Published
on
By
As investigators dig into the background of Thomas Matthew Crooks, the shooter responsible for the attempted assassination of Donald Trump, shocking details have emerged that paint a disturbing picture of radical identity obsession, online extremism, and cultural decay.
New reports confirm that Crooks identified as non-binary and used “they/them” pronouns. Even more unsettling is his long-documented fascination with “furry” culture, an online subculture that blends animal identities with cartoonish sexuality and fantasy role-play.
According to the New York Post, Crooks maintained multiple DeviantArt accounts featuring explicit furry-themed artwork, some with violent or fetishistic overtones. Friends and acquaintances noted his immersion in the subculture, which he appeared to treat as an alternate identity.
Sources also revealed that Crooks expressed admiration for extremist ideologies and often posted disturbing messages online. This included fantasies of violence and revenge.
“He was mentally unwell, and nobody did anything,” said one former classmate. “But the school didn’t want to deal with it. They were afraid of being called transphobic.”
This cultural rot is what happens when society abandons traditional values and embraces identity politics above all else. Instead of addressing mental illness or destructive behavior, educators and peers were pressured to “affirm” Crooks’ every whim.
The left’s obsession with gender identity and fringe subcultures allowed Crooks to spiral further into alienation. His embrace of furry culture—a world often associated with sexual deviance and online radicalization—was ignored.
Investigators are now combing through years of Crooks’ internet history. Initial findings suggest he was involved in multiple anonymous forums that glorified violence and mocked conservative figures.
This wasn’t just a troubled teen. It was a person allowed to stew in online poison, shielded by political correctness and cultural permissiveness.
Crooks’ ties to furry content and gender identity politics don’t just raise questions about his motives—they expose a deeper rot in today’s youth culture.
Conservatives have long warned about the dangers of unchecked identity obsession, where young people are encouraged to adopt fluid personas rather than stable values.
Mental health professionals who prioritize ideological affirmations over medical evaluations are complicit in tragedies like this. Crooks should have been evaluated, monitored, and treated. Instead, he was celebrated for his “bravery.”
The media’s silence on Crooks’ identity issues speaks volumes. If this were a conservative-leaning shooter, headlines would be dominated by ideological outrage. But because the facts cut against the progressive narrative, they are being buried.
Social media platforms, where Crooks posted much of his disturbing content, have yet to be held accountable. Despite flagging political posts by conservatives, they allowed Crooks to marinate in delusion unchecked.
“The warning signs were there,” said Rep. Paul Gosar. “But the system was too scared to act.”
There’s now growing pressure on law enforcement to explain how Crooks, despite these glaring red flags, managed to get within shooting distance of a presidential candidate.
Was it gross negligence? Or was it yet another example of the federal security apparatus failing to prioritize threats that don’t align with left-wing hysteria?
The shooter’s social alienation, fueled by radical internet culture and affirmed by a woke society, offers a grim warning. This is what happens when reality is surrendered to fantasy.
Conservative leaders are calling for urgent cultural reform. That includes removing gender ideology from schools, defunding programs that promote radical identity politics, and restoring moral clarity in youth education.
“We need to stop teaching kids to hate themselves and their country,” said Vice President J.D. Vance. “We need to start teaching discipline, respect, and patriotism.”
BREAKING: Anna Paulina Luna Claims The Biden DOJ DESTROYED…
Representative Anna Paulina Luna has leveled explosive information against the Biden Department of Justice, claiming that critical materials related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation have been deliberately destroyed.
This assertion, if proven true, would represent one of the most damning instances of governmental obstruction and cover-up in recent history.
Luna, who chairs a congressional task force focused on federal transparency, has stated unequivocally that she possesses evidence implicating high-ranking officials in the DOJ.
According to her, these officials not only failed to disclose materials related to Epstein but actively destroyed them to conceal the extent of powerful individuals’ involvement in Epstein’s criminal network.
She introduced legislation titled the SHRED Act, aimed at imposing severe penalties on government agents who destroy or conceal federal records. The proposed bill calls for 20 years to life in prison for anyone caught eliminating evidence in cases of national significance.
