July 13, 2024. Crooks fired eight shots from an AR-15-style rifle, grazing Trump's ear, killing one attendee (Corey Comperatore), and injuring two others before being killed by a Secret Service sniper.The documentary accuses the FBI (under both Biden and Trump administrations) of a deliberate cover-up, claiming they withheld or misrepresented Crooks' extensive online activity and radicalization. Carlson's team obtained data from an anonymous source with access to Crooks' deactivated accounts, including YouTube, Google Drive, and others linked to his phone number and email. This contradicts the FBI's early statements that Crooks had "no online footprint" or "limited interactions," which Carlson calls outright lies.Key Revelations from the Documentary Carlson presents screenshots, videos, and timestamps from Crooks' accounts (active from 2019–2020, when he was 15–17) to argue he wasn't a "lone wolf" but was groomed for violence. Here's a breakdown:
Early Political Views
- Initially pro-Trump: Praised Trump's "America First" policies in 2019 YouTube comments. - Searched for "Trump rally" and "MAGA hat" early on.
Shows a radical shift, not inherent right-wing extremism as FBI initially suggested.
COVID Lockdown Shift
- Became pro-lockdown in April 2020: "Sometimes public safety comes before your personal rights." - Anti-conservative rants: "Viruses don’t spread through race, just like Tucker Carlson probably told you."
Indicates growing left-leaning, anti-right ideology during pandemic isolation.
Violent Threats
- 737+ YouTube comments (2019–2020) calling for assassinations of politicians (e.g., "We need to assassinate [redacted]"), mass shootings, and political violence. - DeviantArt accounts ("epicmicrowave," "theepicmicrowave") with dark fantasies, including assassination role-play. - Google Drive video: Crooks dry-firing a handgun in his bedroom.
Direct warnings ignored; FBI had access via social media monitoring contracts but downplayed.
Radicalization & Contacts
- Abrupt end to online activity after interacting with "Willy Tepes" (possibly Antifa-linked or foreign handler) in 2020. - Two foreign email accounts (Germany, Belgium). - Links to Snapchat, Venmo, Discord, etc., with unshared data.
Suggests recruitment; Carlson speculates Tepes (real or alias) "ripe for recruitment" by unknown forces.
Personal Identity
- Used "they/them" pronouns on profiles. - Furry fetish content (anthropomorphic animal art/porn) on DeviantArt. - Exploring gender identity.
Ties into broader pattern Carlson notes in other shooters (e.g., Nashville, Colorado Springs), linking "radical gender ideology" to violence.
Carlson argues the FBI's 480+ investigators reviewed 500,000+ files but selectively leaked only "pro-Biden" snippets while hiding the rest. He questions why Director Kash Patel (Trump appointee) and Deputy Dan Bongino haven't released full data, calling it a bipartisan cover-up to avoid "conspiracies" about security failures.FBI Response & Backlash
FBI Statement (Nov. 14, 2025): Via X (formerly Twitter), they denied ever claiming "no online footprint," emphasizing Crooks acted alone after reviewing 20+ accounts, 13 devices, and 1,000+ interviews. Director Patel reiterated this in a video, calling Carlson's claims "nonsensical media fairytales."
Media Coverage: Mixed—conservative outlets (Daily Mail, InfoWars) hailed it as a "bombshell"; mainstream (Newsweek, The Independent) framed it as Carlson pushing unproven conspiracy theories. Follow-up NY Post reporting by Miranda Devine (Nov. 17) corroborated the furry/trans elements, sparking renewed debate.
Public Reaction on X: Over 20 recent posts praise it as "must-watch" for exposing suppression, with users sharing clips and questioning Patel. Some criticize Carlson's timing amid his feud with Trump allies over a Nick Fuentes interview.
Where to Watch
Full Video: Free on YouTube: Who Is Thomas Crooks? (34 minutes, uploaded Nov. 14, 2025).
TCN Platform: Exclusive extended version at tuckercarlson.com (subscription required for full access).
This documentary has reignited demands for transparency, with calls for Patel to declassify all Crooks data. As of November 18, 2025, no new FBI releases have followed, leaving many questions unanswered. If you're looking for specific clips or deeper dives into any section, let me know!
Why Thomas Crooks' Online Violent Remarks Likely Went Unnoticed by the FBI
FBI was contracting for mass surveillance of public media.. How did they miss?
