Author Topic: Integrity  (Read 48081 times)

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Integrity
« Reply #225 on: March 15, 2016, 10:08:50 AM »
But I do agree about Trump.  It's a little spooky how blatant he is with dishonesty and how he completely gets away with it.  Check out the clip below and how Megyn Kelly takes apart his claim about Trump University. 

Trump's supporters will NOT BELIEVE any source which trump has demonized.

Think about that.   Anyone who has a feud with trump - they discount their words.  Megyn Kelly delivers a perfectly detailed explanation of why Trump's claims were complete lies... BUT since she's involved in a feud with Trump, his supporters will not even look at the evidence.  They just respond "oh, of course she will make up lies, she hates him!"

They're ignorant.  His base voters are ignorant and emotional driven.  You guys let the tea party fester and this is the result - people proud of being uneducated but they sure are angry.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Integrity
« Reply #226 on: March 24, 2016, 10:49:35 AM »
This woman is incredibly dishonest.


Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Integrity
« Reply #227 on: May 24, 2016, 11:32:28 AM »
The level of dishonesty by these Obama representatives is staggering. 

Fed Judge Blasts DOJ Lawyers for Lying in Court to Defend Obama Amnesty
MAY 23, 2016
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2016/05/fed-judge-blasts-doj-lawyers-lying-court-defend-obama-amnesty/

https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/files/epress/files/2016/2016-05-19_order.pdf

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Integrity
« Reply #228 on: June 09, 2016, 05:43:56 PM »
Fox News Poll: Majority thinks Clinton is lying about emails
By  Dana Blanton 
Published June 09, 2016
FoxNews.com

American voters think Hillary Clinton put national security at risk by mishandling classified emails -- and that she’s lying about it.

By a 60-27 percent margin, they think she’s lying about how her emails were handled while she was secretary of state, according to the latest Fox News national poll of registered voters.   

And by 57-32 percent, voters say U.S. safety was at risk because of Clinton’s mishandling of national secrets.

“Clinton’s explanations are clearly not cutting it with voters,” says Republican pollster Daron Shaw, who conducts the Fox News Poll along with Democratic pollster Chris Anderson.

CLICK TO READ THE POLL RESULTS

“This issue continues to act as a drag on her personal ratings.”

Over half of voters feel Clinton lacks the integrity to serve effectively as president (54 percent), and nearly 6-in-10 have an unfavorable opinion of her (56 percent).

Roughly one third of self-identified Democrats think Clinton is lying about her emails (35 percent) and put national security at risk (32 percent).

Twenty-seven percent of those backing Clinton over Republican Donald Trump in the presidential race think she’s lying about her emails.

The State Department Inspector General concluded May 25 that Clinton failed to comply with department policies by using a private email server.

“The question is whether beliefs about Clinton’s handling of emails are already fully baked into perceptions of her, or if the issue can drag her down further,” says Anderson.

“Her emails must be the most talked about in the history of emails.  Some voters are certainly bored with the issue and tuning it out.”

Views on this issue are holding steady.  Earlier this year, 60 percent said Clinton had mishandled classified emails (February 2016).  And 58 percent felt she was lying about it in September (the last time the question was asked on a Fox News Poll).

The Fox News poll is based on landline and cellphone interviews with 1,004 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide and was conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R) from June 5-8, 2016.  The poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points for all registered voters.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/06/09/fox-news-poll-majority-thinks-clinton-is-lying-about-emails.html?intcmp=hpbt1

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Integrity
« Reply #229 on: July 06, 2016, 09:26:24 AM »
AP Fact Check: Hillary Clinton Email Claims Collapse Under FBI Investigation
by THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Key assertions by Hillary Clinton in defense of her email practices have collapsed under FBI scrutiny.

The agency's yearlong investigation found that she did not, as she claimed, turn over all her work-related messages for release. It found that her private email server did carry classified emails, also contrary to her past statements. And it made clear that Clinton used many devices to send and receive email despite her statements that she set up her email system so that she only needed to carry one.

FBI Director James Comey's announcement Tuesday that he will not refer criminal charges to the Justice Department against Clinton spared her from prosecution and a devastating political predicament. But it left much of her account in tatters and may have aggravated questions of trust swirling around her Democratic presidential candidacy.

A look at Clinton's claims since questions about her email practices as secretary of state surfaced and how they compare with facts established in the FBI probe:

CLINTON: "I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material." News conference, March 2015.

THE FACTS: Actually, the FBI identified at least 113 emails that passed through Clinton's server and contained materials that were classified at the time they were sent, including some that were Top Secret and referred to a highly classified special access program, Comey said.

