It's a dangerous exercise to make assumptions about an American's dedication to the country based on their allegiance (or lack thereof) to the current president. In the case of Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, too many on either side have done just that.

Vindman's testimony regarding President Trump's phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has been met with the kind of praise or criticism only found in an extraordinarily partisan era. Immediately, some of the president's staunchest allies began to question Vindman's motivation. Some even went so far as to imply an unpatriotic connection to Ukraine, his birthplace. And Democrats, ready to strengthen the impeachment case against their greatest political foe, were eager to latch onto anything, especially a current member of the National Security Council who might be seen as an official defector.

The collective reaction to Vindman is problematic because it shows that both parties often care more about the messenger than the message they bring.

It should go without saying that presidents are temporary fixtures on the national stage. Americans, no matter if they're public or private citizens, should never be forced into an unwavering duty to the person in the Oval Office. No one in that executive capacity deserves an allegiance that looks beyond a commitment to the truth. Furthermore, directly connecting patriotism to the support of or opposition to a commander in chief is not only unfair but proof that one doesn't understand the true meaning of patriotism at all.

No matter where Americans stand on the issue of impeachment, the pursuit of truth must be the primary focus. This requires that Republicans, no matter how much they desire a political win, accept the possibility of wrongdoing from Trump. Conversely, Democrats must accept that the conclusion of the entire saga may be a result that is not to their partisan liking. But before we reach an endpoint it is imperative that facts from all the pertinent players are allowed to be presented. That is why individuals such as Vindman must be allowed to bring honest testimony that is unhindered by censure from either side.

Unsurprisingly, this behavior applies not only to the current administration but the ones to come. It matters not whether a president is Democrat or Republican. It is necessary that we proceed on a case-by-case basis in a way that demands facts first and withholds attacking the messenger's commitment to his or her country.

In the long term, it is not our impermanent leaders who will stand the test of time, it is the support of American ideals. It is impossible for a nation of ideologically diverse individuals to completely agree on who is best suited to guide the country. Determining someone to be unpatriotic, or even a traitor, is only appropriate when there is proof that they've actively worked to betray our principles, not solely if they oppose an American president or appear to be doing so by bringing testimony that may hurt his cause. In addition, no president is above the law and any improper or downright illegal behavior must result in a swift correction.

Patriotic duty should never be defined by shifting partisan feelings. Rather, patriotism demands that an individual set personal opinions aside and place the country before party.

Only time will tell whether there is sufficient evidence to impeach and even remove Trump from office. Perhaps, like the Mueller probe, the inquiry will show misconduct that falls short of the necessary requirements. If Americans should have learned anything from the Russia investigation, it is to wait for facts to be collected. Vindman and other witnesses may or may not be liked by either party at various times in the impeachment process, but this says absolutely nothing about their loyalty to the country at large.

Kimberly Ross (@SouthernKeeks) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner's Beltway Confidential blog and a columnist at Arc Digital.