LaxPower Back-Up Stick

Kismet wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 1:39 pm Fantastic = as predicted we now have TWO THREADS with folks yammering on this topic. Can everyone pick a thread and just use it going forward?

...aren't you glad you started it by calling me out for my throwaway line about one of the reasons why I support Jim Webb.
See what your unsolicited trolling started.

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 1:43 pm

Kismet wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 1:39 pm Fantastic = as predicted we now have TWO THREADS with folks yammering on this topic. Can everyone pick a thread and just use it going forward?

...aren't you glad you started it by calling me out for my throwaway line about one of the reasons why I support Jim Webb.
See what your unsolicited trolling started.

Nice try bozo - source of all this garbage is YOU - who could have just IGNORED the alleged throwaway line.

Kismet wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:01 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 1:43 pm

Kismet wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 1:39 pm Fantastic = as predicted we now have TWO THREADS with folks yammering on this topic. Can everyone pick a thread and just use it going forward?

...aren't you glad you started it by calling me out for my throwaway line about one of the reasons why I support Jim Webb.
See what your unsolicited trolling started.

Nice try bozo - source of all this garbage is YOU - who could have just IGNORED the alleged throwaway line.

And not swift boated a fellow veteran.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:12 pm And not swift boated a fellow veteran.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/walz-previous ... =112833386

Tim Walz previously faced criticism over the way he characterized his military service, records show
ABC News reviewed some of Walz's past interviews, statements and speeches.
ByOlivia Rubin and Will Steakin, August 15, 2024,

In early 2016, Tim Walz sat down with CSPAN for a bipartisan discussion about his opposition to President Barack Obama's push to reduce troop levels overseas. To begin the panel, the host introduced Walz -- at the time in his fifth term as a U.S. representative -- in part by incorrectly outlining his military service.
"Enlisted in the Army National Guard at 17 and retired 24 years later as Command Sergeant Major," she said of Walz, "and served with his battalion in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan."
Walz nodded in agreement at that statement -- despite the fact that, according to military records and his own admission, he had never served in Afghanistan.

The incident is emblematic of the episodes that have drawn criticism from some Republicans over the way Walz and others have sometimes described his decades-long military service since retiring in 2005, or have not corrected others who have incorrectly described his service.

Walz has fiercely defended his service, saying at a campaign rally this week that he is "damn proud" of his military record.
"These guys have -- are even attacking me or my record of service," Walz said on Tuesday during a speech in Los Angeles. "And I just want to say, I'm proud to serve my country, and I always will be."

While there is no evidence that Walz has committed the crime of stolen valor, an ABC News review of hours of footage from his past interviews and speeches, along with years of records from his initial campaigns, shows that journalists, some of his colleagues in the National Guard, and even voters have sometimes been left with an inaccurate picture of his military service that has led to criticism dating back years.

These inaccuracies, which at times went uncorrected, include Walz not denying the statement that he served in Afghanistan, and Walz repeatedly saying that he retired with a rank he achieved but did not retire with, as well as an instance in 2018 of Walz claiming that he carried weapons of war "in war," about which the Harris-Walz campaign said that he misspoke.

During Walz's 2016 CSPAN interview, he said later in the 41-minute segment that his "guard unit backfilled to Europe" and at times his job "was to make sure the troops and their families were taken care of." But the instance underscored the ways in which descriptions of Walz's record -- which can be nuanced and complicated -- have at times been left murky to those watching.

"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," A Harris-Walz campaign spokesperson said in a statement to ABC News.

'The balloon was deflated'
Those who served in the National Guard with Walz -- or after him -- have been split in their opinions of the controversy.

Thomas Behrends, who took over Walz's battalion after Walz retired from military service in 2005, has been a vocal Walz critic for years, accusing him of using a false rank after retiring and criticizing his decision to retire before his battalion was deployed to Iraq.
"At the point when he quit, the balloon was deflated and all the soldiers out here, basically it was like one of their main senior leaders had died. They couldn't believe it," Behrends said in an interview with ABC News.

Walz has said he decided to retire in 2005 to run for Congress, and there is no indication that Walz, at that time, had been formally notified he would be deployed to Iraq. According to National Guard records, the 1st Battalion of the 125th Field Artillery received an alert order on July 14, 2005 -- two months after Walz retired from service.
...Walz appears to have been aware prior to his retirement that his unit was under consideration for deployment. Shortly after announcing his first run for Congress in March 2005, Walz issued a statement saying his unit had been notified of a "possible partial mobilization," stating that he had a "responsibility not only to ready my battalion for Iraq, but also to serve if called on."
"On Thursday, March 17 the National Guard Public Affairs Office announced a possible partial mobilization of roughly 2,000 troops from the Minnesota National Guard," Walz posted to his campaign website in 2005, according to a version viewed by ABC News via the Wayback Machine.
"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," Walz posted on the site. "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."
Walz also stated he intended to remain in the race even if he were to be deployed.
"I don't want to speculate on what shape my campaign will take if I am deployed, but I have no plans to drop out of the race. I am fortunate to have a strong group of enthusiastic supporters and a very dedicated and intelligent wife. Both will be a major part of my campaign, whether I am in Minnesota or Iraq."
The post on his 2005 campaign website ends by stating, "If called to duty, Walz would leave behind his wife Gwen and four-year-old daughter, Hope."
Walz won his congressional race that November -- a few weeks after his unit ended up being deployed.

'It's quite a title to have'
In the National Guard, Walz began serving as command sergeant major, a leadership position, in 2004, and was officially appointed to the role in April 2005, shortly before he retired from service, according to a statement from Army Col. Ruan Cochran. However Walz did not remain in the role long enough to keep the title in retirement.
Still, Walz repeatedly referred to himself as a "retired command sergeant major" for years.

In 2016, Behrends penned a private letter to Walz, thanking him for his service but imploring him to stop using the title, which he said Walz didn't earn.
"It saddens me that after your long career in the National Guard, that you did not fulfill the conditions of your promotion to Command Sergeant Major," said the letter, a copy of which was provided to ABC News. "It's quite a title to have, when it has been earned. I would hope that you haven't been using the rank for political gain, but that is how it appears."

A former battalion commander of Walz's National Guard unit also issued a scathing rebuke of the way the Minnesota governor has described his military rank since retiring and entering politics, writing on Facebook that Walz "did not earn the rank or successfully complete any assignment as an E9," referring to the governor's repeated use of the title.
"It is an affront to the Noncommissioned Officer Corps that he continues to glom onto the title. I can sit in the cockpit of an airplane, it does not make me a pilot. Similarly, when the demands of service and leadership at the highest level got real, he chose another path," wrote John Kolb, who became lieutenant colonel of his Minnesota unit shortly after Walz retired and launched his bid for Congress. When reached for comment, Kolb told ABC News that his statement "speaks for itself."

A line in Walz's bio on the Harris-Walz campaign website also initially described Walz as a "retired Command Sergeant Major in the Army National Guard," according to a review of the webpage via the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine.
The campaign later changed the wording to say Walz "served as a Command Sergeant Major."

'Artful omission'
Responding to criticism of Walz, the Harris-Walz campaign has acknowledged there have been some discrepancies in how the Minnesota governor has described his military service in the past.
The campaign told ABC News last week that Walz "misspoke" when he referred to "weapons of war that I carried in war" in a video clip from March 2018 that circulated online, in which the then-candidate for governor was shown arguing why weapons of war should not be on the streets.
"In his 24 years of service, the Governor carried, fired and trained others to use weapons of war innumerable times," the campaign said in a statement responding to accusations from Vance.

On his congressional campaign website in September 2005, according to the Wayback Machine, Walz is described as "Command Sergeant Major Walz," who retired after serving "overseas with his battalion in support of Operation Enduring Freedom." While correct, the website does not specify that Walz deployed to Italy, rather than to Iraq or Afghanistan where he may have faced combat.

