FBI identifies Trump rally shooter as Thomas Matthew Crooks <--- Thread is about the perpetrator, the crime, and the motivation, not Trump

[Landon Caeli]

I've heard talk of civil war from the right and left in media. It's less prominent than that of a "culture war" but it exists.

Well, it must be incredibly rare, considering I haven't heard it spoken about in any serious manner, ever... At least not by adults.

 

[Ana the Ist]

conspiracy theories flood the internet, creating dangerous ‘spiral’​

[The] claims typically came from random social media users — the writers casting aspersions or seeking to affix blame based on their place in the nation’s intensely polarized political landscape.

The conspiracies formed two now familiar camps — one blaming the “deep state” for what happened, the other claiming without evidence that the shooting was not what it seemed.

“Seemed staged,” one social media user wrote.

But even some elected officials joined with false claims. “Joe Biden sent the orders,” Rep. Mike Collins (R-Ga.) wrote on X, the social media platform.

“What’s always interesting to me about moments like this is that digital sleuths, be they everyday people, be they politically motivated online trolls … we’re all looking in the same place for reliable true and correct information,” said Joan Donovan, a professor of journalism and emerging media studies at Boston University and founder of the Critical Internet Studies Institute. “What’s hard, I think, for the everyday person, is what they’re really looking for is verified information that they can use.”

The hot takes on the internet create a ripe breeding ground for increased division and potential violence, Nisbet said.

“We see each other as enemies, not as fellow Americans,” Nisbet said. “If the other side is immoral, not human, is an existential threat to us and to our country, then it is morally OK to take violent action against them.”

One of the main drivers of political violence is perception — how violent each side thinks the other is, Nisbet said. [Producing a vicious cycle.]

It's pretty simple....

1. The Buffalo shooter that targeted blacks was an eco-fascist and despite his manifesto being available online, it was scrubbed in less than 24 hours, and in roughly 48 hours, his motive as "white supremacy" was pretty firmly established.
Proof. 10 dead in Buffalo supermarket attack police call hate crime

When the motive is even remotely attributable to some right wing ideology....it will be, and quickly.


2. Nashville trans shooter. Kills multiple children and adults in school shooting. Leaves a suicide note, multiple journals, and despite multiple requests both public and legal....no motive is ever ascribed. It's not until later leaks that the evidence showed a hatred of white, male, Christians and their supposed "privilege" in particular was at least a part of the shooter's ideology. Official motive however, was never ascribed to the event. Race was deliberately kept out of the convo of the parade massacre wherein a mentally unstable black man drove over elderly women and children killing multiple victims, and a black subway shooter wasn't even described as black in the short manhunt following his attempted mass murder on a subway car.

I know that the left likes to imagine that there's no possibility the resentment and dehumanizing narratives about white people or the right....or black people (in many ways) can lead to

It's not as if this is the only time a mass killer (or attempted mass killer) has had their motives hidden from the public. The mainstream left media doesn't want to hold itself accountable for fomenting a lot of racial and political hatred. We all know this...there's no big story of how BLM was a scam that didn't help black people and multiple members were convicted of fraud....because mainstream media supported BLM for years.

If this shooter had right wing leanings/motives....it's simple, we'll get a clear picture of that, without evidence, in everything from NYT to LATimes.

If the shooter had left wing motives, we'll never hear what they are, unless some cop/fed leaks them. The left would jump at the chance to promote the right as dangerous and unhinged. If they don't portray Crooks that way by the end of the week....it's obvious why.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Well, it must be incredibly rare, considering I haven't heard it spoken about in any serious manner, ever... At least not by adults.

Well I'll tell you right now....we're in a powderkeg situation.

Most of the necessary elements are there....

1. A deep political divide with a disappearing middle and extremism on both sides.
2. Increasing political violence, from Antifa counterprotests and anti-cop protests to the 2020 riots and Jan 6th.
3. Poor economic conditions, rampant crime, which create a "nothing to lose" mentality for many at the bottom.
4. Increasingly dehumanizing rhetoric. If you're a white man, you're the Oppressor who's opinion doesn't matter and problems aren't considered. Trans people, foreigners, religious minorities like jews...all facing increasingly dehumanizing rhetoric as well.
5. Increasingly high stakes political rhetoric. "If our side doesn't win, that's the end of democracy/the US as we know it".
6. Poor leadership. When leaders should be talking about fixing the economy, getting us out of foreign wars, fixing the border crisis, restoring law and order to prevent pharmacies and grocery stores from closing, and fixing education.....they're talking about Roe v Wade (not unimportant, but far less important) and Project 2025 (which is more a conservative wishlist than anything to be afraid of).