“Even if they are conducting a criminal investigation, you should probably pick up the phone and call us,” Luna told Fox News. “We have been more than patient.”
These developments come amid growing conservative suspicion that the Biden administration has no interest in unmasking Epstein’s full network. The notion that key records could be gone forever only intensifies fears that justice is being buried under a bureaucratic rug.
Luna’s office has reportedly sent multiple requests to the Department of Justice demanding clarity on the handling of Epstein-related materials. So far, those inquiries have been met with either vague responses or complete silence.
The congresswoman did not mince words in her public statements, suggesting that the DOJ’s behavior constitutes a deliberate act of obstruction. If true, such actions could violate federal law and trigger an entirely new legal battle.
“The Biden DOJ has obstructed Congress, ignored subpoenas, and now appears to have destroyed critical evidence,” Luna said. “This is corruption at the highest level.”
Critics argue that this is yet another example of double standards in Washington. “Had this been a Republican-led DOJ accused of destroying documents in a child sex trafficking case, the media would be apoplectic,” one conservative commentator noted.
For years, the Epstein case has symbolized the deep rot within America’s elite circles. The financier’s suspicious death in prison and the subsequent lack of high-profile indictments have fueled accusations of a widespread cover-up.
Now, Luna’s allegations breathe new life into those concerns. If records were indeed destroyed, the implications are profound. It would mean that the DOJ, under Biden, actively shielded criminals from justice.
What’s more troubling is that these destroyed materials could have named prominent individuals—politicians, celebrities, and global financiers—who participated in or enabled Epstein’s crimes.
In this context, Luna’s SHRED Act isn’t just legislative symbolism. It is a clarion call for accountability in an era marked by elite impunity. Her bill seeks to ensure that future officials think twice before erasing truth from the historical record.
Despite Luna’s repeated calls for transparency, there has been no formal response from Attorney General Merrick Garland. The silence speaks volumes to many who believe the DOJ is stonewalling on purpose.
Meanwhile, conservative lawmakers have rallied behind Luna. A growing number of Republicans in the House and Senate are voicing support for investigations into the DOJ’s handling of Epstein evidence.
Some have even floated the idea of appointing a special counsel to probe the matter independently. Given the stakes, such a move may be the only path forward to restore public confidence.
As investigators dig into the background of Thomas Matthew Crooks, the shooter responsible for the attempted assassination of Donald Trump, shocking details have emerged that paint a disturbing picture of radical identity obsession, online extremism, and cultural decay.
New reports confirm that Crooks identified as non-binary and used “they/them” pronouns. Even more unsettling is his long-documented fascination with “furry” culture, an online subculture that blends animal identities with cartoonish sexuality and fantasy role-play.
According to the New York Post, Crooks maintained multiple DeviantArt accounts featuring explicit furry-themed artwork, some with violent or fetishistic overtones. Friends and acquaintances noted his immersion in the subculture, which he appeared to treat as an alternate identity.
Sources also revealed that Crooks expressed admiration for extremist ideologies and often posted disturbing messages online. This included fantasies of violence and revenge.
“He was mentally unwell, and nobody did anything,” said one former classmate. “But the school didn’t want to deal with it. They were afraid of being called transphobic.”
This cultural rot is what happens when society abandons traditional values and embraces identity politics above all else. Instead of addressing mental illness or destructive behavior, educators and peers were pressured to “affirm” Crooks’ every whim.
The left’s obsession with gender identity and fringe subcultures allowed Crooks to spiral further into alienation. His embrace of furry culture—a world often associated with sexual deviance and online radicalization—was ignored.
Investigators are now combing through years of Crooks’ internet history. Initial findings suggest he was involved in multiple anonymous forums that glorified violence and mocked conservative figures.
This wasn’t just a troubled teen. It was a person allowed to stew in online poison, shielded by political correctness and cultural permissiveness.
Crooks’ ties to furry content and gender identity politics don’t just raise questions about his motives—they expose a deeper rot in today’s youth culture.