Most of those emails — 110 of them — were included among 30,000 emails that Clinton returned to the State Department around the time her use of a private email server was discovered. The three others were recovered from a forensic analysis of Clinton's server. "Any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton's position or in the position of those with whom she was corresponding about the matters should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation," Comey said. Clinton and her aides "were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information," he said.

CLINTON: "I never received nor sent any material that was marked classified." NBC interview, July 2016.

THE FACTS: Clinton has separately clung to her rationale that there were no classification markings on her emails that would have warned her and others not to transmit the sensitive material. But the private system did, in fact, handle emails that bore markings indicating they contained classified information, Comey said.

He said the marked emails were "a very small number." But that's not the only standard for judging how officials handle sensitive material, he added. "Even if information is not marked classified in an email, participants who know, or should know, that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it."

CLINTON: "I responded right away and provided all my emails that could possibly be work related" to the State Department. News conference, March 2015.

THE FACTS: Not so, the FBI found.

Comey said that when his forensic team examined Clinton's server it found there were "several thousand work-related emails that were not in the group of 30,000" that had been returned by Clinton to the State Department.

CLINTON: "I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for personal emails instead of two." News conference, March 2015.

THE FACTS: This reasoning for using private email both for public business and private correspondence didn't hold up in the investigation. Clinton "used numerous mobile devices to view and send email" using her personal account, Comey said. He also said Clinton had used different servers.

CLINTON: "It was on property guarded by the Secret Service, and there were no security breaches. ... The use of that server, which started with my husband, certainly proved to be effective and secure." News conference, March 2015.

CLINTON campaign website: "There is no evidence there was ever a breach."

THE FACTS: The campaign website claimed "no evidence" of a breach, a less categorical statement than Clinton herself made last year, when she said there was no breach. The FBI did not uncover a breach but made clear that that possibility cannot be ruled out.

"We assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal email account," Comey said.

He said evidence would be hard to find because hackers are sophisticated and can cover their tracks. Comey said his investigators learned that Clinton's security lapses included using "her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries." Comey also noted that hackers breached the email accounts of several outsiders who messaged with Clinton.

Comey did not mention names, but a Romanian hacker who called himself Guccifer accessed and later leaked emails from Sidney Blumenthal, an outside adviser to Clinton who regularly communicated with her.

CLINTON: "I opted for convenience to use my personal email account, which was allowed by the State Department." News conference, March 2015.

THE FACTS: Comey did not address Clinton's reason for using a private server instead of a government one, but he highlighted the perils in routing sensitive information through a home server.

The FBI found that Clinton's personal server was "not even supported by full-time security staff like those found at agencies and departments of the United States government or even with a commercial email service like Gmail," the director said.

A May 2016 audit by the State Department inspector general found there was no evidence Clinton sought or received approval to operate a private server, and that she "had an obligation to discuss using her personal email account to conduct official business with their offices." Courts have frowned on such a practice.

In an unrelated case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled Tuesday that the purpose of public records law is "hardly served" when a department head "can deprive the citizens of their right to know what his department is up to" by maintaining emails on a private system.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/ap-fact-check-hillary-clinton-email-claims-collapse-under-fbi-n604526

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Integrity
« Reply #230 on: July 07, 2016, 03:24:14 PM »

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Integrity
« Reply #231 on: July 13, 2016, 09:33:17 AM »
Sen. Ben Sasse Condemns Both Trump, Hillary as 'Dishonest'
By Theodore Bunker   |   Tuesday, 12 Jul 2016

Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse wrote an open letter on Medium decrying the dishonesty of the presumptive nominees of both parties and calling for a reexamination of the reasons for voting.

"Ask yourself: Why are these two the most unpopular candidates in the history of presidential polling? Because they are not honest. And everyone knows it. They do not embody the best of America," the freshman Republican says.

"Sadly, I do not regard either of them as worthy of our trust," he says about whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton could be relied upon to "protect and defend the Constitution."

"I think one of them does not even know what the Constitution is about, and the other doesn't care," he says, without naming either presumptive presidential nominee.

Sasse, who has opposed Trump for months, noted that he "was elected less than two years ago over the strong objections of the Washington establishment."

In February, Sasse took to Twitter in a rapid-fire series of tweets, at one point waxing philosophical: "The presidency is not our national embodiment of Nietzschean Will," according to CNN.

In his opposition to Trump, Sasse is vocally disagreeing with his party constituents in the Cornhusker State, 61 percent of whom voted for Trump in the May primary.

"He's carrying on like a professor, telling the world how things should be," Republican Bob Krist, a Nebraska state senator, told The Washington Post last month. "Either get out in front and lead, or be part of the process that you have been elected to be a part of."

