Alexander Vindman connects Jan. 6 insurrection to efforts to silence impeachment testimony
Retired Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, whose role as a whistleblower spurred the first impeachment inquiry into former President Donald Trump in 2019, tells Yahoo News that he sees a direct connection between efforts by the Trump White House to discredit his testimony and the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. According to a lawsuit filed by Vindman against several associates of the former president, the former National Security Council Director for European Affairs faced unlawful retaliation for his role in the impeachment proceedings.
Video Transcript
MICHAEL ISIKOFF: So you are drawing a direct connection between what happened to you and the White House pressure campaign against you and what's going on now with the January 6 investigation.
ALEXANDER VINDMAN: That's absolutely right. Frankly, it's a really quite logical argument to make. Even the Ukraine scandal itself was just the beginning of an enterprise designed to win the 2020 election. At that point he was looking for dirt on Joe Biden. But when he failed to do that, when Trump failed to do that, he pursued other means. He pursued this big lie about stolen elections. So it's all part of a continuing ongoing effort.
With regards to how he sees enablers or sees different actors in his orbit that could advance his interests. I think what feeds those are two things. One is benefit, and the other one is fear. So some of these actors act on benefit, like the Josh Hawleys of the world, will act on benefit because they see a way to pander to Trump. They see a way to pander to the base and continue to curry favor and potentially enable a follow on Senate run or a presidential run. Who knows what kind of aspirations they have. And the other one is fear. It's the fear of consequence. It's the fear that you will be attacked by the president.
If you're a Republican, you will not be in the good graces of the Republican Party. You'll be censured. And there will be severe consequences for you not supporting the president, not toeing the party line. We see that experience with Kinzinger and Cheney. And then, of course, the ultimate-- the topping on this effort is, if I get to power, you could expect to be pardoned for any wrongdoing. So it's a pretty darn comprehensive effort to encourage or compel actors to carry the president's water. And I think that's why this case is so important.
