The Walz Waffle

How Much More Before Walz Becomes An Unacceptable Liability?

The Tim Walz National Guard fracas is quickly becoming a true once-in-a-lifetime political story.

By degrees, the media has been dragged almost kicking and screaming into addressing the serials “mis-statements” (the media only calls them “lies” when they are spoken by Republicans") by Kamala Harris’ VP nominee regarding his service in the Minnesota National Guard and the timing of his retirement.

The latest admission has been his belated acknowledgement that he had never actually served in combat, despite having claimed so numerous times.

"In making the case for why weapons of war should never be on our streets or in our classrooms, the Governor misspoke. He did handle weapons of war and believes strongly that only military members trained to carry those deadly weapons should have access to them, unlike Donald Trump and JD Vance who prioritize the gun lobby over our children,” the spokesperson added.

The video clip of Walz's previous remarks shows him discussing gun control and referring to his own military background. “We can make sure that those weapons of war, that I carried in war, is the only place where those weapons are at,” Walz says in the clip posted by Harris’ campaign on Tuesday.

However, Walz has done a bit more than “mis-speak” this one time. As

Alex Berenson

has reported, this particular “mis-statement” has been a recurring theme of Tim Walz’ political career:

On the mediocrity and mendacity of Tim Walz

Yet as he ran for Congress in 2006, Walz presented his time in the military in a way that could easily have fooled voters into believing he had seen combat.

On his Website, he told voters that he “served overseas with his battalion in support of Operation Enduring Freedom — ” the Afghan war. (Operation Iraqi Freedom was the official name for the Iraq war.)

Technically, Walz was not lying, at least then. His Minnesota National Guard unit had deployed to Italy in 2003, where it helped guard Air Force bases where pilots flew missions over Afghanistan.

So, yes, he had “supported” the Afghan war - though the average contractor chow hall worker at Kandahar Air Base had more to do with its success than he did, and more risk. (As someone else wrote today, Donald Trump has now faced more live fire than Walz.)

Readers should also note that Alex, as a reporter for the New York Times, filed stories from Afghanistan in 2003. Unlike Tim Walz he has been under live fire.

Yet what is perhaps most illuminating about this entire narrative arc has been the facility with which the Trump opposition research team pounced on the issue, as well as the clumsy and artless defensiveness of Kamala Harris’ campaign staff in responding to it. Even four days into the story, the Democrats are still struggling to gain control of this narrative.

It is too soon to tell how the pile-on could affect Walz’s debut, and its political salience could be muted by the fact that Walz is not at the top of the Democratic ticket. Still, Republicans are poised to continue hammering Walz’s service, alongside his handling of the covid pandemic and George Floyd protests as governor, in the hopes of dulling his potential appeal to White moderate voters in the battlegrounds of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.

What is not too soon to tell is that the story is hurting the Democrats, and is likely to continue hurting the Democrats.

Harris revealed Tim Walz as her Vice Presidential running mate Tuesday morning, August 6, ending what had been a somewhat contrived media drama over the Democrats “Veepstakes”.

At that point, the signature question from the outside appeared to be why Governor Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania was not the VP pick, given the level of anti-semitic rhetoric that had been circulating openly during the previous week.

Governor Shapiro had been the perceived front-runner in the “Veepstakes”, and had been the prohibitive betting favorite until the evening just before Harris announced she had picked Tim Walz.

However, no sooner had Harris announced her pick than the Daily Wire ran a piece noting that in 2018, during Walz’ first campaign for governor, two other members of the Minnesota National Guard—both actual retired Command Sergeants Major—had tried to raise a media ruckus over how Walz chose to end his time in the National Guard.

In an open letter posted to Facebook that year, retired Command Sergeants Major Thomas Behrends and Paul Herr wrote that Walz retired just a few months after receiving a warning order that his battalion would be deployed to Iraq – even though he told military personnel he would be going on the mission.

“On May 16^th, 2005, [Walz] quit, betraying his country, leaving the 1-125^th Field Artillery Battalion and its Soldiers hanging; without its senior Non-Commissioned Officer, as the battalion prepared for war,” Behrends and Herr wrote.

The pair wrote that Walz said he needed to retire to run for Congress, but this was untrue. Walz could have run for Congress and requested permission from the Secretary of Defense before he entered active duty, the pair claimed.

At the same time, conservative media personality Erick Erickson had a 5-minute video ready to be released on X, which he did shortly after the Harris campaign made its announcement.

As I noted at the time, the Daily Wire story did not fully detail the “stolen valor” aspect of Walz’ embellishments (the Daily Wire piece did not mention Erickson’s video), which it difficult to fully assess that explosive claim.

Even so, it was clear there was some controversy brewing around Walz.

The following day, Newsweek entered into the fray, reporting that the National Guard was taking issue with Walz’ statements.

