Tim Walz Falsely Accused of 'Stolen Valor' by J.D. Vance
By: Nikki McCann Ramirez (Rolling Stone)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Trump's VP pick accused his rival of having dodged a deployment to Iraq, and of engaging in "stolen valor garbage"
By Nikki McCann Ramirez
There's very little the two men running to be the nation's next vice president have in common, but the one thing they do share is a history of military service.
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, who as of Tuesday is running alongside Vice President Kamala Harris, served for 24 years as a member of the Army National Guard after voluntarily enlisting at the age of 17. Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio), former President Donald Trump's running mate, served for four years as a member of the Marines.
On Wednesday, Vance took a swing at Walz over his military record, repeating viral claims that Walz had "dropped out of the Army and allowed his unit to go without him" to Iraq. Vance described Walz's military record as "stolen valor garbage."
JD Vance accuses Tim Walz of "stolen valor":
"[Walz] said we shouldn't allow weapons that [he] used in war to be on America's streets. … When were you ever in war? … Do not pretend to be something that you're not." pic.twitter.com/TI09Yil0RL
— The Recount (@therecount) August 7, 2024
As a member of the Army National Guard, Walz helped respond to major natural disasters, worked in firearm and artillery training, received commendations as a prolific sharpshooter, and was sent to Italy to support U.S. operations in Afghanistan as part of Operation Enduring Freedom. In 2005, Walz ended his military career to pursue a successful run for Congress, he retired honorably with a slew of awards and medals and the rank of master sergeant — an administrative downgrade from command sergeant major, which he had been promoted to earlier in the year but had not completed training for.
Vance also accused Walz of feigning a record in active combat: "[Walz] said — and he was making a point about gun control — he said, 'we shouldn't allow weapons that I used in war, to be on America's streets.' Well, I wonder, Tim Walz, when you ever in war?"
The senator actually misquoted Walz in his screed. In the clip Vance was referencing, Walz says that he "carried" weapons in war, not "used." Given that Operation Enduring Freedom was a part of the post-9/11 War on Terror, and that Walz was deployed to Italy under it — and likely had a service weapon — the claim that he is engaging in "stolen valor" holds little water.
Vance spoke on Wednesday as if he served more honorably than Walz, noting that he went to Iraq "I did it, I did what they asked me to do and I did it honorably," he said The senator was deployed for six months in Iraq as a combat correspondent in 2005 as part of the Marines' Public Affairs office. He — like Walz — never engaged in active combat and has stated that he was "lucky to escape any real fighting," during his deployment.
Walz has spoken at length about his service in the past, and it's not the first time his political opponents have attempted to diminish his service. The claim that Walz abandoned his unit to avoid fighting in Iraq was leveled against him in 2018 and 2022, during his campaigns for the governorship and reelection, largely by former state Sen. Scott Jensen and Thomas Behrends — a former National Guardsman who was deployed to Iraq after Walz's retirement.
In 2022, former battalion commander Joseph Eustice, who served with Walz, told the Star Tribunethat the accusations against Walz stemmed from ill-informed or "sour-grapes" soldiers who were passed over for promotions. "He was a great soldier," Eustice told the Tribune. "When he chose to leave, he had every right to leave … The man did nothing wrong when he chose to leave the service; he didn't break any rules."
In 2018, Al Bonnifield, who served under Walz in the Guard, told MPR News that Walz "talked with us for quite a while on that subject [of retiring]. He weighed that decision to run for Congress very heavy. He loved the military, he loved the Guard, he loved the soldiers he worked with."
Walz told the outlet that "once you're in, it's hard to retire. Of my 40 years or 41 years, I had been in the military 24 of them. It was just what you did … So that transition period was just a challenge."
Tags
Who is online
648 visitors
I dont see this particular charge gaining any traction.
What did Walz do?
Stealing...what?
Probably he Stole JD Vance's famous couch?
Did you hurt yourself stretching so far to try and reference the only talking point democrats seem to have?
Please-- could you re-state that in plain English? TIA!
(Thanks in Advance)
Walz, from his run for Congress, likes to create the impression he served in combat. Besides claiming he's carried guns in "war," in his first national profile from 2006 the Atlantic claims he served in Operation Enduring Freedom and that he'd "returned from fighting the War on Terror." The author, Joshua Green just wrote a piece yesterday for Bloomberg claiming Walz served in Iraq.
Where did Green get that false information I wonder?
Well, he did deploy to Vicenza, a UNESCO World Heritage Site in Northern Italy. I've been there multiple times and have had to combat the tendency to overindulge on the good food and wine there.
I'd never heard of it. Looks like a place to add to the itinerary for northern italy.
Why did he decide to go there? (Or was it actually an order from a commanding officer?
)
I’m sure that he had orders.
All of my visits to Vincenzo were voluntary except one. It was a day visit and my only helicopter flight over the Alps, As I recall, no one named Brown was aboard. We didn’t almost crash but we did unapproved fly over of the Leaning Tower when we took off at Pisa.
I served in Iraq in 2003 during the time Saddam got captured. My unit was a Medevac unit, consisting of Blackhawk helicopters, stationed at Balad Airbase. Our mission was, obviously, to go out and get the wounded and bring them back to the Combat Support Hospital. Due to my rank, I was not one of the crewmembers but ran our headquarters platoon.
Fortunately, none of our birds were hit by anything, however, we did get mortared every day for the first 43 days we were there and sporadically after that. No casualties in our unit, thank God, but one guy just over the berm from our position took shrapnel to the leg. We never saw direct combat, thankfully and we all made it home.
The point of saying all this is that I would never say I've been to combat. I think that saying so belongs to those who were actually getting actively shot at. I don't really count the mortars because they just lobbed about three to six a day in the general direction of the base rather than try to aim for a specific target, so they weren't as dangerous as they could have been. Some close calls, but whatever.
I saw the vid of Walz talking about having carried guns in war. Based on the information currently available, I think that was misleading at best. He was nowhere near combat. He didn't carry a weapon when deployed to Italy. In my view, he tried to claim an honor he didn't earn. I don't claim it for myself and I was much closer than he was.
That is my opinion, for whatever that's worth.
Well i would first thank you for your service, and agree you have more credentials than most to critique Walz, but I believe he was attempting imagery where as the guns he most certainly did train with during his 24 years in the reserves, are not the same weapons he believes should be available to everyday citizens. Now I own guns and can see and respect his point attempted made. I believe he should have made a better attempt. I do not believe Vance holds any real high ground in his attempted attacks on Walz, and with Don the Cons record of clicking horse back saddled bone spurring more debate about his lying revolution attempting hate and aggression as pushed via indirection towards insurrection is really the best to head, as in this direction....
but Trump trumps all others in his world, and for that, a;ll should be concerned
Like I said, it's simply my opinion. One that I suspect will be shared by a lot of vets.
Except they aren't the same guns. They only look the same. They don't function the same. The M4 has both semi-auto and three-round-burst mode, while the M4A1 has both semi-auto and fully automatic (machine gun). Civilian models are only semi-auto. The military does not use AR15 style guns in any caliber, except possible exceptions for Special Forces (doubtful).
So, even in making the misleading claim about carrying a gun in war, he's also misleading in saying the same guns used on the battlefield should not be available to civilians because that's already the case. He, and others using the military gun angle, are simply trying to mislead the uninformed by claiming they are military guns. They should just be honest and say they don't want civilians to have semi-automatic weapons. Or, even more honest, guns at all.
I doubt any politician has any high ground over another, these days. All they do is attack each other. Personally, I'd love to see just one forego the attacks and simply talk about the policies they want to enact.
Youth should not be held against you as you honor your elders. Young people are not expected to have much life experience. Time tempers the ego and makes us more humble and understanding.
The older I get the less I am inclined to criticize folks for sinning.
Perhaps you will evolve given more time. Hang in there, for now...
What, politicians have policies...?
Right?!!
100% right. It was a misstatement and 'many' are right to remark about it. But then, to impugn the man's character for the sake of political expediency (alleged "stolen valor") can't be allowed to happen. Going forward Walz will have to remember better. (Being 60 and near 60 - Kamala has its 'senior' moments too!)
The point being made was about types of guns on the streets of America, I reckon. (I am not following guns as topic much these days.) Of course, for some conservatives that point is a non-starter. So the 'hunt' is on to look into the 'innards' of the statements made by Walz for something else to 'start' their opposition response off! Everyone who cares. . . knows what Walz meant, but yes, he could have left off, the SINGLE and potent word: 'in' or stated, 'carried in training.' It's a misstep. But, it is what it is.
Good point!
If only three to six mortar shells are lobbed at you daily, you are never in any real danger of being killed-- or even just being seriously injured.
(Its only when the number of shells lobbed at you daily goes up to, maybe, 30 or 40 that you would have any chance of being seriously injured)!
And as I am sure you are aware the danger of actually being killed by mortar shells being lobed at you never puts you in real danger until it reaches, say, 90 to 100 per day!
Or god forbid, the enemy uses them to make sticky bombs.💣
I think you need to think this through a little more.
Or, actually, I did. I see what you were doing here. My apologies.
Still, at least it was usually only three and six once in a while. Dunno why it was always in threes.
JHC, our local military experts on NT know all about military regulations. Too bad none of them actually served in the military with the exception of a handful on NT and that small handful gets even smaller when talking about having served in combat.
He did nothing wrong committed no rules violations, and served 24 years as an enlisted man, that is enough said.
Vicenza is more than a world heritage site with good food and it is the home of the:
The 173rd Airborne Brigade ("Sky Soldiers") is an airborne infantry brigade combat team (IBCT) of the United States Army based in Vicenza, Italy. It is the United States European Command's conventional airborne strategic response force for Europe.
The right will do whatever they think they can get away with to besmirch Walz, and Harris, that is a given.
Vicenza is more than a world heritage site with good food and it is the home of the:
The 173rd Airborne Brigade ("Sky Soldiers") is an airborne infantry brigade combat team (IBCT) of the United States Army based in Vicenza, Italy. It is the United States European Command's conventional airborne strategic response force for Europe.
Very true and the 173rd BCT has awesome capabilities. I’m not sure what the relationship with the 1-125th FA BN is. I do know that our local Italian allies weren’t all that happy with a new US base and several thousand additional soldiers there.
Doesn't sound too bad there..
So obviously by his deciding to be stationed there its obvious that Tim Walz was committing Treason! Or at the very least he was committing an extremely serious case of the proverbial act of "Stolen Valor"!
BTW, for people who are unfamiliar with standard military terms such as #StolenValor, let me just state that its one of the most serious offenses in the entire United States military!
(Of course all hope is not lost lost-- there's a relatively unknown clause that clearly states " if a soldier commits an act of "Stolen Valor"-- charges may be partially dropped if he/she/they return all of the valor that they have stolen (unused and in good condition of course) within 30 days!
JD lied?
Wow...so shocking...
/s
Walz lost the faith with his fellow soldiers we he quit two years earlier than his commitment to avoid the deployment of his unit to war. Then he lost the faith of all Americans when he lied about being in war and about his rank.
These are not the actions of a man of character.
Not even close.
There are a thousand good reasons not to vote for Trump. And yet many people (including most of the "conservatives") on NT, say they will vote for him anyway.
I feel fairly confident people will say the same about Tim Walz.
Unless Walz said Americas war dead are "suckers and losers", that would be a bridge too far.
Are you voting for the Harris ticket?
I think so.
Donald Trump told Gen. John Kelly that Americans buried in military cemeteries are suckers and losers. Are you going to vote for Donald Trump ?
So join the crowd.
[deleted][✘]
“Are you going to vote for Donald Trump ?”
Such a simple question that when asked without rancor should be answered without hesitation.
Yes you have said you are going to vote for Trump. So what is the point of attacking Walz for something that is arguably less bad than what the person you are going to vote for did?
Trump was the president of the United States when he called dead American soldiers suckers and losers.
Welcome to NTers
How can you vote for a man of such clearly low character?
I'm reading on twitter that Trump has only one campaign event scheduled for the next week. What is going on?? Throwing in the towel or too old to care anymore?
just WOW from a one stating he is voting for Trump....
You see the part all y’all are missing is …. If one is bad, so is the other,
[deleted][✘]
This coming from a Biden and Kamala supporter? The king and now the queen of hiding in their basements?
Hilarious!
There are levels of badness. A head cold is bad. Ass cancer is worse. They are both bad but one is immeasurably badder...
Ah yes, the “badness” indicator. I see. Now I understand. /S
No, your problem is that your false equivalence is FALSE...
a false, false equivalency?
okay, works for me.
They all are Sparty, they all are...
Yes, I do believe you believe that.
