Yesterday a Lehigh Valley politician text me quite upset that Bob “Crooksy” Brooks was being endorsed by the Blue Dogs. They said to me incredulously, “So we have a Bernie-endorsed, Medicare For All supporting and Progressive Caucus candidate, who the BLUE DOGS are endorsing?? They’re about as conservative as the Dem caucus gets. This guy is all over the place.”

Yep, we’re getting warmer here.

The entire plan to get Bob “Crooksy” Brooks to run for Congress was the most cynical kind of politics possible on the part of the people who talked him into it and endorsed him. They didn’t vet the guy at all before telling him it’s a great idea, because they knew he would cash in his union leadership position for enough money to pay some consultants a healthy pay day, which would help the careers of the youthful staffers who pushed this scheme. So they ignored that he stiffed his mother-in-law, that he hated Barack Obama, he’s a racist, he’s a gun and religion nut, and he’s oblivious to political violence. They knew that some heavy-hitters in the Democratic Party would ignore all of these flaws too, because endorsing him would be good for their ambitions. They knew that once those heavy-hitters were on board, many in the political class would fall in line with them and defend a guy who holds none of their values, because they’re sheeple. And with money, endorsers, and completely establishment creatures spinning a guy taking money from his mother-in-law, they might be able to get him across the line in the primary, and then they could pray that it’s a wave year and no one will care that we nominated a literally awful human being.

Ok, so now why?

It’s not like Crooksy is a big thinker. It’s not like this tree trunk is Machiavelli. As PoliticsPA more politely put it, the guy can barely put together a coherent sentence on his feet. I hate to compare him to John Fetterman, given Fetterman’s issues, but the shoe fits. The guy just goes out and repeats slogans and buzzwords, like “working class,” “Medicare for All,” and “Blue Collar.” As I said before, it’s a noun, a verb, and Josh Shapiro out of this guy’s mouth. He’s bringing about as much intellectual thought to government and politics as my one legged ass is bringing to a 100 meter dash race.

So let’s be honest about this- a bunch of DC consultants have decided the Democrats have a blue collar white guy problem to fix. Their theory is that as long as Trump is around they really don’t need to appeal to their actual base voters- people of color and college educated, white collar moderates that have been moving their way dating back to Trump’s arrival. Those married women with masters degrees in Upper Macungie and the Black woman who is a leader in her church will never vote for Trump’s GOP, at least in these smart DC types’ minds. So don’t worry about them. Nominate a bald white guy who has no real ideas and has spent most of his life disagreeing with what the Democratic Party has become, and try to win back the mythical white unicorn with a sub-mediocre IQ and a ton of opinions about “how the world has changed.” Maybe as an added bonus if he hits all of the buzzwords that are cool with the terminally online crowd he can appeal to people that find the Democratic Party’s longstanding battles for equality and Civil Rights boring compared to some mythological revolution. It’s so dumb that it can appeal to all of the really dumb people at once, and well, we’ve seen how that works.

This approach is not only insulting to actual Democratic base voters, but it’s actually deeply insulting to voters who haven’t been voting for us too. So basically you’re saying to the former Democratic voter in Whitehall or Northampton that works in a blue collar job that you think this thoughtless drone is what they want to see? Give me a break. Republicans are not going to buy into this guy who was endorsed by Bernie Sanders. Literally all of them fit into two camps at this point- people that are voting Republic because they think Democrats have lost their minds, or people that are voting Republican because they want some sort of cultural inquisition to purge our politics of liberal thought. The guy endorsed by Bernie Sanders appeases neither of those groups and disappoints the people who have been with us for a while now.

Bob “Crooksy” Brooks is a candidate with no political soul. Is he a Blue Dog now because they endorsed him? Is he a populist progressive because Bernie Sanders and SEIU endorsed him? The truth is, he’s neither. He’s just another consultant laboratory creation in DC and Harrisburg that is looking forward to having a good time in DC on someone else’s dime. I mean, I guess in a different time in my life I’d justify running a bucket of slop for Congress by saying he’ll vote for a Democratic Speaker, but given his views on Kaepernick and Obama I doubt he really likes Hakeem Jeffries. Basically if this works, it’s a big “F-U” to the people who have been voting for us, I guess we had to sell you out to get power, and if it doesn’t, we’ll go through this whole stupid process again in two years with a tougher electorate and a new cast of characters to repeat it with. What a stupid idea this was.

