FBI Director Kash Patel is facing mounting pressure from the American public to provide comprehensive answers regarding the bureau's investigation into Thomas Crooks, the would-be assassin of former President Donald Trump. This comes after prominent broadcaster Tucker Carlson directly challenged the FBI's official account, accusing the agency of dishonesty about the shooter's digital footprint.
Conflicting Narratives Emerge
In a bid for transparency last Friday, Director Patel, 45, published a detailed list of what he termed investigative 'facts' concerning the 20-year-old Crooks. The statement outlined that over 480 FBI employees were involved in the probe, which concluded that Crooks had minimal online and in-person interactions, acted entirely alone, and did not share his intentions with anyone.
Patel further emphasised the scale of the investigation, noting that authorities had conducted more than 1,000 interviews, reviewed 2,000 public tips, and seized 13 digital devices.
Tucker Carlson's Explosive Claims
This renewed openness from the FBI followed a highly anticipated documentary released by Tucker Carlson, 56, who claimed the bureau 'lied' about Crooks having no meaningful online presence. Carlson countered this by presenting what he alleged were Crooks' own social media posts, which he received from an anonymous source with access to the shooter's wiped accounts.
According to Carlson's documentary, these posts depict a young man who was initially a Trump supporter but allegedly drifted towards the radical left during the COVID-19 pandemic. Carlson asserts that the FBI concealed this political shift and instead framed Crooks as right-wing.
The FBI's Rapid Response team swiftly rebutted these allegations on social media platform X, stating unequivocally: 'The FBI has never said Thomas Crooks had no online footprint. Ever.'
Public Demand for Transparency
The conflicting accounts have ignited a firestorm of public demand for the full release of the case files. Social media users have bombarded the FBI with questions, expressing deep scepticism and calling for immediate transparency.
One user directly challenged Patel's social media claims, writing, 'That's a nice set of claims you've posted... Can you give us the receipts, please?' Another questioned, 'Why was his home sanitized and didn’t even have silverware?' reflecting broader public unease about the handling of evidence.
Many commentators echoed the sentiment that with no ongoing trial, there is no justification for withholding information. 'We should have access to his online posts to better understand what radicalized him,' one user argued, while another pointedly asked, 'So you'll be releasing all of those files and reports shortly, yes?'
The controversy underscores the lingering public doubt and the urgent calls for the FBI to fully open its investigation into the attempted assassination that shocked the nation.