Conservatives have long warned about the dangers of unchecked identity obsession, where young people are encouraged to adopt fluid personas rather than stable values.
Mental health professionals who prioritize ideological affirmations over medical evaluations are complicit in tragedies like this. Crooks should have been evaluated, monitored, and treated. Instead, he was celebrated for his “bravery.”
The media’s silence on Crooks’ identity issues speaks volumes. If this were a conservative-leaning shooter, headlines would be dominated by ideological outrage. But because the facts cut against the progressive narrative, they are being buried.
Social media platforms, where Crooks posted much of his disturbing content, have yet to be held accountable. Despite flagging political posts by conservatives, they allowed Crooks to marinate in delusion unchecked.
“The warning signs were there,” said Rep. Paul Gosar. “But the system was too scared to act.”
There’s now growing pressure on law enforcement to explain how Crooks, despite these glaring red flags, managed to get within shooting distance of a presidential candidate.
Was it gross negligence? Or was it yet another example of the federal security apparatus failing to prioritize threats that don’t align with left-wing hysteria?
The shooter’s social alienation, fueled by radical internet culture and affirmed by a woke society, offers a grim warning. This is what happens when reality is surrendered to fantasy.
Conservative leaders are calling for urgent cultural reform. That includes removing gender ideology from schools, defunding programs that promote radical identity politics, and restoring moral clarity in youth education.
“We need to stop teaching kids to hate themselves and their country,” said Vice President J.D. Vance. “We need to start teaching discipline, respect, and patriotism.”
BREAKING: Anna Paulina Luna Claims The Biden DOJ DESTROYED…
Representative Anna Paulina Luna has leveled explosive information against the Biden Department of Justice, claiming that critical materials related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation have been deliberately destroyed.
This assertion, if proven true, would represent one of the most damning instances of governmental obstruction and cover-up in recent history.
Luna, who chairs a congressional task force focused on federal transparency, has stated unequivocally that she possesses evidence implicating high-ranking officials in the DOJ.
According to her, these officials not only failed to disclose materials related to Epstein but actively destroyed them to conceal the extent of powerful individuals’ involvement in Epstein’s criminal network.
She introduced legislation titled the SHRED Act, aimed at imposing severe penalties on government agents who destroy or conceal federal records. The proposed bill calls for 20 years to life in prison for anyone caught eliminating evidence in cases of national significance.
“Even if they are conducting a criminal investigation, you should probably pick up the phone and call us,” Luna told Fox News. “We have been more than patient.”
These developments come amid growing conservative suspicion that the Biden administration has no interest in unmasking Epstein’s full network. The notion that key records could be gone forever only intensifies fears that justice is being buried under a bureaucratic rug.
Luna’s office has reportedly sent multiple requests to the Department of Justice demanding clarity on the handling of Epstein-related materials. So far, those inquiries have been met with either vague responses or complete silence.
The congresswoman did not mince words in her public statements, suggesting that the DOJ’s behavior constitutes a deliberate act of obstruction. If true, such actions could violate federal law and trigger an entirely new legal battle.
“The Biden DOJ has obstructed Congress, ignored subpoenas, and now appears to have destroyed critical evidence,” Luna said. “This is corruption at the highest level.”
Critics argue that this is yet another example of double standards in Washington. “Had this been a Republican-led DOJ accused of destroying documents in a child sex trafficking case, the media would be apoplectic,” one conservative commentator noted.
For years, the Epstein case has symbolized the deep rot within America’s elite circles. The financier’s suspicious death in prison and the subsequent lack of high-profile indictments have fueled accusations of a widespread cover-up.
Now, Luna’s allegations breathe new life into those concerns. If records were indeed destroyed, the implications are profound. It would mean that the DOJ, under Biden, actively shielded criminals from justice.
What’s more troubling is that these destroyed materials could have named prominent individuals—politicians, celebrities, and global financiers—who participated in or enabled Epstein’s crimes.
