Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman made it clear in his testimony before Congress on Tuesday that he took his concerns about President Trump’s dealings with Ukraine — of which there were many — directly to his superiors. He did not leak those concerns to the press, he said.
There’s no reason to believe Vindman went to the media, though his superior, former top national security adviser Tim Morrison, did raise concerns about Vindman’s judgment. Even so, those concerns did not include Vindman potentially leaking confidential information.
In fact, Vindman was one of the first officials to alert Morrison and National Security Council legal adviser John Eisenberg to the possibility that the July 25 call between Trump and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine could get out. He was concerned about the damage the phone call could do to U.S.-Ukraine relations, Morrison admitted.
But Republicans ignored these facts during Vindman’s testimony and instead sought to undermine his reputation.
“Your boss had concerns about your judgment, your former boss, Dr. [Fiona] Hill, had concerns about your judgment, your colleagues had concerns about your judgment, and your colleagues felt there were times when you leaked information,” Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio said. “Any idea why they have those impressions?”
WATCH: Rep. Jim Jordan: “You never leaked information?”
Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman: “I never did, never would. That is preposterous that I would do that.”#ImpeachmentPBS pic.twitter.com/fFVJJHpzqK
— PBS NewsHour (@NewsHour) November 19, 2019
“I never did. I never would,” Vindman replied. “That is preposterous that I would do that.”
But let’s say Vindman did leak to the media. Would that change his testimony? No. He’s still a firsthand witness who heard Trump bring up an investigation into Joe Biden during his conversation with Zelensky. It doesn’t matter how many publications Vindman did or did not speak to — the facts he offers still stand.
These are facts the Republicans are well-equipped to dismantle. We have the transcript, though not in its entirety. Still, there’s little evidence that Trump engaged in a quid pro quo with Zelensky based on what we do know. Republicans have made this point many times over because it’s a good one to make.
By raising the allegation that Vindman was a White House mole, Jordan hoped to discredit Vindman’s account by connecting him to a coordinated bureaucratic effort to topple Trump’s presidency. But Vindman’s testimony suggests that his concern with Trump’s actions had less to do with the president and more to do with the national security risks Trump’s actions posed.
Vindman has made clear his belief that adding Biden’s name to the mix threatened to erode bipartisan support for Ukraine in Congress, which could hinder the United States’ efforts to bring Ukraine into the Western Europe front and hold Russia’s aggression at bay. This, Vindman said, was his sole concern when he went to Eisenberg and Morrison.
The Republicans’ attempt to assign motives to Vindman is counterproductive. The GOP would be better off fighting the facts of Vindman’s testimony rather than reverting to ad hominem attacks that amount to nothing more than a waste of time.