Walz's website at the time also promoted multiple articles about his campaign for Congress, including headlines stating "After Hackett's Close Call, Iraq War Veterans Are in Demand" and a link to an article titled "Other Iraq War Veterans Running."

Later, Walz's campaign website for his 2018 gubernatorial bid also said Walz "joined his battalion overseas in support of Operation Enduring Freedom," without specifying that he deployed to Italy.

And although Walz reiterated last week that he's never claimed to have been in combat, some in the past criticized the way he characterized his service.
"Tim Walz is misleading us about his military service," wrote one person in the Winona Daily News in November 2006. "As Minnesota military reservists who served in Iraq, we are disappointed."
The writer said that Walz served "honorably," but claimed that through "artful omission, Walz is leaving the impression that he served in the combat zones."
In another latter to the Albert Lea Tribune, the writer said, "I also feel misled about Tim Walz's military service."
That writer pointed to "pictures he has on his Web site that make it look like he was in combat" as well as "links to articles such as 'War veterans for office' in which he was featured."
"Tim Walz is not a combat veteran and was never even stationed in the middle east," the letter said.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:12 pm

Kismet wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:01 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 1:43 pm

Kismet wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 1:39 pm Fantastic = as predicted we now have TWO THREADS with folks yammering on this topic. Can everyone pick a thread and just use it going forward?

...aren't you glad you started it by calling me out for my throwaway line about one of the reasons why I support Jim Webb.
See what your unsolicited trolling started.

Nice try bozo - source of all this garbage is YOU - who could have just IGNORED the alleged throwaway line.

And not swift boated a fellow veteran.

Come on man you boys have been swift boating Old Salt for years. Why don't you all find a new playbook. The one your all using now was written by Knute Rockne. Old Salt made it crystal clear what his opinion is and I for one as a veteran of the US Military agree with him. So am I equally as guilty as the retired SM poor use of words that were identified by the Harris camp of admitting that he " misspoke" ? Why don't any of you have the intestinal fortitude to admit that the retired SM simply admit he made a mistake. I forgot...rule #1 of any politician is to never admit you made a mistake.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:39 pm Come on man you boys have been swift boating Old Salt for years. Why don't you all find a new playbook. The one your all using now was written by Knute Rockne. Old Salt made it crystal clear what his opinion is and I for one as a veteran of the US Military agree with him. So am I equally as guilty as the retired SM poor use of words that were identified by the Harris camp of admitting that he " misspoke" ? Why don't any of you have the intestinal fortitude to admit that the retired SM simply admit he made a mistake.

Because that's not what Vance, FoxNation, OS and others are saying....they're playing political games, and you know it.

If they REALLY cared, they'd simply ask Walz: hey man, did you serve in combat? Walz would say "no, I didn't"...and that would be the end of it.

Instead? He's called a liar who is using Stolen Valor.

And when you look at this treatment, Cradle: would you EVER run for office as a Veteran having watched this?

Walz is being treated worse than Kamala and Trump, who didn't serve a single day. In what world does that make ANY sense?

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:36 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:12 pm And not swift boated a fellow veteran.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/walz-previous ... =112833386

Tim Walz previously faced criticism over the way he characterized his military service, records show
ABC News reviewed some of Walz's past interviews, statements and speeches.
ByOlivia Rubin and Will Steakin, August 15, 2024,

In early 2016, Tim Walz sat down with CSPAN for a bipartisan discussion about his opposition to President Barack Obama's push to reduce troop levels overseas. To begin the panel, the host introduced Walz -- at the time in his fifth term as a U.S. representative -- in part by incorrectly outlining his military service.
"Enlisted in the Army National Guard at 17 and retired 24 years later as Command Sergeant Major," she said of Walz, "and served with his battalion in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan."
Walz nodded in agreement at that statement -- despite the fact that, according to military records and his own admission, he had never served in Afghanistan.

The incident is emblematic of the episodes that have drawn criticism from some Republicans over the way Walz and others have sometimes described his decades-long military service since retiring in 2005, or have not corrected others who have incorrectly described his service.

Walz has fiercely defended his service, saying at a campaign rally this week that he is "damn proud" of his military record.
"These guys have -- are even attacking me or my record of service," Walz said on Tuesday during a speech in Los Angeles. "And I just want to say, I'm proud to serve my country, and I always will be."

While there is no evidence that Walz has committed the crime of stolen valor, an ABC News review of hours of footage from his past interviews and speeches, along with years of records from his initial campaigns, shows that journalists, some of his colleagues in the National Guard, and even voters have sometimes been left with an inaccurate picture of his military service that has led to criticism dating back years.

These inaccuracies, which at times went uncorrected, include Walz not denying the statement that he served in Afghanistan, and Walz repeatedly saying that he retired with a rank he achieved but did not retire with, as well as an instance in 2018 of Walz claiming that he carried weapons of war "in war," about which the Harris-Walz campaign said that he misspoke.

During Walz's 2016 CSPAN interview, he said later in the 41-minute segment that his "guard unit backfilled to Europe" and at times his job "was to make sure the troops and their families were taken care of." But the instance underscored the ways in which descriptions of Walz's record -- which can be nuanced and complicated -- have at times been left murky to those watching.

"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," A Harris-Walz campaign spokesperson said in a statement to ABC News.

'The balloon was deflated'
Those who served in the National Guard with Walz -- or after him -- have been split in their opinions of the controversy.

Thomas Behrends, who took over Walz's battalion after Walz retired from military service in 2005, has been a vocal Walz critic for years, accusing him of using a false rank after retiring and criticizing his decision to retire before his battalion was deployed to Iraq.
"At the point when he quit, the balloon was deflated and all the soldiers out here, basically it was like one of their main senior leaders had died. They couldn't believe it," Behrends said in an interview with ABC News.

Walz has said he decided to retire in 2005 to run for Congress, and there is no indication that Walz, at that time, had been formally notified he would be deployed to Iraq. According to National Guard records, the 1st Battalion of the 125th Field Artillery received an alert order on July 14, 2005 -- two months after Walz retired from service.
...Walz appears to have been aware prior to his retirement that his unit was under consideration for deployment. Shortly after announcing his first run for Congress in March 2005, Walz issued a statement saying his unit had been notified of a "possible partial mobilization," stating that he had a "responsibility not only to ready my battalion for Iraq, but also to serve if called on."
"On Thursday, March 17 the National Guard Public Affairs Office announced a possible partial mobilization of roughly 2,000 troops from the Minnesota National Guard," Walz posted to his campaign website in 2005, according to a version viewed by ABC News via the Wayback Machine.
"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," Walz posted on the site. "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."
Walz also stated he intended to remain in the race even if he were to be deployed.
"I don't want to speculate on what shape my campaign will take if I am deployed, but I have no plans to drop out of the race. I am fortunate to have a strong group of enthusiastic supporters and a very dedicated and intelligent wife. Both will be a major part of my campaign, whether I am in Minnesota or Iraq."
The post on his 2005 campaign website ends by stating, "If called to duty, Walz would leave behind his wife Gwen and four-year-old daughter, Hope."
Walz won his congressional race that November -- a few weeks after his unit ended up being deployed.

'It's quite a title to have'
In the National Guard, Walz began serving as command sergeant major, a leadership position, in 2004, and was officially appointed to the role in April 2005, shortly before he retired from service, according to a statement from Army Col. Ruan Cochran. However Walz did not remain in the role long enough to keep the title in retirement.
Still, Walz repeatedly referred to himself as a "retired command sergeant major" for years.