In this context, Luna’s SHRED Act isn’t just legislative symbolism. It is a clarion call for accountability in an era marked by elite impunity. Her bill seeks to ensure that future officials think twice before erasing truth from the historical record.
Despite Luna’s repeated calls for transparency, there has been no formal response from Attorney General Merrick Garland. The silence speaks volumes to many who believe the DOJ is stonewalling on purpose.
Meanwhile, conservative lawmakers have rallied behind Luna. A growing number of Republicans in the House and Senate are voicing support for investigations into the DOJ’s handling of Epstein evidence.
Some have even floated the idea of appointing a special counsel to probe the matter independently. Given the stakes, such a move may be the only path forward to restore public confidence.
This latest scandal further erodes the credibility of an already battered Department of Justice. From the Hunter Biden laptop fiasco to the political targeting of conservatives, the agency has been repeatedly accused of partisanship.
Now, with Epstein documents allegedly destroyed, the DOJ’s credibility is in tatters. Public trust, once broken, is hard to rebuild.
The American people deserve the truth. And if Luna’s allegations are accurate, they deserve justice, no matter how high the guilty parties sit.
“This is a live federal investigation. We’ve asked ICE to take immediate action,” Homan said during a televised interview.
The individual in question is reportedly an undocumented alien with a criminal record, unlawfully hired by AOC’s office.
According to internal reports, the employee had multiple encounters with law enforcement and should have been deported years ago.
Homan stressed that AOC’s potential interference with ICE operations could amount to obstruction of justice.
“This goes beyond hiring an illegal alien. There’s evidence she actively helped shield this person from deportation,” he stated.
Conservative leaders are sounding the alarm, warning that this may be only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to far-left officials flouting immigration laws.
AOC has long been known for championing sanctuary cities and attacking border agents, often labeling them as “racist” and “oppressors.”
Now, critics say her reckless rhetoric has crossed over into potentially criminal behavior.
“If a sitting congresswoman used her office to harbor an illegal alien, that’s a clear violation of federal law,” Homan declared.
Sources inside ICE say agents have already gathered documentation and begun interviewing individuals connected to the case.
Evidence suggests AOC may have leveraged her political power to block enforcement action against the individual she employed.
House Republicans are demanding accountability, with several calling for a formal ethics investigation into her conduct.
“This is what happens when radicals gain power. They think the law doesn’t apply to them,” said Rep. Andy Biggs.
Democrats quickly circled the wagons, accusing Homan of launching a political smear campaign.
But Homan stood firm, reminding the public that the law is the law and political office offers no immunity from prosecution.
House Speaker Mike Johnson revealed on Tuesday that Democrats are demanding billions in wasteful and ideological spending, including $3.9 million for LGBTQI+ democracy grants in the Western Balkans, as part of their conditions to reopen the government.
Speaking on the 14th day of what he called the Democrat government shutdown, Johnson said the American people are suffering because Democrats have chosen politics over responsibility.
“Welcome to day 14 of the Democrat government shutdown,” Johnson said during his press briefing. “It’s two weeks of Democrats in Congress inflicting untold pain on the American people for nothing other than pure politics.”
Johnson explained that House Republicans had already offered a clean continuing resolution to keep the government funded, but Democrats repeatedly rejected it.
Instead, he said, Democrats are tying unrelated left-wing priorities to essential government operations in an attempt to strong-arm Republicans into approving radical spending measures.
He accused Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of catering to what he described as the party’s “Marxist base.”
The Speaker laid out details from the Democrats’ counterproposal, calling it a $1.5 trillion wish list of reckless spending that would send taxpayer money to liberal causes and foreign projects that have nothing to do with running the U.S. government.
Among the examples he cited were $24.6 million for climate resilience programs in Honduras.
Another $13.4 million would go to civic engagement programs in Zimbabwe.
An additional $2.9 million is earmarked for desert locust risk reduction in the Horn of Africa.
The Democrats’ plan also calls for $2 million to fund “organizing for feminist democratic principles” in Africa, according to Johnson.
