Hideous Hypocrisy of JD Vance on Tim Walz's Military Service (Part 2)

Friends: Welcome to another Weekend Edition of "The Pulse of Politics - USA" newsletter. Today, I'm once again addressing the pending political warfare regarding the military service of Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, the running mate of Vice President Kamala Harris.

This is a follow up to last week's edition (Part 1). But first, I want to give a special thanks to the military veterans in my LinkedIn network (listed below) who generously took the time to make their voices heard "on the record" for Part 1. Their exemplary contributions, based on exclusive interviews, have been very helpful in further clarifying and shedding light on this continuing controversial debate.

• Myles B. Caggins III is a retired U.S. Army Colonel. He is a three-tour combat veteran of the wars in Iraq and Syria. Col. Caggins serves on the board of directors of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America.
• Valarie R. Austin, U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel (retired).
• Corina DuBois, Navy vet and one of the first women to serve on combat ships.
• Len Swanson, a veteran of the Vietnam War with 14 years of service.

If you missed last weekend's edition you can view it and see the dozens of comments here. The question addressed was:

Is it unpatriotic or un-American for one veteran to castigate the service of another who received an honorable discharge?

If you are unfamiliar with this controversy involving former president Donald Trump's running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vance (a Marine vet), you can also check out the following informative article below from The Washington Post (Fact Checker) for more details:

• Assessing claims about Tim Walz's military service: Republicans are attacking the Democratic vice-presidential nominee on his retirement timing and with allegations of “stolen valor”

Proud Service

Although I have never served in the military, my late father was a veteran of the U.S. Army, 10th Mountain Division. There was never a time in my life that I heard dad speak poorly of another veteran or any branch of the U.S. Armed Forces.

Serving his nation in uniform was one of my father’s legacies. His military service inspired me to pursue a decades-long career in public service at the federal level.

My dad was always proud of his military service. He taught me to always show respect and reverence for everyone who puts on the uniform to serve America.

Dad honored ALL servicemen and women, regardless of branch, rank, length of service, or reasons for leaving (albeit with an honorable discharge).

Flag Draped Coffin

I will always vividly remember my dad’s funeral, in which honor guards draped the American flag over his coffin and played Taps, per standard operating procedure for veterans. Then they meticulously folded the flag into a precise triangle and handed it to me.

That American flag now sits prominently in a display case at home as a reminder of the importance and lasting impact of military service, as dad had taught me.

My father's service had a lasting impact on him. It taught him at a young age about the significance of defending freedom and democracy, and never denigrating the service of another veteran.

I could never fathom anyone demeaning my dad’s military service for any reason. And no one ever did.

Like so many vets, my dad was most proud on Veterans Day, when he wore his Veteran of the 10th Mountain Division shirt from the corresponding military association for which he was a member.

Therefore, like many Americans, I was shocked when Vance publicly denigrated the service of Walz — and, sadly, for pure political gain at the behest of Trump.

My Take

I view the brazen attacks by Vance on Walz's military service as a barometer of the Ohio senator's character (or lack thereof), particularly the claims of "stolen valor". Nevertheless, as Walz has even said, Vance (like all vets) deserves to be thanked for his service as a Marine who deployed to Baghdad, Iraq, in a non-combat role.

The bottom line is that all military service is honorable if carried out honorably, which is usually the case.

Vance's assertions about Walz which have proven factual are twofold (as of this writing):

• First, Walz once said he used a combat weapon during war; he did not. Walz never saw combat in wartime, according to multiple sources.
• Second, Walz embellished his rank after leaving the service by falsely claiming it was a notch higher than it otherwise would have been had he not retired.

It's still questionable whether Walz left the National Guard fully knowing his unit was going to deploy to Iraq several months thereafter.

Walz left the military to run for Congress in Minnesota's first congressional district (a long held Republican seat), which he won and held for 12 years.

Vance claims Walz knew in advance about the upcoming deployment of his unit to Iraq, and thus abandoned his troops before they headed into a combat zone -- per the accusation of "stolen valor".

But it’s debatable whether or not Walz served honorably for his full 24 years of service, even though he was awarded several medals during that time. The answer depends upon whom you ask.

Regardless of whether Walz intentionally lied or just inadvertently misspoke about the two aforementioned claims, it's notable that Trump has told tens of thousands of lies, misstatements and half-truths since he first ran for president to the present day.

Trump told more than 32,000 lies during his presidency alone, according to a tally from The Washington Post. There's no telling how many more lies Trump has told since entering national politics, both before and after his presidency.

Does the Trump-Vance campaign really have credible standing to attack Walz's veracity when the former president is a serial liar?

Final Thoughts

Vance is castigating Walz over questions surrounding military service while saying absolutely nothing about Trump's alleged dodging of draft in the Vietnam War, not to mention the host of other derogatory and malicious comments the former commander-in-chief has leveled at the military for many years.

The Harris-Walz campaign issued a statement noting that Trump "knows nothing about service to anyone or anything but himself."

Therefore, regardless of the controversy over Walz's record of service, Vance’s vicious attacks not only make him a raging hypocrite but disqualify him of being taken seriously at all (at least in my view).

How can Vance continue to attack Walz over his record of service, while simultaneously remaining eerily silent about Trump's defaming of military service?

This clear contradiction should be given serious consideration by those applauding and encouraging Vance's continued verbal assaults on Walz, who served two decades longer than Vance.

Walz should be judged on the totality of his 24-years of service, rather than on just a few isolated accusations.

WHAT DO YOU THINK? Please leave your valuable comments below.

• And if you like this newsletter, kindly consider sharing it with your social media networks on LinkedIn and elsewhere. Many thanks!

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: I'm a long-time registered independent voter who is unaffiliated with the Harris-Walz campaign or any political campaign. My experience in government and politics in the nation's capital spans 25 years, including work at The White House, the Presidential Transition Office, two winning presidential campaigns, the U.S. Congress (Office of the House Majority Leader), and two federal agencies (both as a political appointee and career civil servant).

AUTHOR'S NOTE: Thank you to the following individuals who engaged with Part I of this series by sharing their valuable comments:

cc: Alex Kouskolekas Cyndi Wilkins Stephen Plourde PHIL FRIEDMAN? Ray Mills MBA, MS Bill Stankiewicz Mark A. Holland Louise Smith KATHY POWERS Frank Feather Thomas Jackson Nicole Vames Sloane Jed Elderkin Grandmother Towut Brian Pearson