Kamala Harris selects Tim Walz as VP

Again. He was a CSM at the time he retired. To many people that wouldn't be dishonest to say you retired as a CSM. He was a CSM and he retired.

Huge props to the Harris campaign for making the change to avoid people being overly pedantic and getting hung up on a non-issue. Way to go Harris team. Shame on anyone carrying water for the Swiftboat for Truth guy.

 

Walz’s deployment in Italy during Operation Enduring Freedom was a support mission. What did he do, carry a gun from the armory to inspection? Italy wasn't a battlefield. Comparing him to Trump or Vance isn’t the point, he should have not exaggerated. You'd call out Trump for the same thing and probably already have. Trump shouldn't do it and neither should other candidates on presidential tickets.

That tweet is from 2018, over a decade after retiring, and he’s still saying he’s a "retired CSM." Come on, man. Let’s be real about this and leave it at that

 

Exactly. Let's be real about it.

 

Ugh

Not only did they deserved to be pepper sprayed, they asked for it as a price for their broadcasting their message.

 

For retirement pay determination,
Walz's rank is considered Master Sergeant
(versus his last obtained rank of Command Sergeant Major)
since Walz had not finished the CSM education requirements and
had not held that position for three years.

Thus, Walz retired as a Command Sergeant Major and
his retirement pay is based on the Master Sergeant rank.

ETA:
Will @Scarface281 STFU? My guess is no. That would require for him to read and understand ... The Swiftboating of Walz is Sick, Inacurate, and Will Fail. It is easier to be shallow and disengenus.

 

Swift Boaters for Vance

 

I've given my take, and now you have with yours.

I did not serve. If you did, I'm willing to hear out your take a little further.

Here's one vet's take on this.

 

https://www.rollingstone.com/politi...ely-accused-stolen-valor-jd-vance-1235075718/

Vance’s claim that Walz abandoned his unit to avoid deployment to Iraq — which has been echoed throughout the right — was directly countered by Army Lt. Col. Ryan Rossman, director of operations for the Minnesota National Guard, who spoke to HuffPost.

The unit “received an alert order for mobilization to Iraq on July 14, 2005,” Rossman said, two months after Walz retired. According to CNN, Walz first filed his paperwork to run for Congress in January of that same year, and — as several veterans have noted — the administrative process of a military retirement typically takes several months before approval. His unit would not deploy to Iraq until March 2006.

Vance also accused Walz of feigning a record in active combat: “[Walz] said — and he was making a point about gun control — he said, ‘We shouldn’t allow weapons that I used in war to be on America’s streets.’ Well, I wonder, Tim Walz, when you ever in war?”

The senator actually misquoted Walz in his screed. In the clip Vance was referencing, Walz says that he “carried” weapons of war, not that he “used” them, and that “in war is the only place where those weapons are at.” Given that Operation Enduring Freedom was a part of the post-9/11 War on Terror, and that Walz was deployed to Italy under it and likely had a service weapon, the claim that he is engaging in “stolen valor” holds little water.
​

 

First off. I will say it's right to retire when he likes when he has done his 20.... If it was an issue his commanders would have issues a Stop Loss.. But they didn't so really the case is closed right there..

As I stated before, you have people who seek revenge even in the military at all angles...

ok I found this from the Harris campaign

“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.”

There is nothing wrong with that statement... it's all true...

So here is what seems to be some of the hoopla.. "The Harris-Walz campaign on its website initially called Walz a “retired Command Sergeant Major” but then updated his biography to say he “served as a command sergeant major.”

Basically they need to use his true rank.. But the individuals that are writing stuff up for his bio are non-military and they think this is ok.. It's not and Waltz should step in and correct them.

As far as the crap about him abandoning his men.. That's BULL CRAP... Waltz was not trained as Seal, Green Beret, Devil Dog, Recon, PJ, Combat Controller or etc.. He was Army National Guard.. Now is that bad.. No it's not.. But he was not trained for combat like the ones I just mentioned.

