Commentary: Big Tent Ideas

WILL THIBEAU AND WADE MILLER: Tim Walz’s Dishonorable Retirement And Stolen Valor

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, the Democratic vice-presidential candidate, campaigning in Phoenix, Ariz., Aug. 9, 2024. (Screen Capture/CSPAN)

For almost 20 years, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz has routinely lied about and misrepresented his military service for political gain and public admiration.

The steady accumulation of facts over the last few weeks makes it undeniable that Walz wanted his supporters to believe he was a retired Command Sergeant Major (CSM) and combat veteran with deployments to theaters of war. A respectable service record was tainted by Walz’ actions before and since his retirement.

Walz retired as a Sergeant Major (SGM), and his formal promotion to CSM was rejected after he misled his chain of command in a disgraceful manner. He signaled his intention to serve as a CSM and to deploy with his unit — a deployment that would have constituted his only deployment into a combat zone — and then took actions to avoid that combat deployment. He explicitly and brazenly engaged in “stolen valor” — the fraudulent representation of military honor — to achieve status and respect he does not deserve.

In a 2018 speech on gun confiscation measures, Walz made it clear that the “weapons of war that I carried in war” should be unavailable for civilian ownership. This was undeniably stolen valor, as Walz never served in combat, nor was he ever deployed to a region that could be considered a combat zone. This was so obviously stolen valor that even Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign had to issue a statement claiming that he “misspoke.”

The closest Walz came to war was a training rotation in Italy while Operation Enduring Freedom was taking place in Afghanistan. Italy was as much a part of Operation Enduring Freedom as bases like Ft. Benning or Ft. Bragg in the United States, and obviously none of those domestic bases are in active combat regions. But that did not stop Walz’ allusions to his wartime experience in the Army.

Walz exercised an all-too common obfuscation in describing his service to make it seem as if he spent meaningful time in harm’s way. In a 2007 congressional hearing on post-traumatic stress, Walz explained how his unit, once deployed “in support of OEF,” came back and received insufficient support for the treatment of combat-related traumatic disorders. Walz strongly implied that he and his team experienced combat-related stress that justified treatment for PTSD which they were denied. Walz and his unit bore no risk from combat, but Walz knew he could get away with colluding details to create the impression of deployment experience he never earned.

Walz did not correct then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi when she labeled him as a “battlefield” veteran in 2007, nor did Walz make clear on CSPAN in 2008 that his unit never deployed to Afghanistan, when the host explicitly introduced him as having served there.

It gets worse though. Walz fled service in the National Guard once he heard of a planned deployment to Iraq. Years later, after he abandoned the troops he was entrusted to lead, Walz claimed status as a “retired Command Sergeant Major,” even to the point of emblazoning that rank insignia on his congressional challenge coin. This is no small matter, or trite concern of military jargon.

A CSM is a unique senior enlisted rank given to soldiers who have the senior-most enlisted leadership role over a large Army unit. These leaders go through unique selection and training, earn more money and have tremendous career prospects after service. It is the difference between leading a sales team within a company and leading the entire company.

Walz was given a Command Sergeant Major billet with the understanding he would pursue the required training to formally receive the accompanying rank, and then lead men in combat in Iraq. It is common for leaders placed in such positions to be “frocked” (allowed to wear the next higher rank insignia) without formally having been promoted, based on the expectation they would fulfill the professional and educational obligations required of leaders with this rank before their date of formal promotion is finalized. Walz was never officially promoted to the rank of Command Sergeant Major.

Walz’ unit was informed of the potential for a deployment into a combat zone. At this point his chain of command approached him to determine his commitment to fulfilling his duties as a frocked CSM for the expected notice of deployment. At that time, Walz indicated he was committed to the deployment. However, as the date of deployment drew closer, he went around and above his own chain of command to sneak in a retirement package in hopes of not having to deploy. His chain of command has since publicly stated that, had Walz followed the proper chain of command in making such a request, they likely would have denied his request, given his importance to the pending deployment and his prior commitment to participating in it.

As we now know, once Walz heard of his unit’s pending deployment in the fall of 2004, he, as the senior leader of the organization, ditched the unit. As a result, Walz never completed the coursework and actions necessary to be formally promoted to CSM, and therefore was denied use of that rank insignia and was retired at the last rank he had attained, Sergeant Major (SGM). In full knowledge of his own rank status at the time, it is notable that he still attempted to claim he was a CSM on his retirement paperwork and in public appearances in subsequent years. Even while still in uniform, Walz made a habit of pretending to be someone he was not.

Walz’s partner in leadership made the point as clear as possible. “When the demands of service and leadership got real at the highest level, he [Walz] chose another path.”

There are many instances since 2006 of Walz claiming to be a “retired CSM” even though he was retired as an SGM. Claims of this nature were even made in a campaign ad for his run for Congress. The same claim of being a retired CSM was made by Walz in front of a VFW post when Walz was a member of Congress and as a Veteran Affairs committee member. When asked in 2010 whether the 30,000-troop surge worked in Afghanistan, Walz stated: “Well, it’s not a hypothetical for me, I’ve done that,” indicating his immediate experience with the surge.

Walz is a self-aggrandizing valor thief, by any definition, and his service record reveals he is uninterested in the genuine sacrifice so many Americans offered at the altar of our nation’s interests. There are genuine patriots in both parties who have served honorably and who have reflected on their own service honestly and honorably.

Republican Rep. Dan Crenshaw of Texas and Democrat Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois were each mutilated in combat, and are saluted for their sacrifices, while many other military veterans in Congress served in support roles and are also respected for their service. Had Walz not abandoned his unit through deceptive means to avoid a combat deployment, and then subsequently lied about his own service in a manner that certainly constitutes stolen valor, he would have merited the esteem that is due to all honorably serving veterans, regardless of their political views.

What we already know to be true about Walz is enough empirical evidence to factually level the accusation of stolen valor. A mother of a fallen soldier in Walz’s unit claimed he took the “coward’s way out.” The chaplain of his unit claimed: “To drop out after a (warning order) is issued is cowardly.” Walz’s Battalion Commander said: “It is an affront to the noncommissioned officer corps that he continues to glom onto the title (of CSM).”

Should the media do their jobs, we will probably see more instances of stolen valor by Walz in the coming days.

Will Thibeau is an Army combat veteran, former infantry officer, and the Director of the American Military Project at the Center for the American Way of Life.

Wade Miller is a Marine combat veteran, former infantryman, and the Executive Director of Citizens for Renewing America.

Between the two of them, they have a combined 5 combat deployments.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.

(Featured image credit: Screen Capture/CSPAN)