On Medium, Sasse explains why he can't simply choose the lesser of two evils, which he calls "strategic voting," and calls himself a "conscience voter."

"To us, the act of voting is also a civic duty that tells people what we think America means, what we want to teach our kids about moral leadership, what face we want America to present to the world, and what sort of candidates we want more of in coming years."

Sasse doesn't deny that Washington needs change, just that he believes Trump isn't the right person to bring it, and neither is Clinton.

"Sadly, they both appear to be willfully dishonest," Sasse writes. "It's one thing to elect someone who ends up lying to us after the fact. (That's terrible.) But it's another thing entirely to conclude in advance that they are both liars, and simply shrug and elect them anyway.

"That does something to the national soul that tears at the fabric of who we are."

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Ben-Sasse-Condemns-Trump-Clinton/2016/07/12/id/738275/#ixzz4EJ6fsTms

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Integrity
« Reply #232 on: August 01, 2016, 04:17:30 PM »
Clinton’s claim that the FBI director said her email answers were ‘truthful’
By Glenn Kessler
July 31, 2016 

The former secretary of state, senator and first lady is the presumptive Democratic nominee for president.
 
“Director Comey said my answers were truthful, and what I’ve said is consistent with what I have told the American people, that there were decisions discussed and made to classify retroactively certain of the emails.”
—Hillary Clinton, interview on “Fox News Sunday,” July 31, 2016

Clinton made these remarks after “Fox News Sunday” host Chris Wallace played a video of her saying: “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified materials. I am confident that I never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time. I had not sent classified material nor received anything marked classified.”

As Wallace put it, “After a long investigation, FBI Director James Comey said none of those things that you told the American public were true.”

After Clinton denied that, Wallace played another video of an exchange between Comey and Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), chair of the House Select Committee on Benghazi:

GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her emails either sent or received. Was that true?
COMEY: That’s not true.
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said, “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.” Was that true?
COMEY: There was classified material emailed.

So what’s going on here?

The Facts

Clinton is cherry-picking statements by Comey to preserve her narrative about the unusual setup of a private email server. This allows her to skate past the more disturbing findings of the FBI investigation

For instance, when Clinton asserts “my answers were truthful,” a campaign aide said she is referring to this statement by Comey to Congress: “We have no basis to conclude she lied to the FBI.”

But that’s not the whole story. When House Oversight Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) asked whether Clinton had lied to the American public, Comey dodged: “That’s a question I’m not qualified to answer. I can speak about what she said to the FBI.”

At another point, Comey told Congress: “I really don’t want to get in the business of trying to parse and judge her public statements. And so I think I’ve tried to avoid doing that sitting here. … What matters to me is what did she say to the FBI. That’s obviously first and foremost for us.”

Comey was also asked whether Clinton broke the law: “In connection with her use of the email server? My judgment is that she did not,” Comey said.

As for retroactive classification of emails, Comey did say many emails were retroactively classified. But he also said that some emails were classified at the time — and Clinton and her aides should have been aware of that.

Here’s how Comey put it in his lengthy statement when he announced the completion of the investigation: “Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”

Comey said “seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters.”

He added: “There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.” He noted that “even if information is not marked ‘classified’ in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.”

In her response to Wallace, Clinton at one point appeared to deflect responsibility to her aides: “I relied on and had every reason to rely on the judgments of the professionals with whom I worked. And so, in retrospect, maybe some people are saying, well, among those 300 people, they made the wrong call.”

Testifying before Congress, Comey said it was possible Clinton was not “technically sophisticated” enough to understand what the classified markings meant. But he said a government official should be attentive to such a marking.

The Pinocchio Test

As we have seen repeatedly in Clinton’s explanations of the email controversy, she relies on excessively technical and legalistic answers to explain her actions. While Comey did say there was no evidence she lied to the FBI, that is not the same as saying she told the truth to the American public — which was the point of Wallace’s question. Comey has repeatedly not taken a stand on her public statements.

And although Comey did say many emails were retroactively classified, he also said that there were some emails that were already classified that should not have been sent on an unclassified, private server. That’s the uncomfortable truth that Clinton has trouble admitting.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/07/31/clintons-claim-that-the-fbi-director-said-her-email-answers-were-truthful/

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Integrity
« Reply #233 on: August 19, 2016, 12:38:42 PM »
What is equally as disturbing as the blatant lack of integrity is all of the folks who follow along like cult members. 

[/youtube]


andreisdaman

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16720
Re: Integrity
« Reply #234 on: August 19, 2016, 12:42:59 PM »
What is equally as disturbing as the blatant lack of integrity is all of the folks who follow along like cult members. 