Interesting stuff here–

On or about March 17, 2026, an Allentown resident – John Santana – observed that Crosswell’s red box content was set to password-protected, rendering it inaccessible to the general public. Santana also followed up four days later, only to find the red box still private. According to the complaint filed with the FEC, it “created a situation in which any outside group accessing and using this content could only have done so through direct or indirect coordination with the campaign,” in violation of FEC regulations.

The complaint also states that Crosswell “potentially facilitated illegal in-kind contributions to (his) campaign from outside groups operating on non-public materials.”

Campaigns post specific messaging requests, video footage, and voter targeting information (e.g., demographics) on their websites, often using a distinctively marked red box, notes the Campaign Legal Center. Often times, coded language is used, such as “see” for TV ads, “hear” for radio, or “read” for direct mail, to guide the outside group.

Redboxing also commonly involves posting footage and photos of the candidate, as well as strategy tips about the race. A super PAC supporting the candidate then uses the footage and photos along with the campaign-requested messaging in its ads.

I’ll say two things here- red boxes are completely legal. Second, and probably more importantly, there’s no reason on God’s Green Earth to put a password on your red box. Campaigns don’t use their websites to store their content. The only reason to have a red box is to make the information available to your outside supporters via one way communication. I have no idea what Crosswell, or for that matter Carol, had a password on their red box. Maybe they weren’t meant to be public yet for some reason. Or maybe they were giving the password out, as the complaint suggests. I don’t know how you ask the FEC to go find probable cause to investigate that though. I thought you needed probable cause to investigate.

Another thing that just peaked my “spidey sense” a bit here- the individual filing the complaint is an operative. It’s not clear who he’d be working for though. He’s worked for the PA Dems (So maybe Brooks?), Working Families Party (Brooks), Make the Road (Brooks? I haven’t seen who they’re supporting), and interned for former Congresswoman Susan Wild. Regardless of who he did this on the behalf of, he caught something here. Putting a password on a red box is weird.

I’m going to lay this out pretty simply. Who is the real you? Absolutely none of us are exactly the person that we think we are in our minds. No one thinks *they* are a bad person when they’re doing bad things. They justify it to themselves, and sometimes there’s even logic to it. Life gets in the way of our better ideals sometimes. We take inconvenient, contradictory positions. That becomes even more true in the pursuit of power, riches, and fame. It’s why politics in general is full of a bunch of kiss asses who want important titles and positions. It’s not that they want to be kiss asses, but sometimes life gets in the way. I lived that life for like 22 years. Now I really don’t give a shit who hates me, or what blacklist they’re going to put me on. I’m just happy to be alive. I really don’t care if I’m never chairman of the committee on whatsha-muh-call-it, or get to speak at next year’s awards dinner. It’s small stuff.

Actions speak louder than words though. A guy sitting at the house his ex-in-laws helped him get, posting Oathkeeper memes is speaking his truth. A political candidate trying to convince voters to vote for him to be their Congressman will lie. Oh sure, they’ll tell you and themselves it’s not a lie, they’ll make up a reason they converted and saw the light. But they do that after how many years? It was 22 years ago that Bob “Crooksy” Brooks accepted help from his in-laws financially, it was 18 years ago that he signed a promissory note to pay it back, it was like 8 years ago that he was sued, and it was like four years ago that he lost his appeal in front of the Pennsylvania Superior Court, and for like all of that time he and his ex sat by and didn’t pay back the money they signed a contract to pay back. I’m sure he’s justified it in his own mind. I’m sure he thinks you should justify it as a bad divorce or “hard times,” or whatever too. But for a period of time longer than too many people’s lives, he didn’t do what he said he’d do.

In 2012, Bob wasn’t a Congressional candidate yet. He wasn’t the President of a statewide union yet. No Governors were calling him up and trying to be his friend, no Senators in Arizona knew who the hell he was, and certainly Bernie Sanders wasn’t too concerned about him yet. He was a normal guy, on the internet, stating his truth. His truth? He thought Barack Obama sucked. Why? Did he hate Obamacare? Did he wish Osama Bin Laden was still alive? Did he wish all those UAW jobs in Detroit that Obama saved were gone? Did he think passing modern banking regulations, or putting in place the first coherent strategy for fight climate change was bad? Maybe he wished the American economy had fully melted down in 2009? I don’t know. Now he has his “friends” Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg, Josh Shapiro, and Ruben Gallego telling you he’s some sort of progressive champion. He’s an every man. Does he mean “every” man, or does he mean every man that isn’t like Colin Kaepernick that wanted to protest inequities and biases in our society? What exactly made him say that Kaepernick was a douchebag? Listen, I don’t pretend to love that Kaepernick became a symbol of protest in our country while justifying not voting. Bob didn’t cite that though, kind of like he never told us why he disliked Obama at the time. The truth is that he did not agree with the majority of Democrats on Obama, or Kaepernick, but now wants you to know that he’s going to restore “true” Democratic values in Washington, if you just trust him. Kind of like he was going to pay back his mother-in-law, trust him.

