"As this develops, it is becoming increasingly clear that it is indeed a whistleblower."
Maybe in the broadest context of the meaning of whistleblower. But in the government, the term has very specific meaning. By definition, you can't whistleblow on someone in another agency or department. That's just leaking. In the Intelligence Community, for example, you can only blow the whistle on wrongdoing by someone in the Intelligence Community.
The whistleblower didn't get anything first hand, it was second and third hand, by his own administration. The complaint itself reeks of a coordinated conspiracy, using the same template as the Steele Dossier, to take down the president. The fact that someone with direct knowledge didn't file the complaint themselves makes it clear there was a conspiracy. The fact that the whistleblower plainly states there were multitude White House officials involved is another clue.
The fact that the complaint lines up with the phone call transcript isn't even an issue. No one is alleging the complaint was fabricated. The ICIG would have caught that right away and the complaint would have been dismissed outright. As for moving the transcript from one server to another, that's not a crime. The White House is allowed to do whatever it wants to with privileged communications. Anything beyond that for a reason requires speculation and mind reading. If you ask why they moved it to a more secure server, unless you know the answer, you can't just come up with an answer, that fits a certain narrative, and pretend that isn't what conspiracy theorists do. That's the bread and butter of conspiracy theories.
It's like the #MeToo, and the Kavanaugh thing. Rather than knee-jerk believe women, or believe men, you're much better off believing facts and evidence. And if facts are missing, don't make them up in order to get you to where you want to be.
