The shooter was 12 when Trump was first elected. archive
Odd that a Republican would.
There are quite a few republicans pissed that Trump is the ticket again. They don’t like him and find him destructive to, well, everything.
Not so odd.
Not all republicans are the type that stormed the capital. Those just happen to be the loudest and draw the most attention.
If someone was republican who sees through the Trump cult, it’d be reasonable to see them infuritated with the party they once identified with. Given his age I’m not so sure I’d be conclusive one way or another right now though.
Seems mental distress and illnesses played another large factor here, as they so frequently like to do. Im not surprised the people being peddled the most propaganda are the one’s ‘snapping’.
Archive: https://archive.is/OKkIi
Discord servers are restricted ring-fenced sections of the internet. They are often used by gaming groups and communities as secure chat rooms but are also used by fringe organisations to push their ideologies and discuss wild conspiracy theories and plots.
There’s nothing convenient about Discord’s UI, famously assembled by drunken idiot monkeys with a grudge against functional design.
Some articles (like this one from USA Today have mentioned that in '21 he made a small donation to the Progressive Turnout Project, and it’s interesting that that’s missing from this article. Did it turn out to not be true or did they purposefully omit that?
I’m from Yurop so I don’t even pretend to understand the election system in the US let alone PA, but I’ve seen some comments that led me to understand that he could well be a Democrat even though he was a “registered Republican” because there might not even be good D candidates for him to vote for in PA, and many D voters tactically vote for the least bad R candidate.
Not sure him being a “gun lover” really necessarily paints him as a Republican either; Americans regardless of party affiliation can be pretty… uh, enthusiastic about guns, although yeah it does seem to be more common on the right but I’m not sure it’s enough to draw any conclusions from it.
And just so there’s no misunderstandings, I really don’t have a dog in this hunt so I’m not looking to blame Democrats for the shooting, I’m just trying to digest the news I’ve been reading.
The Republican party registration has other corroborating information listed such as middle initial address and date of birth.
The donation only has the same first and last name.
So they’re including the Republican party registration, as it’s more confirmed… And they’re not saying he voted Republican, just that he was registered that way.
As for having an interest in guns, he owned an AR-15, so must have had some interest there.
I definitely think it’s possible he could be either. The bit about guns is mainly because guns is one of their things. Some Republicans love guns more than anything.
Either way, I’m mostly impressed at how quickly those facts became the most important bits of information. I guess it makes sense though. I’m just glad he’s white and not brown. lol
The donation is not confirmed to be him. The listed donation just came with a first and last name. No age or birth date, with no middle initial or name. There are a lot of people with the same first and last name and there’s no reason to believe it was this particular Thomas Crooks that made the donation.
Some articles (like this one from USA Today have mentioned that in '21 he made a small donation to the Progressive Turnout Project, and it’s interesting that that’s missing from this article. Did it turn out to not be true or did they purposefully omit that?
It was a donation to a get out the vote project. On inauguration day. About as useful as tits on a tractor.
I don’t know if he made the donation to make it seem like he was a Democrat or for no good reason, but he didn’t donate $15 on January 20th to help Democratic turnout.
They probably left it out because getting into it would only muddy the waters or even lend false credence to the cult’s conspiracy theories about him being “deep state antifa” or whatever.
How did they identify him using DNA? That’s a fucking red flag. Is there some database I’m not aware of? Or did he have prior arrests?
When you’re rooting for a conspiracy all new info cam be read as a red flag if you’re creative and paranoid enough.
Because it’s potentially indicative of a national database of everyone’s DNA, rather than just the criminal database, which would be (and perhaps is) a privacy nightmare
Some states have been collecting blood for almost 40 years and can’t even really say why. They just started doing it…
https://www.ibj.com/articles/58596-storing-babies-blood-samples-pits-privacy-versus-science
Like, they have an excuse for taking the samples that seems valid. Except I don’t think they’re actually testing them. And there’s no reason to keep after testing.
Now, I dont think it’s for a secret DNA database, I think it’s normal red state bullshit.
Just pointing out in some states the take and keep blood samples from every birth
Privacy minded people don’t like the idea of easily accessible geology databases. This was a good use of that technology, but people worry about that technology be used for evil. Health insurance companies reflagging you, or much worse.
There are genealogy databases that are public and or cooperate with authorities. Perhaps I’m a privacy nihilist, but IMHO, the cat’s kind of out of the bag for a lot of this. If you didn’t submit your DNA to a genealogy DB, you probably have family members that did so could see if they were 30% Italian or something.
It was the only reliable way to find who the biological parents of my father were, so yeah.
I once read an expert on this and it seems they only need a very low amount of DNA samples (like 0.1% of the population) in the database to be able to narrow down any search to the sibling level.
And traditional detective work can then figure out which sibling, if there are multiple.
So yeah, the cat is out of the bag with this one.
Exactly, your DNA doesn’t need to be in the DB at all, you just your relatives DNA in the DB.
Yes all these rocks and minerals need to be watched closely
Lol
I think you mean genealogy maybe?
They could easily get samples from family members to confirm. I’m sure one or both of his parents were in discussions with the FBI shortly after this all went down
Some organizations do mass DNA collection from kids to help identify them later in life.
The school sends out a notification that the parents can sign up to have their kid swabbed so their kid’s tiny corpse can be identified. They don’t word it like that, but that is the idea.
So he may have been swabbed as a kid and they referenced that.
California has been collecting dna from babies since the 80s apparantly
I wonder how many people there are aware
I didn’t realize how sketchy that all was. The form mentions genetic testing for conditions, but that was just like 2 of the spots. They did like 6 to a tiny newborn. I’d recommend other parents to object.
And I’m going to submit the destruction forms for my kids and myself.