Today Bob wants you to vote for him for Congress. In 2019 he was posting a “III%’er” meme saying we need school prayer and guns in our society. Today he’ll tell you he doesn’t mean that. Of course not, Democratic Primary voters don’t like that. Does Bob though? He will definitely tell you he didn’t mean it then, and especially that he didn’t mean it in the context of posting it days after an armed white nationalist lunatic shot up a bunch of people at an El Paso Walmart. Trust him, he’s telling you the truth now with his words, not with his 2019 actions. Trust him, like his mother-in-law should have.

You know, there’s a lot of people who express political views they come to regret later, some genuinely and some because it becomes a problem for them. There’s plenty of people who fight with their family and have money issues. There are literally millions of Democrats with mixed and even negative views about the direction their party has chosen to take, including the person you’re reading right now. I could almost give “Crooksy” a pass on it all today. Almost. He should have run as who he is, who he demonstrated he is by his actions over decades. Of course, he may not know who that is, since he originally endorsed one of his opponents and then decided to change his mind like a starf**ker once he got a little attention from some powerful people telling him he should run. But you see, that’s the thing- I get lying to yourself, anyone can be a hypocrite, but it’s that Bob lies to literally anyone. I mean, the guy’s argument for his 2022 appeal of the money he owed his ex-mother-in-law was mostly that she *waited too long* to try and collect it. Not that he didn’t sign it in the first place. He argued technicalities. But now he wants you to know that she never really wanted it anyway, even after having him sign a contract, and she’s not a great person. But you know, forget that he signed it, right?

Some people say we shouldn’t go negative in a primary. Still more say we should let candidates explain their past. Look guys, that’s just not how campaigns work. You either find out now and decide if you can accept a lying right-wing MAGA guy as your Congressman, or you find out in September and October when some shady super PAC pastes it on your eye balls with TV ads. Maybe you’re fine that he was funding election deniers and pro-lifers while not endorsing Kamala Harris from his post as a union leader. You should probably know that you need to be fine with that. All I’ve done about him here is tell you the truth, there’s nothing more I can do with it. As one family member said to me, “he’s the one that’s going to win.” And you know what, maybe he is. I mean look at all the people who initially said they’d support someone else, or were natural allies with the folks supporting another candidate, and now they’re all defending the indefensible because they’re afraid of retribution. As I said up top, it’s a business of kiss asses. People who want to keep their “important title/job” in the party. So they want people to keep quiet, in the hopes that they can ram him through the primary and hope that people are so sick and mad about Trump that they’ll still vote for this pile of slop. Then maybe sometime in the next couple of years before the guy loses when the political atmosphere evens out more, just maybe he’ll take a picture with them at a gala or endorse their candidacy for dog catcher in Podunk Township. That’s what it’s all about, right?

Forget all of that though, let’s just accept the obvious truth- Bob “Crooksy” Brooks believed everything he said online, everything he did in his life, and is exactly the person his actions suggest, he’s just sorry he got caught. Now that he’s a candidate he needs to be what John Fetterman’s consultants are telling him to be, to win this primary. I’m sure he won’t flip back to some of his old positions once he’s nominated though, it’s not like there’s other voters out there who do believe these things. There’s no way he was being honest as an actual “every man” citizen in 2019 or 2012, he’s being honest now as a candidate. I guess you could almost believe that if you’re just getting to know him now in 2026. Some folks knew him when he was the bartender he talks about on his commercials. They knew the real Bob “Crooksy” Brooks. The one he’s apologizing for now. They knew the “Crooksy” who wasn’t Congressional material. Be honest, you do too.

I spent months telling you all about Bob “Crooksy” Brooks. I told you how he stiffed his mother-in-law. I told you how he’s a religious radical and gun nut. I told you how he hates Barack Obama. I told you he’s a racist. I told you recently how his camp is getting aggressive lately with people. I’m going to be honest, this guy is by far the worst of the four people running. There were some people who said I was making things up or embellishing them. The truth was that I did neither.

