I don't really agree with that.
These issues could cause the case to get dismissed. When a joint force commanding general claims there was extreme command influence and the case should be dismissed because the troops can't get a fair trial, that is more than mere distraction. It is part of an all out media war with the intent of getting the case dropped ahead of time.
It is not a distraction when one is asked for a lawyer and the lawyer is not provided. The issue, of course, is proving that. NCIS is not required to tape their sessions as the other military services do. Actually, though, that will give the benefit of the doubt to the defendants, I'd think.
And finally, if it is provable that accused were not permitted to relieve themselves, then that is a serious charge in the information campaign to free these men.
If you re-read my original post, I noted the command influence question is not a distraction. This press release is, however.
It is not a distraction when one is asked for a lawyer and the lawyer is not provided.
When did they ask for one (and under what circumstances), and did questioning continue? In that case, I'd be very interested and need a cite.
And finally, if it is provable that accused were not permitted to relieve themselves
They were. They just weren't permitted to leave. Look, I've read pro se habeas corpus petitions claiming most of the same allegations as this. They're almost always denied.