Thomas Matthew Crooks (note: commonly misspelled as "Cooks") left a significant digital trail of violent rhetoric, including over 700 YouTube comments from 2019–2020 (when he was 15–16) advocating political assassinations, terrorism-style attacks, and phrases like "MURDER THE DEMOCRATS."
npr.org +1
These were discovered after his July 13, 2024, assassination attempt on Donald Trump, despite the FBI's access to his phone and devices.
fbi.gov
The FBI maintains Crooks was unknown to them pre-incident, acted alone, and had no clear motive, while critics like Tucker Carlson accuse them of incompetence or cover-up.
newsweek.com +1
Below, I break down the key reasons this activity evaded proactive detection, based on official statements, investigations, and broader surveillance challenges.Key Reasons for Oversight
Sheer Volume of Online Data
The FBI and other agencies monitor billions of social media posts daily via tools like keyword scans and AI algorithms, but the scale overwhelms resources—processing petabytes of data with limited analysts (e.g., FBI's ~35,000 employees handle global threats).
brennancenter.org +1
Crooks' posts were scattered across platforms (YouTube, Discord, Snapchat, etc.) under pseudonyms or deactivated accounts, buried in noise without real-time flagging.
foxnews.com
Even user-flagged content (e.g., his violent comments) didn't escalate to FBI radar.
Timing and Age of Posts
Proactive monitoring prioritizes current threats; historical posts (especially from minors) are rarely retroactively scanned unless tied to a tip or warrant. Privacy laws like COPPA protect minors' data.
aclu.org
His extreme comments dated to 2019–2020, four years before the shooting—too old for routine surveillance, and he went "dark" online afterward.
npr.org
FBI only linked them post-incident via device forensics.
Director Wray was even questioning whether Trump was shot.. an obvious lie and an attempt at distraction
Legal and Privacy Constraints
The Fourth Amendment requires probable cause for deep dives; suspicionless bulk surveillance is limited, relying on voluntary platform reports or public tips. Encrypted/deleted content adds barriers.
brennancenter.org +1
No pre-incident tips about Crooks triggered a warrant. Platforms like Google (YouTube's parent) share data selectively, and his accounts weren't "high-risk" enough for automatic alerts.
foxnews.com
Platform Cooperation Gaps
FBI contracts with tech firms (e.g., Meta, Google) provide access, but companies prioritize user privacy and may delay or redact data. Foreign or niche platforms (e.g., Crooks' possible overseas emails) complicate this.
brennancenter.org
Despite traceability from his phone number/email, FBI didn't pursue his full footprint pre-shooting. Post-incident, they accessed devices but found no foreign ties or accomplices.
fbi.gov
No Clear "Red Flags" for Intervention
Violent rhetoric alone isn't illegal (protected by First Amendment unless it meets incitement standards). FBI focuses on actionable threats, not vague ideation.
brookings.edu
Crooks' posts were alarming but not specific enough for arrest (e.g., general calls for "assassinations" vs. naming targets). Even flagged by users, they weren't deemed imminent.
foxnews.com
New York Post printed this article in February 2025 from a whistleblower
Resource Prioritization and Internal Failures
With threats from terrorism, cybercrime, and elections, domestic "lone wolves" like Crooks get deprioritized. Critics cite FBI's history of missing signals (e.g., Parkland shooter).
foxnews.com
Then-Director Wray's claim of a "thin" online presence contradicted later findings, suggesting analytical gaps or under reporting.
foxnews.com
FBI denies a cover-up, insisting they never claimed "no footprint."
newsweek.com
Broader Context and Ongoing DebateThe FBI's post-shooting probe (involving 480+ staff and 500,000+ files) confirmed some violent content but no motive or co-conspirators.
foxnews.com +1
As of November 18, 2025, under Director Kash Patel, full data remains classified, fueling calls for a fresh investigation into both Crooks and the FBI's handling.
abc6onyourside.com +2
Reforms like better AI tools or mandatory platform reporting are discussed, but civil liberties groups warn against overreach.
justsecurity.org +1
In short, it's a mix of systemic overload, legal hurdles, and case-specific oversights—not malice, per the FBI, but enough to erode trust. If you'd like sources on FBI reform proposals or similar cases, let me know!
Unanswered Questions
Cremation of the Body
The body was cremated the day the investigation began.. no tox screening, no tissue samples, nothing saved… clearly not standard police procedure in any murder case.. much less the attempted murder of a former presedent and presidential candidate
Wiping the Crime Scene
The day after the attempted murder the FBI sanitized the crime scene - no blood, no tissue for examination
FBI Unresponsive to Congressional Inquiries a Year Old
Why is the FBI and DOJ lying?