I don't mean to get into a philosophical discussion, but the correct application of Occam's Razor, when choosing between two equally likely hypotheses (or conspiracy theories
) is to select the one that makes the fewest new assumptions.
It's not necessarily the simplest nor the most obvious although usually it works out that way. And it's not always right.
I really think that a few people in Justice came up with a way to kill two birds with one stone: hammer a Mexican cartel and pad statistics on illegal gun sales into Mexico. Unfortunately, the plan was completely unworkable. Doubly unfortunately, it was executed anyway.