That would be the “belief” indicator. Which would be very close to the “opinion” indicator.
Are you really unaware of the meaning of the word, "False"?
Has she done a presser yet? What's the hold up I wonder................well other than like her boss, she can't talk coherently off teleprompter.
Vance is handling things just fine. Trump knows he needs a rest after day after day of rallies.
How can you vote for a 'man' of such clearly NO character???????????????????????????
yep! He's 78 years old. He probably needs at least a 2 hour nap every day
We are talking Biden now?
Ya! The former 'president' has a handy scapegoat when he loses.
Isn't Biden 81?
Yes, and he is the only one of the four that takes a nap every day.
And you know this because...?
Ok, so you know Biden takes daily naps. Did you notice in my original comment I suggested trmp probably took a 2 hour nap every day? And if he doesn't he probably needs to do. I used to lay my cranky 2 year olds down for naps once a day
Contrary to what you might think, napping is a characteristic common to many if the most productive high achievers...
Einstein, Alexander Graham Bell and Churchill as examples.
Let's first accept that Jim Walz gives a good first impression. Secondly, he emanates good and decency and his life story (so far) backs that up! Donald gave down the escalator and for a first impression spit into the face of latinos, Mexicans, and immigrants living and working in this country. Vance, well, he is Donald's "second" - that speaks for itself!
I like to take naps. I can't do it every day but when I have a day off, a nap is on the schedule
[✘]
Maybe that's one way the man child can avoid future tantrums. Nap time for donald and a diaper change.
Naps were a necessity when I was working and time allowed, especially on the weekends. I'm kind of in early retirement now and am not working so the naps aren't such a necessity for me now. But I am definitely a napper and it doesn't matter what age you are.
The vast majority of Americans with more than half a brain like myself would never vote for a man with such low character like Donald Trump. It's a rather simple litmus test. Either you prove yourself an intelligent patriotic American who loves the constitution and our nation, or you vote for a convicted felon, accused sexual predator and proven liar with "character" lower than a toilet bowl floater like Trump.
He had already filed to run for Congress prior to the announcement of the deployment. Not the other way around.
Walz was deployed to Vicenza, Italy in 2003 supporting the Afghan war.
Walz achieved the rank of Command Master Sergeant provisionally. He took a demotion for retirement since he had not completed necessary parts of the program to remove the provision.
Watching people desperately trying to tear down a decent 24 year veteran on nuances with a heavy does of spin while having full intent to vote for a vindictive, loose-cannon, traitorous scoundrel (who did not serve and demeaned those who did) for PotUS is the pinnacle of hypocrisy.
I dont think we've seen the pinnacle from them yet, but its coming.
Maybe, but at this point Trump supporters are so far beyond rational analysis that it does not really matter anymore.
Trump is not going to gain any new supporters. What is more likely is that he will lose supporters. And at the least, he will lose turnout.
Here come the justifications …..
He had committed to six years with the NG long before that.
We weren’t at war with Italy and supporting a war is not the same as going to war. Besides, that all happened before he quit and left his brothers and sisters hanging without a senior NCO right before THEY were going to war.
Bullshit, I’m not attacking his “honorable” duty. I’m attacking the less than honorable part at the end. This reminds me of the defenders of Kerry after his lies and misrepresentations. Walz, like Kerry, is ….. Not Fit for Command.
Hypocrisy, is attempting to defend the indefensible.
Good luck in November!
You are voting for a traitor who never served a day and who views KIA and POW as losers and suckers. A traitor who tried to steal a US presidential election with fraud, coercion, lying, and incitement. A loose-cannon who cares only about himself and would abuse the presidency for his own needs.
And then you ignore the patriotic service of a 24 year veteran and instead attempt (poorly) to demean this decent man through absurd exaggeration.
The hypocrisy is profound.
Just amazing that you do not see the glaring irony in your statement in this context.
Lucky for me I could care less what nameless, faceless people on the internet think.
It is hard to communicate just how little but the measure of “Nano” does comes to mind ….
and some of US could care less about what you think as well, cause it's really not all that important, and there is so much more to care less about, that it makes me want to care more...
I was wondering why you were here, thanks for clearing that up.
Some members come here purely to sharpen their trolling skills.
Walz stuck it out for 24 years. He didn't bail after 4 like Vance who didn't even see combat himself. So he probably needs to just sit down and color
Donald Trump might the most vulnerable candidate in history on the subject of military service.
1. There is wide belief he fraudulently avoided the draft.
2. He joked about sexually transmitted diseases being his own private "war"
3. He berated John McCain who was a prisoner of war for years and suffered serious injury while so.
4. He told John Kelly that American war dead were suckers and losers.
If this garbage from Vance about Walz keeps up the Dems should go DIRECTLY at Trumps vulnerabilities on this subject. I dont know if they will but they should.
You are a veteran, are you trying to equate 1 weekend a month to an active duty personal? He served 24 years in the guard. While admirable it isn't the same.
I don't believe you know much about how the Guard and Reserves work. It's not just one weekend a month. They also spend a lot of time doing training for weeks at a time. Whey they are deployed they aren't working just on weekends, they are considered to be full time active duty when deployed. I worked with a Guard unit in Alaska. Most of the personnel were full time Guard...and they still did their one weekend a month. That's 2 weeks without a day off. My son-in-law is Air National Guard. He's been in training since November. So don't try to compare my time as active duty to the amount of duty served by a Guardsman.
I am a veteran and served in the guard after active duty, so take you BS defense somewhere else, it is absolutely not equivalent. and his deployment was never to an active war zone, he avoided that by quitting and abandoning his men. and went to Italy once for nine months, what a fucking hardship.
Bye bue George. I tried but it was not meant to be
would love to practice some anti trolling skills, but have things to do today. Hell, i just need me a good vent for anger pent, and I just can't for the life of me, see, how bone spur middle foot Trump can somehow battle the most bazaar, horrendous, ultimate personal battle ever so far, as 'aids and STD's' had the Gaul to threaten Trumps petty precious little Primadonna pampered puss fuss muss by creating 'Trumps own personal Viet Nam' , as I do recall him claiming. While losers like McCain were embarrassing Don the Juan by being shot down and captured, Trump had to contemplate which floozy mightvhave an Uzi down yonder, oh the sacrifice, cause those 'losers' that got them selves killed with only one life to give, sure had a lot of nerve, when Don the perve was facing down Sylvia Syphilis, Gorgeous Gloria Gonorrhea, the girl that would clap with no hands when gone to see ya, and then there was Liddia with chlamydia, Heather Pamela Vance (HPV), and Heather Herpes Hope, and that HIVD dope Don the Con had to batttle through, oh what a trooper, as they pegged em in the poo per his request, and he said Pewty Pew Pew was the Putin it in best ....
... it's pretty fun, especially with all the whining that follows.
It's disgusting and deplorable and I'm so sick and tired of the endless defense of the indefensible traitor convicted felon and rapist
Some trolls say that the Guard serves less time or some such ignorant bullshit and that Walz actually served less than 24 years - like 4 times less.
JFC
Thanks TG. I saw that agnorance from some others here - that they only served on the weekends and that Walz therefore spent way less than 24 years in the service. Like 4 times less than Vance for fucks sake.
I'm so sick of that shit.
why whatever are you referring to...`
I also think some people lie. They really don't know what they're talking about when it comes to the Guard
Exactly and yeah some folks are famous for making shit up as they go - like the former 'president', or in other words, lying.
More like 10 times less. 912 hours is 2.5 years
JFC
FFS
6.2.21
6.2.25
6.2.14
Oh, you were talking Vance. In that case 1.6 times.
But i'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, Tim Walz was never a full time guard member. so he only served 1 weekend a month, unlike your deflection to you alleged time in Alaska trying to use full time guard members as a example. He was a TEACHER not a title 32 employee while serving in the guard. Not a full time employee working 2 weeks straight without a day off. FFS!
You have a problem with a full time school teacher and coach ALSO serving part-time as a member of the National Guard for 24 years?
No, but i'm also not going to say that it is equivalent to someone who put their entire lives on hold going active duty full time.
Yeah, but Walz, like those with him serving, was in the theater of war . And, if the collective "you" served, you know that one follows orders to go where Command decides one is needed to be 'positioned' for th e good of the services . That is, you don't (routinely) get to just go 'on your own.'
Indeed, reading below, in 2008 that very theater became a battleground . ( "The 173rd Airborne Brigade ("Sky Soldiers") is an airborne infantry brigade combat team (IBCT) of the United States Army based in Vicenza, Italy. It is the United States European Command's conventional airborne strategic response force for Europe ." - Credit: Kavika )
On Monday, two paratroopers who fought in th e July 13, 2008 , battle shared their recollections as part of discussions designed to keep the 173rd Airborne Brigade’s history fresh for current “sky soldiers.”
Col. Matthew Myer and Chief Warrant Officer 2 John Hayes said the fight came down to quick decision-making. “One thing tactically that really helped us was we moved our forces ... down to be more accessible,” said Myer, who was the company’s commander. “That helped us have redundant communications. “The second thing was we could resupply ourselves by ground. We set the battlefield and it enabled us to reinforce, and we never lost communications.” Their talk to an audience of around 100 paratroopers was part of the Leaders Legacy series, which has been running since January.
Myer and Hayes stressed the importance of training, even when war isn’t imminent .
Col. Matthew Myer, center, and Chief Warrant Officer 2 John Hayes, right, share lessons learned from the Battle of Wanat with members of the 173rd Airborne Brigade in Vicenza, Italy, on July 1, 2024, in advance of their Saber Junction training. At left is Capt. Rob Koontz, who was moderating. (Jennifer French/U.S. Army)
Col. Matthew Myer, center, and Chief Warrant Officer 2 John Hayes, right, share lessons learned from the Battle of Wanat with members of the 173rd Airborne Brigade in Vicenza, Italy, on July 1, 2024, in advance of their Saber Junction training. At left is Capt. Rob Koontz, who was moderating. (Jennifer French/U.S. Army)
“Never underestimate the importance of the service you’re in,” Myer said. “You might think, ‘We’re a peacetime army; we’re just training.’ Good leaders know how to emphasize how important the job is that we do. The more you can do that, the better you’ll be prepared.”
Read more at:
Source - Stars and Stripes
Vance’s Military Service and What It Taught Him
Joining in 2003, Vance served four years in the Marine Corps, including a tour in Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom. His primary role was as a public affairs specialist, a role that honed his communication skills, a talent readily apparent in his later writing and public speaking.
In fact, such 'arguments' are not relevant to having served or not! Indeed, the remark, "equate 1 weekend a month" misses its mark when Walz is proven to have been deployed for at least nine months (Command sent/he obeyed) in Italy. Btw, is the point of this discussion quality of service or quantity of service?
Emphatically.
If “ifs” and “but” were candy and nuts we’d all have a merry Christmas.
"Yeah, but Walz, like those with him serving, was in the theater of war."
Hey now……knowing where to get the best pasta and wine can be a hardship in an area that you are not used to.
And before anyone whines, it is common practice for those of us that spent our ENTIRE military careers active duty to kid guardsmen and reservists about being weekend warriors.
My son spent 8 years active Navy and 16 years Naval reserve and to this day I kid him that he only spent 8 months of that on a boat.
He served for 24 years.
You already know the basic math for that. A weekend a month, plus two weeks summer camp is a basic thirty-eight day year. Twenty four of them is 912 days - not even three in a uniform. Apparently, there are no deployments to add. No wonder he 'hated' to leave.
this is what 45 needs to serve, X10
Okay, that's funny....Well played Iggy.
just trying to avoid going back to work as long as possible, but duty calls, you fine posters carry on and N Joy
Yep and Harris and Biden and Obama and Clinton and Bush ….. oh wait ….
That is a snuck premise (A snuck premise is a controversial and unsupported assumption t hat someone includes in their argument as if it’s necessarily true. ) Let's clean up the 'distortion' that is trying to attach itself to a good and decent man.
[Excerpt.]
Born in West Point, Nebraska in 1964, Walz is just barely a member of the Baby Boomer generation. He worked on the family farm during the summers; at age 17, his father, a Korean War veteran and school administrator, took him to enlist in the National Guard, beginning more than two decades of mostly reserve military service starting before Walz even graduated high school. His father died of lung cancer two years later, an experience that shaped Walz’s views on healthcare policy. “That last week [of my dad’s life],” he recalled in a 2018 ad, “cost my mom a decade of having to go back to work to pay those bills.”
After several years in the Guard and in other odd jobs, including processing mortgage loans and building grain silos, Walz went to Chadron State College on the G.I. Bill, earning a social sciences degree in 1989. Then he followed his father’s path again and began a career in education. He started in southern China, where he briefly taught English and history. “They gave me more gifts than I could bring home,” Walz told a Nebraska newspaper in 1990. “It was an excellent experience.” After returning stateside, Walz would lead trips to China with American students for years.