In 2016, Behrends penned a private letter to Walz, thanking him for his service but imploring him to stop using the title, which he said Walz didn't earn.
"It saddens me that after your long career in the National Guard, that you did not fulfill the conditions of your promotion to Command Sergeant Major," said the letter, a copy of which was provided to ABC News. "It's quite a title to have, when it has been earned. I would hope that you haven't been using the rank for political gain, but that is how it appears."

A former battalion commander of Walz's National Guard unit also issued a scathing rebuke of the way the Minnesota governor has described his military rank since retiring and entering politics, writing on Facebook that Walz "did not earn the rank or successfully complete any assignment as an E9," referring to the governor's repeated use of the title.
"It is an affront to the Noncommissioned Officer Corps that he continues to glom onto the title. I can sit in the cockpit of an airplane, it does not make me a pilot. Similarly, when the demands of service and leadership at the highest level got real, he chose another path," wrote John Kolb, who became lieutenant colonel of his Minnesota unit shortly after Walz retired and launched his bid for Congress. When reached for comment, Kolb told ABC News that his statement "speaks for itself."

A line in Walz's bio on the Harris-Walz campaign website also initially described Walz as a "retired Command Sergeant Major in the Army National Guard," according to a review of the webpage via the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine.
The campaign later changed the wording to say Walz "served as a Command Sergeant Major."

'Artful omission'
Responding to criticism of Walz, the Harris-Walz campaign has acknowledged there have been some discrepancies in how the Minnesota governor has described his military service in the past.
The campaign told ABC News last week that Walz "misspoke" when he referred to "weapons of war that I carried in war" in a video clip from March 2018 that circulated online, in which the then-candidate for governor was shown arguing why weapons of war should not be on the streets.
"In his 24 years of service, the Governor carried, fired and trained others to use weapons of war innumerable times," the campaign said in a statement responding to accusations from Vance.

On his congressional campaign website in September 2005, according to the Wayback Machine, Walz is described as "Command Sergeant Major Walz," who retired after serving "overseas with his battalion in support of Operation Enduring Freedom." While correct, the website does not specify that Walz deployed to Italy, rather than to Iraq or Afghanistan where he may have faced combat.

Walz's website at the time also promoted multiple articles about his campaign for Congress, including headlines stating "After Hackett's Close Call, Iraq War Veterans Are in Demand" and a link to an article titled "Other Iraq War Veterans Running."

Later, Walz's campaign website for his 2018 gubernatorial bid also said Walz "joined his battalion overseas in support of Operation Enduring Freedom," without specifying that he deployed to Italy.

And although Walz reiterated last week that he's never claimed to have been in combat, some in the past criticized the way he characterized his service.
"Tim Walz is misleading us about his military service," wrote one person in the Winona Daily News in November 2006. "As Minnesota military reservists who served in Iraq, we are disappointed."
The writer said that Walz served "honorably," but claimed that through "artful omission, Walz is leaving the impression that he served in the combat zones."
In another latter to the Albert Lea Tribune, the writer said, "I also feel misled about Tim Walz's military service."
That writer pointed to "pictures he has on his Web site that make it look like he was in combat" as well as "links to articles such as 'War veterans for office' in which he was featured."
"Tim Walz is not a combat veteran and was never even stationed in the middle east," the letter said.

A quick look at the retired SMs DD Form 214 would clearly specify his rank/ pay grade at the time he retired from the National Guard. IMO that is the only thing that matters. Having been temporarily assigned as acting CSM is a discussion that will continue to keep going around and around on this forum and will still keep going nowhere. I'm certain that somewhere in a National Guard rules and regulations manuel it is spelled out somewhere if a temporary assignment to a higher rank allows you to claim that you actually achieved that rank. A good indicator IMO was he being paid as an E9 or just handling the responsibilities of CSM without being paid as such.

a fan wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:51 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:39 pm Come on man you boys have been swift boating Old Salt for years. Why don't you all find a new playbook. The one your all using now was written by Knute Rockne. Old Salt made it crystal clear what his opinion is and I for one as a veteran of the US Military agree with him. So am I equally as guilty as the retired SM poor use of words that were identified by the Harris camp of admitting that he " misspoke" ? Why don't any of you have the intestinal fortitude to admit that the retired SM simply admit he made a mistake.

Because that's not what Vance, FoxNation, OS and others are saying....they're playing political games, and you know it.

If they REALLY cared, they'd simply ask Walz: hey man, did you serve in combat? Walz would say "no, I didn't"...and that would be the end of it.

Instead? He's called a liar who is using Stolen Valor.

And when you look at this treatment, Cradle: would you EVER run for office as a Veteran having watched this?

Walz is being treated worse than Kamala and Trump, who didn't serve a single day. In what world does that make ANY sense?

Why the need to ask? The retired SM should be knocking people out of his way to get to the microphone and clarify all on his own. He has chosen to not say anything about it and that doesn't bother you in the least? If you were facing a similar dilemma would you handle it the same way? I'm guessing that you would not.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 3:03 pm Why the need to ask? The retired SM should be knocking people out of his way to get to the microphone and clarify all on his own. He has chosen to not say anything about it and that doesn't bother you in the least? If you were facing a similar dilemma would you handle it the same way? I'm guessing that you would not.

We already told you he did just that two days ago.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/08/1 ... e-00173906

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:58 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:36 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:12 pm And not swift boated a fellow veteran.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/walz-previous ... =112833386

Tim Walz previously faced criticism over the way he characterized his military service, records show
ABC News reviewed some of Walz's past interviews, statements and speeches.
ByOlivia Rubin and Will Steakin, August 15, 2024,

In early 2016, Tim Walz sat down with CSPAN for a bipartisan discussion about his opposition to President Barack Obama's push to reduce troop levels overseas. To begin the panel, the host introduced Walz -- at the time in his fifth term as a U.S. representative -- in part by incorrectly outlining his military service.
"Enlisted in the Army National Guard at 17 and retired 24 years later as Command Sergeant Major," she said of Walz, "and served with his battalion in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan."
Walz nodded in agreement at that statement -- despite the fact that, according to military records and his own admission, he had never served in Afghanistan.

The incident is emblematic of the episodes that have drawn criticism from some Republicans over the way Walz and others have sometimes described his decades-long military service since retiring in 2005, or have not corrected others who have incorrectly described his service.

Walz has fiercely defended his service, saying at a campaign rally this week that he is "damn proud" of his military record.
"These guys have -- are even attacking me or my record of service," Walz said on Tuesday during a speech in Los Angeles. "And I just want to say, I'm proud to serve my country, and I always will be."

While there is no evidence that Walz has committed the crime of stolen valor, an ABC News review of hours of footage from his past interviews and speeches, along with years of records from his initial campaigns, shows that journalists, some of his colleagues in the National Guard, and even voters have sometimes been left with an inaccurate picture of his military service that has led to criticism dating back years.

These inaccuracies, which at times went uncorrected, include Walz not denying the statement that he served in Afghanistan, and Walz repeatedly saying that he retired with a rank he achieved but did not retire with, as well as an instance in 2018 of Walz claiming that he carried weapons of war "in war," about which the Harris-Walz campaign said that he misspoke.

During Walz's 2016 CSPAN interview, he said later in the 41-minute segment that his "guard unit backfilled to Europe" and at times his job "was to make sure the troops and their families were taken care of." But the instance underscored the ways in which descriptions of Walz's record -- which can be nuanced and complicated -- have at times been left murky to those watching.

"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," A Harris-Walz campaign spokesperson said in a statement to ABC News.

'The balloon was deflated'
Those who served in the National Guard with Walz -- or after him -- have been split in their opinions of the controversy.

Thomas Behrends, who took over Walz's battalion after Walz retired from military service in 2005, has been a vocal Walz critic for years, accusing him of using a false rank after retiring and criticizing his decision to retire before his battalion was deployed to Iraq.
"At the point when he quit, the balloon was deflated and all the soldiers out here, basically it was like one of their main senior leaders had died. They couldn't believe it," Behrends said in an interview with ABC News.

