second complaint has not been filed indicating that a second whistle-blower largely lines up with the first? well, to your question earlier, alex, does it change the storyline or not? we don t know the answer to it, but it is crucial. we have the transcript of the call in that the president does ask for a favor after discussing military aid that he asks for a favor to the ukrainian president, and we know it took place, and the bigger question mark that we are starting to get pieces on is the quid pro quo or whatever you want to call it a link between the military aid and the president wanting to see investigations in the 2016 or the bidens. if the whistle-blower has more information on thashgts and information is coming out as you point fod text med to the text that could change the storyline, but members of congress feel they don t need more and the transcript of that call with the president saying would you do me a favor though after talking about military funding for
you drive for the question, and you keep asking it until you get an answer. this is one very positive sign that we have seen this week on not only from chuck but from people on other networks and people in the print media, they are take it as national emergency, and they are treating it with the seriousness that it deserves, so kudos to chuck. ej? i can t even name the person that i think is the winner of the week, because i think hands down the whistle-blower is the person of the week. headline of the washington post, emerging evidence buttresses the evidence of the whistle-blower, and now we have learned that there is another whistle-blower out there, and maybe more, and this is great thing that what the whistle-blower said is true, and secondly every whistle-blower out there now knows that it is at least possible if you speak out to really overturn everything in washington if it should be
reveal and so will anybody else? as a matter of law, and i did a study, because everybody is asking this question, but it appears to me, only limited protection of the identity of whistle-blowers through the official whistle-blower process. if the whistle-blower has talked to an inspector general which is the case with both of the people, the inspector general is forbidden under some circumstances of revealing the identity unless the inspector general believes that it is coming ow, and so there is a little bit of wiggle room there, but it is a limit on the inspector general and not on the president or the president s chief of staff or personal lawyer or cia director or anything else if they find out through some other mean, and it does not seem to me that the law binds their hands from putting that person s name out into the public. shannon, you saw the battle on the morning talk shows over the president s behavior, and this is a sample of the democrats and republicans
whistleblower coming forward advance the story or change the narrative or box the president in a tighter corner or give me your responses and i will start with jason johnson? this helps because there is going to be a flood of whistleblower coming forward. everybody is covering their butts at this particular point. maybe the adults in the room or people who were just concerned. they should blow the whistle as their theme song what they re going to come forward. that s what we ll see for weeks now. it is one thing to try to persuade one whistleblower and find out things about their family when five or six or seven people, some appointed by the trump administration, that s a sign that the dam is finally breaking. natasha. i think it is definitely going to get credence to the first whistleblower s complaint more so than the transcripts we have seen already because this person also has firsthand knowledge and presumably give
forward that indicates that they are similar along the same lines of what they are whistle-blowering about. from the first whistle-blower complaint, we know multiple u.s. government officials that informed that whistle-blower who first came forward who informed their complaint, so we always knew that there were more people within the government or had access to the contents of this call either they listened in on it in a role like i occupied at the white house or somewhere in the president s circle, and we have always known there were others and the first whistle-blower coming forward they have realized now that they need to come forward as well with the firsthand information. so i think it is very s significant and i would point out that the nsc has political appointees there, but it is largely staffed by government servants, and so it is a tremendous act of courage for