 

[Landon Caeli]

Well I'll tell you right now....we're in a powderkeg situation.

Most of the necessary elements are there....

1. A deep political divide with a disappearing middle and extremism on both sides.
2. Increasing political violence, from Antifa counterprotests and anti-cop protests to the 2020 riots and Jan 6th.
3. Poor economic conditions, rampant crime, which create a "nothing to lose" mentality for many at the bottom.
4. Increasingly dehumanizing rhetoric. If you're a white man, you're the Oppressor who's opinion doesn't matter and problems aren't considered. Trans people, foreigners, religious minorities like jews...all facing increasingly dehumanizing rhetoric as well.
5. Increasingly high stakes political rhetoric. "If our side doesn't win, that's the end of democracy/the US as we know it".
6. Poor leadership. When leaders should be talking about fixing the economy, getting us out of foreign wars, fixing the border crisis, restoring law and order to prevent pharmacies and grocery stores from closing, and fixing education.....they're talking about Roe v Wade (not unimportant, but far less important) and Project 2025 (which is more a conservative wishlist than anything to be afraid of).

All of those six things are far more likely the cause of the current situation than the spreading of "civil war rhetoric", by the right, as was suggested earlier, in the post I was responding to.

...Those are real world issues, not civil war "rhetoric".

 

[Larniavc]

If the shooter had been black, maybe. Otherwise, it's yet another silly conspiracy theory.

You miss the point by focussing on the minutiae of the example.

 

[Ana the Ist]

In one of these threads, I linked to a comment from a classmate alleging he was bullied a lot. I’ve seen subsequent comments about the person making those claims being kind of a glory hound with a tenuous relationship with the truth. So who knows.

Yeah it's the sort if thing that can be easily part of a false memory after an event like this.

Was he bullied a lot or not bullied? Did he keep to himself or have a small circle of friends?

Easy to project these ideas backwards and think them memories.

Are you calling conservative kids dumb? lol

Lol no...I'm calling schools more inclined to indoctrination these days. That doesn't necessarily mean he was indoctrinated....but generally one has to spit back whatever the curriculum is under those circumstances.

On the bullying thing....I also heard he got loud cheers from the students and crowd at graduation when he walked the stage to receive his award for math and science.

 

[Ana the Ist]

All of those six things are far more likely the cause of the current situation than the spreading of "civil war rhetoric", by the right, as was suggested earlier, in the post I was responding to.

I'm suggesting these things precede civil wars.

...Those are real world issues, not civil war "rhetoric".

I'm not saying they are civil war rhetoric....I'm saying they precede civil wars.

 

[Ana the Ist]

It's always ridiculously easy. Which assignation or assassination attempt in American history was not ridiculously easy? The only thing hard is making a getaway.

JFK. I'd say that shot on a moving target wasn't "ridiculously easy". Not impossible by any stretch but took an experienced and capable shooter.

The getaway, if you're familiar with history, was bizarre. He acted, by all accounts, as if he hadn't just shot the president....went to the movies....and claimed to have been set up.

 

[Landon Caeli]

I'm suggesting these things precede civil wars.




I'm not saying they are civil war rhetoric....I'm saying they precede civil wars.

In that case, then we both agree that it is most likely not right-wing civil war rhetoric that caused the attempted assassination of DJT...

...Rather, it was more likely to be actual real world realities that lead up to it - the same kind of realities that often lead to real civil war.

 

[Ana the Ist]

No, that wasn't all it was.

Ok.

The LGBTQ community might disagree about how divisive their rhetoric was.

Fair enough.

Stuff didn't seem extreme because you agreed with it or because it was said with a smile. But claiming that gay marriage threatens the fabric of the family

Uh...heavy metal music has been claimed to destroy the fabric of families. I'm not sure how extreme that accusation is.

or that the Clintons murdered several of their associates are not "pretty tame."

I don't think anyone is claiming the Clintons killed all those people. I think people are claiming that the Clinton's have had people killed, or are protected in some capacity by the CIA, because of the drug running done in Arkansas by the CIA under their drug running scheme.

If you have looked at the list, I'm curious why you dismiss it as conspiracy theory nonsense?

