Tim Walz embellished his military service record

[probinson]

https://www.reddit.com/r/minnesota/comments/xk6kum

This is pretty sad.

A link that goes to Reddit, where the linked article references a WalletHub "study". Compelling stuff.

 

[probinson]

Walz is a veteran of Operation Enduring Freedom.

How so? Walz supported Operation Enduring Freedom from Italy.

And what about his misrepresented rank his entire political career? Do you think Walz is unaware of what his proper rank is?

 

[JosephZ]

How so? Walz supported Operation Enduring Freedom from Italy.

That's exactly what makes Walz a veteran of Operation Enduring Freedom.

 

[Bradskii]

Or...I can retire now and run for Congress.

Not being from the US or your state I couldn't vote for you if you did run. But if I was...I might.

 

[probinson]

That's exactly what makes Walz a veteran of Operation Enduring Freedom.

And what about misrepresenting his rank? I see you left that part out. I've posted multiple videos and images demonstrating how Walz has misrepresented his rank as "retired Command Sergeant Major" throughout his entire political career. In fact, his biography page on the Minnesota state website still says this, despite it being stealth edited on the Harris campaign website earlier today.

Are you OK with him misrepresenting himself in this way?

 

[JosephZ]

And what about his misrepresented rank his entire political career? Do you think Walz is unaware of what his proper rank is?

In 2018, a spokesperson for the Minnesota National Guard told MPR that it was legitimate for Walz to say he served as a command sergeant major even if he retired at a lower rank.

 

[probinson]

That's exactly what makes Walz a veteran of Operation Enduring Freedom.

So are you saying that people who were deployed to Italy and never saw combat in Operation Enduring Freedom are equal to veterans who were deployed to the frontlines in Afghanistan?

 

[probinson]

In 2018, a spokesperson for the Minnesota National Guard told MPR that it was legitimate for Walz to say he served as a command sergeant major even if he retired at a lower rank.

Why are you dodging the question? He can say that he served as a Command Sergeant Major, but that's not what he has said. He has called himself "retired Command Sergeant Major", which is not correct.

Again, here is the stealth edit that the Harris campaign made today.

Before:

After:

 

[JosephZ]

So are you saying that people who were deployed to Italy and never saw combat in Operation Enduring Freedom are equal to veterans who were deployed to the frontlines in Afghanistan?

Yes.

 

[Bradskii]

Really! Can we deal with actual facts here. Walz also never carried a gun in combat unless there was some conflict in Italy that didn’t make the news. The campaign is well ahead of some of the posters on this thread who are defending this stolen valor. They are now trying to figure out how to clean up this mess. Diversion is not an effective tactic in covering Walz’s embellishments.

Let me see. Who do I listen to regarding this? A lot of right wing talking heads who want to disparage the guy because he's up for VP? And for no other reason, because we all know they'd be singing his praise if he was a Republican and Trump had picked him. Or do I listen to guys that are actively serving and know exactly what the situation is and can explain it clearly and concisely, like @RDKirk?

Let me get back to you when I've given it some thought. And maybe you can think on it as well.

 

[JosephZ]

Why are you dodging the question? He can say that he served as a Command Sergeant Major, but that's not what he has said. He has called himself "retired Command Sergeant Major", which is not correct.

I'm not dodging the question, I gave you a detailed response to this earlier in the thread.

 

[probinson]

I'm not dodging the question, I gave you a detailed response to this earlier in the thread.

So you're OK with him misrepresenting his rank as "retired Command Sergeant Major"?

 

[Bradskii]

I found this conversation from a few of you in the military but have different thoughts on it quite interesting. I guess it could be said there will be a certain amount of traction Trump's campaign will get from this.....how much remains to be seen .

One thing I wonder about though. If it were Trump this was about would the Pro Walz group here still be saying the same thing? You know the media would be roasting him alive over it....so what about you? Would you stand in defense of Trump like you have Walz?

And don't say Trump would never serve in the military to dismiss the question.....hypothetically if he did.

With the same track record as Walz? It would not be possible to disparage him for it. I'd be embarrassed to think about doing it. Same way as I have no interest in anyone disparaging Vance's service. I commend him for his time in uniform. He served his country. Good for him. I've nothing but praise for his time in the Marines.

