More On The Vegas Shooter

If the Las Vegas massacre were a TV show, we would be on the verge of finding out that the dead guy found at the scene was not really the shooter, but actually only someone that the real shooter set up to take the blame.  Think about it.  The shooter has been identified as Stephen Paddock, a retired accountant who lived in a retirement community outside Las Vegas.  He had no arrest record although his father was a bank robber who made the FBI's ten most wanted list decades ago.  He held positions that required him to get a government security clearance which he easily obtained.  He had a hunting and a fishing license, but that's certainly no big deal.  He was active in support of Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election; pictures have surface of him holding an anti-Trump sign at a rally in the summer of 2016.  He is not known to have had any psychological problems.  He did like to gamble, but that's why he lived near Vegas.  He had no known disputes that could have led him to an outburst of anger.  In short, he was an average retired baby boomer who lived in a comfortable retirement.

There seems to be no motive for what Paddock is said to have done.  In fact, the attack seems quite different from Paddock's entire existence.  According to his brother, Paddock had a hand gun and maybe a rifle, but certainly not ten of them and absolutely not a machine gun. 

So was it really Paddock who was shooting?  Or did someone else shoot from Paddock's room after first killing Paddock and making it look like a self inflicted wound?  And if it was someone else, who did it and why?

I realize that this sounds like a conspiracy theory, and maybe I do watch too many crime shows on TV.  Still, Paddock as the shooter makes no sense.  Did this guy who had no known psychiatric difficulties suddenly have a major breakdown?  If so, why didn't anyone notice?

I truly wonder if we know what actually happened.