 

[Ana the Ist]

In that case, then we both agree that it is most likely not right-wing civil war rhetoric that caused the attempted assassination of DJT...

Unlikely but possible. I'm not going to write it off entirely without evidence.

...Rather, it was more likely to be actual real world realities that lead up to it - the same kind of realities that often lead to real civil war.

Yeah. One I forgot was the breakdown of debate. Debate tends to bring understanding if not agreement and whenever one side starts refusing debate entirely on political issues....they've destroyed the sort of "pressure valve" that kills political tension.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Uh...heavy metal music has been claimed to destroy the fabric of families. I'm not sure how extreme that accusation is.

I don’t recall the complaints against heavy metal being used to justify the denial of civil rights.

Either way, in the world in which I grew up, the complaints against heavy metal got more extreme than you probably realize. The fears of satanism were very real.

I don't think anyone is claiming the Clintons killed all those people. I think people are claiming that the Clinton's have had people killed,

That’s splitting hairs. Charles Manson never killed anybody himself either.

or are protected in some capacity by the CIA, because of the drug running done in Arkansas by the CIA under their drug running scheme.

If you have looked at the list, I'm curious why you dismiss it as conspiracy theory nonsense?

It’s been a while at this point, so I don’t recall all of them, but off the top of my head, several alleged “bodyguards” were merely helicopter crewman who never had more than minimal contact with the Clintons. I remember one of the names on the list being the wrong person altogether.

 

[essentialsaltes]

• The building was meant to be covered by local law enforcement because it was not in the immediate vicinity of the venue, according to law enforcement sources not authorized to speak publicly about the investigation. The details of how the U.S. Secret Service and local authorities divided tasks for the rally remain unclear.
• When authorities learned of the threat: Videos show that some in the crowd noticed the gunman and tried to get the attention of law enforcement at least a minute [WaPo says 86 seconds] before he fired at Trump. Local police say an officer got onto the roof just before the shooting but had to retreat because the gunman moved to shoot at him.
• Videos from the rally show Trump standing at a lectern with two Secret Service snipers positioned on a rooftop in the background. In the seconds leading up to Trump’s being struck by gunfire, the snipers can be seen looking through a scope and adjusting their rifles before firing.

While the gunman was visible to those at the back of the building, the angle of the roof meant it was far harder for Secret Service snipers to see him until he aimed over the peak with his gun.

“There was local police in that building. There was local police in the area that were responsible for the outer perimeter of the building,” [SS Director Cheatle] said.

Mayorkas said it’s not unusual for the Secret Service to rely on other law enforcement agencies during a presidential campaign to fill out tasks, noting that is especially true for the Trump campaign.

The state police said securing the property and building where Crooks was perched on the roof was not part of the officers’ duties [they were within the perimeter]. It remains unclear which agency was responsible for securing that building.

Troy Douthett with the Butler City Council dismissed as “hogwash” the Secret Service’s claim that the shooter was outside its security perimeter.

“Local law enforcement is not equipped for protecting a president. That’s just insanity to me. We would have full expectation that the professionals would be professional,” he added.

[He sounds defensive; wonder if his brother is on the Butler PD.]

 

[ozso]

 

[Landon Caeli]

• The building was meant to be covered by local law enforcement because it was not in the immediate vicinity of the venue, according to law enforcement sources not authorized to speak publicly about the investigation. The details of how the U.S. Secret Service and local authorities divided tasks for the rally remain unclear.
• When authorities learned of the threat: Videos show that some in the crowd noticed the gunman and tried to get the attention of law enforcement at least a minute [WaPo says 86 seconds] before he fired at Trump. Local police say an officer got onto the roof just before the shooting but had to retreat because the gunman moved to shoot at him.
• Videos from the rally show Trump standing at a lectern with two Secret Service snipers positioned on a rooftop in the background. In the seconds leading up to Trump’s being struck by gunfire, the snipers can be seen looking through a scope and adjusting their rifles before firing.

While the gunman was visible to those at the back of the building, the angle of the roof meant it was far harder for Secret Service snipers to see him until he aimed over the peak with his gun.

“There was local police in that building. There was local police in the area that were responsible for the outer perimeter of the building,” [SS Director Cheatle] said.

Mayorkas said it’s not unusual for the Secret Service to rely on other law enforcement agencies during a presidential campaign to fill out tasks, noting that is especially true for the Trump campaign.

