- Worldwide, the sites of conscience are speaking loudly of the horrors of yesterday
- A treasure hunt without the treasure: The dorky thrills of geocaching
- Current Affairs Wrap: Boris romps to power, more tragedy in NZ and history’s stupidest barney
- A feminist revision of 90’s “girl power”
- The importance of alternative media in the modern age
A week after fighting off the claims of one whistleblower, Donald Trump faces another – one purportedly from within the intelligence community.
The other shoe may be on its way to the floor, as a second whistleblower with knowledge of the alleged plot by Trump to coerce the Ukrainian government into looking into Joe Biden has come forward. This is according to Mark Zaid, the legal representative for the first whistleblower.
Zaid told ABC News on Sunday that the second whistleblower is a member of the intelligence community, adding fuel to the impeachment inquiry fire razing Capitol Hill.
A colleague of Zaid’s, Andrew Bakaj, confirmed the news on Twitter: “I can confirm that my firm and my team represent multiple whistleblowers in connection to the underlying 12 August disclosure to the Intelligence Community Inspector General. No further comment at this time.”
The impeachment inquiry swirls around a phone call between Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelinskiy. Since, detractors have claimed that the first whistleblower did not have direct knowledge of the phone call in question, and thusly, was incorrectly portrayed.
With the possibility of a second person reinforcing the contents of the call, the President has redoubled his rhetoric, writing the following on Twitter: “The first so-called second-hand information ‘Whistleblower’ got my phone conversation almost completely wrong… so now word is they are going to the bench and another ‘Whistleblower’ is coming in from the Deep State, also with second hand info. Meet with Shifty (Chairman of the intelligence committee and enabler of the inquiry, Adam Schiff – Ed). Keep them coming!”
Late last week, the White House vowed to ignore the possibilities of impeachment, until it passed a popular vote on the floor. Nancy Pelosi maintains that there “is no requirement under the Constitution, under House Rules, or House precedent that the whole House vote before proceeding with an impeachment inquiry,” as she stated in a Thursday letter to the House’s Republican Leader, Kevin McCarthy.