Army Lieutenant Colonel Kristen Augé, the state public affairs officer for Minnesota National Guard, told Just the News on Wednesday that the governor did not retire as "Command Sergeant Major Walz" in 2005, as stated on Minnesota's official website, but as master sergeant "because he did not complete additional coursework at the U.S. Army Sergeants Major Academy." A soldier who does not complete the requisite coursework is automatically demoted, according to Army regulations.

As I noted that evening, one of the more damning “mis-statements” was the claim to be a retired Command Sergeant Major in his bio page on Kamala Harris’ campaign web site.

For six terms, Governor Walz represented Minnesota’s First Congressional District – a conservative-leaning district where he was only the second Democrat elected since 1890. The son of an Army veteran and a retired Command Sergeant Major in the Army National Guard himself, Walz was the ranking member on the House Veterans Affairs Committee, where he passed legislation to help stem veterans’ suicides.

Additionally, a puff piece in Bloomberg had to be corrected, having originally reported Tim Walz as being deployed to Iraq.

In a presidential campaign that’s become all about who’s “weird,” Kamala Harris’ just-announced running mate on the Democratic ticket, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, comes across as entirely—almost suspiciously—normal.

That was my impression when we first met way back in 2005, when I wrote a profile of him during his first run for Congress. Even then, national politics was becoming so warped that “normal” seemed like an exotic quality, and Walz exuded it.

At the time, the Iraq War was ongoing (and going badly), and he stood out as Command Sergeant Major Walz, a 24-year veteran of the Army National Guard, recently returned from serving in Iraq as part of Operation Enduring Freedom. He’d retired to teach high school and coach football.

This was corrected to show where Walz had actually been overseas, which was Italy.

There was no doubt even at that point there were factual problems regarding how Walz’ described his service record.

At the same time, The Washington Post waded into the story. I noted then that the Post confirmed that Walz’ was indeed “incorrect” about his service record.

Walz definitely has problems with his military record. These quotes are from a Washington Post piece:

The Harris campaign, in response to those comments, said in its statement to The Post that Walz carried, fired and trained others how to use “weapons of war innumerable times.” It declined to address why Walz claimed incorrectly to have done so in war.

“Governor Walz would never insult or undermine any American’s service to this country — in fact, he thanks Senator Vance for putting his life on the line for our country,” the statement said. Vance, a Marine Corps veteran, served in Iraq in a noncombat role for six months beginning in fall 2005.

Later there’s this little statement:

Though Walz did achieve the rank of command sergeant major, it was a provisional rank until he completed required coursework for senior leaders, National Guard officials said. He did not do so by the time he departed the military and his retirement rank reverted to master sergeant on May 15, 2005, officials said. Walz retired the next day.

The Harris campaign declined to address why Walz has inaccurately said he retired as one. He has sometimes called himself a “former command sergeant major,” which is accurate.

The Washington Post is using its very best newspeak to avoid saying “Walz lied” but the end result is the same: The Washington Post is documenting two instances at least of Tim Walz lying about his National Guard service.

That Walz was in trouble was confirmed the following morning, August 8, when Walz “revised” his bio page on the campaign website.

Tim Walz is feeling the heat. He’s scrambling to “correct” his “mis-statements”.

As of 06:06:59 GMT today, this was how Tim Walz framed his National Guard Service on the Kamala Harris campaign web site:

For six terms, Governor Walz represented Minnesota’s First Congressional District – a conservative-leaning district where he was only the second Democrat elected since 1890. The son of an Army veteran and a retired Command Sergeant Major in the Army National Guard himself, Walz was the ranking member on the House Veterans Affairs Committee, where he passed legislation to help stem veterans’ suicides.

web.archive.org/web/20240808060659/http…

By 09:10:58 GMT today, the paragraph had been revised to read as follows:

For six terms, Governor Walz represented Minnesota’s First Congressional District – a conservative-leaning district where he was only the second Democrat elected since 1890. The son of an Army veteran who served as a command sergeant major, Walz was the ranking member on the House Veterans Affairs Committee, where he passed legislation to help stem veterans’ suicides.

web.archive.org/web/20240808091058/http…

Tim Walz is provably engaging in a bit of Internet revisionism.

That damage had been done was confirmed a few hours later, when Politico and other sites reported that Walz had updated his campaign bio page.

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 axed a reference to Walz as a “retired command sergeant major” and now says 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. Walz, the governor of Minnesota, served for 24 years in the National Guard before retiring in 2005 from the military to run for the U.S. House, where he became the most senior enlisted soldier to serve in Congress.

When I first commented on this, I speculated that this would be damaging to Walz mainly by neutralizing him as an attack vector against Donald Trump and JD Vance. Walz’ presence on the ticket with him now having been confirmed as embellishing his service record would, in my estimation, blunt several probable lines of attack against the Republicans.

