Posted by William A. Jacobson Friday, October 4, 2019 at 9:55pm
NY Times supposed bombshell: Someone is thinking about filing a second Ukraine whistleblower complaint but has not done so, and may not need to do so since he or she already has been interviewed.
The New York Times is continuing the tradition of the Russia collusion media frenzy, where every few days a new media “bombshell” was launched, only to be revealed as a dud. By the time the bombshell was debunked, a new media bombshell was launched, hence a new news cycle.
It was the permanent crisis news cycle:
Since Mueller was appointed in May 2017, after James Comey was fired as FBI Director, we have been in a perpetual 3-5 day “scoop” news cycle based on the Mueller probe.
For over a year barely a week goes by that some publication doesn’t publish a “scoop” about what Mueller is thinking, who his team is talking to, what they might do or might not do, and so on. The Mueller probe is the media gift that keeps giving, usually based on anonymous sources.
Just as each breathless and frequently demonstrably inaccurate media firestorm has died down — Wait, another Big Scoop. Let’s start a new news cycle. It never ends, and will not end so long as Mueller is investigating Trump, whether Trump is a “subject” or a “target” or something else.
The nation has suffered this media-driven Mueller probe gaslighting ….
It’s happening again.
The case for the First “Whistleblower” is falling apart, with the revelation of previously undisclosed pre-complaint communications with Adam Schiff’s office, damaging testimony from the recently resigned special envoy to Ukraine, and above all, the release of the complaint itself which demonstrated it was a professionally prepared legal brief and closing argument not a true whistleblower revelation.
Now the media is in search of a new whistleblower, and the NY Times has found one to create another news cycle. Except this Second Whistleblower has not filed a whistleblower complaint, but is only thinking about it according the the Times’ sources. Seriously.
This “bombshell” is lighting up Twitter and will dominate the news for the weekend, 2nd Official Is Weighing Whether to Blow the Whistle on Trump’s Ukraine Dealings:
A second intelligence official who was alarmed by President Trump’s dealings with Ukraine is weighing whether to file his own formal whistle-blower complaint and testify to Congress, according to two people briefed on the matter.
The official has more direct information about the events than the first whistle-blower, whose complaint that Mr. Trump was using his power to get Ukraine to investigate his political rivals touched off an impeachment inquiry. The second official is among those interviewed by the intelligence community inspector general to corroborate the allegations of the original whistle-blower, one of the people said.
The inspector general, Michael Atkinson, briefed lawmakers privately on Friday about how he substantiated the whistle-blower’s account. It was not clear whether he told lawmakers that the second official is considering filing a complaint.
A new complaint, particularly from someone closer to the events, would potentially add further credibility to the account of the first whistle-blower, a C.I.A. officer who was detailed to the National Security Council at one point….
Got that? Someone is thinking about filing a whistleblower complaint but has not done so, and may not need to do so since he or she already has been interviewed.
Such a person would not, under any circumstances, be a real whistleblower — the person is not revealing anything new and is merely a witness to someone else’s complaint. It’s a media hoax to assign the term “whistleblower” to such a person, but it creates a new news cycle.
Yet within minutes of the 8:38 p.m. publication of the report by the NY Times tonight, this supposed second whistleblower was being hailed as the end of Trump.
“A second intelligence official who was alarmed by Trump’s dealings with Ukraine is weighing whether to file his own formal whistle-blower complaint and testify to Congress, according to two people briefed on the matter.”https://t.co/NT9PuV3fVg
Keep tweeting, criminal. https://t.co/8f0DcJadKM
— Greg Sargent (@ThePlumLineGS) October 5, 2019
— The Hill (@thehill) October 5, 2019
Oof: The second individual “has more direct information about the events than the first whistle-blower” https://t.co/3etB9VdCEx
— Adam Parkhomenko (@AdamParkhomenko) October 5, 2019
Just more manipulation.
But maybe the media Russia collusion hoax isn’t the best analogy:
“Crazy how this is mimicking the Kavanaugh accusations. By Sunday Michael Avenatti will be holding a press conference talking about a third whistleblower.”