Johnson highlighted the $3.9 million in LGBTQI+ democracy grants for the Western Balkans as an example of Democrats’ misplaced priorities.
“They want to spend 3.9 million of your hard-earned dollars for LGBTQI+ democracy grants in the Western Balkans,” Johnson said. “We are not doing that.”
He argued that Democrats are also trying to undo common-sense reforms enacted by Republicans that prevent illegal immigrants from accessing taxpayer-funded healthcare.
“This is a fact,” he said. “They would add illegal aliens and non-citizens back to taxpayer-funded benefits. It would cost taxpayers nearly $200 billion.”
Johnson further warned that Democrats want to roll back modest work requirements placed on able-bodied young men without dependents.
At the same time, Democrats are pushing to make COVID-era Obamacare subsidies permanent, with no income limits or meaningful reforms.
Johnson said this approach would not only punish working Americans but also reward dependency and mismanagement.
The Speaker accused Democrats of prioritizing ideological projects over the immediate needs of the American people.
He said their proposal exposes how out of touch the party has become, highlighting spending for causes abroad while Americans face uncertainty at home.
“This is not about keeping the lights on,” Johnson said. “This is about Democrats trying to use the shutdown as leverage to fund their far-left agenda.”
Johnson reminded reporters that Republicans have already passed legislation to reopen the government responsibly, without any of the unrelated political riders Democrats insist on including.
The Republican plan, he said, would maintain government operations, protect taxpayers, and prevent wasteful spending abroad.
Johnson also pointed out that the Democrats’ proposal would restore funding to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, sending a half-billion dollars to what he described as liberal media outlets that have long benefited from taxpayer subsidies.
He described it as another example of Democrats using government funding to reward their political allies rather than serving the public good.
“These are not the priorities of the American people,” Johnson said firmly. “They are the priorities of a radical political class that has forgotten who they work for.”
The Speaker ended his remarks by calling on Democrats to stop the political games and join Republicans in reopening the government immediately.
“We have a clean bill ready to go,” he said. “It keeps the government open, pays our troops, secures the border, and protects hardworking taxpayers. Democrats need to stop holding America hostage.”
Johnson’s comments reflect growing frustration among House Republicans who say Democrats are using the shutdown to push through spending on social experiments, foreign projects, and activist groups under the guise of government funding.
He warned that such spending will only deepen America’s fiscal crisis and fuel public anger toward Washington’s political class.
“This is a moment for leadership,” Johnson concluded. “It’s time to put the American people first and end this shutdown—not by giving in to woke demands, but by standing firm for fiscal sanity and common sense.”
It wasn’t the usual red-carpet spectacle or carefully staged paparazzi shot — something about Jennifer Lopez’s latest public appearance had people talking.
The energy was different. Cameras caught her arriving with a man who wasn’t just another face in Hollywood, and within hours, the internet lit up with speculation. Was this simply two old acquaintances crossing paths again, or the start of a story that could dominate headlines?
More Than Just a Reunion?
At first glance, it looked innocent enough — Jennifer sharing easy smiles, leaning in with the kind of comfort that comes from familiarity. But those who watched closely noticed the details: how their conversations seemed unhurried in a world that never stops rushing, how laughter lingered just a little too long, how their body language suggested something beyond casual friendship.
A Face From the Spotlight
The real surprise came when fans recognized him: a onetime Hollywood leading man whose name once dominated movie posters and glossy magazine covers. His career, marked by hit films in the late ’90s and early 2000s, had intersected with Lopez’s own meteoric rise more than once. Their paths had crossed before — premieres, afterparties, industry circles — but never with the quiet intensity that now had people wondering if history was being rewritten.
A Story Still Unfolding
For Lopez, who continues to balance her powerhouse career with her life in the public eye, this connection feels different. It isn’t about publicity stunts or tabloid fodder — at least, not yet. Instead, it’s about two people who understand the pressures of fame, who have lived through its shine and shadows, and who might just be finding comfort in one another.
