He probably had a thumb drive on his person that was that was taken after he was shot, thus a robbery.
Great point.
A real investigation should include the computer(s) he was using at the DNC. It is possible that they had tracking software which means they would have data on when files were transferred to the external drive, or emailed, etc etc.
My opinion thus far is that the DNC did not want the FBI to “investigate” the Russian hacking by inspecting their computers is because (1) there wasn’t any or (2) there is the risk that other DNC criminal activity associated with the election (and maybe more) could be discovered.
That is the most interesting question that no one has asked. What makes people assume that something of value wasn’t stolen? The assumption has always been that since some valuables were left, that nothing was stolen. A thumb drive or some other object would have value to the thief if that is what they were after. In fact, it would have been the motivation and why he had to be killed - in order to cover it up.