The NYT story is that someone who is not currently a whistleblower is considering becoming a whistleblower to tell us what we've already been told by the first whistleblower, whom the non-whistleblower has already testified in support of, so he should have no new evidence to provide, unless it's something he withheld from the ICIG.
Thank God. For a moment I thought Trump might get away with whatever it is he's accused of being guilty of today. But it sounds like they really have him now...