Conclusion
The world may never know exactly what was exchanged in those shared glances and easy laughs — at least not right away. But one thing is clear: Jennifer Lopez has once again managed to capture attention without trying.
Whether this is a fleeting reunion or the quiet spark of something bigger, fans are watching closely. After all, Hollywood loves a comeback — and maybe, just maybe, this time it’s a comeback for two.
Jennifer Lopez and Ben Affleck wed in July 2022 and finalized their divorce in January 2025
Jennifer Lopez and Ben Affleck’s love story has come to an end — again.
On Aug. 20, 2024, the Marry Me actress filed for divorce from Affleck. The news came after months of marital strife, which resulted in the couple living apart and focusing on their “separate lives.” The former couple’s divorce was finalized 20 weeks later in January 2025.
Affleck and Lopez initially met in 2002. After ending their engagement in 2004, they both pursued other relationships and started families of their own.
The “On the Floor” singer was married to Marc Anthony from 2004 to 2014, and they are parents to twins Max and Emme. Meanwhile, the
Deep Water actor was married to Jennifer Garner from 2005 to 2018, and they have three kids together, daughters Violet and Seraphina and son Samuel.
In April 2021, the pair were spotted together for the first time in over a decade, sparking relationship rumors. Lopez and Affleck eventually went public with their rekindled romance and wed in July 2022.
From the beginning of “Bennifer” to their second engagement, here’s a complete breakdown of Jennifer Lopez and Ben Affleck’s relationship.
Lopez and Affleck first met in 2002 on the set of their movie Gigli, which came out the following year. At the time, Lopez was married to her second husband, Cris Judd, though they eventually divorced.
Lopez told PEOPLE in 2016, “I really felt like when I met Ben, ‘Okay, this is it.’ “
The duo quickly became one of the biggest couples in Hollywood and one of the first to receive a hybrid couple name: “Bennifer.”
In a November 2002 interview with Diane Sawyer, Lopez revealed her engagement to Affleck, describing it as “traditional, but also in a very spectacular way, as of course Ben would do it … it was very, very beautiful.”
PEOPLE reported at the time that Affleck proposed with a custom-made Harry Winston pink-diamond solitaire ring he chose himself.
In her interview with Sawyer, Lopez described her then-fiancé as “brilliantly smart … Loving. Charming. Affectionate,” adding that her mother approved.
“And I just admire him in every way,” she said.
She also acknowledged that some people viewed their relationship as unlikely, but pointed out that she and the actor had bonded over similar upbringings.
“We’ve talked about this so many times, and we talked about how people kind of see him with … one type of person and me with another type of person, and the two of us together is like, ‘How did that happen?'” she said.
Lopez added, “And how we’re probably more alike and from the same kind of background … same kind of upbringing and same kind of family and same kind of house.”
Heading into 2003, Lopez and Affleck were one of the most popular Hollywood couples to appear in the tabloids and were infamously hounded by the paparazzi.
Lopez even acknowledged their notoriety in the music video for her song “Jenny from the Block,” which featured paparazzi shots of herself and Affleck doing everything from pumping gas to lounging on a yacht together.
“We didn’t try to have a public relationship,” Lopez told PEOPLE in 2016. “We just happened to be together at the birth of the tabloids, and it was like ‘Oh my God.’ It was just a lot of pressure.”
Lopez told InStyle that the media circus surrounding her relationship with Affleck was “just crazy.”
“Now at least I can show you who I am a little bit,” she said. “Back then you just believed anything you read on the cover of a tabloid. Many times it wasn’t true, or it was like a third of the truth.”
In a January 2021 podcast interview, Affleck reflected on how rude media coverage of Lopez was when they were together.
“People were so f—- mean about her — sexist, racist. Ugly, vicious s— was written about her in ways that if you wrote it now you would literally be fired for saying those things you said,” he said. “Now it’s like, she’s lionized and respected for the work she did, where she came from, what she accomplished — as well she f—– should be! I would say you have a better shot, coming from the Bronx, of ending up as like [Justice Sonia] Sotomayor on the Supreme Court than you do of having Jennifer Lopez’s career and being who she is at 50 years old today.”