Walz has said he decided to retire in 2005 to run for Congress, and there is no indication that Walz, at that time, had been formally notified he would be deployed to Iraq. According to National Guard records, the 1st Battalion of the 125th Field Artillery received an alert order on July 14, 2005 -- two months after Walz retired from service.
...Walz appears to have been aware prior to his retirement that his unit was under consideration for deployment. Shortly after announcing his first run for Congress in March 2005, Walz issued a statement saying his unit had been notified of a "possible partial mobilization," stating that he had a "responsibility not only to ready my battalion for Iraq, but also to serve if called on."
"On Thursday, March 17 the National Guard Public Affairs Office announced a possible partial mobilization of roughly 2,000 troops from the Minnesota National Guard," Walz posted to his campaign website in 2005, according to a version viewed by ABC News via the Wayback Machine.
"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," Walz posted on the site. "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."
Walz also stated he intended to remain in the race even if he were to be deployed.
"I don't want to speculate on what shape my campaign will take if I am deployed, but I have no plans to drop out of the race. I am fortunate to have a strong group of enthusiastic supporters and a very dedicated and intelligent wife. Both will be a major part of my campaign, whether I am in Minnesota or Iraq."
The post on his 2005 campaign website ends by stating, "If called to duty, Walz would leave behind his wife Gwen and four-year-old daughter, Hope."
Walz won his congressional race that November -- a few weeks after his unit ended up being deployed.

'It's quite a title to have'
In the National Guard, Walz began serving as command sergeant major, a leadership position, in 2004, and was officially appointed to the role in April 2005, shortly before he retired from service, according to a statement from Army Col. Ruan Cochran. However Walz did not remain in the role long enough to keep the title in retirement.
Still, Walz repeatedly referred to himself as a "retired command sergeant major" for years.

In 2016, Behrends penned a private letter to Walz, thanking him for his service but imploring him to stop using the title, which he said Walz didn't earn.
"It saddens me that after your long career in the National Guard, that you did not fulfill the conditions of your promotion to Command Sergeant Major," said the letter, a copy of which was provided to ABC News. "It's quite a title to have, when it has been earned. I would hope that you haven't been using the rank for political gain, but that is how it appears."

A former battalion commander of Walz's National Guard unit also issued a scathing rebuke of the way the Minnesota governor has described his military rank since retiring and entering politics, writing on Facebook that Walz "did not earn the rank or successfully complete any assignment as an E9," referring to the governor's repeated use of the title.
"It is an affront to the Noncommissioned Officer Corps that he continues to glom onto the title. I can sit in the cockpit of an airplane, it does not make me a pilot. Similarly, when the demands of service and leadership at the highest level got real, he chose another path," wrote John Kolb, who became lieutenant colonel of his Minnesota unit shortly after Walz retired and launched his bid for Congress. When reached for comment, Kolb told ABC News that his statement "speaks for itself."

A line in Walz's bio on the Harris-Walz campaign website also initially described Walz as a "retired Command Sergeant Major in the Army National Guard," according to a review of the webpage via the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine.
The campaign later changed the wording to say Walz "served as a Command Sergeant Major."

'Artful omission'
Responding to criticism of Walz, the Harris-Walz campaign has acknowledged there have been some discrepancies in how the Minnesota governor has described his military service in the past.
The campaign told ABC News last week that Walz "misspoke" when he referred to "weapons of war that I carried in war" in a video clip from March 2018 that circulated online, in which the then-candidate for governor was shown arguing why weapons of war should not be on the streets.
"In his 24 years of service, the Governor carried, fired and trained others to use weapons of war innumerable times," the campaign said in a statement responding to accusations from Vance.

On his congressional campaign website in September 2005, according to the Wayback Machine, Walz is described as "Command Sergeant Major Walz," who retired after serving "overseas with his battalion in support of Operation Enduring Freedom." While correct, the website does not specify that Walz deployed to Italy, rather than to Iraq or Afghanistan where he may have faced combat.

Walz's website at the time also promoted multiple articles about his campaign for Congress, including headlines stating "After Hackett's Close Call, Iraq War Veterans Are in Demand" and a link to an article titled "Other Iraq War Veterans Running."

Later, Walz's campaign website for his 2018 gubernatorial bid also said Walz "joined his battalion overseas in support of Operation Enduring Freedom," without specifying that he deployed to Italy.

And although Walz reiterated last week that he's never claimed to have been in combat, some in the past criticized the way he characterized his service.
"Tim Walz is misleading us about his military service," wrote one person in the Winona Daily News in November 2006. "As Minnesota military reservists who served in Iraq, we are disappointed."
The writer said that Walz served "honorably," but claimed that through "artful omission, Walz is leaving the impression that he served in the combat zones."
In another latter to the Albert Lea Tribune, the writer said, "I also feel misled about Tim Walz's military service."
That writer pointed to "pictures he has on his Web site that make it look like he was in combat" as well as "links to articles such as 'War veterans for office' in which he was featured."
"Tim Walz is not a combat veteran and was never even stationed in the middle east," the letter said.

A quick look at the retired SMs DD Form 214 would clearly specify his rank/ pay grade at the time he retired from the National Guard. IMO that is the only thing that matters. Having been temporarily assigned as acting CSM is a discussion that will continue to keep going around and around on this forum and will still keep going nowhere. I'm certain that somewhere in a National Guard rules and regulations manuel it is spelled out somewhere if a temporary assignment to a higher rank allows you to claim that you actually achieved that rank. A good indicator IMO was he being paid as an E9 or just handling the responsibilities of CSM without being paid as such.

Oh, it went somewhere all right. You and Old Spice decided to tarnish the reputation of a 24 year veteran of the armed services. You like servicemen and service women in roles of influence and authority in this country? Just keep it up, and we will be looking at performance reviews and other silliness, in the hope that there is something, almost anything from the way this has unfolded, to use to tear down a person who volunteered to work for the nation's armed services.

My high regard for DMac is bolstered; he at least calls out the bullsh*t when he sees it. Old Spice? Party over Country POS, and the proof of it is basically mountainous at this point. You? Just an Old Spice fanboy? Or is it really OK to tarnish the reputation of folks who served? Who taught school kids? Who ran for Congress? Who ran for Governor?

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 3:08 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:58 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:36 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:12 pm And not swift boated a fellow veteran.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/walz-previous ... =112833386

Tim Walz previously faced criticism over the way he characterized his military service, records show
ABC News reviewed some of Walz's past interviews, statements and speeches.
ByOlivia Rubin and Will Steakin, August 15, 2024,

In early 2016, Tim Walz sat down with CSPAN for a bipartisan discussion about his opposition to President Barack Obama's push to reduce troop levels overseas. To begin the panel, the host introduced Walz -- at the time in his fifth term as a U.S. representative -- in part by incorrectly outlining his military service.
"Enlisted in the Army National Guard at 17 and retired 24 years later as Command Sergeant Major," she said of Walz, "and served with his battalion in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan."
Walz nodded in agreement at that statement -- despite the fact that, according to military records and his own admission, he had never served in Afghanistan.

The incident is emblematic of the episodes that have drawn criticism from some Republicans over the way Walz and others have sometimes described his decades-long military service since retiring in 2005, or have not corrected others who have incorrectly described his service.

Walz has fiercely defended his service, saying at a campaign rally this week that he is "damn proud" of his military record.
"These guys have -- are even attacking me or my record of service," Walz said on Tuesday during a speech in Los Angeles. "And I just want to say, I'm proud to serve my country, and I always will be."

