“ This does and should not distract us.”
Who’s distracted?
These are valid questions. The answers might be innocent but until that’s the case it’s curious that you’re here trying to coax people into looking the other way.
Say it was someone his parents know. That doesn’t change anything. They are both therapists and every shooter has a therapist. They could be involved. That would even explain the cover story about them reporting a grown man missing after a few hours. How many coincidences before you get curious?
Correct. Wanting to check into this is not a distraction. But check the comments in the thread. Most people are saying this is the evidence of government complicity when there is so much more hard evidence like letting Trump go onstage or abandoning the roof just before Crooks climbed up there.
The problem with this fact is that the answers are overwhelmingly likely to be innocent. Think of the reverse: if you could not find what this investigator found, then no friend or relative of Crooks or his parents visited Washington DC in the past few years, even once. The much more interesting findings are connected to the devices that went regularly between Crooks home and office, i.e. the shooter himself.
I also note that ever since Web Hubbell, the DNC and the Deep State (but I repeat myself) have thrown out a weird fact that we get all excited about and then it turns out (which they knew all along) to be completely innocent. Then they fact check just that one thing — they might even build a 60 minutes episode around it — and declare the whole issue closed.