Thomas Crooks tried to kill President Donald Trump. He instead killed an innocent man and may have handed a second term to his intended victim. I mean, Trump with his fist in the air as the Secret Service tries to pull him off the stage is just one of those pictures that has an impact. It was kinda badass.
But it seems young Mr. Crooks had an interest in firearms for a while, and that's somehow a problem.
At least, that's my read based on the fact that the New York Post did an entire article about that.
President Trump’s would-be assassin, Thomas Crooks, developed an obsession with firearms and long-distance shooting in the years leading up to his deadly rampage at the July 2024 Butler, Pa., campaign rally, according to federal records reviewed by The Post.
The details of Crooks’ interest in guns and target practice were included in a trove of documents provided to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), as part of his ongoing inquiry into the first Trump assassination attempt.
The gunman’s father, Matthew Crooks, told federal investigators that his son’s conversations with him were usually brief and related to firearms.
However, he did not liken their shared interest in guns and shooting to a form of father-son bonding, telling investigators he believed Thomas “had ulterior motives” that became clear “the minute he pulled that trigger,” in a possible reference to the Trump assassination attempt.
Matthew reports that he handed the gun to Thomas, believing that he was headed to the gun range rather than to carry out an attempt on the then-former president's life. Why he believed his son had ulterior motives is unclear, though Matthew says he changed the combination to his safe regularly because of Thomas looking over his shoulder as he unlocked it.
There was also a moment where Thomas was cleaning a gun and apparently animatedly talking to himself.
Matthew still gave him the gun that morning just a few days later, though, so he must not have thought too much about it at the time.
But at the end of the day, my question is, why would any of this matter?
"He was obsessed with guns!"
So are a lot of people who have never pulled the trigger with a human being in their crosshairs. Being fascinated by guns isn't disqualifying from owning them, so Mr. Crooks and his interest aren't relevant.
Instead, it paints a misguided target on the back of anyone who has a profound interest in firearms. It's nothing but a way to add to the stigmatization of gun owners. Anyone who is "obsessed" with guns is someone who is a threat and should be feared, which just means more people will decide it's not worth talking about.
Is that what the Post is trying to do? I honestly don't know. The Post is better than the New York Times by a mile. That's not exactly a challenge.
Crooks's supposed interest in guns may have been legitimate, or it stemmed entirely from the fact that he wanted to kill President Trump. We still don't know why he wanted Trump dead, but I guess that's not as important as the fact that he supposedly liked to shoot stuff.
Just think, though. Had Crooks been successful, what might have happened?
Thankfully, he wasn't, and we don't have to find out for sure.
Instead, Crooks killed Corey Comperatore and wounded two other innocent people. The only thing he actually did to Donald Trump was graze his ear and give him a photograph that is one of the defining political moments of our time.
Crooks got what he deserved, but God only knows why he did what he did. I have questions about that, few answers, and a newfound disdain for the one New York daily that I didn't think sucked entirely.