While there is no evidence that Walz has committed the crime of stolen valor, an ABC News review of hours of footage from his past interviews and speeches, along with years of records from his initial campaigns, shows that journalists, some of his colleagues in the National Guard, and even voters have sometimes been left with an inaccurate picture of his military service that has led to criticism dating back years.

These inaccuracies, which at times went uncorrected, include Walz not denying the statement that he served in Afghanistan, and Walz repeatedly saying that he retired with a rank he achieved but did not retire with, as well as an instance in 2018 of Walz claiming that he carried weapons of war "in war," about which the Harris-Walz campaign said that he misspoke.

During Walz's 2016 CSPAN interview, he said later in the 41-minute segment that his "guard unit backfilled to Europe" and at times his job "was to make sure the troops and their families were taken care of." But the instance underscored the ways in which descriptions of Walz's record -- which can be nuanced and complicated -- have at times been left murky to those watching.

"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," A Harris-Walz campaign spokesperson said in a statement to ABC News.

'The balloon was deflated'
Those who served in the National Guard with Walz -- or after him -- have been split in their opinions of the controversy.

Thomas Behrends, who took over Walz's battalion after Walz retired from military service in 2005, has been a vocal Walz critic for years, accusing him of using a false rank after retiring and criticizing his decision to retire before his battalion was deployed to Iraq.
"At the point when he quit, the balloon was deflated and all the soldiers out here, basically it was like one of their main senior leaders had died. They couldn't believe it," Behrends said in an interview with ABC News.

Walz has said he decided to retire in 2005 to run for Congress, and there is no indication that Walz, at that time, had been formally notified he would be deployed to Iraq. According to National Guard records, the 1st Battalion of the 125th Field Artillery received an alert order on July 14, 2005 -- two months after Walz retired from service.
...Walz appears to have been aware prior to his retirement that his unit was under consideration for deployment. Shortly after announcing his first run for Congress in March 2005, Walz issued a statement saying his unit had been notified of a "possible partial mobilization," stating that he had a "responsibility not only to ready my battalion for Iraq, but also to serve if called on."
"On Thursday, March 17 the National Guard Public Affairs Office announced a possible partial mobilization of roughly 2,000 troops from the Minnesota National Guard," Walz posted to his campaign website in 2005, according to a version viewed by ABC News via the Wayback Machine.
"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," Walz posted on the site. "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."
Walz also stated he intended to remain in the race even if he were to be deployed.
"I don't want to speculate on what shape my campaign will take if I am deployed, but I have no plans to drop out of the race. I am fortunate to have a strong group of enthusiastic supporters and a very dedicated and intelligent wife. Both will be a major part of my campaign, whether I am in Minnesota or Iraq."
The post on his 2005 campaign website ends by stating, "If called to duty, Walz would leave behind his wife Gwen and four-year-old daughter, Hope."
Walz won his congressional race that November -- a few weeks after his unit ended up being deployed.

'It's quite a title to have'
In the National Guard, Walz began serving as command sergeant major, a leadership position, in 2004, and was officially appointed to the role in April 2005, shortly before he retired from service, according to a statement from Army Col. Ruan Cochran. However Walz did not remain in the role long enough to keep the title in retirement.
Still, Walz repeatedly referred to himself as a "retired command sergeant major" for years.

In 2016, Behrends penned a private letter to Walz, thanking him for his service but imploring him to stop using the title, which he said Walz didn't earn.
"It saddens me that after your long career in the National Guard, that you did not fulfill the conditions of your promotion to Command Sergeant Major," said the letter, a copy of which was provided to ABC News. "It's quite a title to have, when it has been earned. I would hope that you haven't been using the rank for political gain, but that is how it appears."

A former battalion commander of Walz's National Guard unit also issued a scathing rebuke of the way the Minnesota governor has described his military rank since retiring and entering politics, writing on Facebook that Walz "did not earn the rank or successfully complete any assignment as an E9," referring to the governor's repeated use of the title.
"It is an affront to the Noncommissioned Officer Corps that he continues to glom onto the title. I can sit in the cockpit of an airplane, it does not make me a pilot. Similarly, when the demands of service and leadership at the highest level got real, he chose another path," wrote John Kolb, who became lieutenant colonel of his Minnesota unit shortly after Walz retired and launched his bid for Congress. When reached for comment, Kolb told ABC News that his statement "speaks for itself."

A line in Walz's bio on the Harris-Walz campaign website also initially described Walz as a "retired Command Sergeant Major in the Army National Guard," according to a review of the webpage via the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine.
The campaign later changed the wording to say Walz "served as a Command Sergeant Major."

'Artful omission'
Responding to criticism of Walz, the Harris-Walz campaign has acknowledged there have been some discrepancies in how the Minnesota governor has described his military service in the past.
The campaign told ABC News last week that Walz "misspoke" when he referred to "weapons of war that I carried in war" in a video clip from March 2018 that circulated online, in which the then-candidate for governor was shown arguing why weapons of war should not be on the streets.
"In his 24 years of service, the Governor carried, fired and trained others to use weapons of war innumerable times," the campaign said in a statement responding to accusations from Vance.

On his congressional campaign website in September 2005, according to the Wayback Machine, Walz is described as "Command Sergeant Major Walz," who retired after serving "overseas with his battalion in support of Operation Enduring Freedom." While correct, the website does not specify that Walz deployed to Italy, rather than to Iraq or Afghanistan where he may have faced combat.

Walz's website at the time also promoted multiple articles about his campaign for Congress, including headlines stating "After Hackett's Close Call, Iraq War Veterans Are in Demand" and a link to an article titled "Other Iraq War Veterans Running."

Later, Walz's campaign website for his 2018 gubernatorial bid also said Walz "joined his battalion overseas in support of Operation Enduring Freedom," without specifying that he deployed to Italy.

And although Walz reiterated last week that he's never claimed to have been in combat, some in the past criticized the way he characterized his service.
"Tim Walz is misleading us about his military service," wrote one person in the Winona Daily News in November 2006. "As Minnesota military reservists who served in Iraq, we are disappointed."
The writer said that Walz served "honorably," but claimed that through "artful omission, Walz is leaving the impression that he served in the combat zones."
In another latter to the Albert Lea Tribune, the writer said, "I also feel misled about Tim Walz's military service."
That writer pointed to "pictures he has on his Web site that make it look like he was in combat" as well as "links to articles such as 'War veterans for office' in which he was featured."
"Tim Walz is not a combat veteran and was never even stationed in the middle east," the letter said.

A quick look at the retired SMs DD Form 214 would clearly specify his rank/ pay grade at the time he retired from the National Guard. IMO that is the only thing that matters. Having been temporarily assigned as acting CSM is a discussion that will continue to keep going around and around on this forum and will still keep going nowhere. I'm certain that somewhere in a National Guard rules and regulations manuel it is spelled out somewhere if a temporary assignment to a higher rank allows you to claim that you actually achieved that rank. A good indicator IMO was he being paid as an E9 or just handling the responsibilities of CSM without being paid as such.

Oh, it went somewhere all right. You and Old Spice decided to tarnish the reputation of a 24 year veteran of the armed services. You like servicemen and service women in roles of influence and authority in this country? Just keep it up, and we will be looking at performance reviews and other silliness, in the hope that there is something, almost anything from the way this has unfolded, to use to tear down a person who volunteered to work for the nation's armed services.

My high regard for DMac is bolstered; he at least calls out the bullsh*t when he sees it. Old Spice? Party over Country POS, and the proof of it is basically mountainous at this point. You? Just an Old Spice fanboy? Or is it really OK to tarnish the reputation of folks who served? Who taught school kids? Who ran for Congress? Who ran for Governor?