Now the media is covering it too. MSN covered him being sued by his mother-in-law. Now the Washington Post is covering his racism and cultural radicalism. Last week, PoliticsPA covered how his campaign is hiding him because of his poor performances. Frankly, this should have happened months ago, but I’m glad they’re covering this.

There is a strain of thought that no one should say anything negative in a primary campaign. That’s stupid. There will be lots of negatives in a general election, regardless of how badly you don’t like that. It is better that these things reach the public early and are known ahead of nominating someone. If Bob wasn’t a candidate, none of this stuff would be relevant to public discussion. It’s relevant because he, and a few cynical folks who wanted him to run, got himself into this race. That was a mistake, and we need to make sure the public continues to hear about this information and knows it completely.

Bob “Crooksy” Brooks is a time bomb waiting to blow on the Democratic Party, and the Washington and Harrisburg establishments are trying to force him on us. He stiffed his mother-in-law out of tens of thousands of dollars. He hated Barack Obama. He hated Colin Kaepernick. He loves guns and school prayer. You wonder why the guy is a Democrat. It doesn’t look like he was before. His terrible beliefs alone would be worth hiding.

Of course, Crooksy’s handlers are trying to hide him:

PoliticsPA has learned that prior to the debate, representatives of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) informed the debate’s organizers that it did not want to make the video of the event available online without a disclaimer. The DCCC cited concerns that footage would appear in GOP attack ads against the primary winner in the general campaign.

To others, the suggestion appeared as a tactic to protect Brooks, who has received endorsements from Gov. Josh Shapiro, Sen. Bernie Sanders, and former Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, among others.

And right on cue, a noun, a verb, and Josh Shapiro.

“D.C. Republicans and Bob’s political opponents are leveling desperate attacks for a simple reason: Bob is the candidate that Governor Josh Shapiro, Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg, countless local leaders, and working people agree is the best to take on Donald Trump, flip this seat, and fight for us,” said Brooks campaign manager Jenna Kaufman.

Countless local leaders? Not outside of Allentown. Not really anywhere else in the district either. Bob’s a creation of Beltway creatures and folks out in our Capitol on the banks of the Susquehanna. There’s no other substance with this guy though. Bob really has no idea why he’s running, other than people who benefitted asked him. He probably knows his own union’s issues well at this point, but he’s shown no mastery of anything else. The guy remains incoherent, months into his campaign. He can’t put together a full answer about any policy:

By some accounts, Brooks, the president of the Pennsylvania Professional Firefighters Association, had a difficult evening, barely answering the questions posed by journalist Ryan Gaylor, before returning to his talking points.

He was posed one question by Gaylor about how he would reduce the country’s climate warming carbon emissions and better prepare for the increasingly severe impacts on climate change.

All Brooks could offer was that all the climate cuts that President Trump made need to be “put back into legislation.” He then talked about his time driving a snowplow, before returning to “replacing the cuts that have already been put in place. It’s simply about putting the concept back into the legislature and covering those and getting them back into play because everything we’ve been taken out of, the kind of thing we’re looking at now.”

He was also asked to square the statement that he would ban money from political action committees in politics, yet, he has taken in more from PACs than the other three candidates.

“Don’t hate the player, hate the game,” replied Brooks. “I’m not a congressman. I can’t make those rules. The rules are made and you have to play by the rules that are in place.”

When pressed if he is making a distinction between corporate PACs that he opposes and PAC money that have donated to him, Brooks said, “Listen, I’d like to get all money out of politics, but you need to be able to work and be able to fund your campaign. And you can’t fund a campaign on 20 bucks.”

Don’t hate the player, hate the game. An incoherent answer on climate change. This guy would be an embarrassment in Congress. It’s amazing that people think he’s up to this challenge.

They don’t though. He’s just convenient for them. It’s so important for them that they drag him across the line that they’re starting to get aggressive with folks. Make no mistake, when both negative articles about Crooksy went offline yesterday after being published, I’m sure there was pressure involved. I mean, the DCCC asked debate organizers to not put the damn debate online. What does that tell you? They have a rutabaga for a candidate and know they need to hide him. It’s still worth it for their personal aspirations, so they’ll do it. They can’t possibly think this guy is coherent.

Look, it would have been best if this guy didn’t run. On the one hand, if he wins, the Lehigh Valley will be represented by someone who is incapable and personally embarrassing. If he loses the general election we continue to be represented by a Trump rubber stamp. If he loses the primary now, really to anyone, it will leave hard feelings, but better that than the damage he’d do beyond this point. Like anyone else with personal baggage like his, he should have dropped out and dealt with his lawsuit issue that he’s put off for 22 years. Instead he’s compounding that by bumbling through this campaign. People are starting to notice, and that’s sad.

