It’s been 16 months since that horrific day in Butler, Pennsylvania, when then-candidate Donald Trump was nearly assassinated by a deranged gunman—and somehow, we still know next to nothing about the young man who pulled the trigger. Thomas Crooks remains just as much of an enigma today as he was the moment Secret Service agents hauled his lifeless body off that rooftop.
For all the MAGA movement’s rightful demands for transparency, for answers, for even the most basic explanation as to why this kid tried to take out Trump—killing Corey Comperatore, a husband, father, and hero in the process—we’re still coming up empty.
Some details have trickled out, but none of them explain why a 20-year-old outcast lugged a rangefinder and an AR-style rifle onto a rooftop that day — or why authorities failed to act even after rallygoers spotted him in his makeshift sniper’s nest before the shooting started. What we do know is that months before Butler, Crooks was already experimenting with bomb-making.
But here’s the real problem: we still have no idea who he was talking to, what motivated him, or why he decided to try to take out Trump. And for those who expected that, once Trump’s team took over at DOJ and FBI, the sealed boxes would finally be cracked open and the truth revealed… well, the disappointment is real.
Earlier this week, Tucker Carlson released a 35-minute video suggesting that Thomas Crooks had a far more extensive digital footprint than the public was led to believe. According to Carlson, his team accessed Crooks’ Google Drive, uncovering a video of the would-be assassin dry-firing a handgun, along with years’ worth of Crooks’ “violent” online threats.
“Thomas Crooks came within a quarter inch of destroying this country, and yet, a year and a half later, we still know almost nothing about him or why he did it. That’s because, for some reason, the FBI, even the current FBI, doesn’t want us to know,” Carlson argued.
Carlson’s exposé, which has already pulled in more than 15 million views, appears to have jolted the Bureau awake. Within hours, current FBI Director Kash Patel pushed out a Friday afternoon tweet offering a vague, top-level summary of the FBI’s “ongoing efforts” in the Crooks investigation:
Crooks Case Overview:
Over 480 FBI employees were involved in the Thomas Crooks investigation. Employees conducted over 1,000 interviews, addressed over 2,000 public tips, analyzed data extracted from 13 seized digital devices, reviewed nearly 500,000 digital files, collected, processed, and synchronized hundreds of hours of video footage, analyzed financial activity from 10 different accounts, and examined data associated with 25 social media or online forum accounts.
The FBI’s investigation into Thomas Crooks identified and examined over 20 online accounts, data extracted from over a dozen electronic devices, examination of numerous financial accounts, and over 1,000 interviews and 2000 public tips.
The investigation, conducted by over 480 FBI employees, revealed Crooks had limited online and in person interactions, planned and conducted the attack alone, and did not leak or share his intent to engage in the attack with anyone.
The reactions to Patel’s statement have been, to put it mildly, fiery. The replies under his post are filled with people demanding real answers — some insisting he should go directly on Tucker Carlson’s show and address the glaring questions Carlson raised. And honestly, who can blame them?
What’s absolutely obvious at this point is that public interest in Thomas Crooks — who he was, what shaped him, and why he tried to murder Donald Trump — is nowhere near fading. If anything, it’s intensifying. Every time new details emerge from outside official channels, the FBI’s already-wobbly narrative looks even shakier.
And that’s the core problem: when the government dribbles out half-answers while independent reporters uncover more than federal investigators seem willing to admit, trust evaporates. People are right to demand better.
There’s only one solution now — the same one the FBI and DOJ always resist: radical transparency.