Do I like the guy? Not in the slightest. Do I like what he says? Not in any way shape of form. Do I think he is an honourable man with integrity? No, I do not. Do I think his politics are in any way praiseworthy? Not in a million years. And I'd say exactly the same about Trump if he'd served. But ol' bone spurs didn't even do that. Plus his attitude (and actions) to women and his disdain for the democratic process plus...well the list goes on and on and on, so he's about as close to the bottom of the barrel as it's possible to be.

But if he'd served? That would be something I'd congratulate him on. And I'd fight his corner on that matter with anyone.

 

[DaisyDay]

Paid by whom?

Inquiring minds want to know. How about Leonard Leo? Isn’t he taking over from the Koch Brothers?

 

[Bradskii]

You hit the nail on the head, just watch for the diversions from your question to attack Trump.

Your problem is that you can't see that it's possible to commend him for any service he might have done and tear him apart for his character and his politics. The other side of that coin is that you cannot praise Walz for his service simply because he's a guy who is standing against your team. All you can do is try to disparage his service to his country because he is standing against your team.

You have to realise that everyone knows this. Including you.

 

[Vambram]

Inquiring minds want to know. How about Leonard Leo? Isn’t he taking over from the Koch Brothers?

I ain't never heard of Leonard Leo. Therefore, I don't know.

 

[probinson]

With the same track record as Walz? It would not be possible to disparage him for it. I'd be embarrassed to think about doing it. Same way as I have no interest in anyone disparaging Vance's service. I commend him for his time in uniform. He served his country. Good for him. I've nothing but praise for his time in the Marines.

Do I like the guy? Not in the slightest. Do I like what he says? Not in any way shape of form. Do I think he is an honourable man with integrity? No, I do not. Do I think his politics are in any way praiseworthy? Not in a million years. And I'd say exactly the same about Trump if he'd served. But ol' bone spurs didn't even do that. Plus his attitude (and actions) to women and his disdain for the democratic process plus...well the list goes on and on and on, so he's about as close to the bottom of the barrel as it's possible to be.

But if he'd served? That would be something I'd congratulate him on. And I'd fight his corner on that matter with anyone.

Just so I'm understanding your viewpoint here, are you saying that it's inappropriate to call out Walz for misrepresenting his rank as "retired Command Sergeant Major" for his entire political career simply because he served for 24 years? Does that excuse his intentional misrepresentation of his rank?

I have much respect anyone who has served in the military. That includes Walz. But that doesn't excuse misrepresenting his rank for political purposes for his entire political career.

 

[Bradskii]

The more this goes on, all I can think is, "they've been investigating him like crazy and this is all they can find?" One Google search would yield hundreds of scandals on their top candidate, and it would take 5 seconds.
It makes me think: What a dad! What a coach! What a soldier! What a governor!
I have definite governor envy. A meme shows Walz being group hugged by school children. "This governor gives kids free breakfast and lunch." Then my governor, surrounded by solemn kids. "This governor defunds schools, bans books, and abolished child labor laws "

I saw that scene. It was genuinely emotional.

 

[RDKirk]

In 2018, a spokesperson for the Minnesota National Guard told MPR that it was legitimate for Walz to say he served as a command sergeant major even if he retired at a lower rank.

We get into close details of the wording there. Yes, for sure he can say he "served as," which isn't necessarily the same as "retired as."

As I mentioned before, it's not terribly uncommon for a general officer to continue to have been "frocked" to a higher rank to be placed into a specific position, then retire at his lower permanent rank....but continue to be known by his higher rank.

But we're talking about an enlisted guy here...it doesn't even matter.

 

[probinson]

We get into close details of the wording there. Yes, for sure he can say he "served as," which isn't necessarily the same as "retired as."

As I mentioned before, it's not terribly uncommon for a general officer to continue to have been "frocked" to a higher rank to be placed into a specific position, then retire at his lower permanent rank....but continue to be known by his higher rank.

But we're talking about an enlisted guy here...it doesn't even matter.

Earlier in the thread, I posted a few videos and images of Walz referring to himself as "retired Command Sergeant Major". Is that accurate, in your opinion?