I’m not really shocked anymore. Bob “Crooksy” Brooks has nothing to talk about. The guy doesn’t pay his debts. The guy believes right-wing radical positions. He’s a racist. He hates Barack Obama. He holds odd views about political violence. So he just repeats Josh Shapiro, Bernie Sanders, and Pete Buttigieg on a loop. He has no issues on which he’s campaigning, just vague “working class values.” He’s basically John Fetterman, but Josh Shapiro likes this version.

The heat is on Crooksy and his team, and maybe it’s a bit too much. His campaign is calling up people who support other candidates publicly and trying to make them listen to why they’re wrong. Since it wasn’t me, I won’t describe it as attempts at intimidation, but that was certainly my experience with them. One of their wannabe thug endorsers tried to get in my face about writing about their organization on here. When I asked her if I was wrong in what I wrote, all she could reply was “it’s not exactly how it went.” Of course she was probably drunk, which is fine and all, but I found it hilarious she thought she’d intimidate me. Lady, I’ve been to the brink of death, do you think I care?

Then there was the missed interview with Lehigh Valley News. Look, I’ll be fair to the staff people on the race here, every campaign makes some scheduling mistakes and forgets some stuff. Crooksy may have just honestly messed up. Or, he’s hiding away now. According to the commenters he skipped the ROAR candidate forum in Bethlehem. A person who was supposed to be a moderator for the Blue Ridge debate reports that “it sounds like Brooks is pulling out of it.” No shock. Let the commercials talk for them, because the candidate isn’t up to complicated answers. He pulled his shirt up over his face when asked about aid to Israel at one event last year.

Then there was his latest mailer, which sums up his campaign better than anything- zero substance and some endorsements from people using him. Bob is just going to DC for a good time and his endorsers just want him to go so it helps them. Kind of simple.

This guy is a zero. I’d take any of the others first. At least they didn’t stiff family.

There’s a few elected officials coming around to endorsing Bob “Crooksy” Brooks for Congress. They are unconcerned that he stiffed his mother-in-law, among many other questions about Crooksy. They’re unconcerned that it’s starting to get noticed. They’re unconcerned that the appeals court rejected his appeal unanimously. The fact that this man calls himself a “family man” and isn’t doesn’t bother them. It’s interesting to say the least.

There’s also major substantive red flags here too. All of the folks endorsing him supported and liked Barack Obama as President, while Crooksy did not. They do not support “guns on demand” or school prayer, while Crooksy does. They’re concerned about political violence, while Crooksy is not. They’re not out posting a Colonial American flag and saying “Colin Kaepernick doesn’t like this flag, so I’m gonna share it,” while Crooksy was. They must not think Crooksy meant them when he said Democrats don’t know how to talk to the middle class anymore, but they were all running as Democrats before Crooksy. All of that is fine though.

Meanwhile there is a pair of high profile primaries going on at the state legislative level within PA-7 where these same folks are taking a different line. Taiba Sultana’s insane primary against Senator Lisa Boscola is no good to some of these folks because said insane things before and was accused of assaulting her son. CeCe Gerlach just could not be the pick to replace Josh Siegel in PA House District 22, so much so that some of the powers that be found a candidate who hadn’t even applied for the opening to be their candidate instead. At least some of them have suggested that Gerlach wouldn’t be trusted to side with the Democrats on key votes in the 102-101 chamber because she’s too extreme. So let me get this straight, the guy who stiffs his mother-in-law out of a court ordered verdict for money he owed her is a good family man, but the lady who was accused of assaulting her son is some violent nutbag. The guy who opposes Black men protesting police brutality, thinks Barack Obama sucked, thinks we need more guns, wants to bring back school prayer, and thinks the Democratic Party sucked before him is a reliable Democratic vote in a narrowly divided Congress, but the progressive lady that doesn’t side with the Republican Party on literally anything is not a reliable vote in the PA House? I think I sort of am starting to understand what’s being said here.

I’m not for Sultana’s challenge and I am for Gerlach’s, but the point remains the double standard is out in the open with a bright red light on it. If you hire John Fetterman’s consultant team, I guess you can literally chase a Black guy down the street with a gun and get away with it, or stiff your family out of money you owe them. It is pretty amazing to watch people attach themselves to this.