He and Gwen, an English teacher, met soon after—they apparently shared a classroom— and married in 1994. ( Reportedly , their wedding date, June 4, was chosen by Walz because it was the anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre in China, per his wife.) The couple soon moved back to Minnesota, Gwen’s home state, and bought a home near Mankato West High School for $145,000. Walz taught social studies, chaired a gay-straight alliance and led the school’s struggling football team to a state championship in 1999—spawning Harris’ introduction for him on Tuesday as “Coach Walz.”
After earning a master’s in teaching in 2001 from Minnesota State, Walz and his National Guard field artillery unit were deployed to Italy in support of
Operation Enduring Freedom ,
the global war on terrorism launched after 9/11. He was there for nine months spanning 2003 and 2004.
Shortly after, Walz apparently became interested in running for office, filing with the Federal Election Commission in February 2005
for a congressional race and retiring from the military in May.
Though Vance and others have lobbed attacks at him for abandoning his unit, they did not receive an alert order to prepare for deployment to Iraq until July, after his retirement, Minnesota National Guard Army Lt. Col. Ryan Rossman said in a statement Wednesday .
Here’s How Much Kamala Harris’ VP Pick Tim Walz Is Worth
Did you ever serve?
Yes. See 8. below.
Really? Looking, looking, still looking …….
In November 2005, Cpl. James D. Hamel , a Marine Corps combat correspondent with the 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing, wrote an article at Al Asad Airbase in Iraq about all the hard work it takes to keep the KC-130Js of Marine Aerial Refueler Transport Squadron 252 in the air.
“Without the aircrew, no one would be able to fly,” Capt. Michael S. Roberts, a pilot with VMGR-252 told Cpl. Hamel in the article that can be found on the Defense Visual Information Distribution Service. “The difference between a good and bad crew is the difference between an unsuccessful or successful mission.”
On Monday, the author of that article — Cpl. Hamel — was picked by former President Donald Trump to be his running mate on the Republican ticket in November.
Photos by: Cpl. James D. Hamel Date Taken: 11/02/2005
Link?
Lie
Well If that be the case . . . how would compare his military service to that of Donald J. Trump?
So you are saying that anyone that did not serve has no character.
Interesting concept but I would expect some push back from this.
About the same as Harris or Biden or Hillary or Obama or Bubba or Dubya …. Oh wait, Dubya wins that one even though many of my friends on the left didn’t think so back then.
Know what I mean?
In the articles I've read Walz seems to have promoted himself. He called himself a Command Sergeant Major where Army has called him a Master Sergeant. Not only did he push himself from E-8 to E-9 but he moved from the less prestigious lower to upper echelon within those grades - essentially rising three rungs on the ladder. All with less than three years on the actual job.
One can always find articles that present the 'truth' one desires.
It is far better to try to find the actual truth. Facts. Reality. And in this case, the reality is that Walz did achieve the rank of Command Sergeant Major in 2004 and would have been able to retire at that rank had he stayed in the National Guard until at least 2007. Instead he decided to run for Congress and retired in 2005 and subsequently accepting demotion based on that retirement.
Watching people desperately trying to tear down a decent 24 year veteran on nuances, lies, and spin while having full intent to vote for a vindictive, loose-cannon, traitorous scoundrel (who did not serve and demeaned those who did) for PotUS is the pinnacle of hypocrisy.
His promotion was conditional, one of the conditions was graduating the Sergeants Major Academy. He didn’t.
Whoa pal - that's the same presumptuous generalizing [deleted][✘]
"Lt. Col. Kristen Augé, a public affairs officer with the Minnesota National Guard. “He retired as a master sergeant in 2005 for benefit purposes because he did not complete additional coursework at the U.S. Army Sergeants Major Academy.”"
The nuances are really pesky, as any RA soldier would tell you. That's why his 24 tears is worth about three.
[deleted][✘]
Correct, it was provisional. And because he did not complete the requirements he was demoted upon retirement.
Are you going to try to spin this too?
It's what some Trumpists do: Accent the negative about their opponents while dismissing themselves completely from general mention. That is why "we" need to call it out 'every time' we get the chance!
lol
If cnn says he lied ....................
His promotion was conditional, one of the conditions was graduating the Sergeants Major Academy. He didn’t.
Which means he was never promoted
I don’t understand why this is so hard to grasp.
I have already noted several times now that this was a provisional promotion.
A provisional promotion is a promotion. The promotion becomes permanent when the promoted individual completes the stated requirements.
So it is not a permanent promotion, but it most certainly is a promotion.
As noted, this feeble attempt to discredit Walz is not going to work. It is false to claim that Walz was not promoted to Control Sergeant Major. It is truthful to note that he was promoted and that to be permanent he had more requirements to fulfill.
Attempt to be truthful.
Every single person who has read this thread understands what you are saying. Nobody is buying the bullshit the gop is spreading about Walz. Being so pedantic is backfiring badly onto the gop...
Let them carry on. It only makes them look small and oh so petty!
My truth is there for
you to see.
A provisional promotion means you will get the promotion if you complete the following requirements.
He did not complete them therefore he never saw the increase in rank.
Just be honest.
If by everybody you mean thise that have no idea how the military works because they have never served, then yes, they have all read it.
[✘]
[✘]
One last wrinkle before I step out.
I am certain that you believe you are correct on paper, in black and white.
I'm also certain that upon entering the 125th HQ in 2004-2005 the chain of command was posted in a conspicuous place and for more than a year Walz's photo was there as the Command Master Sergeant and that is how he was treated and addressed until he retired.
Acting assignments assume the rank with or without the pay or additional benefits commensurate with that grade.
Now be honest, if you were an acting MCPO for the last year of your Navy career, would you stop friends or past subordinates from referring to you as Master Chief?
Or would you go into some long litany as to why you retired at a lower grade.
Now back to the silliness.
Their brand of nitpicking = mud
When Walz filed his retirement papers he was a Command Master Sergeant , and as you say was addressed as such.
As to yesterday, I corrected 2 months to two weeks ( don't know what I was thinking) thanks.
Also apologies about the NG in general. Post Korea my Uncle served at the PA NG Armory in NE Philly full time for decades. We could stop in almost any time and find him there. I never realized that the NG was more like the reserves than the Army. My bad.
Walz's promotion was conditional, I believe someone referred to it as Acting CMS, but he was still addressed and treated like an E9 by his subordinates and expected to fulfill whatever additional duties E9 required. For that period of time he commanded the respect of that rank. That he didn't retire at that rank is moot in my opinion.
Now get back to your wryness
[✘]
After all, many Trumpists yet refer to Donald and 'permit' Donald to refer to himself as "Mr. President" even though he is. . . technically (a) "former-president" in their company.
To be honest I would like to be referred to as Master Chief, however, I would not later lie about it if I was applying for or trying out for something if I did not follow the rules and rightfully completely acheive that rank.
Was he when he filled out his bio sheet when he ran for Congress or Governor?
Why did the Harris campaign have to amend his bio after the backlash of his lying about what rank he retired as.
Boot camp Great Lakes May-July 1985
OS A school July-October 1985
Uss Midway October 1985 to Sept 1989
USS New Jersey Sept 1989 to decommission 1991
Shore duty Long Beach Naval Station 1991-1993
USS Independence 1993-1996
USS conolly 1996- 1998
FACSFAC Jacksonville 1998-2001
Retired on USS John F Kennedy 2001-2005
Hope that takes some “doubt” out of your mind.
Thank you
No need to lie. You say I achieved E9 from date to date and retired as an E8 with x many years experience in blah blah blah.
Easy Peasy.
“ Walz attained the rank of command sergeant major and served in that role but retired as a master sergeant in 2005 for benefit purposes...
Fact-checking attacks on Tim Walz’s 24 years in the Army National Guard | The Seattle Times
How long is this pointless nitpicking going to go on?
Who knows, maybe as long as the argument over the extent of Trumps wound and was it from a bullet or the teleprompter.
When you acknowledge that he lied on his bios all through his political career.
Very true but Walz lied in pretty much all of his bios during his entire political Career.
There's a distinct possibility it will last more than eight years...
Since we have
A photographic proof of a seemingly unaltered trajectory of the bullet several feet past the former President's head and
B more photos of the chaos which includes both intact teleprompters
I will stick to
C; Bone fragments from Mr. Comporatore's head.
I don't think repeating it over and over is going to win any hearts or minds.
JMO
Let's be safe and say possibly up to sixteen years, or more...
No but it is still true.
[✘]
Don't believe anything certain posters say. Nothing.
Probably.
Chief, give it a rest.
You are arguing over detail and the English language over someone you never had any intention of voting for.
Everyone in Minnesota has been through this the 8 times Walz won elections;
to the House of Reps from 2007 to 2019.
While in the House he was on the Veterans Committee and the ranking member 2017 - 2019 where he was described as a tireless advocate for veterans.
And when he was elected Governor of MN in 2018 and 2022.
MN voters have been down this road at least 8 times and understand that he accepted demotion as an E8 the day before his retirement. They accepted that he reached CMS and they thanked him 8 times by voting for him
Article after article in the MN government websites and even the Military Times accept the fact that he retired while in the position of Command Master Sargeant and lauded his service on the House Veterans Committee.
Minnesota Rep. Walz takes over as top House Democrat on Veterans panel (mn.gov)
So I guess we should just simply go the same route of those in Minnesota and not pay attention to the lies he has told for decades?
The fact that he did not retire as a CMS is what the truth is and he lied on his bio about it for decades.
i will leave it at that.
Don’t really care what you believe or don’t believe.
It's not true despite a certain poster repeating it
AWESOME!
The truth
Deplorable how some lie about this honorable decent man and his dedication and service to his country.
After 24 yrs of service CMS Walz retired.
True statement.
Was he retired as an E9, no.
According to his records or the reports on them he requested to separate as an E8 which happened the day before he retired.
Numerous outlets reported it the same way every time he was reelected to the US house of Reps
and another two times when he was elected Governor. Have certain outlets implied in your mind that he retired as E9?
Maybe, but maybe that's just your issue, because just as many have made it clear about the timeline of his separation.
You are tilting at windmills...
Walz’s freaking bios have said he retired as an E9. If what I am saying is ‘tilting at windmills’, why did the Harris campaign quietly change his VP campaign bio from retiring as an E9 to an E8?
Again, those that have never served do not
care because the majority of them are uninformed but those who did may have considered Walz a good VP pick, but because of his lies, they could be the difference between him being VP and him not.
It is obvious the windmill tilting is to the far left……and they have been proven wrong.
This is the party of Richard blumenthal. They don’t care and it’s easy to ignore.
Who wrote the bios?
They, like you accuse most liberals of routinely doing, have reacted to your feelings and are appeasing an incredibly small number of voters, by indicating that he did, temporarily achieve E9, but retired as an E8
What? DO NOT WHAT ? UNDERSTAND?
Ask any number of people who was the most famous 5 Star General responsible for winning WWII.
The answer will inevitably be Eisenhour or MacArthur.
Are they correct?
ABOSFUCKINGLUTELY!
Only Mac Arthur was retired as 4 Star General and no one effing cares............................................
Case dismissed.
Just as it's easy to ignore off topic comments from the peanut gallery.
Let me try and explain this from my own experience when it comes to being promoted through the higher enlisted rankings.
When I was eligible to be an E7, I had to take a test. If I passed that test, then I was subject to a board of peers throughout the Navy that would determine whether I would be an E7 or not. I had to submit an assload of paperwork to show that I had what the board was looking for and it took several months before the results came out. In other words, I had to go through similar circumstances as Walz. Yes, some would refer to me as Chief before I passed the board and I would just laugh it off because I had not yet passed the board. The day I passed the board was the day I would accept being called Chief, because nothing would reverse it.
When you are eligible for E8 and E9 you do not have to take a test, just go through a similar board as an E7.
Yes, Walz could have been referred to as CMS, as I could have been referred to as Chief, but it would not have been official until he and I completed the requirements given to us.
The only way the Harris campaign would have listed him as a retired CMS is by one or both of two things. He told them he did or they just copied what was on his bios as governor.
Even the Minnesota guard acknowledged that he had been less than truthful with his retired rank.
I hope this truly cleared this up for you and gave you a better understanding of the military promotion process.
What? DO NOT WHAT ? UNDERSTAND
maybe if you had read the entirety of my comment….to wit….
Again, those that have never served do not
care because the majority of them are uninformed but those who did may have considered Walz a good VP pick, but because of his lies, they could be the difference between him being VP and him not.
