Here’s a question: Why on earth are we funding the FBI when the bureau can’t even tell us the truth about a guy who came within a split second and a fraction of an inch of assassinating an American president?

I mean, doesn’t the “I” in “FBI” stand for Investigation?

Instead, we have to rely on indy podcaster Tucker Carlson and the New York Post’s dogged Miranda Devine to do the investigative work and expose the truth about the social media footprint of Thomas Crooks — a footprint that the lying leadership of Chris Wray’s FBI told us didn’t even exist.

Did you know, for example, that Crooks was a Trump-hating leftist with a furry fetish who used “they/them” pronouns? No, you didn’t. That’s because our FBI let stand the mainstream media’s lie that Crooks was “a registered Republican” — a lie that began circulating mere hours after the attempted assassination. Here’s disgraced former FBI Director Chris Wray, who stonewalled Congress and the American people on July 24, 2024, a couple of weeks after the shooting:

In terms of what we’ve been able to find so far, a lot of the usual, uh, repositories of information have not yielded, um, anything notable in terms of motive or, uh. like, ideology.

Remember: This is the same Chris Wray who opined that we weren’t sure whether Trump was really even shot — that maybe it was just shrapnel that scooped out his ear like that, even though a New York Times reporter captured a Pulitzer-winning photo of the bullet whizzing right past Trump’s head.

In this case, it didn’t take a genius to say, “I told you so.”

A few days earlier, Wray’s partner in crime, FBI Deputy Director Paul Abbate, had told Congress that Crooks’s social media comments “appear to reflect anti-Semitic and anti-immigration themes to espouse political violence and are described as extreme in nature.”

Ah, so it’s that “right-wing violence” that they kept warning us about during the length of the Biden presidency. It’s as if they were getting their narrative talking points from the Autopen itself.

In “fairness” to the mainstream media, they also reported that Crooks had made “a $15 donation to the Progressive Turnout Project on Inauguration Day in 2021,” but that only causes folks to shrug their shoulders about the ideology that drove Crooks to nearly change the trajectory of world history. Shucks, just some mixed-up politically malleable kid, I guess.

In fact, as Devine points out, Crooks wasn’t mixed up at all: “Thanks to an enterprising source who uncovered Crooks’ hidden digital footprint, we can see that Abbate misled Congress by omission, because he left out an entire section of Crooks’ online interactions from January to August 2020 when he did an ideological backflip and went from rabidly pro-Trump to rabidly anti-Trump and then went dark, never seeming to post again.”

Why wouldn’t the FBI tell us that Crooks ultimately did a political 180 in early 2020, the last year of Trump’s first term, and started posting stuff about fighting the government “with terrorism style attacks”? Wouldn’t an online posting suggesting that you “sneak a bomb into an essential building and set it off before anyone sees you, track down any important people/politicians/military leaders etc and try to assassinate them” raise an eyebrow with those whose job it is to detect this sort of threat and protect the rest of us from it?

Answer: Because it would’ve put the victim of the attempted assassination, Donald Trump, in an even more sympathetic light, and it would’ve therefore hurt the Democrats politically in the run-up to last year’s presidential election. Lucky for us, it didn’t matter.

It was on Friday that Carlson, who has neither the financial resources nor the investigative manpower of, say, The New York Times or The Washington Post, nonetheless delivered the goods in a 34-minute podcast. The rest of fair-minded (read: non-legacy) media have since followed suit and built upon that reporting.

If only Carlson could resist the apparently overwhelming urge to give softball interviews to infantile Hitler-worshipers like Nick Fuentes.

Trump’s FBI Director Kash Patel recently said that Cooks acted alone, but a lot of folks are now calling for the investigation to be reopened — including the widow of Corey Comperatore, the volunteer fire chief who was murdered that day.

On that sad note, here’s former FBI Assistant Director Chris Swecker: “I wouldn’t trust the previous iteration of the FBI and the Biden Administration to not hide their mistakes and not be proactive when it comes to Donald Trump and getting out there and trying to intervene and intercede. … Regarding the motivation, we know again that the previous iteration of the FBI and the Biden Administration tried to convince us that there was only right-wing terrorism or right-wing fanatics, and that simply wasn’t the case. But they oriented their whole strategy around that. It was spring-loaded to do just that. And they took their eye off the ball, so it would not be a shocker to learn that the FBI and the agencies had taken their eye off the ball when it comes to the lethality and the danger of the left wing.”

As Devine concludes: “Trump and those close to him are skeptical about the official story and question how the impoverished parents of Crooks, who had to ask for money from neighbors to pay for their son’s funeral, could afford to hire a white-shoe law firm, Quinn Logue, out of Pittsburgh. It is hard to believe the FBI and/or Secret Service missed Crooks. The question is, what did they do about him?

It’s a good question. Indeed, it’s the question.

There’s a lot we still don’t know about this assassination attempt, but it’s that "lethality of the left wing” that keeps coming up, isn’t it?