Lopez and Affleck met on the set of the 2003 rom-com Gigli. Despite their chemistry on-screen, the film bombed at the box office and was panned by critics. PEOPLE called it “the Stinker of Summer.”
Less than two weeks after the film’s release, Affleck admitted on The Tonight Show that the movie “wasn’t good,” and they “got buried.” He even poked fun at the film by reading the negative reviews on the late-night show.
Just days before Lopez and Affleck were set to be married in Santa Barbara on Sept. 14, 2003, the couple announced in a statement that they would be postponing their marriage. Lopez and Affleck cited the intense media spotlight as the reason for the postponement.
“Due to the excessive media attention surrounding our wedding, we have decided to postpone the date,” Affleck and Lopez said in the statement. “When we found ourselves seriously contemplating hiring three separate ‘decoy brides’ at three different locations, we realized that something was awry.”
“We felt what should have been a joyful and sacred day could be spoiled for us, our families and our friends,” they added.
PEOPLE previously reported that after briefly splitting up in the wake of the canceled wedding, the duo rekindled their relationship, but officially called it quits in January 2004. The intense media attention is largely said to have been a major factor in their breakup.
“Jennifer Lopez has ended her engagement to Ben Affleck. At this difficult time, we ask that you respect her privacy,” Lopez’s rep said at the time, while Affleck’s rep added, “I am not going to confirm anything about his personal life. We don’t want to get dragged into quicksand. Everybody wants a war. It’s not happening from our side.”
In her interview with PEOPLE in 2016, Lopez said that despite their split, there was “genuine love” between herself and Affleck.
“I think different time different thing, who knows what could’ve happened, but there was a genuine love there,” she said.
Jersey Girl, the second film starring Lopez and Affleck, was released in March 2004 — two months after the couple split. Filmmaker Kevin Smith, who wrote and directed the movie, would claim years later that he came up with the “Bennifer” nickname during the film’s production.
Lopez and Affleck remained supportive of one another in the years following their split.
In 2020, Affleck showed his support for Lopez’s acting career, saying that she should have been nominated for an Oscar for her role in Hustlers.
“She should have been nominated. She’s the real thing,” Affleck told New York Times reporter Brooks Barnes. “I keep in touch periodically with her and have a lot of respect for her. How awesome is it that she had her biggest hit movie at 50? That’s f—— baller.”
Following Lopez’s split from Alex Rodriguez in April 2021, the singer began spending time with Affleck in L.A.
“They are friends. They have always been friends and they have seen each other through the years,” a source told PEOPLE.
Another source told PEOPLE, “They have a great time hanging out. … It’s been years since they caught up properly. They have lots to talk about. They plan on hanging out again.”
Less than a week later, the two were spotted in Montana together. Sources told PEOPLE they were pictured riding in a car together near a resort in Big Sky, where Affleck has a home.
“[Jennifer] spent several days with Ben out of town. They have a strong connection. It’s all been quick and intense, but Jennifer is happy,” a source told PEOPLE.
In July 2021, Lopez posted a carousel of photos on Instagram in honor of her 52nd birthday. Grouped in the mix of bikini and boat pictures, the final photo in the roundup showed Lopez and Affleck kissing.
This marked the first time the couple personally posted about each other on social media.
At the Venice Film Festival in September 2021, the duo made returned to the red carpet for the first time since reuniting. It was a big night for the two, but especially for Affleck as it was the premiere of his film, The Last Duel.
Affleck and Lopez channeled Old Hollywood vibes as they strutted the carpet alongside each other in glamorous looks. Affleck donned a classic black tux, while Lopez wore a white mermaid-style gown, accentuated with a string of Swarovski crystal embellishments and accompanied by Cariter diamonds.
The couple marked another major milestone later that month when they attended their first Met Gala together on Sept. 13 at the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Costume Institute Gala. Not only did Affleck and Lopez stun in Ralph Lauren, but they shared a passionate kiss through their masks.