Tim Walz embellished his military service record

[probinson]

Let me point out that the law on "Stolen Valor" refers very specifically to someone who wears unauthorized medals and decorations.

Thank you for the clarification. And actually, the law was changed in 2013 to also include fraudulent "receipt of" medals and decorations.

(a) In General.--Section 704 of title 18, United States Code, is ​

amended--​

(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``wears,''; and​

(2) so that subsection (b) reads as follows:​

​

Fraudulent Representations About Receipt of Military ​

Decorations or Medals. <<NOTE: Penalties.>> --Whoever, with intent to ​

obtain money, property, or other tangible benefit, fraudulently holds ​

oneself out to be a recipient of a decoration or medal described in ​

subsection (c)(2) or (d) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not ​

more than one year, or both.''.​

​

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-113publ12/html/PLAW-113publ12.htm

​

So the veteran alleging "Stolen Valor" in that video was definitely wrong about that part.

 

[probinson]

Not any longer. I'll still call in to see what actual service members have to say. But I'm not interested in anything else you have to offer.

OK. But for future reference, this isn't an airport. No need to announce your departure.

 

[Bradskii]

OK. But for future reference, this isn't an airport. No need to announce your departure.

I was trying to prevent you wasting time by responding to me. To no avail. I guess you'll do the same this time. I won't.

 

[probinson]

I was trying to prevent you wasting time by responding to me. To no avail. I guess you'll do the same this time. I won't.

I get it. You don't care what I have to say. And now the whole forum knows it. And I'm OK with that. Thanks for your input.

 

[RDKirk]

Here is a great comment on X about the "Swiftboating" of Walz as explained by Adam Kinzinger, another Guard veteran...and Republican politician. Kinsinger was Air Guard, so he uses the Air Force names for the ranks instead of the Army ranks. There is a bit of profanity in it.

x.com

x.com

 

[JosephZ]

Here is a great comment on X about the "Swiftboating" of Walz as explained by Adam Kinzinger, another Guard veteran...and Republican politician. Kinsinger was Air Guard, so he uses the Air Force names for the ranks instead of the Army ranks. There is a bit of profanity in it.

x.com

x.com

That was an excellent explanation from Kinzinger.

 

[probinson]

Here is a great comment on X about the "Swiftboating" of Walz as explained by Adam Kinzinger, another Guard veteran...and Republican politician. Kinsinger was Air Guard, so he uses the Air Force names for the ranks instead of the Army ranks. There is a bit of profanity in it.

x.com

x.com

Thanks for the video.

After hearing your explanation and watching this video, I think it's clear that Walz did nothing wrong when he retired, even if it was to avoid a deployment to Iraq. I can see why some in the military might take issue with it, but it is not indicative of Walz having done anything wrong.

However, I am not OK with Walz calling himself "Retired Command Sergeant Major Walz". This seems to me an intentional misrepresentation of his rank. Surely he must know that he is "Retired Master Sergeant Walz", yet has chosen to embellish his retired rank repeatedly throughout his political career.

 

[wing2000]

"It's a wrong and sick attack against a man who did 24 years of service". Adam Kinzinger

I agree.

 

[wing2000]

Kinzinger noted that if one retires within 3 years of being promoted, one reverts back to prior rank for retirement purposes.

 

[probinson]

"It's a wrong and sick attack against a man who did 24 years of service". Adam Kinzinger

I agree.

Why do you say "attack"? Do you think asking why someone is referring to themselves by a retired rank that they did not earn is an "attack"?

 

[probinson]

Kinzinger noted that if one retires within 3 years of being promoted, one reverts back to prior rank for retirement purposes.

Indeed. So he would not be "Retired Command Sergeant Major Walz" but "Retired Master Sergeant Walz".

 

[RDKirk]

Thanks for the video.

After hearing your explanation and watching this video, I think it's clear that Walz did nothing wrong when he retired, even if it was to avoid a deployment to Iraq. I can see why some in the military might take issue with it, but it is not indicative of Walz having done anything wrong.

However, I am not OK with Walz calling himself "Retired Command Sergeant Major Walz". This seems to me an intentional misrepresentation of his rank. Surely he must know that he is "Retired Master Sergeant Walz", yet has chosen to embellish his retired rank repeatedly throughout his political career.

As I said earlier, I would say, "....served as Command Sergeant Major upon retirement." It's not something to be ignored...it's actually a significant deal that he'd been frocked to that position.

But I'd point out that general officers do what Walz did very frequently, continuing to refer to themselves in politics and profession by their frocked ranks and positions instead of their permanent ranks and positions.

 

[Postvieww]

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.

You problem is that you ignore facts to promote a leftist agenda! In post #117 I said:

He served and that is honorable but lying about that service is dishonorable and he will have to answer for it in this campaign.

He got out early because he didn’t want to be deployed to Iraq with the men he was charged with commanding. Some of those men he let down don’t feel the same way about this as do many on this thread who try to paint this situation as honorable and normal, it is not. Abandoning the men you are charged with commanding to avoid deployment and further a political career is not honorable no matter how hard leftist try to spin it. People have the right to be gaslighted over this VP pick just the same as they do over Kamala who was at one time an embarrassment to the party now we are being fed the lie she is the savior of the democrat party. Walz has many other problems with his past that are fair game for scrutiny. Again anyone who faithful serves this nation is honorable but that fact gives no one the right to lie about that service.

 

[Postvieww]

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.

This guy is a gift to the Trump campaign. His record is dismal. This also shows Kamala's true colors as the blatant leftist she is. Very shallow to think just because he is up for VP is the reason he is scrutinized. He has so many issues in his political career and they are all fair game. Stop whining about the disinfectant of light on the subject.

 

[KCfromNC]

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.

A post which claims to want to deal with actual facts then attempts to change the subject away from the "facts" presented in the OP by talking about something totally different.

Seems credible.

 

[KCfromNC]

Most of the discussion in this thread has been surrounding the timing of Walz's retirement. But I'm more interested in understanding the rank he identifies himself by on his biography page.

Really? That's the deciding factor in whether to vote for Harris this election?

Seems like a kinda weird way to pick a candidate.

 

[RDKirk]

Some of those men he let down don’t feel the same way about this as do many on this thread who try to paint this situation as honorable and normal, it is not. Abandoning the men you are charged with commanding to avoid deployment and further a political career is not honorable no matter how hard leftist try to spin it.

"Honorable" is without a doubt how his DD-214 explicitly characterizes his discharge: Precisely as "honorable" with that exact word. Your opinion is irrelevant to his DD-214.

And it is definitely and objectively "normal" in the military. Soldiers don't normally delay retirement on the possibility of going to combat in the future.

 

[civilwarbuff]

I'm a veteran.

Then you should probably know better.....unless it was from years ago. The rules have changed over time.

 

[RDKirk]

Kinzinger noted that if one retires within 3 years of being promoted, one reverts back to prior rank for retirement purposes.

I wasn't sure offhand if the "three year commitment" was uniform across the board for all ranks. I guess I'm still not sure. There is always such a commitment, but I'm not sure if it's three years for every rank.

And as I've been saying, it's frequent for general officers...yet they continue to refer to the rank they were frocked to at retirement, not their permanent retirement rank. As he mentioned, maybe a third of the retired "four star generals" are actually being paid in retirement as three star generals.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Throwing in a little bit of lite hearted humor.

Tim Walz in political cartoons

Illustrated history of Kamala Harris’ running mate as governor of Minnesota

www.foxnews.com