We’re barely outside the Berg’s 18th Law theshold with the Las Vegas shooting.
But buried on paragraph 17 of The Guardian’s coverage of the atrocity is a hint as to why the story may well soon disappear from the mainstream media:
Paddock’s motive remains unknown. “This person may have been radicalised, unbeknownst to us, and we want to identify that source [according to Las Vegas sheriff Joe Lombardo].”
Of course, everyone on all sides is racing to show Paddock was with the “other side”; some lefty sites are “reporting” he had friends of friends with “alt-right” sympathies, while “InfoWars” is claiming he was influenced by “Anti”-Fa (although the target – a country western concert, with an audience many a “progressive” would like to see scourged from the earth (by organic, gluten-free, carbon-neutral means, not icky guns). Only ISIS seems to want to claim the guy.
But if it turns out that InfoWars is right, and that the target bepeaks the motivation?
Watch this story disappear faster than the last bag of Cheetos at a Dave Matthews concert.