Retired Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman is reflecting on his experience with Donald Trump’s “campaign of defamation” against him after testifying in the former president’s first impeachment trial.
“A little more than a year ago, after I testified about then-President Trump’s misconduct on Ukraine before the House impeachment inquiry, Trump and his allies targeted me and my family for retribution,” Vindman wrote in an op-ed published by Lawfare on Monday.
Vindman noted Trump questioned his loyalty, threatened him on Twitter, and suggested to his loyalists action should be taken against him.
“Trump proxies amplified these themes on 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 those who amplified [Trump’s] campaign of defamation.”
“While the former president was likely immune from civil suit, I should have sued those who amplified his campaign of defamation.”
He went on to ask, “Should anyone be surprised that viewers of right-wing media are radicalized when media personalities themselves promote radical ideas based on lies?”
Vindman argued the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 was “fueled by the Big Lie of ‘stolen elections’ and ‘evil Democrats.'”
He recognized the criminal justice system is holding the protesters accountable and Congress had a chance to hold Trump accountable. Still, he questioned, how Americans can hold the right-wing media accountable.
“The First Amendment gravely limits the available tools to seek accountability for the right-wing media. Policymakers cannot, after all, tell media organizations what to say,” Vindman continued.
He cited examples of how he has been the target of “a comprehensive defamation campaign by right-wing media outlets and their pundits.”
“All the while, congresspeople and right-wing media outlets reiterated attacks on me for being an immigrant and somehow not American, seeking to ‘undermine’ Trump and ‘the chain of command,’ feeling ‘simpatico with the Ukraine,’ acting as a member of the ‘deep state’, and taking part in a ‘palace coup,'” Vindman wrote.
He reiterated it was a “mistake” not to pursue legal action against these media outlets and other individuals.
“Had I and others thrown down a litigation marker during the first impeachment, perhaps these media organizations would have thought just a little bit about the risks of desecrating the truth before they spread post-election lies,” Vindman argued.
He continued to argue that while media companies and right-wing media personalities claim freedom of speech is at stake, it is not true because the First Amendment does not cover defamation, as Vindman put it.
“Putting companies in fear of the real costs in civil damages for slander, libel, and false claims that can cumulatively incite violence and that can individually harm actual human beings should have a restraining effect on their behavior,” Vindman said.
