That is a matter of perspective. From my perspective he is objecting to a crime that has been committed, and being imprisoned for it. The burden of proof is on the man who would be king.
Vichy supporters? Vichy? OK, I'll play. Just who, among the "Vichy supporters" is Marshal Petain? Who is Pierre Laval? Where is the Nazi occupation army that is being collaborated with? Who does that make you, Charles de Gaulle?
Nope, just an unassuming member of the La Résistance. Just as I am no one significant, neither do any of you rise to the infamy of Laval or Petain. That you should see yourselves in such roles is a symptom of your delusions of grandeur. You must content yourself with the role of Vichy grunts, perhaps in the employ of the Secrétaire d’État à l’Information et à la Propagande? Otherwise known as Obama's Plumbers. Or possibly part of the "old boy" network of the RNC.
My point, which I was sure would elude you, is that there is no one who could remotely be said to be filling those roles, because your simile is so extraordinarily inapt.
What is next? Birtherism expressed in terms of expressionist painters? Or perhaps COBOL v. FORTRAN?