CNN's Jim Acosta explains why he was told to wear a bullet proof vest to Trump rallies

CNN's Jim Acosta is set to release his new book detailing the aftermath of reporting on President Donald Trump. In his book "The Enemy of the People," he talks about the death threats he received from Trump supporters and why he was told to wear a bulletproof vest to Trump rallies.

"As Acosta reports in his book, published on Tuesday, criticism of him by Trump and White House press secretary Sarah Sanders has created a lingering sense of menace and dread, leading to an extraordinary set of personal-security measures," Paul Farhi wrote in The Washington Post.

The book goes onto detail Acosta straining relationship with Trump such as the time the White House revoked his press pass, and only reinstated it after CNN sued them. He also explained the great security lengths that he must go through.

"Acosta reveals that he is regularly tailed by security guards whenever he covers one of Trump's rallies. (CNN has previously asked reporters not to disclose this in press accounts.) At one rally, he notes, the network hired four off-duty police officers to protect him," the report said.

"As death threats poured in during the days before the 2018 midterm elections, Acosta began speaking with the FBI and police detectives who were investigating the threats, and discussing whether to wear a bulletproof vest at Trump rallies. CNN gave him round-the-clock protection," he added.

Acosta then went on to explain the long term impact that Trump's term could have.

Farhi wrote, "After CNN sued the White House to win back his credential, Acosta worried that losing the lawsuit could be the end of his career, making him 'radioactive' to any prospective employer. But he also mused about the larger consequences of an adverse judgment: 'The White House could start ousting journalists it didn't like. Governors and mayors across the country could start blocking reporters from official events. All those government officials would have to do, I worried, was a point to CNN v. Trump and that would be that.'"

Read the full column here.