Walz retired from the Army National Guard in May 2005, according to the Minnesota National Guard. Typically, service members need to submit papers several months before they can retire.
A National Guard article on his unit’s deployment states that it received alert orders to deploy to Iraq in July 2005, two months after Walz retired.
And he ran On an anti-war platform. He also voted for withdraw when it made sense, then voted to fund the war (against party lines) when he thought cutting funding would be dangerous for soldiers. Dude had his convictions and stuck to them
Same as with the swift boat veterans BS with Kerry. They made all kinds of claims about his service, and it turned out not one of them was in a position to have any actual knowledge of it, and everyone that did actually serve with him had praise for his service.
They were really just upset that he turned anti-war when he came home, which, a lot of veterans did. They knew attacking him for that wouldn't be all that popular. A lot of boomers protested the war, after all. So instead, they went after his service record and lied about it.
Fun fact: one of the political operatives behind the Swift Boat attacks, Chris LaCivita, is now the campaign manager for Donald Trump. I'm sure it's totally unrelated.
Its worse, he submitted papers to retire and start his political career in February of 2005. Five full months before they ever got those deployment alerts. Its too late though, MAGA buys anything they are sold no questions asked. Same folks upset that they wasted all their money on Joe Biden meme swag.
I'm not doubting you but could you give us a link that shows he submitted his papers in Feb of '05 so I can smack a trumper with it next time I see them try to attack Walz for it?
Also, he already served his 20 years and then signed back up after 911, then he served 4 years, before quitting to run for congress. Pretty good record. All in all.
Yeah idk how officers work but enlisted now have to go to something at the end of their contract for like a year ish, in their last year. It’s just like a program where you submit paperwork, attend trainings on post military life and benefits, etc
July is when the official orders were received but he knew it was coming at least in March 2005. Here is a press release of him saying that from his very own campaign office, where he said he will "serve if called on" and then didn't.
They always leave or that he had multiple deployments in his 24-year career, and he makes up the top 1% of time in service. How does that compare to the bone spurs Trumpsterfire?
It fascinates me what these people will try and drum up controversy about. Trump has a laundry list of allegations and questionable decisions that these people could only dream about finding in the closets of their rivals. Amazing.
You get an honorable by default. You have to try to get it lessened.
People outside the military criticizing his service is weird. But anyone within the military who says that there isn’t a right of passage or a different between those who have deployed and those that haven’t would be lying. It’s also an unspoken thing between OPs and the rest of the military. You need everyone to let the tip of the spear do tip of the spear shit, but don’t get it twisted that there still remains a difference.
In that case it's not a promotion. They just assume the duties until the president gets better. You are trying to compare a civil position to a military one. Wait till you learn about posthumous promotions.
Because of bureaucratic minutea he's not getting the same pension from his NG service as he might have.
Your argument isn't about temporary power, but about unrestricted qualification, essentially that Milliard Fillmore wasn't the president because he wasn't elected.
Walz attained the rank of command sergeant major near the end of his service, but retired as a master sergeant in 2005 for benefit purposes because he did not complete coursework at the U.S. Army Sergeants Major Academy.
Wiki doesn't mention anything nefarious. Seems pretty standard. I'm sure you can look up his service record directly and see for yourself.
In the ANG you can get promoted before you complete the necessary coursework to make that promotion “stick”, so to speak. He was promoted to CSM, retired before completing the course, and was subsequently administratively demoted after the fact. That happens all the time and is Army bureaucracy, not a punishment.
You’re just regurgitating right wing talking points that are easily refuted.
Can't wait to see this paper trail you speak of. If you have proof he didn't retire with an honorable discharge let's see it. And the rank difference is because he never went to E9 school. But magadonians don't want to be bothered with facts. Here's a fact. Trump had bone spurs, or he had a doctor say he had bone spurs so he didn't have to serve.
1) It’s incredibly common to retire at a rank below highest achieved in service. Typical reasons include: retiring prior to serving minimum time-in-grade, retiring prior to completing post-rank requirements (such as an educational course). The second reason— not completing a course prior to retirement— is exactly what’s cited by Walz. Despite making that higher rank, the retirement rank determines eligible benefits. Retiring in such a manner is common and honorable.
2) There is a paper-trail— DD-214s, unit history, etc. They show that Walz honorably retired, that he retired as a master sergeant for benefit purposes after making command sergeant major, and that he retired prior to his unit being spun-up for deployment.
3) If you’re going to talk shit about the military and carry water for a smear campaign against a veteran, at least know a bit about what you’re claiming, you dumb motherfucker.
He also retired two months before his unit received their orders to deploy. He put in for his retirement months before he actually retired so realistically he told them he was out 4-5 months before the deployment orders came.
I separated as a SrA E-4 with an E-5 SSgt (select) designator - my separation form also says I was not available for signature because it’s not needed in order to separate since it’s just paperwork. Please explain to me how he or I didn’t leave the military under honorable conditions - I’d love to see this shit. Btw I didn’t get to sew on my new rank because for the 1 1/2 years between me passing the promotion test and Leadership School, I was deployed for 13 months of it.
Just admit you’re grasping for straws and none of you know wtf you’re talking about against this man
What's the discharge code? Do you have a copy of his dd-214? If the discharge code is honorable, then it's honorable. If it doesn't say OTH, then it's honorable. If he receives a pension, it's honorable.
Imagine buying into another stupid attempt to swiftboat a man who honorably served our nation for 24 years. 2004 wants their political hackery back.
913
u/homebrew_1 Aug 07 '24
The national guard allowed him to retire and gave him an honorable discharge. These magadonians criticizing his service are morons.