What I’m trying to convey, in the face of your obnoxious sarcasm, is that while the administration would of course interfere in what should be an objective investigation, politicians and reporters have a wealth of powerful advocates in their support networks. The administration can only control the message/investigation of the SS. They cannot control the message or investigations of the victim’s support network, however hard they may try.

Let’s run a little scenario: a reporter’s post is doctored or posted completely outside of their control. Their boss calls them in:
“Did you post this?”
“No”
“Yeap, treason!”

Please don’t confuse enthusiasm with critical thinking.

…the obvious flaw that said investigations would clearly conclude the posts were doctored?

The metadata of posts include too many data points (IP address, GPS coords, etc.) needing precise alteration in line with the exact movements of a victim that it would just be too complex to achieve a desirable outcome for Musk. Even if the SS’s investigations were subjective in their approach and/or conclusion, independent investigations would provide a trove of reasonable doubt, even if denied access to the data (which, in itself, would be a point of reasonable doubt).