With the public impeachment inquiry heating up, the dominant media has gone into overdrive with biased reporting to harm the President. Many examples come to mine, but a particularly egregious example is with comparison between the way two Army Lieutenant Colonels, one perceived Liberal and one perceived conservative, are treated.

Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman.

One Lieutenant Colonel alleges witnessing a wrongful quid pro quo over telephone between President Trump and the newly elected leader of Ukraine. The other Lieutenant Colonel has come forward with allegations of disturbing behavior that bear on the professionalism and credibility of the first Lieutenant Colonel.

Many reading this article already know the first Lieutenant Colonel is Alexander Vindman, and likely already know he is a war veteran and other such notable information. Most do not know about the second Lieutenant Colonel, Jim Hickman, or probably perceived him solely as a right wing zealot. The coverage of these Lt. Colonels is another reason so many have lost faith in the Fourth Estate.

The New York Times has been called the nation’s “paper of record”, and lauded as the most well known news source in the world. It’s reach is ubiquitous, and used by many other news sources as “the” source for news in America.

Let’s review how the New York Times has covered he story of these two officers. The Times has been gushing in it’s coverage of Vindman, ever since becoming aware he was opposed to Donald Trump’s Ukraine policy (reporting Trump’s phone call to the National Security Council counsel). Lt. Colonel Vindman is consistently reported as a “war hero” and “Purple Heart recipient”. In October, the Times described him as a “scholar, diplomat, decorated officer in the United States Army” and further described him in hearings wearing “a midnight-blue dress uniform, a bevy of ribbons pinned to his chest”. The Times went after anyone attempting to criticize Lt. Colonel Vindman as unpatriotic and disrespectful to this patriotic, “decorated” officer. When anyone on the conservative right made any criticism of Lt. Colonel Vindman, the Times howled in protest.

It is important to note that while Lt. Colonel Vindman has served in the Army for almost 20 years, including a tour of duty in Iraq, the vast majority of his career was spent away from the operational Army in jobs wearing primarily civilian clothes. As a relatively junior officer, Vindman left troops to go for two years of grad school. He then went into the Foreign Area Officer program, performing primarily diplomatic related duties. He later served on the National Security Council, at which time he alleged to have heard President Trump’s phone call with the newly elected Ukrainian President. This is not to criticize Lt. Colonel Vindman’s service, but to provide context for the comparison with Hickman.

Lt. Colonel Jim Hickman

Lt. Colonel Jim Hickman spent most of his career with the operational Army, including multiple combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, but his combat wounds forced him out after two decades. In addition to the Purple Heart, Hickman also received an Afghanistan Campaign Medal with two Stars, Iraq Campaign Medal with three Stars, Presidential Unit Citation, Combat Action Badge, Air Assault Badge, two Bronze Stars, Legion of Merit, four Meritorious Service Medals, five Army Commendation Medals, two Army Achievement Medals, Good Conduct Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Global War on Terror Expeditionary Medal, Global War on Terror Service Medal, Korea Defense Service Medal, and a NATO Medal. He truly has what was described of Vindman of “a bevy of ribbons pinned to his chest”.

Hickman’s allegations about Vindman are quite relevant for the news to report the whole story of Vindman’s accusations against the President. According to Hickman, he witnessed Vindman unprofessionally ridicule America, Americans, and the idea of American exceptionalism in front of Russian military officers on an exercise in 2013 when Hickman worked with him in Grafenwoher. Hickman alleged multiple lower ranking US soldiers and civilians complained about Vindman’s behavior, and that Hickman “verbally reprimanded” Vindman after he heard the derisive remarks for himself. Hickman wrote “Do not let the uniform fool you………..He is a political activist in uniform.”

Beyond Lt. Colonel Hickman’s credible background and details of the incident with Vindman, Hickman’s boss at the time, Thomas Lasch, came forward recently to corroborate Hickman’s allegations. Lasch wrote: “Jim I remember exercise ATLAS VISION and this incident. I was your boss at the time and was satisfied when you told me you ‘took care of it’ (meaning then MAJ Vindman’s disparaging comments about the US to the Russians) and I just put things together this past week”.

“Jim I remember exercise ATLAS VISION and this incident. I was your boss at the time and was satisfied when you told me you ‘took care of it’ (meaning then MAJ Vindman’s disparaging comments about the US to the Russians) and I just put things together this past week”. — Thomas Lasch

The New York Times coverage of Lt. Colonel Hickman has been reprehensible in bias. In describing Hickman’s explosive allegations about Lt. Colonel Vindman, New York Times reporters Mike McIntire and Nicholas Confessore suggested that Hickman coordinated with the White House to smear Vindman, and that Hickman’s allegations were unsubstantiated. This is despite Hickman’s denial of any coordination with the White House, and similar denials from the White House.

Most egregious, McIntire and Confessore did not even mention Hickman’s service to the nation, but instead described him solely as a “Florida Man” and follower of a right wing website. Complete marginalization of a true war hero who came forward with information in a sense of his duty to the nation. The exact thing the Times criticized in anyone attempting to marginalize Vindman.

The New York Times is not the only news source to show this astounding bias in the coverage of these two Lieutenant Colonels. The reporters will claim that identifying Lt. Colonel Hickman as a “Florida man” is factually correct. It is factually correct, but the disparate coverage between the backgrounds of these two officers is where the public is misled, as the New York Times cheer lead for the anti-Trump, liberal side in this story, while attempting to discredit the conservative. It has gone on for too long, and explains the reason so many conservative Americans just will not put faith in what was previously a trusted news source.

All the American people want is fair and unbiased reporting. The media has a long way to go, and it can start by showing a fraction of respect to Lt. Colonel Hickman as it has demanded of Lt. Colonel Vindman.

Bill Connor, is an Orangeburg, S.C. attorney, Army Infantry Colonel and author of the book “Articles from War.” He deployed multiple times to the Middle East and was the senior U.S. military adviser to Afghan forces in Helmand Province, where he received the Bronze Star. A Citadel graduate with a JD from the University of South Carolina, he is also a Distinguished Graduate of the U.S. Army War College, earning his master of strategic studies.