Mac Arthur retired as a 4 star because he was demoted for insubordination and not following orders…….not for not completing requirements for advancement.
I believe Walz honorably served. Not so much regarding others.
Walz isn't the liar.
Sounds like sour grapes about one who has served his country honorably. Walz is a decent and honorable man.
So why did the Harris campaign change his bio to what we have been telling you for days now?
In the interest of full transparency and shut up the MAGA!
It was explained and understandable but never a big deal...
To clear up the nuanced ambiguity because partisans were trying to blow this up into a big deal.
He achieved the rank of Command Sergeant Major. When he retired, since he had not completed the three year program, he could only receive Master Sergeant benefits. Thus his retirement caused a demotion to Master Sergeant.
It is truly pathetic watching some veterans nitpick on a fellow vet and blow everything out of proportion. All because to them slimy partisan politics are more important than respecting the service of a fellow veteran. 24 years of patriotic service and partisans try to discredit his service by ridiculously exaggerating nits.
Yea you believe that transparency bs. If they were being so ‘transparent’, why was the truth not first posted instead of shaming his lying ass causing the Harris campaign to change the bio.
It is only no big deal to the uninformed
You go ahead and believe it is slimy politics. Only partisans and the uninformed would say so. I highly suggest you read 7.1.48 to understand why Walz is a lying sack of shit
It is obviously slimy partisan politics. It is truly sickening watching you and others attempt to discredit a 24 year veteran merely to gain some minor political points.
Maybe if you had served you would understand. Otherwise, to the uninformed, it is partisan and no big deal
As I noted, it is obvious. You have been all over this chickenshit trying to discredit a fellow vet simply because of partisan politics.
24 years of distinguished, honorable service and you are trying to discredit this man based merely on imprecise language.
This is a fine example of why partisanship is so disgusting.
I have never spoken badly about his 24 years. As a matter of fact, I have even lauded him and not attack him for only doing something like 900 days because he was a Guardsman.
What is chicken shit is watching a whole bunch of people who never served defend him for his years of lying to his constituents,and now the country, about what he RETIRED AS.
Again, I ask you to read my 7.1.46 to understand why he is a sack of shit for his deceit.
Also, if it is what you call chickenshit, why didn’t the Harris campaign hust blow it off instead of changing his bio on their site. Seems no leftist wants to answer this honestly.
Of course you have. You are trying to make a big deal out of the fact that he did not go into the details of his retirement; that he did not explain how he took a demotion from Command Sergeant Major because he retired before completing the program. He was a Command Sergeant Major when he submitted his retirement papers. He was a Master Sergeant upon retirement.
Your hyperbolic criticism is trying to portray this as though he was never promoted to Command Sergeant Major and that he has falsely claimed a promotion he did not receive.
Disgusting partisan attacks which exaggerate a minor detail to discredit the service of a fellow veteran for mere political gain.
Because of people like you who are trying to exploit every little detail for political gain. It is sickening to see veterans so driven by partisan desires to make a traitor and scoundrel president that they would resort to exaggerated attacks on the service record of a fellow veteran.
'I have never spoken badly about his 24 years'
Just that he lied about everything, which is a lie
Isn't that what's called stolen valor?
He called himself a retired Command Sergeant Major.
Here's his battalion commander on the topic:
A fine example of the making a minor distinction in phrasing into a big deal.
He was promoted to Command Sergeant Major. He submitted his retirement papers at that rank. The fact that he was demoted to Master Sergeant due to retiring before he could complete the Command Sergeant Major program does not retroactively take away his promotion.
He is retired. He was indeed a Command Sergeant Major in the National Guard. Big deal that he did not elaborate on the (irrelevant) technical details of his retirement benefits.
Given this is the best desperate partisans can come up with against Walz speaks well about the man.
Think ya might need to learn how the military works TiG. This is what his working peers feel of his failures. He did, indeed, fail, in a military sense.
Quite simply, he is a quitter - and needs to be dropped.
I see 5 paragraphs, deflecting to "but trump is a scoundrel while making excuses for Walz" in your future.
Which he knew he wasn't entitled to.
g deal
Tell that to the veterans who are angered by it.
Like saying he served in war, or allowing himself to be described as a combat veteran when being interviewed on TV, or never correcting the record when journalists covering him or even Nancy Pelosi publicly call him a combat veteran.
Everyone keeps getting a mistaken opinion of Tim Walz service. How could that possibly keep happening. Crazy, huh?
There are two kinds of liars. The Donald Trump bombastic braggarts and the Bill Clinton type weasels who manipulate people by insinuating things that aren't true by intentionally crafting misleading claims that are designed to leave the wrong impression with the listener but the speaker will stop short of definitively speaking a verifiable falsehood. They just nod along when the deception works.
It's emotional liar verse the one who meticulously plans and crafts their lies to try and give themselves plausible deniability. We know which one Walz is.
Dropped from what ?
Jesus Christ, you have had 8 years to call for Trump to be dropped and all you do is attack people who oppose him.
Yesterday Trump claimed specifically that Harris was putting out fake images of her rally crowds. Do you here and now today call for Trump to drop out ?
How about you? Are you calling for Trump out today because he is not mentally fit for office?
Why not? You seem to be saying that Walz is not fit to be vice president. Trump accused his political opponent of literally fabricating photos of her rally size. It was not a retweet, it was not him saying someone else said it. He said it.
Call for Trump to drop out today or let it ALL go.
As I think I have seen you say somewhere here, Walz has been in numerous elections since this "stolen valor" charge became public years ago, and he has won all of those elections. I guess the people of Minnesota are unpatriotic since they elected this ne'er do well a US Congressman multiple times and then Governor of Minnesota.
What is different now? He could be part of toppling the Dear Leader.
I've said it numerous times. I wish Trump dropped out. That'd be fantastic. Although , I doubt he really cares what an anonymous person on the internet who's never voted for him and won' this time either thinks.
What that has to do with Tim Walz lying about his service record is beyond me though.
He was a local official in a blue state with no independent press coverage. Nationally, no one cared about Tim Walz until last week and now he's being scrutinized for the first time ever.
You are strongly implying Walz is not fit and have made many comments suggesting that. Trump is the one who is not fit for office and you have said nothing other than that you are not going to vote for him.
I dont think Walz did anything dishonorable but if people with good faith think he did, alright. He has won four elections, I believe, since his retirement from the Army circumstances became public. I guess a hell of a lot of Minnesotans (in other words Americans) dont agree with you.
nonsense
Need to get your glasses/eyes checked - I'm not discussing Trump.
John - I know you hate Trump - EVERYONE on NT knows you hate Trump.
How 'bout showing me (do the ol' cut'n'paste thingy) and show me and the rest of us on NT EXACTLY where I mentioned Trump in my comment.
I DIDN'T.
Walz is a FAILED military member who lied, abused his privileges and is doing the very, very typical Dem/Lib tippy-toe waltz of lying about his lying.
He should NOT be someone selected as a representative of the United States.
A fine example of a veteran trying to trash a fellow veteran for partisan purposes. Walz was planning to run for Congress and submitted his filing before there was even a notice that his unit might be deployed.
Walz had every right to retire after 20 years. To deem it a failure that he chose to retire and run for Congress is slimy.
LOL. You have been trying to harass me for years because I have been "mean" to Trump. Just say here and now that Trump should drop out of the race. Vance can take his place.
So all the people he served with are lying?
Doug Julin — who oversaw Walz in the Minnesota National Guard as a more senior command sergeant in the 1st Battalion, 125th Field Artillery — told CNN on Thursday that Walz went behind his back to retire after he learned that their unit was going to be deploying to Iraq.
Julin said that in the fall of 2004, he and his commander received a notification of sourcing alerting them that they would be deploying to Iraq within the next year and they proceeded to alert everyone under their command to prepare themselves.
On March 17, two months before retiring, his office issued this statement:
This is ridiculous. He was absolutely entitled to submit his retirement papers and he was as the rank of Command Sergeant Major when he did so.
They do like to ignore the truth in their 'search' for the perfect partisan truth. It's obvious that Walz has lied yet they ignore it.
His official website for the Governor of Minnesota still states ' After 24 years in the Army National Guard, Command Sergeant Major Walz retired from the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion in 2005. '. The KamalaHarris website has been modified to say 'rising to the rank of Command Sergeant Major'. If it's no big deal then why did the Harris website suddenly change the wording? As John Kolb stated, just because I sat in the cockpit of a jet fighter doesn't let me call myself a pilot.
There's also come contention about the timeline of his retirement from the Guard and if he knew of the upcoming deployment. As he was a frocked CSM he was on the command staff and would have been privy to advance announcements well before the brigade would be notified.
Somehow I doubt if we will ever know the full truth. But here's also the word from John Kolb from the above link that also talks about something that should be very important for anybody holding the office of Vice President.
Here Kolb applauds Walz in his decision to retire as he got out of the way for better leadership. That's an amazing comment to see spoken about anybody running for public office. We should expect and demand the best of our leadership and instead we get this.. How anyone can say that Trump/Vance and/or Harris/Walz are fit for the White House is beyond me. Must be blind partisanship.
Anyone who claims that Walz submitted his retirement papers after learning of a possible deployment is lying based on the consistent reporting of the timeline. Further, he could retire after 20 years and he was at 24. If he believed he could better serve his nation as a congressman then I see nothing wrong with him taking that action.
It is notable that you et. al. are desperately trying to spin this into a big deal while defending Trump against his many wrongdoings.
We veterans understand the usage of the term. It is similar to Marines (like Vance) running around calling themselves 'Marines for life' - even though he only served four years in the service and did not retire as a Marine ("for life" as in 20 years of service). Oh, and as some here are 'fond' to point out: Some marines consider it an insult to be called "ex-Marine" - even though technically they are all ex-Marines on departure especially if not retired as one.
This is a tempest in a teapot, which the collective "you' would love to see exploited into something bigger. It won't on its own. Military servicemembers and especially active duty folks understand what is being attempted here and see right through it. Servicemembers respect the rank one serves in dutifully- officially or unofficially . Why? Because many of them can empathize with what takes to get to any level of service/ranking.
Go on indulge "yourselves" on it. It won't work on enough servicemembers or veterans to matter, nevertheless.
It's hateful
It is a lie to state that I ignored the truth. You, of course, are playing the same slimy game as Sean. I stated that he was promoted to Command Sergeant Major and was at that rank when he submitted his retirement papers.
That is exactly what happened.
My post was clear and you cherrypick to discard the context so that you could dishonestly twist its obvious meaning:
What 'we have been telling you for days'
Some think I believe what they tell me.
Or give a fuck
Yup, it's deplorable.
"Is slimy"????????
Of course you're speaking as a very experienced military veteran who knows all there is to know about anything and everything military. Did you Google them? "/S" (Can only surmise that you have no military experience based on your discussions.)
Maybe not in your world, but in the military world there are steps/policies/procedures folks have to follow - and Walz did not follow those procedures/policies/steps and then LIED about his service involvement.
Don't recommend you use your "Boolean" logic when you're trying to discuss real world issues.
It is a bit like "emeritus" status. It's an honorific allowance. Until some set of sour pusses come along and try to make something vile out of it by pointing out a technicality. What's really choice (if I see it right) is these same people pointing out this technicality of incomplete courseware completion - while not denying Walz executed the "duties and responsibilities" of Command Sargent Major are the same people criticizing him for RETIRING after 20 plus years of National Guard service—ignoring the technical aspect of a completed 20 years of service!
Guess you're still unable to actually respond to questions asked - SHOW ME John where I brought up Trump in my comment.
Can't do it, can you - 'cause there is no instance.
I dont care whether or not you brought up Trump. Okay, I brought it up. Will you call for Trump to drop out , today, because he is not fit to hold office?
I think he was being sarcastic and issuing you a heads up for things about to come your way.
aims that Walz submitted his retirement papers after learning of a possible deployment is lying based on the consistent reporting of the timeline.
Lol.
In March, Walz said ""As Command Sergeant Major I have a responsibility not only to ready my battalion for Iraq, but also to serve if called on. I am
dedicated to serving my country to the best of my ability, whether that is in Washington DC or in Iraq."
By his own words he was aware of the upcoming deployment to Iraq and had not decided to retire at this point. That's perfectly consistent with CSM Julin's statement, who you call a liar.
"I don't care"
Thanks John - message loud and clear for all to see.
Thanks to MAGA for everything you are saying bad about Tim Walz. Harris - Walz is now experiencing a groundswell in their grassroots support, fund raising, new voters and a very fast rise in all the polling. You guys are practically work for them...
