If you were alive and sober during the Brett Kavanaugh hearing, you could already predict how the Ukraine story was going to play out. We start with one “whistleblower.” Early today, George Stephanopoulos broke the story that there was a second “whistleblower.”

Zaid tells ABC News’ Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos that the second person — also described as an intelligence official — has first-hand knowledge of some of the allegations outlined in the original complaint and has been interviewed by the head of the intelligence community’s internal watchdog office, Michael Atkinson.

The existence of a second whistleblower — particularly one who can speak directly about events involving the president related to conversations involving Ukraine — could undercut Trump’s repeated insistence that the original complaint, released on Sept. 26, was “totally inaccurate.”

And now Zaid’s partner, Andrew Bakaj, says there are multiple “whistleblowers.”

BZZZZZT.

From what we’ve seen so far, from the transcript, from the testimony of a participant, Kurt Volker, and from the “whistleblower complaint” the basic allegation is that there is a law that says Democrats cannot be investigated for corruption and President Trump violated that law. People, like Mitt Romney, might not like it but demanding action of foreign nations is done all the time. The fact that it is Joe Biden’s coke addled whelp at the center of this is immaterial. Quite honestly, it really doesn’t matter how many “whistleblowers” climb forth out of Adam Schiff’s rectum, more people testifying on the same event does not make that event wrong or criminal. The most these additional “whistleblowers” can talk about is what we already know…unless they start contradicting one another, and then it could get interesting.

All you can say is that President Trump was dead on the money on this one:

=========
=========
Like what you see? Then visit my story archive.

I’m on Facebook. Drop by and join the fun there.
=========
=========