[/youtube]



This is ridiculous.....the money was not a ransom payment ...it was used as leverage.....if Iran wanted the money them they would have to release the hostages....simple....we used the situation to our advantage....which was smart

you're getting like SC with these youtube hit pieces

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Integrity
« Reply #235 on: August 19, 2016, 12:45:04 PM »
This is ridiculous.....the money was not a ransom payment ...it was used as leverage.....if Iran wanted the money them they would have to release the hostages....simple....we used the situation to our advantage....which was smart

you're getting like SC with these youtube hit pieces

And right on cue, one of the Obamabot zombies (redundant?) shows exactly what I'm talking about.  Think for yourself.  If you can. 

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Integrity
« Reply #236 on: September 21, 2016, 03:15:02 PM »
Looks like the audience thinks Hillary lacks integrity. 


Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Integrity
« Reply #237 on: October 05, 2016, 10:52:04 AM »
She "doesn't recall."   ::)

Clinton: 'I Don't Recall' Joking About Drone Strike on Julian Assange
By Ritika Gupta   |   Wednesday, 05 Oct 2016

As Wikileaks celebrated its 10th anniversary in Berlin with founder Julian Assange vowing to publish new "significant" documents related to the U.S. presidential elections ahead of the Nov. 8 vote,  Hillary Clinton said she did not remember ever joking about a drone attack on Assange during her tenure as secretary of state, Politico reported.

"I don't know anything about what [WikiLeaks] is talking about, and I don't recall any joke. It would have been a joke had it been said, but I don't recall that," Clinton said of a report published Sunday by the website True Pundit.

The website cited anonymous "State Department sources" in the report to claim that Clinton in 2010 asked some staff members, "Can't we just drone this guy?" referring to Assange who was then preparing to release 250,000 secret U.S. cables.

Clinton Campaign manager Robby Mook declined to comment on the rumor, telling WTTG Fox 5 DC reporter Ronica Cleary, "I'm reticent to comment on anything that the Wikileaks people have said. They've made a lot of accusations in the past."

"Donald Trump and his allies are trying to do everything they can to change the debate here right now … They got to find some way to change this up and they're trying to do that by doubling down on conspiracy theories," Mook added.

The former secretary of state, who was in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, campaigning continued to attack Donald Trump over his secrecy regarding tax returns, the Daily Mail reported.

Wikileaks has so far released approximately 20,000 emails from seven accounts belonging to DNC staffers in July.

When was asked if she was worried about Assange's recent promise to soon release documents that could affect the November election, Clinton retorted, "Well, I don't know anything about what he's talking about."

http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/Clinton-Julian-Assange-Drone-Strike-Joke/2016/10/05/id/751770/#ixzz4MEaIyFIZ

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Integrity
« Reply #238 on: August 06, 2024, 11:08:59 AM »
Paid letter: The Truth About Tim Walz
Published November 02, 2018

Tim Walz has embellished and selectively omitted facts and circumstances of his military career for years.

We, retired Command Sergeants Major of the Minnesota National Guard, feel it is our duty and responsibility to bring forth the truth as we know it concerning his service record. So, we have put together a timeline of his service post 9/11. To the best of our knowledge, this information is completely true, having been verified by all those who served in positions with first hand knowledge of the facts and circumstances of his service and departure from the Minnesota National Guard. Many of the dates and time frames are from his official discharge document and the reduction order reducing him to Master Sergeant.

On September 18th, 2001 Tim Walz reenlisted in the Minnesota Army National Guard for six years.

In early 2003 he was selected to attend the United States Army Sergeants Major Academy. The non-resident course consists of two years of correspondence coursework, followed by a two-week resident phase at Fort Bliss, Texas. When a Senior Non-Commissioned Officer accepts enrollment in the course, they accept three stipulations. First, they will serve for two years after graduation from the academy, or promotion to Sergeant Major or Command Sergeant Major, whichever is later. Second, if they fail the course they may be separated from the military. Third, they will complete the course or be reduced to Master Sergeant without board action. Senior Non-Commissioned Officers initial and sign a Statement of Agreement and Certification upon enrollment. The State Command Sergeant Major or Army National Guard Command Sergeant Major counsels the soldier and certifies that the senior Non-Commissioned Officer understands their responsibilities. These stipulations are put in place because the academy is a college level school, the military invests a lot of taxpayer money in the student. The military needs to ensure they will get the return on investment that the taxpayers deserve.

In late summer of 2003, First Sergeant Walz deployed with the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion in support of Operation Enduring Freedom to Italy. The mission was to augment United States Air Force Europe Security Forces doing base security for six months. In no way were the units or Soldiers of the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion replacing any units or military forces so they could deploy to Iraq or Afghanistan.

After the units return to Minnesota in the spring of 2004, he was selected by high level Command Sergeants Major to serve in the position of the Command Sergeant Major of the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion.

