“Less than a year ago, after I testified about President Trump’s then misconduct in Ukraine prior to the House impeachment inquiry, Trump and his allies targeted me for punishment. , “Vindman wrote in a op-ed published by Lawfare on Monday.
Vindman said Trump questioned his loyalty, threatened him on Twitter, and suggested to his loyalists that actions should be taken against him.
“Trump’s proxies have amplified these themes in television news, internet news, and social media, resulting in risks to my life and my reputation as a public servant,” he added.
Vindman said he should have “sued the perpetrators [Trump’s] campaign of defamation. “
“While the former president is likely to have been avoided from the civil suit, I should have charged those who exaggerated his campaign of defamation.”
He went on to ask, “Should anyone be surprised that right -wing media viewers are radicalized when media personalities themselves promote radical ideas based on lies?
Vindman declared that the uprising at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 was “started by the Big Lie of ‘stolen elections’ and ‘evil Democrats.'”
He acknowledged that the criminal justice system held the protesters accountable and had the opportunity to hold Trump accountable. However, he asked, how can Americans hold the right -wing media accountable.
“The First Amendment often limits the tools available to demand accountability for the right media. Policy makers cannot, after all, tell media organizations what to say,” Vindman continued. .
He cited examples of how he became the target of “a comprehensive campaign to defame right-wing media outlets and their pundits.”
“At all times, congressmen and right-wing media outlets have repeated attacks on me for being an immigrant and somehow not an American, seeking to‘ damn ’Trump and‘ the chain of command, ‘feeling‘ sympathetic to Ukraine, ’acting as a member of the‘ deep state ’, and participating in a‘ palace coup, ’” Vindman wrote.
He reiterated that it was a “mistake” not to pursue legal action against media outlets and other individuals.
“If I and others had thrown a trial marker during the first impeachment, perhaps these media organizations would have thought a little about the risks of defaming the truth before they spread the lies after the election. , “Vindman argued.
He goes on to argue that while media companies and right -wing media personalities say freedom of speech is at stake, this is not true because the First Amendment does not cover defamation, as Vindman said.
“Putting companies in fear of the real cost of civil damages for libel, libel, and false claims that could collectively provoke violence and could individually harm real people. should have a preventive effect on their behavior, ”Vindman said.