Every individual that joins the military will see combat.. Only the ones who's MOS/AFSC will see combat...

T_Man

 

AP: "Harris’ campaign has referred to Walz as a 'retired Command Sergeant Major,' one of the top ranks for an enlisted soldier. He did, in fact, achieve that rank, but personnel files show he was reduced in rank months after retiring."

Politico: "Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign updated its online biography of running mate Tim Walz’s military service amid Republican efforts to question his record in the Army National Guard. On its website, the Harris campaign removed a reference to Walz as a 'retired command sergeant major' and now states that he once served at the command sergeant major rank—a small change that nonetheless reflects his true rank at retirement from the Army National Guard."

He retired as a CSM. Claiming he retired as a CSM is accurate but can be misleading since he was reduced by one rank months after retiring. The Harris campaign changed his bio from "retired Command Sergeant Major" to "once served at command sergeant major rank."

It is misleading to refer to him as a CSM now, as that is no longer his rank. It is also misleading to use "retired CSM" since that doesn’t reflect his updated rank. However, it is not misleading to state that he "once served at the CSM rank."

I'd also like to respond to your last comment about representation.

Clear and honest representation is indeed crucial in politics and public discourse. It's a principle that, if held in high regard, would be incompatible with supporting certain political figures known for frequent misrepresentations (i.e., Trump).

Corrections serve several important purposes:

1. Addressing misinformation: When information isn't accurately represented, whether due to intentional deception or honest mistakes, corrections are necessary and beneficial.
2. Challenging false assertions: It's important to contest claims that are demonstrably incorrect, especially when they come from influential figures.
3. Clarifying technical truths: Sometimes, information can be technically accurate but potentially misleading without proper context. Clarification in these cases is valuable.
4. Providing context: Even completely accurate information can sometimes be used out of context for political purposes. Offering additional context can prevent the misuse of facts.

In essence, correcting or clarifying information serves multiple purposes, all aimed at promoting a more informed and honest public dialogue. The key is to approach these corrections with integrity, focusing on facts rather than partisan motivations.

From what I have read, the correction in this case aligns more with points #3 and #4—clarifying technical truths (though potentially misleading) and providing additional context.

Lastly, we need to hold everyone to high standards of truth and honesty. In this election, it's clear which campaign consistently lies and doesn’t attempt to correct those lies, but instead doubles down on them.

 

News flash...

Neither one saw any combat action...

Again, Waltz just needs to keep it real.. I mean to serve over 20 years no matter if it's FT or PT is honorable enough right there.. Also to make a rank as SGM is very impressive.. Most people don't understand how hard it is to make the rank of MSG.. So to go beyond that is salute...

T_Man

 

I listened to an interview with Walz’s CO at the time of Walz’s retirement. He says Walz was fully entitled to his retirement and has no quibble with his rank. What he wasn’t happy about was that Walz went over his head to request his retirement at a time when the unit was starting to train for deployment and felt Walz wasn’t straightforward with him.

He did acknowledge that at the time Walz retired the unit hadn’t received orders to deploy but they had been told to prepare.

 

Simply put.. they stated that deployment was 1 to 2 years out...

The CO is PISSED that Waltz went over his head and he's holding a grudge for that.... Petty BS...

The Harris Campaign and Waltz just need to make sure they keep everything on the up and up.. just that simple..

T_Man

 

So he ran and ditched his peers when it got serious?

 

If there is a debate she agreed to on Fox, then why is this an issue?

Harris also has taken questions from the media.

 

Again will note that the GOP strategy is to go after over the top personal attacks than address policy.

 

Sure. Forget that he had already served 24 years and had been deployed already. More than you or I had done for this country

 

Wth, they arrange or bill an "exclusive interview" but doesn't let the man speak his entire piece or alot time in a 24hr news channel with multiple sub channels for an extended interview.

They cut him off when he rebutt the charge that Walz didn't know for sure. He was high enough to know more than others.

****ing clown show news org