Apparently jealous of all the attention the (registered Democrat) whistleblower is getting for ratting out Trump on the Ukraine phone call, another so-called whistleblower has come out of the woodwork. Like the first, this one has filed a complaint in which he alleges to have heard something from someone about something he has no personal knowledge about. Naturally, the Washington Post took this story and ran with it, since, after all, it may (or may not) put President Donald Trump in a negative light. And when the Post hears something like that, they don’t investigate and they don’t question it. They just say, “You had me at Trump,” and go to the presses.
“An Internal Revenue Service official has filed a whistleblower complaint reporting that he was told that least one Treasury Department political appointee attempted to improperly interfere with the annual audit of the president or vice president’s tax returns, according to multiple people familiar with the document,” the Post reported.
Uh-huh. So this whistleblower does not personally know that this occurred. He “was told.” By whom? The Washington Post? How many times are Democrats going to run this playbook before the American people groan in unison and scream at them to stop coming to us with this unverified, unsubstantiated nonsense? Who is this guy? Who are the “multiple people familiar with the document” the Post interviewed? Who is the “political appointee” WHOSE TAX RETURNS IS THIS STORY ABOUT?
A responsible journalist might have lined up at least a few of these answers before going to press, and a responsible editor would have damn sure demanded them. We’re sure none of that happened here, though, because, hey, the media’s credibility is already shot, so why not just go for broke?
“The Post has been unable to verify the allegation in the whistleblower’s complaint of improper communication between Treasury and IRS on the tax audit program,” they note.
Of course not.
Asked by the Post if it bothered him that critics were saying his complaint was uncorroborated, the whistleblower said no.
“That’s what investigations are for,” he said.
Well, no. Investigations are typically launched when there is good, firsthand reason to believe that there is something worth investigating. Unfortunately, we’re now in an era where any Deep State Democrat can say whatever they want about the president and get a whole political machine rolling towards impeachment.
Oh, Democrats. If you pull the rabbit out of the hat and win the next election, God help your president. Payback is a bitch.