Give it a couple of Q&A's interviews or a presser or two. Unless questions are leaked, it will be word salad for everyone
I saw that interview on CNN and Julin seemed so upset that Walz bypassed Julin in seeking approval for the retirement that the CNN anchor had to ask him if he was more upset about Walz retiring or because he perceived that Walz had personally dissed him by bypassing him (breaking with protocol).
Because of Julin's apparent personal grudge with Walz his viewpoint is a little suspect.
Does the fact that Walz had to break protocol in order to retire (Julin said he likely would have denied the request) support Walz's version of his retirement?
How would i know?
Julin was clearly upset that Walz bypassed him as Walz immediate superior. Watch the video, he talks about that aspect more than anything else. I think it casts a shadow, at least, over his opinion of Walz.
Walz’s National Guard Rank
The Republican National Committee has criticized Walz for saying “in campaign materials that he is a former ‘Command Sergeant Major’ in the Army National Guard despite not completing the requirements to hold the rank into retirement.”
Walz’s biography on the Harris campaign website correctly says that the governor “served for 24 years” in the National Guard, “rising to the rank of Command Sergeant Major.”
Walz’s official biography on the Minnesota state website goes further, referring to the governor as “Command Sergeant Major Walz.”
“After 24 years in the Army National Guard, Command Sergeant Major Walz retired from the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion in 2005,” the state website says.
Walz did serve as command sergeant major , but Walz did not complete the requirements to retire with the rank of command sergeant, Augé told us in an email.
“He held multiple positions within field artillery such as firing battery chief, operations sergeant, first sergeant, and culminated his career serving as the command sergeant major for the battalion,” Augé said. “He retired as a master sergeant in 2005 for benefit purposes because he did not complete additional coursework at the U.S. Army Sergeants Major Academy.”
This isn’t the first time that Walz’s National Guard rank has come up in a campaign.
In their 2018 paid letter to the West Central Tribune, when Walz was running for governor, the two Minnesota National Guard retired command sergeants major who criticized Walz for retiring before the Iraq deployment also wrote: “Yes, he served at that rank, but was never qualified at that rank, and will receive retirement benefits at one rank below. You be the judge.”
Personal note: I am following this issue loosely, as I am having a hard time taking it too seriously. Hope the sharing helps in some way.
What's sad here is that I didn't reply to you or even mention your name in my post. I replied to Sean. If you infer that I replied to you then perhaps that means you have a guilty conscience.
After they modified it, why do you ignore that? It used to say 'retired Command Sergeant Major'.
Yes, he was frocked to that position but he didn't complete the requirements so he was not promoted to it. Continuing to use it is like me saying I once sat in the cockpit of a jet fighter so I'm a pilot.
Give Walz the credit due for 24 years in the Guard, honorable service and all. But stop pushing untruths like he holds some great thing.
How would i know?
you don’t know? You have no life experience with people going over someone’s head to obtain a favor?
I provided everything under the 'rank' section by copying and pasting. I have nothing else I need to 'declare.' It is what it is. Take it or leave it.
Besides, I am shocked you are addressing me so soon as you told be this:
16.1.43 Yes, in the eyes of the government I am a veteran, served with an honorable discharge. I was on active duty during the Vietnam era. In my fucking opinion that does not make me a Vietnam Vet. I have explained what IMO is required to be a Vietnam Veteran and I did not serve active duty in the Republic of Vietnam. That you refuse to accept my definition as I state it for myself is your issue, not mine. I've been very clear and now I'm done with you. You have your opinion on this, I have mine. Leave me alone. We will not agree and I'm done.
ridiculous. Among other things, Walz was acting as a Command Sergeant Major in his day to day duties. That would be analogous to you actually flying the jet plane.
He retired legally, he committed no crime, and if NG wanted they could have put a stop loss on his retirement and they did not.
It is discouraging the same old shit thrown at/about Walz, this went on in MN during his time as a congressman, and the population many of them combat supported Walz.
Do you have any idea of what "Frocked" means in the military?
It may have been "legal", but he totally bypassed the chain-of-command which is the fraud part that I'm concerned with.
Not ridiculous, you just refuse to see it. Being frocked in the Army is
Yes, he wore the rank and did the work as he was acting as a Command Sergeant Major. That's what frocking means. Doesn't mean he is actually promoted to that rank because there were additional requirements that he needed to complete before the promotion could happen. While frocked, he gets to wear the insignia of the higher grade, gets called by that rank and performs the duties of that rank. But he's not yet promoted and does not get the pay for the higher rank.
But the bigger issue here is that he had promoted himself and allowed others to also promote him as a retired Command Sergeant Major. That is a lie.
I'm done answering your questions or trying to have an honest conversation with you due to your disrespect. But when you continue to post lies I will call you out. If you don't want to see it than I suggest you put me on ignore.
Moreover, Walz is said to ordeal over where he could benefit military members and veterans the most on duty, in deployment, or in the halls of government seeking to pass legislation. This is sour grapes by people who want to tear down those who disagree with their policies for our lives. They seek to make a big stink and it will be 'fertile' ground on a small 'hill' for them. And that is about it. The majority of military folks active duty and veterans understand bull when they see it. Just continue to correct the propaganda when it 'launches' itself into the 'atmosphere.' Donald is trash. "They" want trash to run the country to the detriment of us all.
7.1.83 Walz, according to the post, was “frocked.” The term is used by the military to refer to an individual who is selected for a promotion but is not yet granted the rank. A frocked soldier may be given a uniform and responsibilities to match their promoted rank, despite not receiving any additional privileges or increase in pay, according to a 2022 Department of Defense memo on the procedure.
Not sure why you think I would not know this, since I stated at 7.1.93:
to people who dont really care about the intricacies of the military promotion protocol, which I strongly suspect is a large majority of Americans, this is nitpicking for political purposes.
Adam Kinzinger , who should know, says this type of retirement is very common, even in the face of deployment. That is good enough for me.
Kinzinger is correct. Sure, it does create manpower shifts and inconveniences (depending on the individual being loss skills and performance values) but, it is allowable. And, it is TELLING that no STOP LOSS was issued. This is political propaganda at this point. Maybe the thinking is the longer this goes. . .the more people who can be confused and EXPLOITED by continuing to have it go 'viral.'
I am glad the Harris/Walz ticket has just 'hit it and quit it' already.
Yeah, telling because Walz went over the head of the guy who was supposed to make the decision, who said he would have denied the request to retire had Walz followed procedure.
Crazy how that aligned with where Walz would make the most money, have the most power and be safe. Quite a sacrifice he made for his troops who got deployed.
Oh spare us ! I dont recall you blinking an eye when the Republican president at the time said American war dead were suckers and losers.
7.1.90
Lie: Gov. Walz left his men without leadership.
Truth: His unit was fully staffed and had adequate leadership without him. In fact, had the unit not had appropriate staffing, they could have denied his retirement and ordered a “stop loss,” which happened to thousands of military members in jobs that needed people. Stop loss was used regularly and would have been enacted if the situation deemed it.
That is a concern about motivation and for that I can only state (and discern) what comes out of the resources available. Twenty four years of service means he did his time, he served his country (contractually), he left honorably. I give credit when and where it is due.
You are probably right, from everything I have read Walz is worthless and unnecessary, from Governor all the way down to his guard service, he was good for giving huge sums of money to a Muslim cleric who celebrated the Hamas attack and linked to a neo-nazi webpage. Maybe he didn’t go so he wouldn’t have to kill his Muslim brothers?
That doesn’t contradict what i wrote.
you’ll never believe this, but people in power in any organization will bend the rules for friends, family etc, which is why people with connections go outside of the chain of command to obtain things they might not be entitled to
Superfluous.
And I didn't say anything about his retirement except for the simple fact that he promotes himself as a retired Command Sergeant Major. His official government website for the Governor of Minnesota still calls him that. The Harris for President website initially stated that and had to walk that back. Plenty of evidence has been provided to show that he has lied and has allowed others to lie, all for political gain. That's the problem.
One could think that as fierce as you are on all of Trump's lies that you would be against any lying for political or personal gain. Guess it's only Trump lies that gets you upset.
“ One could think that as fierce as you are on all of Trump's lies that you would be against any lying for political or personal gain. Guess it's only Trump lies that gets you upset.”
“from everything I have read Walz is worthless and unnecessary”
I read that he’s a “moderate.” Lol
Butt, on the Weirdo Scale® J D Vance pegs the Weirdometer©...
Seriously how does a guy who makes 1/4 of a million a year own absolutely nothing? Manchurian candidate?
Again, if you had ever served, you would realize how incorrect you are. I dare you to show where I have demeaned any of his 24 years of service. I am being critical of his way he tried to pass of his retirement rank, not anything within his 24 years, but nice try.
I again request you read my 7.1.48, in which I know you have not, to understand why my assessment holds water and your defense of someone who lied for years about his retirement rank to the people of Minnesota and tried to do the same thing to the rest of the country and see how wrong you are.
I can assure you that if Vance said that he FOUGHT in a war zone, you would be leading the charge to discredit him and we would see incessant questions asking why we would be supporting someone who lied about his service.
“ I can assure you that if Vance said that he FOUGHT in a war zone, you would be leading the charge to discredit him and we would see incessant questions asking why we would be supporting someone who lied about his service.”
Like some are saying, it doesn't matter whether or not they say they served/were in the service to understand what's going on here. Slimy is far too kind of a description.
'Weak 'men' - says it all right there
It doesn't matter whether you served or not to understand that it is slimy.[✘]
It’s almost useless to try and educate those that do not want to be educated.
The fact remains that Walz lied about his deployment status and his retirement rank.
It is hilarious that they say we are making a big deal of nothing but can’t coherently explain why the Harris campaign quietly changed the bio on their website.
Only way they could have gotten the bio was either through Walz himself or off his governor bio.
Either way he lied and their defense of this is disgusting.
I do know, however, that any reply to this will be a A’but Truuuuuuuuuuuump’ deflection.
A fine example of the making a minor distinction in phrasing into a big deal.
only to those who have never served or are hell bent on defending someone all in the name of ‘get Trump at all costs’
You would think the Harris campaign would have vetted him a little closer but I guess when you have someone that is as much a leftist radical as the top of the ticket, then nothing else matters.
He was absolutely entitled to submit his retirement papers and he was as the rank of Command Sergeant Major when he did so
No he wasn’t. For the millionth time, he never completed the requirements to obtain E9 so he was never entitled to go by that rank.
i have explained this to you multiple times.
How the hell did far right wingers get to be so stupid?
The military history of Walz is transparent. He's a good guy.
Walz trained folk on the AR and the M4.
Those trashing him likely couldn't even figure out the safety.
nice and plainly stated, but i dont know to the first,
l agree and do believe he is a good guy.
Walz obviously knows his shit.
What i find strange, is that many could find the safety, and are trashing him over words he shouldn't have used, while defending on Captain Bone Spur the pussy grabbin back stabbin guy quoted by General Kelley as thinkin those that gave their lives on D day, were somehow losers,,,?
This 'man' is NOT a Leader, he is a Loser
Isn’t it amazing that the left has, over and over again, stated that Walz lying about his deployment history and his retirement rank is no big deal , but get so triggered when it is explained over and over to them the truth.
BTW. No one is demeaning him of his 24 years served, at least what I can see, only what we are discussing here.
Also, good guys don’t allow for their cities to be burned, the stores to be looted and people killed all in the name of some dude killed by a cop that most have forgotten about today
What truth?
Maybe if you opened your eyes and actually looked for it it you would be enlightened.
I remember when I was in Nam. The Chief Petty Officer in the Army of the 2nd battalion 3rd Marines in Kom Tun said I needed to save the Brigadier Lieutenant. And by God I did, just like I’ll help save America
-Tim Walz-
The collective "you" will not be allowed to STIGMATIZE Walz (as stigmatization is what "you" do well.). Governor Walz is going to be just fine. Military members are not so wimpy that they can not understand the rationale behind his statements and actions.
Wonder if this was left out of his bio -
I remember when I was in Nam. The Chief Petty Officer in the Army of the 2nd battalion 3rd Marines in Kom Tun said I needed to save the Brigadier Lieutenant. And by God I did, just like I’ll help save America
-Tim Walz-
??
Governor Walz was born in 1964, Vietnam ended in 1975 - Walz was eleven years old in 1975. (Your quote has no reference material attached to it.)
What the hell is a Chief Petty Officer in the army of the 2nd battalion 3rd Marines?
Seems like someone even makes up stories about people that don’t even exist.
I’m sure our leftist friends here will say he just misspoke and all is forgiven.
So what was his rationale for lying about his deployment status and his retirement grade?
That's my point.
