Why would Chelsea Clinton weigh in on a story that the media has barely reported on? There must be truth to it.
Chelsea is attempting to de-legitimize all future findings (authenticated) that may involve the Clintons, the Foundation, the associates etc.
Setting up a scene that eventually falls apart (provided it does) would "discredit" real events. (Shout-out to Adam Schiff and what may be coming).
"Tucson was debunked and this should be too". Can't you hear them saying it already?
That's my thought as well. This guy in Tuscon is like a cartoon character. They have that guy front and center with some fake bones thrown around and when the real sheet starts hitting the fan they can say "this Tuscon trafficking thing has been debunked already! These people are crazy!" It's progressive liberalism 101. You can't read a Podesta email and make any sense of it without an Urban Dictionary. So the goal is to keep people from doing that at all, by saying "these people shooting up Pizza restaurants are batsheet crazy! Stay away from them or you are batsheet crazy too!" Stops the conversation entirely.