On August 5th, 2004 he was photographed holding a sign at a protest outside a President Bush campaign rally in southern Minnesota.

On September 17th, 2004 he was conditionally promoted to Command Sergeant Major. The conditions had been outlined to him when he was counseled and he signed the Statement of Agreement and Certification. If the conditions are not met, the promotion is null and void, like it never happened.

In early 2005, a warning order was issued to the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion, which included the position he was serving in, to prepare to be mobilized for active duty for a deployment to Iraq.

On May 16th, 2005 he quit, leaving the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion and its Soldiers hanging; without its senior Non-Commissioned Officer, as the battalion prepared for war. His excuse to other leaders was that he needed to retire in order to run for congress. Which is false, according to a Department of Defense Directive, he could have run and requested permission from the Secretary of Defense before entering active duty; as many reservists have. If he had retired normally and respectfully, you would think he would have ensured his retirement documents were correctly filled out and signed, and that he would have ensured he was reduced to Master Sergeant for dropping out of the academy. Instead he waited for the paperwork to catch up to him. His official retirement document states, SOLDIER NOT AVAILABLE FOR SIGNATURE.

On September 10th, 2005 conditionally promoted Command Sergeant Major Walz was reduced to Master Sergeant. It took a while for the system to catch up to him as it was uncharted territory, literally no one quits in the position he was in, or drops out of the academy. Except him.

In November of 2005, while the battalion trained for war at Camp Shelby, Mississippi, it received an offer from retired Master Sergeant Walz. He offered to fund raise for the battalions bus trip home over Christmas that year.

The 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion was deployed for 22 months in 2006 - 2007. During this time, they were restricted by Army regulations and could not speak out against a candidate for office. In November 2006 he was elected to the House of Representatives. He claims to be the highest-ranking enlisted service member ever to serve in congress. Even though he was conditionally promoted to Command Sergeant Major less than eight months, quit before his obligations were met, and was reduced to Master Sergeant for retirement. Yes, he served at that rank, but was never qualified at that rank, and will receive retirement benefits at one rank below. You be the judge.

On November 1st, 2006, Tom Hagen, Iraq War Veteran, wrote a letter to the editor of the Winona Daily News. Here are a couple of sentences from the letter: But even more disturbing is the fact that Walz quickly retired after learning that his unit -southern Minnesota's 1-125 FA Battalion - would be sent to Iraq. For Tim Walz to abandon his fellow soldiers and quit when they needed experienced leadership most is disheartening.

Here is part of Tim Walzs response: After completing 20 years of service in 2001, I re-enlisted to serve our country for an additional four years following Sept. 11 and retired the year before my battalion was deployed to Iraq in order to run for Congress.

According to his official Report of Separation and Record of Service, he re-enlisted for six years on September 18th, 2001. However, in his response he says that he re-enlisted for four years, conveniently retiring a year before his battalion was deployed to Iraq. Even if he had re-enlisted for four years following Sept.11, his retirement date would have been September 18th, 2005. Why then did he "retire" on May 16th, 2005, before his supposed four-year enlistment was up? And he makes it sound like he "retired" a year before his battalion deployed to Iraq; when in reality he knew when he "retired" that the battalion would be deployed to Iraq.

The bottom line in all of this is gut wrenching and sad to explain. When the nation called, he quit. He failed to complete the United States Army Sergeants Major Academy. He failed to serve for two years following completion of the academy, which he dropped out of. He failed to serve two years after the conditional promotion to Command Sergeant Major. He failed to fulfill the full six years of the enlistment he signed on September 18th, 2001. He failed his country. He failed his state. He failed the Minnesota Army National Guard, the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion, and his fellow Soldiers. And he failed to lead by example. Shameful.

Thomas Behrends

Command Sergeant Major (Retired)

Paul Herr

Command Sergeant Major (Retired)

This is a paid endorsement letter to the editor.

https://www.wctrib.com/community/letters/the-truth-about-tim-walz

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 42406
Re: Integrity
« Reply #239 on: August 06, 2024, 01:51:22 PM »
Paid letter: The Truth About Tim Walz
Published November 02, 2018

Tim Walz has embellished and selectively omitted facts and circumstances of his military career for years.

We, retired Command Sergeants Major of the Minnesota National Guard, feel it is our duty and responsibility to bring forth the truth as we know it concerning his service record. So, we have put together a timeline of his service post 9/11. To the best of our knowledge, this information is completely true, having been verified by all those who served in positions with first hand knowledge of the facts and circumstances of his service and departure from the Minnesota National Guard. Many of the dates and time frames are from his official discharge document and the reduction order reducing him to Master Sergeant.