Old Salt and I never tarnished the retired SMs record or career. If anyone tarnished the retired SMs career that began the minute he made the transformation from soldier to politician. Neither Old Salt or myself put any words in his mouth. I'll call out bullchit anytime I hear it as well counselor. You are the one guilty of doing the bullchiting right now and you know it.
FTR...Old Salt was serving his country while you were sitting on your fat ass at a desk scribbling on your legal pad pretending you were Perry Mason. You probably couldn't fly a kite much less have the capability to fly a helicopter.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 3:35 pm

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 3:08 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:58 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:36 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:12 pm And not swift boated a fellow veteran.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/walz-previous ... =112833386

Tim Walz previously faced criticism over the way he characterized his military service, records show
ABC News reviewed some of Walz's past interviews, statements and speeches.
ByOlivia Rubin and Will Steakin, August 15, 2024,

In early 2016, Tim Walz sat down with CSPAN for a bipartisan discussion about his opposition to President Barack Obama's push to reduce troop levels overseas. To begin the panel, the host introduced Walz -- at the time in his fifth term as a U.S. representative -- in part by incorrectly outlining his military service.
"Enlisted in the Army National Guard at 17 and retired 24 years later as Command Sergeant Major," she said of Walz, "and served with his battalion in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan."
Walz nodded in agreement at that statement -- despite the fact that, according to military records and his own admission, he had never served in Afghanistan.

The incident is emblematic of the episodes that have drawn criticism from some Republicans over the way Walz and others have sometimes described his decades-long military service since retiring in 2005, or have not corrected others who have incorrectly described his service.

Walz has fiercely defended his service, saying at a campaign rally this week that he is "damn proud" of his military record.
"These guys have -- are even attacking me or my record of service," Walz said on Tuesday during a speech in Los Angeles. "And I just want to say, I'm proud to serve my country, and I always will be."

While there is no evidence that Walz has committed the crime of stolen valor, an ABC News review of hours of footage from his past interviews and speeches, along with years of records from his initial campaigns, shows that journalists, some of his colleagues in the National Guard, and even voters have sometimes been left with an inaccurate picture of his military service that has led to criticism dating back years.

These inaccuracies, which at times went uncorrected, include Walz not denying the statement that he served in Afghanistan, and Walz repeatedly saying that he retired with a rank he achieved but did not retire with, as well as an instance in 2018 of Walz claiming that he carried weapons of war "in war," about which the Harris-Walz campaign said that he misspoke.

During Walz's 2016 CSPAN interview, he said later in the 41-minute segment that his "guard unit backfilled to Europe" and at times his job "was to make sure the troops and their families were taken care of." But the instance underscored the ways in which descriptions of Walz's record -- which can be nuanced and complicated -- have at times been left murky to those watching.

"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," A Harris-Walz campaign spokesperson said in a statement to ABC News.

'The balloon was deflated'
Those who served in the National Guard with Walz -- or after him -- have been split in their opinions of the controversy.

Thomas Behrends, who took over Walz's battalion after Walz retired from military service in 2005, has been a vocal Walz critic for years, accusing him of using a false rank after retiring and criticizing his decision to retire before his battalion was deployed to Iraq.
"At the point when he quit, the balloon was deflated and all the soldiers out here, basically it was like one of their main senior leaders had died. They couldn't believe it," Behrends said in an interview with ABC News.

Walz has said he decided to retire in 2005 to run for Congress, and there is no indication that Walz, at that time, had been formally notified he would be deployed to Iraq. According to National Guard records, the 1st Battalion of the 125th Field Artillery received an alert order on July 14, 2005 -- two months after Walz retired from service.
...Walz appears to have been aware prior to his retirement that his unit was under consideration for deployment. Shortly after announcing his first run for Congress in March 2005, Walz issued a statement saying his unit had been notified of a "possible partial mobilization," stating that he had a "responsibility not only to ready my battalion for Iraq, but also to serve if called on."
"On Thursday, March 17 the National Guard Public Affairs Office announced a possible partial mobilization of roughly 2,000 troops from the Minnesota National Guard," Walz posted to his campaign website in 2005, according to a version viewed by ABC News via the Wayback Machine.
"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," Walz posted on the site. "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."
Walz also stated he intended to remain in the race even if he were to be deployed.
"I don't want to speculate on what shape my campaign will take if I am deployed, but I have no plans to drop out of the race. I am fortunate to have a strong group of enthusiastic supporters and a very dedicated and intelligent wife. Both will be a major part of my campaign, whether I am in Minnesota or Iraq."
The post on his 2005 campaign website ends by stating, "If called to duty, Walz would leave behind his wife Gwen and four-year-old daughter, Hope."
Walz won his congressional race that November -- a few weeks after his unit ended up being deployed.

'It's quite a title to have'
In the National Guard, Walz began serving as command sergeant major, a leadership position, in 2004, and was officially appointed to the role in April 2005, shortly before he retired from service, according to a statement from Army Col. Ruan Cochran. However Walz did not remain in the role long enough to keep the title in retirement.
Still, Walz repeatedly referred to himself as a "retired command sergeant major" for years.

In 2016, Behrends penned a private letter to Walz, thanking him for his service but imploring him to stop using the title, which he said Walz didn't earn.
"It saddens me that after your long career in the National Guard, that you did not fulfill the conditions of your promotion to Command Sergeant Major," said the letter, a copy of which was provided to ABC News. "It's quite a title to have, when it has been earned. I would hope that you haven't been using the rank for political gain, but that is how it appears."

A former battalion commander of Walz's National Guard unit also issued a scathing rebuke of the way the Minnesota governor has described his military rank since retiring and entering politics, writing on Facebook that Walz "did not earn the rank or successfully complete any assignment as an E9," referring to the governor's repeated use of the title.
"It is an affront to the Noncommissioned Officer Corps that he continues to glom onto the title. I can sit in the cockpit of an airplane, it does not make me a pilot. Similarly, when the demands of service and leadership at the highest level got real, he chose another path," wrote John Kolb, who became lieutenant colonel of his Minnesota unit shortly after Walz retired and launched his bid for Congress. When reached for comment, Kolb told ABC News that his statement "speaks for itself."

A line in Walz's bio on the Harris-Walz campaign website also initially described Walz as a "retired Command Sergeant Major in the Army National Guard," according to a review of the webpage via the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine.
The campaign later changed the wording to say Walz "served as a Command Sergeant Major."

'Artful omission'
Responding to criticism of Walz, the Harris-Walz campaign has acknowledged there have been some discrepancies in how the Minnesota governor has described his military service in the past.
The campaign told ABC News last week that Walz "misspoke" when he referred to "weapons of war that I carried in war" in a video clip from March 2018 that circulated online, in which the then-candidate for governor was shown arguing why weapons of war should not be on the streets.
"In his 24 years of service, the Governor carried, fired and trained others to use weapons of war innumerable times," the campaign said in a statement responding to accusations from Vance.

On his congressional campaign website in September 2005, according to the Wayback Machine, Walz is described as "Command Sergeant Major Walz," who retired after serving "overseas with his battalion in support of Operation Enduring Freedom." While correct, the website does not specify that Walz deployed to Italy, rather than to Iraq or Afghanistan where he may have faced combat.

Walz's website at the time also promoted multiple articles about his campaign for Congress, including headlines stating "After Hackett's Close Call, Iraq War Veterans Are in Demand" and a link to an article titled "Other Iraq War Veterans Running."

Later, Walz's campaign website for his 2018 gubernatorial bid also said Walz "joined his battalion overseas in support of Operation Enduring Freedom," without specifying that he deployed to Italy.