What I did not expect was for corporate media to want to keep the story alive. Yet that is what happened next, with CNN reporter Brienna Keilar attempting to spin up an issue out of JD Vance not having been in combat himself.

Vance, who served as a U.S. Marine in Iraq, has taken aim at Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as questions have been swirling over how he represented his military service since he was tapped by Vice President Harris as her running mate. 

But, according to CNN's Brianna Keilar, Vance "may be an imperfect messenger" on the issue.

"Because we have, as you introduced him, as a combat correspondent, which is what [Vance's] title was," Keilar told her CNN colleague Dana Bash Thursday. "But when you dig a little deeper into that, he was a public affairs specialist, someone who did not see combat, which certainly the title ‘combat correspondent,' kind of gives you a different impression. So he may be the imperfect messenger on that."

This was, of course, a perfectly asinine remark to make. For starters, “combat correspondent” was JD Vance’ Military Occupational Specialty in the Marine Corps.

Vance enlisted in the Corps as a combat correspondent, or 4341 military occupational specialty, according to his service record, which was provided to Military.com by the service on Monday. He served for four years, from 2003 to 2007.

Fox News even pointed out that Vance had never claimed to have been in combat.

Vance told reporters Wednesday, "I served in a combat zone. I never said that I saw a firefight myself, but I've always told the truth about my Marine Corps service. That's the difference."

While CNN on the surface was attacking JD Vance, there was no denying that, as I again noted, the attack had the collateral effect of keeping Walz’ statements alive for at least another news cycle.

But Keilar also allows the question to turn back onto Walz’ misrepresentations of his own National Guard service—specifically Walz’ own intimations that he did see combat when he did not.

Is CNN milking the Tim Walz story for another round of the news cycle or two? Yes. Are they doing it for ratings? Almost certainly.

Is it keeping a damaging and distnctly anti-Kamala Harris narrative alive? Ultimately, yes. Whether that is the intent or merely coincidental collateral damage we are left to speculate on our own.

Newsweek, also under the auspices of a JD Vance “attack” piece, reiterated Walz’ mis-statements.

Speaking to reporters in Michigan on Wednesday, Donald Trump's running mate accused Walz of "stolen valor," of having "lied" about serving in a war and of "abandoning" his unit.

Walz, who spent 24 years in the National Guard, left in 2005 months before the battalion he led was notified that it would to be deployed to Iraq. Vance also appeared to reference previous comments from Walz in which the governor said, "We can make sure that those weapons of war, that I carried in war, is the only place where those weapons were at."

"Well, I wonder Tim Walz, when were you ever in war?" Vance said. "What was this weapon that you carried into war given that you abandoned your unit right before they went to Iraq, and he has not spent a day in a combat zone?"

As with Fox News, Newsweek also noted that Vance never claimed to have been in combat. Vance had made that plain in his memoirs, Hillbilly Elegy.

Vance has said he never saw real combat during his time in the Marine Corps, and he wrote about his experiences in his bestselling memoirs Hillbilly Elegy.

"As a public affairs marine, I would attach to different units to get a sense of their daily routine," Vance wrote. "Sometimes I'd escort civilian press, but generally I'd take photos or write short stories about individual marines or their work."

In other words, both CNN and Newsweek wound up applying more heat to Tim Walz than JD Vance, and in no small part because both stories confirmed that JD Vance had not embellished his military record, while Tim Walz had unmistakably embellished his National Guard record.

This brings us to the latest reporting, that Tim Walz’ “mis-spoke” on a video, as noted above.

At the same time, Brianna Keilar had to moderate her earlier remarks about JD Vance.

"Informed observers connected to politics or the military, myself included, have noted that the Trump campaign is 'swiftboating' Tim Walz. Attacks on JD Vance's service are also offensive," Keilar began a monologue on Friday. "JD Vance served honorably in Iraq, a combat zone where anything can happen and frequently does. As he said in his book, he was, quote, ‘lucky to escape any real fighting.’ That doesn't make his service less than. ‘Lucky,’ he says. And luck is often what makes the difference in a combat zone or even a training mission. That today is not your day." 

While the CNN reporter was eating her slice of humble pie, a Washington Post “fact checker” was concluding that Walz’ statement about carrying a weapon “in war” was “sloppy and false”. Perhaps eve more damning, however, was that WaPo also documented that Walz knew his unit was about to be deployed to Iraq in 2005, had even made statements indicating he would deploy with his unit if called up—and then retired anyway.

Walz knew that he might soon be deployed to Iraq. However, he had served nearly a quarter-century in the guard and had already announced he was considering a congressional race. He has said he could not do both, and so chose to run for Congress. Whether he abandoned his troops is a matter of perspective, but it is noteworthy that his retirement request was not blocked.

What is particularly damning is that Walz’ congressional campaign issued a press release in March of 2005 stating he would deploy to Iraq if called up.

