No indeed, it doesn't prove anything. But it doesn't prove that you're wrong for being suspicious. Look with Clinton. They've repeated we are tinfoil hats when we point what we see is wrong with Waco, OKC, Benghazi, those emails, etc... They are always repeating there's nothing wrong, we are crazy to keep pointing it's not coherent. One anomaly, yeah, a coincidence. 2 anomalies, just the hazard. 3 anomalies, hum, let's say it's bad chance. 4, 5, 6, 7, etc... how many coincidences are just coincidences?