And although Walz reiterated last week that he's never claimed to have been in combat, some in the past criticized the way he characterized his service.
"Tim Walz is misleading us about his military service," wrote one person in the Winona Daily News in November 2006. "As Minnesota military reservists who served in Iraq, we are disappointed."
The writer said that Walz served "honorably," but claimed that through "artful omission, Walz is leaving the impression that he served in the combat zones."
In another latter to the Albert Lea Tribune, the writer said, "I also feel misled about Tim Walz's military service."
That writer pointed to "pictures he has on his Web site that make it look like he was in combat" as well as "links to articles such as 'War veterans for office' in which he was featured."
"Tim Walz is not a combat veteran and was never even stationed in the middle east," the letter said.

A quick look at the retired SMs DD Form 214 would clearly specify his rank/ pay grade at the time he retired from the National Guard. IMO that is the only thing that matters. Having been temporarily assigned as acting CSM is a discussion that will continue to keep going around and around on this forum and will still keep going nowhere. I'm certain that somewhere in a National Guard rules and regulations manuel it is spelled out somewhere if a temporary assignment to a higher rank allows you to claim that you actually achieved that rank. A good indicator IMO was he being paid as an E9 or just handling the responsibilities of CSM without being paid as such.

Oh, it went somewhere all right. You and Old Spice decided to tarnish the reputation of a 24 year veteran of the armed services. You like servicemen and service women in roles of influence and authority in this country? Just keep it up, and we will be looking at performance reviews and other silliness, in the hope that there is something, almost anything from the way this has unfolded, to use to tear down a person who volunteered to work for the nation's armed services.

My high regard for DMac is bolstered; he at least calls out the bullsh*t when he sees it. Old Spice? Party over Country POS, and the proof of it is basically mountainous at this point. You? Just an Old Spice fanboy? Or is it really OK to tarnish the reputation of folks who served? Who taught school kids? Who ran for Congress? Who ran for Governor?

Old Salt and I never tarnished the retired SMs record or career. If anyone tarnished the retired SMs career that began the minute he made the transformation from soldier to politician. Neither Old Salt or myself put any words in his mouth. I'll call out bullchit anytime I hear it as well counselor. You are the one guilty of doing the bullchiting right now and you know it.

Sorry, no. You acted as Old Spice's bagboy here to smear a 24 year veteran and school teacher. Sad. But at least you love dogs too.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 3:35 pm Neither Old Salt or myself put any words in his mouth.

Yes. You did. You told us that Walz's words "Implied" something.

That's NOT the same thing as "he said THIS".

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 3:38 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 3:35 pm

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 3:08 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:58 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:36 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:12 pm And not swift boated a fellow veteran.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/walz-previous ... =112833386

Tim Walz previously faced criticism over the way he characterized his military service, records show
ABC News reviewed some of Walz's past interviews, statements and speeches.
ByOlivia Rubin and Will Steakin, August 15, 2024,

In early 2016, Tim Walz sat down with CSPAN for a bipartisan discussion about his opposition to President Barack Obama's push to reduce troop levels overseas. To begin the panel, the host introduced Walz -- at the time in his fifth term as a U.S. representative -- in part by incorrectly outlining his military service.
"Enlisted in the Army National Guard at 17 and retired 24 years later as Command Sergeant Major," she said of Walz, "and served with his battalion in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan."
Walz nodded in agreement at that statement -- despite the fact that, according to military records and his own admission, he had never served in Afghanistan.

The incident is emblematic of the episodes that have drawn criticism from some Republicans over the way Walz and others have sometimes described his decades-long military service since retiring in 2005, or have not corrected others who have incorrectly described his service.

Walz has fiercely defended his service, saying at a campaign rally this week that he is "damn proud" of his military record.
"These guys have -- are even attacking me or my record of service," Walz said on Tuesday during a speech in Los Angeles. "And I just want to say, I'm proud to serve my country, and I always will be."

While there is no evidence that Walz has committed the crime of stolen valor, an ABC News review of hours of footage from his past interviews and speeches, along with years of records from his initial campaigns, shows that journalists, some of his colleagues in the National Guard, and even voters have sometimes been left with an inaccurate picture of his military service that has led to criticism dating back years.

These inaccuracies, which at times went uncorrected, include Walz not denying the statement that he served in Afghanistan, and Walz repeatedly saying that he retired with a rank he achieved but did not retire with, as well as an instance in 2018 of Walz claiming that he carried weapons of war "in war," about which the Harris-Walz campaign said that he misspoke.

During Walz's 2016 CSPAN interview, he said later in the 41-minute segment that his "guard unit backfilled to Europe" and at times his job "was to make sure the troops and their families were taken care of." But the instance underscored the ways in which descriptions of Walz's record -- which can be nuanced and complicated -- have at times been left murky to those watching.

"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," A Harris-Walz campaign spokesperson said in a statement to ABC News.

'The balloon was deflated'
Those who served in the National Guard with Walz -- or after him -- have been split in their opinions of the controversy.

Thomas Behrends, who took over Walz's battalion after Walz retired from military service in 2005, has been a vocal Walz critic for years, accusing him of using a false rank after retiring and criticizing his decision to retire before his battalion was deployed to Iraq.
"At the point when he quit, the balloon was deflated and all the soldiers out here, basically it was like one of their main senior leaders had died. They couldn't believe it," Behrends said in an interview with ABC News.

Walz has said he decided to retire in 2005 to run for Congress, and there is no indication that Walz, at that time, had been formally notified he would be deployed to Iraq. According to National Guard records, the 1st Battalion of the 125th Field Artillery received an alert order on July 14, 2005 -- two months after Walz retired from service.
...Walz appears to have been aware prior to his retirement that his unit was under consideration for deployment. Shortly after announcing his first run for Congress in March 2005, Walz issued a statement saying his unit had been notified of a "possible partial mobilization," stating that he had a "responsibility not only to ready my battalion for Iraq, but also to serve if called on."
"On Thursday, March 17 the National Guard Public Affairs Office announced a possible partial mobilization of roughly 2,000 troops from the Minnesota National Guard," Walz posted to his campaign website in 2005, according to a version viewed by ABC News via the Wayback Machine.
"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," Walz posted on the site. "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."
Walz also stated he intended to remain in the race even if he were to be deployed.
"I don't want to speculate on what shape my campaign will take if I am deployed, but I have no plans to drop out of the race. I am fortunate to have a strong group of enthusiastic supporters and a very dedicated and intelligent wife. Both will be a major part of my campaign, whether I am in Minnesota or Iraq."
The post on his 2005 campaign website ends by stating, "If called to duty, Walz would leave behind his wife Gwen and four-year-old daughter, Hope."
Walz won his congressional race that November -- a few weeks after his unit ended up being deployed.

'It's quite a title to have'
In the National Guard, Walz began serving as command sergeant major, a leadership position, in 2004, and was officially appointed to the role in April 2005, shortly before he retired from service, according to a statement from Army Col. Ruan Cochran. However Walz did not remain in the role long enough to keep the title in retirement.
Still, Walz repeatedly referred to himself as a "retired command sergeant major" for years.

In 2016, Behrends penned a private letter to Walz, thanking him for his service but imploring him to stop using the title, which he said Walz didn't earn.
"It saddens me that after your long career in the National Guard, that you did not fulfill the conditions of your promotion to Command Sergeant Major," said the letter, a copy of which was provided to ABC News. "It's quite a title to have, when it has been earned. I would hope that you haven't been using the rank for political gain, but that is how it appears."

A former battalion commander of Walz's National Guard unit also issued a scathing rebuke of the way the Minnesota governor has described his military rank since retiring and entering politics, writing on Facebook that Walz "did not earn the rank or successfully complete any assignment as an E9," referring to the governor's repeated use of the title.
"It is an affront to the Noncommissioned Officer Corps that he continues to glom onto the title. I can sit in the cockpit of an airplane, it does not make me a pilot. Similarly, when the demands of service and leadership at the highest level got real, he chose another path," wrote John Kolb, who became lieutenant colonel of his Minnesota unit shortly after Walz retired and launched his bid for Congress. When reached for comment, Kolb told ABC News that his statement "speaks for itself."