The state police said securing the property and building where Crooks was perched on the roof was not part of the officers’ duties [they were within the perimeter]. It remains unclear which agency was responsible for securing that building.

Troy Douthett with the Butler City Council dismissed as “hogwash” the Secret Service’s claim that the shooter was outside its security perimeter.

“Local law enforcement is not equipped for protecting a president. That’s just insanity to me. We would have full expectation that the professionals would be professional,” he added.

[He sounds defensive; wonder if his brother is on the Butler PD.]

There's no way that the S.S. should have ever relinquished such a pertinent location over to local law enforcement. That is very poor drcision-making on the part of the Secret Service!

And if this is an example of the kinds of decision making the Secret Service makes, then an investigation on who made that call needs to take place immediately.

....And I want to know exactly who that ladder belongs to that multiple sources cite as being used at that location.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

That's because you weren't exposed to their (or, "our", I suppose) media.

For whatever reason, there seems to be a big wall between conservative (esp religious) media and everybody else, where outsiders never really get a glimpse over the wall, regardless of how many people are inside the wall. I saw this when the Tea Party took off - "mainstream society" was surprised by the new movement, when it wasn't really new at all. It was just the Limbaugh crowd getting tv time.

I don't recall anybody calling Clinton "illegitimate" as in he didn't win the election, but "enemy of the state" or similar sentiments were extremely common.

So if we're looking at what led up to or fostered the things that threaten democratic norms (IE: questioning or rejecting election results, eventually in ways that lead to violent altercations)

What's more likely to have set the framework for normalizing election denial
Was it religious media calling people "baby killers"? Or Rush Limbaugh floating conspiracy theories about Vince Foster?

Or was it the events I outlined before that happened surrounding the 2000 and 2004 elections?

Whatever the rhetoric was surrounding Bill Clinton, I don't recall over a dozen house reps trying to stop the election from being certified during his first election, and I don't recall 1/3 of the opposing team suggesting that his 2nd election was "rigged via voting machines" after his subsequent re-election.


And while some goofy conspiracy theories may have been floated around, they were always just that, fringe conspiracy theories.

Conspiracy theories didn't start getting "mainstream status" (as in, a substantial amount of a party, and party leaders willing to embrace them) until the Bush 9/11 stuff.

Terry McAuliffe (then DNC chair) along with some Senators and House Reps attending the premier of "Fahrenheit 911" (and subsequently promoting it) represents a "normalization of conspiracy theories" that hadn't existed up until then.


And I also feel that those events were the precursor to them voting for someone like Trump in the first place. After 3 times in a row of getting labelled as "fascist/racist/etc..." after voting for the respectable (yet, increasingly watered-down) candidates, eventually that causes a "gloves are coming off, we want a counter-puncher" mentality for some people I would imagine.

"Well, they called us names for voting for Bush...okay, well we'll back John McCain, he's a little more tame, and gets along well with their team...hmmm, they still called us racists, let's go with Romney, a New England governor who accomplished healthcare reform and got high approvals ratings in a blue state...what's that, they're still calling us fascists?...ok, that's it, no more playing nice"

 

[Landon Caeli]

Unlikely but possible. I'm not going to write it off entirely without evidence.

So what you're saying here, is that there is the possibility that "right wing" civil war rhetoric may have been the root cause of the attempted assassination...

Not sure why you would want to hang onto that particular idea outside of sheer stubbornness, for the sake of debate though.

 

[essentialsaltes]

....And I want to know exactly who that ladder belongs to that multiple sources cite as being used at that location.

Sources such as...

 

[durangodawood]

...."Well, they called us names for voting for Bush...okay, well we'll back John McCain, he's a little more tame, and gets along well with their team...hmmm, they still called us racists, let's go with Romney, a New England governor who accomplished healthcare reform and got high approvals ratings in a blue state...what's that, they're still calling us fascists?...ok, that's it, no more playing nice"

If correct, this is an absurdly puerile way of deciding who to vote for - and not a particularly flattering portrait of Trump voters.

 

[Landon Caeli]

Sources such as...

Shooter reportedly used a ladder to gain access to roof in Trump assassination attempt

Officers were reportedly told by rally attendees moments before a gunman attempted to assassinate former President Donald Trump of a man trying to reach the roof of a nearby building using a ladder.

www.kbzk.com

Some reports I've read say that the officer also gained roof access via ladder, while other reports say he was "hoisted" by other officers... Clearly some people are lying about this.