Kerry deserved everything he got and more. Watching my friends on the left make excuses for and attempt to defend, the indefensible for people like Kerry and Walz is just sad.
No other way to put it.
Actually there are several other ways to put it....
(Strange that people actually don't know that)
John Kerry was a hero. Swift boaters were traitors.
Sad that far right-wing fascists can destroy a hero's rep.
Fuck all fascists who use lies because they have no truth.
Yup, CJ, all they have is lies.
Shame! Shame! Shame!
Shame! Shame! Shame!
Shirley & Company. 1975!!!
I loved that song in the 70's. This is my first time seeing the video and the actual singers!
I miss the 70s-- I was really into the disco scene. (But now were into stuff that's more fun-- like whiling away the hours with wonderful activities like spending hours inside on our computers, compiling dirt about our leaders & potential leaders and finding creative ways to spread hate...
[J. D. Vance] actually misquoted Walz in his screed. In the clip Vance was referencing, Walz says that he "carried" weapons in war, not "used." Given that Operation Enduring Freedom was a part of the post-9/11 War on Terror, and that Walz was deployed to Italy under it — and likely had a service weapon — the claim that he is engaging in "stolen valor" holds little water.
From the article above.
Vance knows this too. It was just too much of an opportunity for him to try to 'divide' veteran support, nevertheless. Well, it won't work. All us veterans understand how matters are spoken about throughout the years regarding them—past and present. In my case, I made myself fully available for service up to and including combat—but I did not see combat because no war broke out doing the Reagan years (though the "Iranian Crisis" was ongoing when I signed up). I don't go around 'clarifying' in recent years that I did not see combat to everybody or every veteran day group of 'celebrants' I come across. I simply accept their remarks, say thank you and move on.
The substance is the same. Doesn't change anything. Walz was never in war.
And nor was any 'stolen valor" exploited by a word choice ("carried in war" instead of 'carried in a theater of war")! BTW, it does not escape notice that the collective 'you' don't have any problem understanding what J.D. Vance's misquote means ("used in war" - instead of "carried in war" )substantively versus what he got wrong in saying!
Only a fool would would not know the distinction between being in, of, and through war and being around, near, and surrounded by war.
Lol. He relies on his "war" experience as the justification for his gun policy.
know the distinction between being in, of, and through war and being around, near, and surrounded by war.
You would think. Yet Walz claims to have been "in war" despite never being on the same continent as active fighting while serving. I was in Europe too in 2005, it was not a theatre of war and I don't tell people I experienced war because I was there.
He likely relies on his gun training experience as justification for his gun policy. (As has been ascertained he little or no actual combat experience. In which case, he was using the words, "carried in war" loosely.)
Moreover, see 6.2.34.
While some people are unaware of it, he was-- and is-- a gun owner in civilian life.
An avid hunter, Walz was listed by "Guns and Ammo" in its list of "top 20 politicians for gun owners".
Do you mean that he kills animals with his vastly superior fire power?
that be my preferred method
I'm not sure about his firepower . . . but he was an " avid hunter". (So whatever he did, he did it with a great sense of Avidity!)
If its been a slow looking for some valor to steal-- there's nothing like taking a little break and go kill some animals (with superior firepower, natch!)
Born James Donald Bowman, AKA: CPL. James Donald Hamel, AKA: Senator J. D. Vance . . .is quite the 'chameleon.' Chameleon: It's a label he tried to pin on V. P. Harris' birthright as a multiracial/ethnic personage who uses her heritage to her advantage. Yet, here we have 'good ole J. D. . . .advantaging himself with name indulgences over the course of his life!
Why all the name changes?
Private Shame changed his name to JD Vance after being hazed and drilled hard by Major Paine and Corporeal Punishment...
The first name was his Birth name, When His mom and dad got divorced, she remarried and her new husband adopted him, so they changed his name to match his adopted fathers last name, this is very common, children almost always take the adopted parents' surname. Since his birth fathers first name was Donald (J.D.'S Middle name) his mom changed the middle name to David to be anything but Donald since he went be J.D. anyway, it completely removed the father who abandoned them from his name. When he became an adult he chose a name that meant something to him, his maternal grandma's last name, the lady who raised him. It is a sign of respect for her.
I hope that solves the giant conspiracy for everyone.
They each have something to do with his familial relations. James Donald Bowman - father/family name. James D. Hamel - Stepfather's last name. J. D. Vance - Grand's last name.(grandmother side of the family that ultimately finished raising him. If memory serves me rightly.)
Your facts are wrong, His second name was James David not James Donald.
I am going from memory. It's early and I won't bother to relook it up. I changed what I can on it. Just going from memory.
No conspiracy intended. Just pointing out that the man has made name changes. . .its petty to draw attention to yes - and it is petty for J. D. and Donald to try to divide (segment) Kamala Harris' biological 'makeup.'
That is, if those two Trumpists want to make something out of her heritage (beyond her being an American), then we can let the public make whatever it 'will' of J.D.'s name changes over the course of his life!
So that's what turned him into a psychopath. How sad for him.
Why he changed it is sort of fuzzy, somewhere between writing and selling his book he toyed with the idea of the pseudonym J.D.Vance and published the book as such but supposedly some bloggers made the connection to J D Hamel's old blogs. He changed his name to Vance before he took the bar exam in 2013.
So are you saying that anybody that calls out a politician is an asshole?
Interesting concept
So apparently you think that Donald Trump is asshole -- as he has called out politicians on many occasions!
(Now that's really interesting!)
Never said anything different, now did I?
The only true thing from certain poster
Vance was on active duty with the Marine Corps from 2003 to 2007 during the Iraq war.
Vance , who then went by the name James D. Hamel, was assigned to the 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing, one of the Marine Corps’ largest subordinate commands that oversees aircraft such as fighter jets and helicopters.
He was deployed to Iraq in 2005 and 2006 with the aircraft wing but did not serve as a front-line combatant.
His official military occupation, known as a combat correspondent , meant he was tasked with basic communication roles such as writing articles about the happenings in his unit.
Did Vance ever say he served in combat?
No. But that is not the point in this case. The point is this: He can't take "carried in war" (a one-off) and exploit it into a full-throated "stolen valor" moment. Therefore, some balance to the discussion is required. As one 'non-combatant' should understand where another non-combatant is coming from with the verbiage rendered.
Admittedly, Tim Walz, made a slip of the tongue with the single word: "in" but that does not give license for abuse over a single word going forward!
Why didn't he correct it? Was it a slip of the tongue when he said he retired as Command Sergeant Major when he was actually a Master Sergeant.
What Is Stolen Valor?
Stolen valor is essentially a lie. It involves falsely claiming military service, rank, recognition or even someone else's identity . While it's not technically illegal to just "make things up" — for example, to impress friends at a party — stolen valor is more complicated than that, which is why it is considered a crime. (So is military impersonation , a similar offense committed willfully, wrongfully and with or without intent to defraud.) Stolen Valor Act: All You Need To Know (afba.com)
The collective "you' are deploying a snuck premise, that Tim Walz has 'stolen valor" that is a reach too far. So it must stop right now.
Secondly, there are no medals, awards, ribbons, identity in question here. And, as for rank—it can be proven that Walz was Command Sergeant Major in practice and function (which is why his retiring instead of deploying with 'his troops" under him is being treated as a controversy).
He was acting Command Sergeant Major, he retired as a Master Sergeant, that is what he is, period end of story.
The Harris campaign last week updated its online biography for Walz, which previously referred to him as a "retired command sergeant major." It now says he once served at that rank.
At a campaign rally last week, which served as Walz' coronation as her running mate, Harris referred to him as "sergeant major." Walz was also criticized for misrepresenting his rank during the 2018 Minnesota gubernatorial race, and was commonly referred to as "sergeant major" during his time in Congress.
Vance and Republicans have also pointed to a clip, first circulated by the Harris campaign itself, touting his support for gun control, in which Walz said he carried weapons of war "in war."
Tim Walz' Military Service Is Under Attack by the Trump Campaign. Here Are the Facts. | Military.com
It is not a 'hill to die on' due to its pettiness. And since it can't be allayed otherwise, better to just steal its 'thunder.' What is good for the goose will eventually find its way to the gander.
Wow, Harris has gotten resolution to this because she and her campaign, both, choose not to deal with PETTINESS. Too bad, Trumpists can't get Donald to admit to, correct, or self-correct 'anything' that he gets 'side-ways' and without evidence to support it.
Many people are saying that if someone serves in the military and are not killed or seriously wounded-- they are shirking their duty.
Interesting, eh?
Who has said that?
Is Tim Walz a veteran of Operation Enduring Freedom? Did he get a campaign medal?
Did Trump?
FLASHBACK: Tim Walz thanked Nancy Pelosi at a press conference in 2007 in which she said while introducing him that "we appreciate his service on the battlefield."
CSPAN then identified Walz as an "Afghanistan veteran."
Crazy how this keeps happening to Walz. Everyone he deals with seems to think he was in combat. Reporters, Pelosi, even C-Span.
Wonder how that happened?
I thought for a minute she might have been talking about the drug addict riots in Minneapolis, but then i saw it was 2007.
And now we get the Friday night newsdump where the harris campaign says he "misspoke" when he said he carried a gun in war.
Going the Richard Blumenthal route of game plan of how to act when you get caught stealing valor. Democrats don't care about Blumenthal lying about serving in Vietnam, so I doubt they actually care about Walz lying about being a combat veteran.
Link?
Walz went outside the Chain of Command to get permission to retire? That's new.
SO WHAT?!
It seems that some conservatives have 'selected retirement' based on their judgement of what another freedom-loving person should do with his 20 PLUS years beyond retirement designation.
SO WHAT?!
Harris/Walz was never going to get the Trumpists veterans' votes anyway. Nothing ventured. Nothing gained.
You think it's okay to go outside of the chain of command to in order to retire when he shouldn't have been able to?
Unless CSM Julin is lying, that's really bad.
ris/Walz was never going to get the Trumpists veterans' votes anyway.
Of course, but if that's your standard for right and wrong...
I don't know about going outside the chain of command and its being a salient point to one individual's absolute right to retire. The video on "X" suggest that his superior seems affected by his decision-making process and execution. It is interesting that this 'superior' is trolling the man years after in an attempt to turn his career into some occasion of 'yellow-bellied' indulgence. After 24 years, "if" it took 24 years for the service for the services to make its best use of one man. . . that's bullshit.
Let Walz get on with his life. Stop messing around with one's man liberty, freedom, to 'execute.' The collective 'you' don't have to like his though processes, 'you' don't have to like his solution to his problem. . . good grief, give some benefit to the man for having HONORABLY served for as long as he did.
Again:
SO WHAT?!
Who cares if "umpty-dump squat" didn't like him retiring. He had a wife had home; she likely was a part of his decision-making process (applying familial pressures - we're likely never know and maybe we shouldn't know that.) Point being. The contract states 20 years to retirement, he was not opted-out of leaving. . .and so he left. . . if that garners him a few missing votes this fall: it falls under the heading: "You Can't Please Them All.'
Walz left the service. He was entitled to do so. He served his time honorable. He should not be served 'crow' by malcontents who in many of their own circumstances would have OPTED to do the same thing—properly and improperly.
ut going outside the chain of command and its being a salient point to one individual's absolute right to retire.
Because the claim is he did not have that absolute right and if he followed procedure it would have been denied.
Let Walz get on with his life.
Lol. You know he's running for VP, right? He's not some random dude sitting in the barber shop.
And by the way, this is my last word to you on this. It has gotten enough 'free air-time.' The services carried on as they are supposed to do when someone honorably retires. The new personage takes over the 'command.' You can have the last word.
That brings up the subject of the Trump campaign-- and the people who support it. IMO a major mistake they are making is creating a campaign based on their own values, beliefs etc
What would much more effective would be to listen to more voters-- and address their concerns (rather than what they think is important).
For example-- they created a big brouhaha over the issue of tampons being placed in boys bathrooms. That's not the sort of issue that I really don't consider very important-- and I'm not the only one.
Well, it does look odd I can only imagine (even though I can not/have not/will not be in a position to see it)! But, thankfully there is a rationale for the jokes that are bound to have come (already).
he also had a four year old daughter
Yes. I didn't mean to leave her out of his decision-making process!
Fuck all far-right wing fools who have no idea what they're talking about.
He didn't have to go through his senior NCO when he put in his retirement. That has never been a thing,.
Here’s another one…
so many progressives are invested in the character they made up for him that I wonder if anything breaks through
[GlOBAL] war on terrorism , term used to describe the American-led global counterterrorism campaign launched in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 . In its scope, expenditure, and impact on international relations , the war on terrorism was comparable to the Cold War ; it was intended to represent a new phase in global political relations and has had important consequences for security, human rights , international law , cooperation, and governance .