A line in Walz's bio on the Harris-Walz campaign website also initially described Walz as a "retired Command Sergeant Major in the Army National Guard," according to a review of the webpage via the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine.
The campaign later changed the wording to say Walz "served as a Command Sergeant Major."

'Artful omission'
Responding to criticism of Walz, the Harris-Walz campaign has acknowledged there have been some discrepancies in how the Minnesota governor has described his military service in the past.
The campaign told ABC News last week that Walz "misspoke" when he referred to "weapons of war that I carried in war" in a video clip from March 2018 that circulated online, in which the then-candidate for governor was shown arguing why weapons of war should not be on the streets.
"In his 24 years of service, the Governor carried, fired and trained others to use weapons of war innumerable times," the campaign said in a statement responding to accusations from Vance.

On his congressional campaign website in September 2005, according to the Wayback Machine, Walz is described as "Command Sergeant Major Walz," who retired after serving "overseas with his battalion in support of Operation Enduring Freedom." While correct, the website does not specify that Walz deployed to Italy, rather than to Iraq or Afghanistan where he may have faced combat.

Walz's website at the time also promoted multiple articles about his campaign for Congress, including headlines stating "After Hackett's Close Call, Iraq War Veterans Are in Demand" and a link to an article titled "Other Iraq War Veterans Running."

Later, Walz's campaign website for his 2018 gubernatorial bid also said Walz "joined his battalion overseas in support of Operation Enduring Freedom," without specifying that he deployed to Italy.

And although Walz reiterated last week that he's never claimed to have been in combat, some in the past criticized the way he characterized his service.
"Tim Walz is misleading us about his military service," wrote one person in the Winona Daily News in November 2006. "As Minnesota military reservists who served in Iraq, we are disappointed."
The writer said that Walz served "honorably," but claimed that through "artful omission, Walz is leaving the impression that he served in the combat zones."
In another latter to the Albert Lea Tribune, the writer said, "I also feel misled about Tim Walz's military service."
That writer pointed to "pictures he has on his Web site that make it look like he was in combat" as well as "links to articles such as 'War veterans for office' in which he was featured."
"Tim Walz is not a combat veteran and was never even stationed in the middle east," the letter said.

A quick look at the retired SMs DD Form 214 would clearly specify his rank/ pay grade at the time he retired from the National Guard. IMO that is the only thing that matters. Having been temporarily assigned as acting CSM is a discussion that will continue to keep going around and around on this forum and will still keep going nowhere. I'm certain that somewhere in a National Guard rules and regulations manuel it is spelled out somewhere if a temporary assignment to a higher rank allows you to claim that you actually achieved that rank. A good indicator IMO was he being paid as an E9 or just handling the responsibilities of CSM without being paid as such.

Oh, it went somewhere all right. You and Old Spice decided to tarnish the reputation of a 24 year veteran of the armed services. You like servicemen and service women in roles of influence and authority in this country? Just keep it up, and we will be looking at performance reviews and other silliness, in the hope that there is something, almost anything from the way this has unfolded, to use to tear down a person who volunteered to work for the nation's armed services.

My high regard for DMac is bolstered; he at least calls out the bullsh*t when he sees it. Old Spice? Party over Country POS, and the proof of it is basically mountainous at this point. You? Just an Old Spice fanboy? Or is it really OK to tarnish the reputation of folks who served? Who taught school kids? Who ran for Congress? Who ran for Governor?

Old Salt and I never tarnished the retired SMs record or career. If anyone tarnished the retired SMs career that began the minute he made the transformation from soldier to politician. Neither Old Salt or myself put any words in his mouth. I'll call out bullchit anytime I hear it as well counselor. You are the one guilty of doing the bullchiting right now and you know it.

Sorry, no. You acted as Old Spice's bagboy here to smear a 24 year veteran and school teacher. Sad. But at least you love dogs too.

I'm proud all day long to be on the side of Old Salt. This country will always need skilled aviators. As far as lawyers go as a collective group the country is better off without youse all.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 3:48 pm I'm proud all day long to be on the side of Old Salt. This country will always need skilled aviators. As far as lawyers go as a collective group the country is better off without youse all.

More mindless drivel from the King of Mindless Drivel. Methinks the two of you DESERVE one another.

a fan wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 3:46 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 3:35 pm Neither Old Salt or myself put any words in his mouth.

Yes. You did. You told us that Walz's words "Implied" something.

That's NOT the same thing as "he said THIS".

I implied what he said his words said. He misspoke when he claimed he carried a weapon in war. Hell I carried a variety of weapons of war for 3 years. I never said at anytime since I left the army that I ever carried a weapon in war or combat. Hell I was only a lowly E4 and I obviously understood the difference. The retired SM with 24 years of service did not. Perhaps that is what occurs when you stop thinking like a soldier and start talking like a politician? I guess clearly I'm not as prone to misspeaking as is the retired SM.

Kismet wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 3:54 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 3:48 pm I'm proud all day long to be on the side of Old Salt. This country will always need skilled aviators. As far as lawyers go as a collective group the country is better off without youse all.

More mindless drivel from the King of Mindless Drivel. Methinks the two of you DESERVE one another.

Coming from you that is a compliment. TYVM In naval speak isn't drivel the equivalent of bilge? Because bilge is what you speak.

a fan wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 3:07 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 3:03 pm Why the need to ask? The retired SM should be knocking people out of his way to get to the microphone and clarify all on his own. He has chosen to not say anything about it and that doesn't bother you in the least? If you were facing a similar dilemma would you handle it the same way? I'm guessing that you would not.

We already told you he did just that two days ago.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/08/1 ... e-00173906

That's just a dodge. A non-denial denial. He said nothing to clarify his status. No acknowledgement that he did or said anything that caused others to misinterpret or misstate his record. The campaign said he misspoke, he didn't admit that he had. Stubborn. No humility. It caught up with him. He could bluster his way through it in his home state. No such luck on the big national stage when so many of his fellow Guardsmen had been squelched for so many years. He's just powering through, as if he doesn't need to explain or further clarify his record. He should have clarified his record & made amends with his fellow MN NG soldier critics when he was a Congressman, & for sure when, as Governor, he was their CinC. Instead, he dissed them as untrained 19 year old cooks, while the biggest city in their state was still smoldering. Thanks for that, Command Master Sergeant.

good lord, he indeed dealt with all this years ago... and put it to bed.

He misspoke, as was hugely clear because of the many, many times speaking and in writing where he was totally clear about what his service was and what it was not. It was long and honorable.

But nah, let's drag it out and pretend that he wasn't clear all those other times prior and subsequently.

Shameful.

But that's where we are in this upside down country.

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 4:00 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 3:07 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 3:03 pm Why the need to ask? The retired SM should be knocking people out of his way to get to the microphone and clarify all on his own. He has chosen to not say anything about it and that doesn't bother you in the least? If you were facing a similar dilemma would you handle it the same way? I'm guessing that you would not.

We already told you he did just that two days ago.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/08/1 ... e-00173906

That's just a dodge

Great. Then throw him under the Bus.

F Walz. F everyone who served who "implied" they did more than they really did...and Republicans get to be in charge of what is "implied".

So let's get back to celebrating and supporting the man who not only didn't serve, but dodged the draft, but openly mocked you and your fellow Veterans.

Vote Republican across the board.

Still waiting for you to praise Biden for giving your crew the biggest raise they've had in 20 years. But policy doesn't matter. What matters is that the Dems are bad, and the R's who never served are flawless and deserve our full support.

Makes perfect sense. What was I thinking in criticizing your line of thought?