When asked about his possible deployment to Iraq Walz said, "I do not yet know if my artillery unit will be part of this mobilization and I am unable to comment further on specifics of the deployment."

Although his tour of duty in Iraq might coincide with his campaign for Minnesota's 1st Congressional seat, Walz is determined to stay in the race. "As Command Sergeant Major I have a responsibility not only to ready my battalion for Iraq, but also to serve if called on. I am dedicated to serving my country to the best of my ability, whether that is in Washington DC or in Iraq."

"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."

Despite this statement, Walz retired from the National Guard in May 2005.

However, the timing of his retirement did not stop Walz from associating himself with combat duty almost immediately, as this video clip of Nancy Pelosi honoring Tim Walz for his service “on the battlefield” clearly demonstrates.

Much as with Bloomberg reporter Joshua Green’s earlier mistake about Walz having deployed to Iraq rather than Italy, one is left to wonder how Pelosi received the mistaken impression Walz had seen combat.

There is no doubt, however, that Walz himself is the source of the misrepresentations regarding his retirement rank. In a letter to the editor of the Mankato Free Press, Walz responded to claims during his 2006 Congressional campaign that he had embellished his record by….embellishing his record.

For the record, I served 24 years in the Army National Guard and retired as a command sergeant major in May of 2005. I served in three NATO training missions to the Arctic and deployed in support of Operation Enduring Freedom, serving in Italy in 2003-2004.

As has already been noted, Walz retired at the rank of Master Sergeant, not Command Sergeant Major.

This ongoing issue is also creating a stir among the families of servicemen killed in Iraq. The UK’s Daily Mail interviewed the mother of one of the young men from Walz’ own National Guard unit who was killed by an IED in Iraq, who has slammed Walz as a “coward”.

Tim Walz, who would go on to be Kamala Harris' running mate, left his Minnesota National Guard unit two months before it deployed - and some will never trust him again.

That includes Miller's mother who delivered a damning verdict on Walz's character, accusing him of taking the 'coward's way out' and 'running away' by opting to campaign for Congress instead of going to Iraq to face danger with her son.

In an emotional interview with DailyMail.com, nearly two decades after 19-year-old Kyle's death, Kathy Miller said: ‘I don’t think it’s fair that (Walz) takes credit when he didn’t step up to the plate.

It is perhaps remarkable that all of this has blown up in just the past four days, since Walz was announced as Kamala Harris’ running mate.

Yet it is also a testament to the Trump campaign’s opposition research staff. Tim Walz was one of the names being bandied about by Kamala Harris’ staff, and the Trump campaign has clearly done its homework on Walz. As the very first story in the Daily Wire demonstrated, Donald Trump’s team was ready to take on Walz. Moreover, Erick Erickson’s video was not something that could be produced in just a few hours—it clearly had been produced prior to Harris’ making the announcement.

Amazingly, Harris’ own staff failed completely in vetting Walz, as they were caught completely flatfooted by the charges. Instead of responding adroitly to the charges, and perhaps in particular not putting repeating the erroneous claim that Walz retired as a command sergeant major on the campaign website, the Harris campaign at first simply hunkered down and failed to respond to the accusations. Only when that failed did they revise Walz’ bio page—but by then the damage was done, and corporate media was going to report that the change was being made.

Now comes the “admission” from Walz that he “mis-spoke” when he claimed to have carried a weapon of war “in war”.

Yet if Walz “mis-spoke” during that video, then he also “mis-spoke” when he was interviewed by Bloomberg reporter Joshua Green. If Walz “mis-spoke” during that video, then he also “mis-spoke” when he made mention to Nancy Pelosi of his military carrer.

Even worse, for all the times that Walz has clearly mis-spoken, as of this writing JD Vance has not been alleged to have mispoken. Brianna Keilar has even gone on record to walk back her criticisms of JD Vance for not having been in combat.

One does not have to be a committed Trump supporter to see that, on this issue at least, Donald Trump’s team has clearly carried the day. They did their homework on Tim Walz, and did so much better than Kamala Harris’ team did. As a result, Trump and Vance have succeeded in putting corporate media very much on the defensive.

The question now is whether or not this issue is becoming large enough to drive Tim Walz off the ticket. At the moment, there do not appear to be any concerted efforts to displace Walz, but the longer this story persists the worse it is for both Harris and Walz.

Harris and Walz are certainly not helping themselves with their inability to get in front of this story. Walz has not yet put forward any sort of explanation or “mea culpa” capable of fully addressing the issue in all its dimensions. Instead, both he and Harris have sought to duck the question, prevaricating and waffling before conceding that Trump’s people have been right all along.

Will the Walz Waffle be enough to sink Harris’ Presidential aspirations? It has already proved damaging. Time will soon tell how much more damage there is to come.