On September 18th, 2001 Tim Walz reenlisted in the Minnesota Army National Guard for six years.

In early 2003 he was selected to attend the United States Army Sergeants Major Academy. The non-resident course consists of two years of correspondence coursework, followed by a two-week resident phase at Fort Bliss, Texas. When a Senior Non-Commissioned Officer accepts enrollment in the course, they accept three stipulations. First, they will serve for two years after graduation from the academy, or promotion to Sergeant Major or Command Sergeant Major, whichever is later. Second, if they fail the course they may be separated from the military. Third, they will complete the course or be reduced to Master Sergeant without board action. Senior Non-Commissioned Officers initial and sign a Statement of Agreement and Certification upon enrollment. The State Command Sergeant Major or Army National Guard Command Sergeant Major counsels the soldier and certifies that the senior Non-Commissioned Officer understands their responsibilities. These stipulations are put in place because the academy is a college level school, the military invests a lot of taxpayer money in the student. The military needs to ensure they will get the return on investment that the taxpayers deserve.

In late summer of 2003, First Sergeant Walz deployed with the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion in support of Operation Enduring Freedom to Italy. The mission was to augment United States Air Force Europe Security Forces doing base security for six months. In no way were the units or Soldiers of the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion replacing any units or military forces so they could deploy to Iraq or Afghanistan.

After the units return to Minnesota in the spring of 2004, he was selected by high level Command Sergeants Major to serve in the position of the Command Sergeant Major of the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion.

On August 5th, 2004 he was photographed holding a sign at a protest outside a President Bush campaign rally in southern Minnesota.

On September 17th, 2004 he was conditionally promoted to Command Sergeant Major. The conditions had been outlined to him when he was counseled and he signed the Statement of Agreement and Certification. If the conditions are not met, the promotion is null and void, like it never happened.

In early 2005, a warning order was issued to the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion, which included the position he was serving in, to prepare to be mobilized for active duty for a deployment to Iraq.

On May 16th, 2005 he quit, leaving the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion and its Soldiers hanging; without its senior Non-Commissioned Officer, as the battalion prepared for war. His excuse to other leaders was that he needed to retire in order to run for congress. Which is false, according to a Department of Defense Directive, he could have run and requested permission from the Secretary of Defense before entering active duty; as many reservists have. If he had retired normally and respectfully, you would think he would have ensured his retirement documents were correctly filled out and signed, and that he would have ensured he was reduced to Master Sergeant for dropping out of the academy. Instead he waited for the paperwork to catch up to him. His official retirement document states, SOLDIER NOT AVAILABLE FOR SIGNATURE.

On September 10th, 2005 conditionally promoted Command Sergeant Major Walz was reduced to Master Sergeant. It took a while for the system to catch up to him as it was uncharted territory, literally no one quits in the position he was in, or drops out of the academy. Except him.

In November of 2005, while the battalion trained for war at Camp Shelby, Mississippi, it received an offer from retired Master Sergeant Walz. He offered to fund raise for the battalions bus trip home over Christmas that year.

The 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion was deployed for 22 months in 2006 - 2007. During this time, they were restricted by Army regulations and could not speak out against a candidate for office. In November 2006 he was elected to the House of Representatives. He claims to be the highest-ranking enlisted service member ever to serve in congress. Even though he was conditionally promoted to Command Sergeant Major less than eight months, quit before his obligations were met, and was reduced to Master Sergeant for retirement. Yes, he served at that rank, but was never qualified at that rank, and will receive retirement benefits at one rank below. You be the judge.

On November 1st, 2006, Tom Hagen, Iraq War Veteran, wrote a letter to the editor of the Winona Daily News. Here are a couple of sentences from the letter: But even more disturbing is the fact that Walz quickly retired after learning that his unit -southern Minnesota's 1-125 FA Battalion - would be sent to Iraq. For Tim Walz to abandon his fellow soldiers and quit when they needed experienced leadership most is disheartening.

Here is part of Tim Walzs response: After completing 20 years of service in 2001, I re-enlisted to serve our country for an additional four years following Sept. 11 and retired the year before my battalion was deployed to Iraq in order to run for Congress.

According to his official Report of Separation and Record of Service, he re-enlisted for six years on September 18th, 2001. However, in his response he says that he re-enlisted for four years, conveniently retiring a year before his battalion was deployed to Iraq. Even if he had re-enlisted for four years following Sept.11, his retirement date would have been September 18th, 2005. Why then did he "retire" on May 16th, 2005, before his supposed four-year enlistment was up? And he makes it sound like he "retired" a year before his battalion deployed to Iraq; when in reality he knew when he "retired" that the battalion would be deployed to Iraq.