The war on terrorism was a multidimensional campaign of almost limitless scope. Its military dimension involved major wars in Afghanistan and Iraq , covert operations in Yemen and elsewhere, large-scale military-assistance programs for cooperative regimes, and major increases in military spending. Its intelligence dimension comprised institutional reorganization and considerable increases in the funding of America’s intelligence -gathering capabilities, a global program of capturing terrorist suspects and interning them at Guantánamo Bay , expanded cooperation with foreign intelligence agencies, and the tracking and interception of terrorist financing. Its diplomatic dimension included continuing efforts to construct and maintain a global coalition of partner states and organizations and an extensive public diplomacy campaign to counter anti-Americanism in the Middle East . The domestic dimension of the U.S. war on terrorism entailed new antiterrorism legislation, such as the USA PATRIOT Act ; new security institutions, such as the Department of Homeland Security ; the preventive detainment of thousands of suspects; surveillance and intelligence-gathering programs by the National Security Agency (NSA), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and local authorities; the strengthening of emergency-response procedures; and increased security measures for airports, borders, and public events.
War on terrorism | Summary & Facts | Britannica
Observation: I am beginning to wonder if some part of this confusing set of circumstances if due to the complexities of talking and discussing the "Global War on Terrorism" as many countries participated in it:
(Troops/military/intelligence/logistical support)
United States United Kingdom Germany Italy - (Walz was stationed there for nine months.)
Canada Australia New Zealand Netherlands Poland Turkey
(Arrest/Intelligence roles):
Singapore Malaysia Indonesia The Philippines Hong Kong
Veterans Law
Veterans of the Global War on Terror and Benefits Available
April Donahower
September 15, 2018
Updated: June 20, 2024
Background
Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF), and Operation New Dawn (OND) are classified under the umbrella term “Global War on Terror” (GWOT). This international military campaign was launched following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks against the United States.
Healthcare and Benefits Statistics
Benefits
According to VA’s Annual Benefits Report for Fiscal Year 2016 , more than 1 million Global War on Terror veterans have a service-connected disability,
amassing nearly 8 million disabilities collectively.
Healthcare
VA’s Analysis of VA Health Care Utilization among OEF, OIF, and OND Veterans found that about 62%, or 1,218,857, of Global War on Terror veterans have utilized VA healthcare since October 2001. Veterans from these conflicts often share similar diagnoses. The most common conditions among Global War on Terror veterans accessing VA healthcare are:
Veterans of the Global War on Terror and Benefits Available | CCK Law (cck-law.com)
What am I doing now? I am putting forth for consideration and thought (since I have not determined the answer yet).
The "Global War on Terrorism" was a proper war being waged by various countries across the globe which carried its own impactful meaning to the troops/soldiers/participants involved in it.
Evidenced above, the VA took it-the GWoT to be a real war spread wide.
Here’s another one…
Here is another video of Tim Walz nodding along about his rank of Command Sergeant Major.
Walz also doesn’t correct her when she states he served in Afghanistan with his battalion
And we wonder the same thing about far-right wing fascists.
Right back at you vance.
Don't get me wrong, I will tell anyone who hasn't served to fuck off in your defense. But amongst us, really Vance? Sitting at Al-Assad for a couple months, never going outside the wire, you really think you have room to shit talk other vets?
Did you even get dusty? How were the sandstorms?
Did you have AC, being at command level, in the shitters?
Vance, get the fuck out of here, you didn't get dirty with the rest of us.
Vance never denied it, he's stated several times that he was lucky to never see combat. Walz on the other hand does not correct people who say he's a combat vet. If he's a combat vet then we need to also call the SkyCop who walked the flightline at Minot guarding B-52's which were used in the Second Gulf War a combat vet.
Walz has stated he carried 'Weapons of War' in war, but he never did. If you can excuse this lie then you need to stop calling out Trump's lies as well. Lying for political gain is just wrong.
Oh for Christs' sake. Hopeless.
See 15.1 and 15.2. I would be interested in your take on how participants in the Global War on Terrorism (umbrella term) would 'vocalize' their time in service of it.
Coincidental to this, I have a consideration for you, Snuffy. Some time ago I remarked in a comment Vance is an ex-Marine you corrected me by explaining that a Marine is a Marine for the duration of his/her life: Exception: Dishonorable service of some kind.
This leads me to wonder if quality or quantity of service is a determinant, then 'ex-Marine' may be a useful term after all. Since we are going to 'break it down.' It would seem to me a combat correspondent (with a desk job) who does not see or get involved in combat is limited in value compared to the actual fighters in the Marines. If we are breaking it down.
Stop calling out the former 'president' convicted felon and rapists' lies?
Walz hasn't lied.
Exactly. Either we are going to use terms with precise(ness) meanings or we are going to allow for imprecise meanings as well. Such as:
1. Global WAR on Terrorism. (Either it is a literal war or we will allow it to be termed such for its purposes.)
2. Combat Correspondent (Either it requires a literal combat component or the term applies for its purposes.)
3. National Guard. (Either it is for the nation alone; or, we will allow for guardspeople to be internationally stationed on bases abroad.)
Imprecise language is 'everywhere' used in government programs.
To me it would all depend in where they served. Being stationed in Italy is in support of units which are the participants in the war on terrorism. In support of IMO is very different than being an actual participant. According to this, Walz was awarded several medals:
It definitely appears that he was awarded the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal. Had he been awarded that medal I suspect that it would have been listed on Military.com. He was awarded that for his support for units deployed to Afghanistan. That medal is practically automatic however.
My problem is that he doesn't correct people who introduce him as a combat vet. Did you watch the video in 15 or just ignore it? In the video the interviewer is introduceing him with several untruths such as 'The highest ranking enlisted man to serve in Congress', 'Served 24 years and retired as Command Sergeant Major' and 'Served with his battalion during Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan'. And to each of those statements, Walz nods along as if he's agreeing with what is being said. He never corrected her.
I would like you to read the following and tell me your thoughts. This is from 'Outside the Beltway' which is rated left center and high marks for factual reporting.
Tim Walz’ Military Record Redux – Outside the Beltway
Outside The Beltway - Bias and Credibility - Media Bias/Fact Check (mediabiasfactcheck.com)
I think it does a good job of working thru the claims and determining which are valid claims and which are bullshit being tossed.
While I will support and defend the patriotism of Tim Walz because he did server 24 years in the National Guard and that's much more than a great many people would do, I strongly feel that his exaggerations of his military service are just wrong. I know that politicians will exaggerate their personal history, but I do tend to draw the line on military service.
The Harris campaign is cleaning up the errors by now stating
However the official Minnesota Governors Website still is proclaiming he retired as Command Sergeant Major and we know he didn't. He was demoted to an E8 Master Sergeant because he had not completed the requirements for the promotion. That demotion occured one day before his retirement went official so he definitely retired as a Master Sergeant.
I don't remember doing that, I think it was someone else who made that correction. But I do agree with it, with the exception of a dishonorable discharge, a marine is a marine for life.
To be honest here, it almost seems like you're making my argument for me. I won't get back into the difference between marine and discharged marine, but when looking at the two men you are missing a big piece. Tim Walz was stationed in Italy, in a support postion for units assigned in Afghanistan. No where close to combat. While Vance was titled a 'Combat Corrispondent', yes he was stationed in a much safer area. But he was stationed in Iraq, where he did have to carry a rifle and could have come under fire at any time as several "rear areas" did come under attack during the war. As he put it, it was luck that kept him out of combat but you cannot ignore that he was much closer to it than Walz.
Ah but he has. The proof is there. Some just choose to ignore it due to partisanship.
I don't know why this statement is necessary. The Global War on Terrorism medal was awarded according to your statement. Many military personnel wear insignias, medals, and badges simply for doing time in service or some 'generic' group accomplishment. Neither should be expected to give nuance discussions for each one individually or collectively. It's even easier when talking to the non-military public to just - nod, say "Thank you" and just continue on to the next portion of one's day.
Again: See 15.1 and 15.2 . I would be interested in your take on how participants in the Global War on Terrorism (umbrella term) would 'vocalize' their time in service of it.
Whatever
The defense of the indefensible is unbelievable.
No, your continued defense of the indefensible is . . . . I'll get a ticket . . . so I'll leave it at that
I agree, The left should just say he was less than truthful and move on instead of making sure the controversy continues,
It’s rather amusing at first blush but incredibly deceptive.
First, I’m sorry, 24 years in the National Guard of Walz’ day is not 24 years of real service. There was next to zero chance that we were going to call up a Guard artillery unit for combat. Second, as already discussed, he never attained pay grade E-9. He was an E-8 wearing CSM rank insignia—and assigned to the CSM billet—in a Guard unit. Third, all of the awards listed for Walz save the top two are what we call “I was there” medals and ribbons. They’re all for simply being in the Guard during certain periods of time or completing mandatory training. And, frankly, an Army Commendation Medal is a paltry top award, indeed, for a senior NCO.
Vance’s NAM is, simultaneously not all that impressive and the highest award a corporal is likely to achieve absent combat valor. And he actually received plenty of I Was There awards: “Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, Iraqi Campaign Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, Letter of Appreciation (5th award), Meritorious Mast Certificate of Appreciation, and various Campaign and Service Medals.” That’s not bad for four years of service and, frankly, much more impressive to anyone in the know that Walz’ rack.
In fairness, some veterans will scoff that he was in public affairs rather than a combat arms billet. But he did at least carry a rifle in a place where he could be potentially called upon to use it. Walz, claims to the contrary, did not.
You continue on with the same but you NEVER provide any evidence that it's wrong. So the only belief that can be surmised is that you are just posting bullshit and have no clue what you are saying. Have a nice day.
I don't understand why you feel the need to tear down his service and act like he served less than 24 years. Why do you disrespect this decent man? It's deplorable.
Seems like I did answer it. Here it is again.
Other than a claim of defending the indefensible with no proof what did he say that was not correct?
Walz never lied. It's deplorable your constant defense of the indefensible.
Time to put your ignorance on ignore.
In fairness.
Not one good word to say about Walz but endlessly kissing Vance's butt.
It would help if you kept up and read postings. This is what I said in 16.1.6 .
And it was just a few days back where I strongly defended his patriotism. Have you forgotten all about that? You agreed with me in both of those links. Kind of hard to deny the evidence.
How quickly some people forget their own history.
I don't know that it does clarify. Because on one hand the article (singular) seeks to explain that there is warrant for what Walz claims but then goes on to deny that warrant by imposing precise and technical language to it. We all know that language is used imprecisely all the time in practice and that someone who serves in a rank even unofficially for any period can claim the EXPERIENCE as a right to use the designation. For instance, colleges and universities assign EXPERIENCE points for military service and life experiences (to their mature students).
As for the rank at retirement. To me it is a non-issue. So I won't waste time trying to parse it one way or the other.
I think it provides an unbiased review of the attacks on Walz. And spells out where the attacks are bullshit and where the attacks are valid.
Do you forgive all the lies that Trump tells as well? As the governor of a state, and currently the VP in the campaign one would think that he would try to be a little more precise. Yet Walz does not correct people when they introduce him as a combat vet, when they say he served in Afghanistan, what else will he lie about? There's really nothing imprecise about saying he's a combat vet when it's not, it's flat out lying.
that was actually me CB , but im ok with it .
Tim Walz was stationed in Italy in a support position in the GLOBAL WAR ON TERROISM. Again: I would be interested in your take on how participants in the Global War on Terrorism (umbrella term) would 'vocalize' their time in service of it.
What I can not deny is that some are making fine details out of general topics which military veterans do not usually stoop to when discussing the details in public.
Since it has been 'delivered' into discussion, Vance had a non-combat correspondent (desk job), nevertheless. I could be so crude as to suggest that it is comparable to a police officer with only desk job assignments right out of the academy who never ever walks a beat. But, we don't usually discuss even those nuances in public either.
Please point out the precise language that Walz used to state that he was a combat veteran (if you can, please).
Seems like a rash of explaining 'sour grapes' to me. The language is imprecise. There was/is a 'Global WAR on terror' and so those who serve in it are 'warriors.' See what I did there.
Medals adorn many chest that are generic and "merely" time in service' or crossing a line of demarcation suitable to gain it, or time in rate. . . but, we don't go around overly-explaining them
By the way, I am only doing this because it is important to push back against the noise. Every veteran understands how these matters are dealt with in the public (forum). Including combat veterans who are worthy and honorable to allow for 'indulgences' and imprecise language among the rank and file veterans and active duty personnel, respectively.
