Imagining a scenario where a brave passenger overcomes the crazed kamikaze pilot flying his Cessna 340 to stop him from crashing in the General Mills parking lot and merely delaying the delivery of a load of Cinnamon Toast Crunch doesn't sound like much of a magic power. Occam's Razor doesn't even begin to scratch the surface on this one. Particularly considering how many other ways you could actually, and more effectively shut down a food processing plant.

Edit: further details emerging. https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/investigators-comb-through-plane-crash-wreckage-at-general-mills-plant-in-covington

"Another factor investigators will look at is the human factor. Investigators said the owner of the aircraft was being trained by a pilot trainer at the time of the crash. They were performing touch-and-go exercises. "

So they had done a series of touch-and -gos. A touch-and-go is when you touch down, quickly reconfigure for takeoff, and then takeoff again without stopping so you can do as many landings as possible for practice. Again, does it make sense that after practicing landings for a while one of the pilots decides to torpedo the Captain Crunch factory?

Additionally:

"Captain Ken Malcom with the Covington Police Department said around 6:46 p.m. a twin-engine Cessna appeared to start having engine trouble. Witnesses told police it traveled northeast, but appeared to be having trouble gaining altitude and was making unusual engine noises. Malcom said the plane then veered right and came straight down."

Classic Vmc roll as I said. Here's a video showing exactly that. You can hear one of the engines struggling, the nose starts sliding to the dead engine, and once you exceed the critical angle of attack on the rudder, it snap rolls nose down. Have we gotten rid of some of the "ambiguity" for you?

https://youtu.be/YqmomTUVsAw

I don't, and neither do you, but whose theory do you think hits closer to reality? I'm a multi-engine commercial pilot and flight instructor and seeing this in a news story tells me a lot:

Witnesses "believe the plane was having trouble gaining altitude" and "could hear that there was engine trouble," Malcom explained in video footage from the briefing, shared by Atlanta-area station CBS46.

If you lose one engine, as long as you maintain above "minimum control speed," you have the rudder authority to overcome the adverse yaw from thrust asymmetry and the other left turning tendencies. When you dip below that speed, the plane will Vmc roll into the dead engine which is unrecoverable at that altitude and looks like exactly what happened. If it a failure happens low when you have no altitude, low airspeed, it's warm, and you don't have a lot of time to identify and feather the dead engine, you're fucked.

The aviation community is pretty small and especially flying a lot around the southeast I see a lot of the same tail numbers and faces at these municipal airports. Word gets around fast and seldom does the media get aviation stories right. Seeing the frothing conspiracy theorists trying to shoehorn anything into their narrative is gross and insulting, and people like you push others away from whatever legitimacy there may be to the Q anon thing.

I'm a commercial pilot. I fly in and out of Covington dozens of times a week. Sometimes a crash is just a crash. It landed in a parking lot. The building is fine. Building is on the south side of the departure end of runway 10, which we were using today. I was there flying a few hours before. At that point, a million things could happen, and takeoff is the most dangerous part of the flight. Some of you guys need to chill the F out. Not everything is a conspiracy™.

Sometimes a crash is just a crash. I'm a pilot that flies out of this field a lot. There's a big plant just on the south side of departure end of runway 10. Engine failure on a crosswind turnout for an inexperienced pilot could cause a stall spin pretty easily right where the plant is. Damage is limited too, so it's not like the plant is offline.