The bottom line in all of this is gut wrenching and sad to explain. When the nation called, he quit. He failed to complete the United States Army Sergeants Major Academy. He failed to serve for two years following completion of the academy, which he dropped out of. He failed to serve two years after the conditional promotion to Command Sergeant Major. He failed to fulfill the full six years of the enlistment he signed on September 18th, 2001. He failed his country. He failed his state. He failed the Minnesota Army National Guard, the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion, and his fellow Soldiers. And he failed to lead by example. Shameful.

Thomas Behrends

Command Sergeant Major (Retired)

Paul Herr

Command Sergeant Major (Retired)

This is a paid endorsement letter to the editor.

https://www.wctrib.com/community/letters/the-truth-about-tim-walz

Wow! Did you have this post ready, and waiting should VP Kamala choose Tim Walz? How did you manage to find something so obscure?

The West Central Tribune's circulation of more than 16,000 papers is distributed throughout many surrounding communities. It is located in the little burg of Wilmar, MN which has a population of around 20,000 and it is located 2 hours from Minneapolis.

These two fellows paid the West Central Tribune to publish this letter to the editor in November 2018 when Governor Walz was first elected Governor of Minnesota. Despite their letter to the editor, he was reelected in 2022. Letters to the editor are generally checked for factual accuracy, and evidence-based criticism. I assume this one was, but there is no way to know this for sure.

Moontrane

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6311
  • Drill, Baby, Drill!
Re: Integrity
« Reply #240 on: August 06, 2024, 05:47:09 PM »
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2024/08/06/kamala-harriss-vice-president-pick-gov-tim-walz-facing-stolen-valor-accusation/?fbclid=IwY2xjawEfok9leHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHTkLJMmB_ScTgK9D5tVZpYohqI2TrryNqPu9R1FlBh-cIThgU1fTL1fOrQ_aem_ITNvaDnkV5ZAKhekFiYiuw

Kamala Harris’s Vice President Pick Gov. Tim Walz Facing Stolen Valor Accusation

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) — the vice presidential candidate pick of Democrat presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris — has listed on his official biography a higher military rank than the one he ultimately retired with, drawing criticism from some veterans and accusations of stolen valor.

Walz served in the Minnesota Army National Guard and retired at the rank of master sergeant, or an E-8. However, on his official website bio, he lists a higher rank that he served at for a short period that ultimately was rescinded, as he did not complete all the requirements to serve at that rank. However, his bio implies that he retired at the rank of command sergeant major, or an E-9.

His official bio states:

After 24 years in the Army National Guard, Command Sergeant Major Walz retired from the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion in 2005. Tim won his first election to the United States House of Representatives in 2006 and was re-elected for another five terms serving Minnesota’s First Congressional District in Southern Minnesota.

The Minnesota National Guard’s State Public Affairs Officer, Army Lt. Col. Kristen Augé, confirmed to Breitbart News that Walz did not retire as an E-9. She said in an email:

He retired as a master sergeant in 2005 for benefit purposes because he did not complete additional coursework at the U.S. Army Sergeants Major Academy.

Two retired Army Command Sergeant Majors, Thomas Behrends and Paul Herr, wrote in a letter published November 2, 2018, in the West Central Tribune, a local news outlet, that Walz on September 17, 2004, was “conditionally promoted” to Command Sergeant Major but then later failed to meet the conditions of the promotion, which they said was later nullified.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Integrity
« Reply #241 on: August 06, 2024, 07:20:21 PM »
Wow! Did you have this post ready, and waiting should VP Kamala choose Tim Walz? How did you manage to find something so obscure?

The West Central Tribune's circulation of more than 16,000 papers is distributed throughout many surrounding communities. It is located in the little burg of Wilmar, MN which has a population of around 20,000 and it is located 2 hours from Minneapolis.

These two fellows paid the West Central Tribune to publish this letter to the editor in November 2018 when Governor Walz was first elected Governor of Minnesota. Despite their letter to the editor, he was reelected in 2022. Letters to the editor are generally checked for factual accuracy, and evidence-based criticism. I assume this one was, but there is no way to know this for sure.

All those words and no comment on the substance of the story.  Predictable.  Are you bothered at all by this guy abandoning his Soldiers who deployed to Iraq?  Or his stolen valor claim of being  a retired Sergeant Major?