Then you are expecting details that most servicemembers don't bother to illuminate. That is, most military officers and enlisted whom 'flash' a chest full of medals do not take the time to explain the nuances of each one pinned to his or her chest to the public. It's a 'collective.'
Oh my! I still get the two of you mixed up! My apologies (Snuffy and Mark in Wyoming). I actually thought I had the right individual that time too! I mean I really thought about who it was that I was discussing that with before posting. Oh well. My bad. I should have taken the time to backtrack on the comment itself.
I await your understanding of this:
See 15.1 and 15.2 . I would be interested in your take on how participants in the Global War on Terrorism (umbrella term) would 'vocalize' their time in service of it.
Addendum: The Global War on Terrorism. An actual war or imprecise verbiage. Let's discuss.
Going forward, I would like to think that Governor Walz will at the least reevaluate his language and 'shortcuts' in speaking to be more intent on whatever he is attempting to own/claim for himself.
This one is not the gotcha that some would hope it to be.
How they vocalize it is up to them, but as I've repeatedly said Walz was in a support position in Italy. He supported units in Afganistan and he did get the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal because of it. Not sure what else there is to say. You keep asking what the participants would say and I've stated that's up to them. I can only give my opinion.
For example, I turned 18 and joined the Air Force while the war was still going on. I helped pack bins for troops from my station who were going over, but I never went to Vietnam. As such I would not call myself a Vietnam Vet even though I helped to support troops who where sent to Viatnam. I don't know how much clearer to make this.
How's this then.
Please go back and read 16.1.17 because I've answered your question twice.
And that's not the issue. Why did he not correct the interviewer when she stated she served in Afghanistan? All he did in that interview was nod his head in agreement of everything she said. That to me is a pretty big detail to get wrong.
He said repeatedly that he retired as a Command Sergeant Major but that's also not true. It was a provisional promotion only. He never completed the requirements for the rank and one day before his retirement he was stripped of that rank and retired as a Master Sergeant. His official MN governors website still posts that he retired with that rank. The Harris campaign website has walked that one back by sayiing correctly that he achieved that rank.
As far as our government is concerned you are a Vietnam Veteran due to your presumed honorable service, regardless of your personal and private view of it.
Veterans
Vietnam Veterans
United States military involvement in the Vietnam War officially began on August 5, 1964; however, the first U.S. casualty in Vietnam occurred on July 8, 1959. Approximately 2.7 million American men and women served in Vietnam. During the war, over 58,000 U.S. military members lost their lives and 153,000 were wounded. There were 766 prisoners of war of which 114 died in captivity. The war was officially ended by Presidential Proclamation on May 7, 1975.
VA Benefits for Vietnam Veterans
Vietnam Veterans may be eligible for a wide-variety of benefits available to all U.S. military Veterans. VA benefits include disability compensation , pension , education and training , health care , home loans , insurance , vocational rehabilitation and employment , and burial . See our Veterans page for an overview of the benefits available to all Veterans.
I will leave that up to talking heads. The fact is: There was a global war on terror (recognized by the VA as a war in which participants in whichever capacity are subject to benefits), see 15.2. Technically, the authorization for war was wherever our government sent troops and personnel. Despite what s/he did in the service of this country! We can't have it both ways.
That said, I am fully aware that combat is a whole 'other' process in the larger category of service to this nation. I would not downplay it in anyway. I am just trying to tackle the IMPRECISE language permitted around servicemembers and the liberties they take with language.
I am a veteran, and I had one of the best times in my life in the service! I have used limited service-related opportunities afforded me up to and including not going to the VA, but I don't hold it against those who do use 'every' tool the services provide for any veteran/s, nevertheless.
No. There is a huge difference between having the Vietnam Era VA Benefits and being a Vietnam Vet. Everybody who served in that time window was eligible for those benefits provided they did not exit service with a dishonorable discharge. But I will not call myself a Vietnam Veteran as I did not earn that.
Please realize that VA Benefits are merely something you earn just by being in the military. Please do not conflate receiving VA benefits with anything else as you do a big disservice to many veterans who did earn the title.
The language is not imprecise when someone claims something they did not do. That's still lying. I would think that as a veteran yourself you would be more aware of the issue.
If you go back over our conversation, you would see that either do I. Where I have an issue is when someone takes credit for something they didn't do. I've been very clear in where I have praised Walz and commended his service and I've been very clear in the instances where he has lied or allowed others to lie on his behalf. Walz did earn the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal because of his time in Italy supporting troops in Afghanistan. But his lie about carrying his gun in war is a lie. It was not a misquote, it was a lie. You can forgive it all you want, but he did not earn that distinction. And when he allows others to lie about him serving in Afghanistan and does nothing to correct them, he is lying also. I cannot make this any clearer.
You want to forgive his lies, that's on you. I won't do it.
I have no idea what you are trying to convey (beyond personal and private opinion), Snuffy. In the eyes of the government you are a veteran (Viet Nam era related). . . that you don't 'bother' to acknowledge or accept it being so is on you (and your privilege).
If, he persist in stating he carried a gun "in' war after all this, Walz will have to supply reasoning on his own behalf. I am done now. This is going nowhere. The irony is it is awkward to say the least that those (like Vance) whom can see every 'misstep' statement, wording, or phrases by Walz and other liberals can not see the 'MOUNTAIN' of lies Donald shares (he is somewhere on the planet lying through his teeth right this instance I presume). It is what it is. (Sigh.)
Still, Vance has had his 'behind' worn out for trying to score points on a 'gaffe' remark. Nobody thinks this is any instance of 'stolen valor,' as it is too obvious that Walz did not see combat or fire a shot in defense of himself, others, or offensive on a field of battle.
Yes, in the eyes of the government I am a veteran, served with an honorable discharge. I was on active duty during the Vietnam era. In my fucking opinion that does not make me a Vietnam Vet. I have explained what IMO is required to be a Vietnam Veteran and I did not serve active duty in the Republic of Vietnam. That you refuse to accept my definition as I state it for myself is your issue, not mine. I've been very clear and now I'm done with you. You have your opinion on this, I have mine. Leave me alone. We will not agree and I'm done.
To me it would all depend in where they served.
Well of course you are entitled to your opinion.
But in order to do well in the upcoming elections. the MAGA folks will have to take the attention of themselves for a while-- and become aware of what the voters want.
Nothing wrong with all this: "me. me, me" stuff-- and trump has certainly set the example of that! But if he and his supporters really want to win this election, they have to quiet the enormous egos for a while-- and actually get interested in what the voters themselves want.
The statement is not necessary. Walz honorably served and earned any medal awarded to him. Deplorable that some need to tear that down.
I forgot CB, [deleted][✘]
[deleted][✘]
I had friends who served in Vietnam and didn't return. I was on active duty during the Vietnam War but I never served any time in the Republic of Vietnam. By your definition would I be entitled to be called a Vietnam Vet?
IMO I did not earn that distinction and as such I would not claim that honor. It's very black and white to me. And that is why I applaud and praise the patriotism of Tim Walz but do not like the lies he has stated or allowed others to state for him.
Watch this video from "Deadline I White House" starting at 27:00 - ending at 34:00 minutes , the two military guests do an excellent job of reframing the perspective/narrative around Governor Walz's military service:
Walz’s Retirement from the National Guard
In recent years, however, several of his fellow guard members have taken issue with the timing of Walz’s retirement from the National Guard in May 2005, claiming he left to avoid a deployment to Iraq.
Vance, who served a four-year active duty enlistment in the Marine Corps as a combat correspondent, serving in Iraq for six months in 2005, advanced that argument at a campaign event on Aug. 7.
“When the United States of America asked me to go to Iraq to serve my country, I did it,” Vance said. “When Tim Walz was asked by his country to go to Iraq, you know what he did? He dropped out of the Army and allowed his unit to go without him, a fact that he’s been criticized for aggressively by a lot of the people that he served with. I think it’s shameful to prepare your unit to go to Iraq, to make a promise that you’re going to follow through and then to drop out right before you actually have to go.”
In early 2005, Walz, then a high school geography teacher and football coach at Mankato West High School, decided to run for public office. In a 2009 interview Walz provided as part of the Library of Congress’ veterans oral history project,
Walz said he made the decision to retire from the National Guard to “focus full time” on a run for the U.S. House of Representatives for Minnesota’s 1st Congressional District (which he ultimately won in 2006). Walz said he was “really concerned” about trying to seek public office and serve in the National Guard at the same time without running afoul of the Hatch Act , which limits political speech by federal employees, including members of the National Guard.
Federal Election Commission records show that Walz filed to run for Congress on Feb. 10, 2005.
On March 20, 2005, Walz’s campaign put out a press release titled “Walz Still Planning to Run for Congress Despite Possible Call to Duty in Iraq.”
Three days prior, the release said, “the National Guard Public Affairs Office announced a possible partial mobilization of roughly 2,000 troops from the Minnesota National Guard. … The announcement from the National Guard PAO specified that all or a portion of Walz’s battalion could be mobilized to serve in Iraq within the next two years.”
According to the release, “When asked about his possible deployment to Iraq Walz said, ‘I do not yet know if my artillery unit will be part of this mobilization and I am unable to comment further on specifics of the deployment.’ Although his tour of duty in Iraq might coincide with his campaign for Minnesota’s 1st Congressional seat, Walz is determined to stay in the race. ‘As Command Sergeant Major I have a responsibility not only to ready my battalion for Iraq, but also to serve if called on. I am dedicated to serving my country to the best of my ability, whether that is in Washington DC or in Iraq.'”
On March 23, 2005, the Pipestone County Star reported, “Detachments of the Minnesota National Guard have been ‘alerted’ of possible deployment to Iraq in mid-to-late 2006.”
“Major Kevin Olson of the Minnesota National Guard said a brigade-sized contingent of soldiers could be expected to be called to Iraq, but he was not, at this time, aware of which batteries would be called,” the story said. “All soldiers in the First Brigade combat team of the 34th Division, Minnesota National Guard, could be eligible for call-up. ‘We don’t know yet what the force is like’ he said. ‘It’s too early to speculate, if the (soldiers) do go.’
“He added: ‘We will have a major announcement if and when the alert order moves ahead.’”
ABC News spoke to Joseph Eustice, a retired command sergeant major who served with Walz, and he told the news organization this week that “he remembers Walz struggling with the timing of wanting to serve as a lawmaker but also avoiding asking for a deferment so he could do so.”
“He had a window of time,” Eustice told ABC News. “He had to decide. And in his deciding, we were not on notice to be deployed. There were rumors. There were lots of rumors, and we didn’t know where we were going until it was later that, early summer, I believe.”
Al Bonnifield, who served under Walz, also recalled Walz agonizing over the decision.
“It was a very long conversation behind closed doors,” Bonnifield told the Washington Post this week. “He was trying to decide where he could do better for soldiers, for veterans, for the country. He weighed that for a long time.”
In 2018, Bonnifield told MPR News that Walz worried in early 2005, “Would the soldier look down on him because he didn’t go with us? Would the common soldier say, ‘Hey, he didn’t go with us, he’s trying to skip out on a deployment?’ And he wasn’t. He talked with us for quite a while on that subject. He weighed that decision to run for Congress very heavy. He loved the military, he loved the guard, he loved the soldiers he worked with.”
But not all of Walz’s fellow Guard members felt that way.
In a paid letter to the West Central Tribune in Minnesota in November 2018, Thomas Behrends and Paul Herr — both retired command sergeants major in the Minnesota National Guard — wrote, “On May 16th, 2005 he [Walz] quit, leaving the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion and its Soldiers hanging; without its senior Non-Commissioned Officer, as the battalion prepared for war. His excuse to other leaders was that he needed to retire in order to run for congress. Which is false, according to a Department of Defense Directive, he could have run and requested permission from the Secretary of Defense before entering active duty; as many reservists have.”
“For Tim Walz to abandon his fellow soldiers and quit when they needed experienced leadership most is disheartening,” they wrote. “When the nation called, he quit.”
Walz retired on May 16, 2005. Walz’s brigade received alert orders for mobilization on July 14, 2005, according to the National Guard and MPR News . The official mobilization report came the following month, and the unit mobilized and trained through the fall. It was finally deployed to Iraq in the spring of 2006.
The unit was originally scheduled to return in February 2007, but its tour was extended four months as part of President George W. Bush’s “surge” strategy , the National Guard reported. In all, the soldiers were mobilized for 22 months.
Responding to Vance’s claim that Walz retired to avoid deploying to Iraq, the Harris-Walz campaign released a statement saying, “After 24 years of military service, Governor Walz retired in 2005 and ran for Congress, where he was a tireless advocate for our men and women in uniform – and as Vice President of the United States he will continue to be a relentless champion for our veterans and military families.”