Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman was "deeply troubled" by what he believed were President Donald Trump's attempts to "subvert U.S. foreign policy," the Washington Post reported Friday, citing Vindman's testimony given to the Democrat-led House impeachment inquiry last week.
From the Post:
[Vindman] told lawmakers that he was deeply troubled by what he interpreted as an attempt by the president to subvert U.S. foreign policy and an improper attempt to coerce a foreign government into investigating a U.S. citizen.
Vindman's testimony received widespread attention because it furthered the narrative that Trump is a rogue president determined to act out of self-interest, rather than in the interest of the American people.
But according to Fox News' Brit Hume, there is a "huge fallacy" in Vindman's line-of-thinking.
This from the article: “he was deeply troubled by what he interpreted as an attempt by the president to subvert U.S… https://t.co/FgSuHaWDmC— Brit Hume (@Brit Hume) 1572699305.0
That fallacy, Hume went on to explain, is that Trump cannot "subvert" U.S. foreign policy precisely because he is the "constitutional author of foreign policy."
"Actually, it's the fact that the president is the constitutional author of foreign policy, so the idea he is 'subverting' it is illogical," Hume explained.
Indeed, as the Constitutional Rights Foundation explains, the executive branch has the most significant role in crafting U.S. foreign policy, and because the president is the head of the executive branch, the president essentially determines the direction of U.S. foreign policy while in office.