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Integrity
« Reply #242 on: August 06, 2024, 07:21:31 PM »
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2024/08/06/kamala-harriss-vice-president-pick-gov-tim-walz-facing-stolen-valor-accusation/?fbclid=IwY2xjawEfok9leHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHTkLJMmB_ScTgK9D5tVZpYohqI2TrryNqPu9R1FlBh-cIThgU1fTL1fOrQ_aem_ITNvaDnkV5ZAKhekFiYiuw

Kamala Harris’s Vice President Pick Gov. Tim Walz Facing Stolen Valor Accusation

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) — the vice presidential candidate pick of Democrat presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris — has listed on his official biography a higher military rank than the one he ultimately retired with, drawing criticism from some veterans and accusations of stolen valor.

Walz served in the Minnesota Army National Guard and retired at the rank of master sergeant, or an E-8. However, on his official website bio, he lists a higher rank that he served at for a short period that ultimately was rescinded, as he did not complete all the requirements to serve at that rank. However, his bio implies that he retired at the rank of command sergeant major, or an E-9.

His official bio states:

After 24 years in the Army National Guard, Command Sergeant Major Walz retired from the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion in 2005. Tim won his first election to the United States House of Representatives in 2006 and was re-elected for another five terms serving Minnesota’s First Congressional District in Southern Minnesota.


The Minnesota National Guard’s State Public Affairs Officer, Army Lt. Col. Kristen Augé, confirmed to Breitbart News that Walz did not retire as an E-9. She said in an email:

He retired as a master sergeant in 2005 for benefit purposes because he did not complete additional coursework at the U.S. Army Sergeants Major Academy.

Two retired Army Command Sergeant Majors, Thomas Behrends and Paul Herr, wrote in a letter published November 2, 2018, in the West Central Tribune, a local news outlet, that Walz on September 17, 2004, was “conditionally promoted” to Command Sergeant Major but then later failed to meet the conditions of the promotion, which they said was later nullified.

Incredibly dishonest. 

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Integrity
« Reply #243 on: August 07, 2024, 12:17:57 PM »
Here is an excerpt from the official bio from Governor Walz:   "After 24 years in the Army National Guard, Command Sergeant Major Walz retired from the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion in 2005."  https://mn.gov/governor/about-gov/timwalz/

This is an absolute stolen valor lie.  He was given a conditional promotion to Sergeant Major, but had that rank taken away when he failed to complete the Sergeant Major Academy educational requirement.  Then he retired to avoid going to combat with his Soldiers.  His rank is Master Sergeant (E8), Not Sergeant Major (E9), or Command Sergeant Major (also E9 but higher than "regular" E9). 

Minnesota National Guard confirms VP nominee Tim Walz demoted, calling into question official bio
Gov. Walz's biography boasts a higher National Guard rank than he retired with after he was automatically demoted for failing to fulfill obligations of his promotion. He also bailed out on his unit before deployment in Iraq.
By Steven Richards
Published: August 7, 2024
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/past-criticisms-vp-nominee-tim-walzs-retirement-military-resurface?utm_source=mux&utm_medium=social-media&utm_campaign=social-media-autopost

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 42406
Re: Integrity
« Reply #244 on: August 07, 2024, 08:10:44 PM »
Tim Walz was reduced in rank to master sergeant after retirement.


Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Integrity
« Reply #245 on: August 07, 2024, 08:18:00 PM »
Tim Walz was reduced in rank to master sergeant after retirement.

He was never a legit Command Sergeant Major (E9).  He was given a conditional appointment to CSM, but didn't finish the Sergeant Major Academy educational requirement, because he quit to avoid deploying to Iraq.  So, officially, he was always a Master Sergeant (E8), including for pay purposes, BEFORE and AFTER his retirement. 

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15499
Re: Integrity
« Reply #246 on: August 07, 2024, 10:57:51 PM »
Tim Walz was reduced in rank to master sergeant after retirement.

They speak of integrity but worship a guy who avoided service with bone spurs, disparaged all American POW's when he belittled McCain for being captured.... those are facts. Maybe he didn't want to go to an event at a cemetery because it was filled with losers and raining and his hair..... an account supported by John Kelley. Nah, lets focus on this  ;D

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41777
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Integrity
« Reply #247 on: August 08, 2024, 05:49:06 AM »

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Integrity
« Reply #248 on: August 08, 2024, 11:29:11 AM »


I listened to his interview on her podcast.  Pretty damning. 

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Integrity
« Reply #249 on: August 08, 2024, 11:29:28 AM »
Tampon Tim is not a retired Command Sergeant Major.

Harris campaign tweaks Walz biography amid scrutiny of military credentials
The update comes a day after Republicans escalated attacks on his record in the Army National Guard, accusing Walz of inflating his rank at retirement.
The Harris campaign has updated its online biography of running mate Tim Walz, removing a reference to the Minnesota governor as a “retired command sergeant major." | Jamie Kelter Davis for POLITICO
By JARED MITOVICH
08/08/2024
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/08/08/harris-walz-military-credentials-00173236