It is not conditional on the promotion or graduation, it is conditional on accepting a seat in the school/program. The point of making it conditional on accepting the seat is that the Army ensures that it gets school trained CSM for its units that it paid to attend the course.
Trump's lack of military service has not stopped him from making negative comments about the military and those who served in it, even though he is mostly ignorant of all things related to the military, including sacrifice, respect, and honor. I would say that Trump should be credited with providing a military dis-service to the country.
The last time I voted for a major party was in 2012 for McCain and that was holding my nose a little bit.
This is going to be real fun when CBS News gets to fact check its own “fact check.” They put up a “fact check” on Instagram of the claims about Walz’s service and retirement. In their fact check, they quote a Harris campaign spokesman saying that in Congress “he chaired Veterans Affairs.” The problem? That statement itself is (really, really easily) demonstrably untrue, yet CBS gives no indication that it is - by far - the single most objectively false statement appearing anywhere in their “fact check.”
As I posted. This is an interesting twist but what is far more interesting to me is whether holder just missed this in the vetting or saw it and miscalculated. My wife is from Midwest. They love their Harley’s and their military vets. What may seem like nothing burger to coastals is a bigger deal than they think. The point of bringing is Walz was Mr folksy midwestern. Just odd to me Holder missed this or miscalculated as this isn’t playing well to average Joe farmer and his combine friends
Yawn. Dude was deployed in Italy (as part of - wait for it - a WAR) and he carried a weapon while there. pathetic semantics gotcha attempt.
CBS got it right here, but it certainly could have gotten it wrong on Instagram. I'd be curious to see it. Tim Walz's military record under scrutiny as he joins Kamala Harris on Democratic ticket
One of the architects of the Kerry swift boating? Harlan Crow of buying off Clarence Thomas fame. I bet he proposed this idea, too.
While Harlan Crow financed the swiftboat campaign against John Kerry it was Chris LaCivita Trump's defacto campaign manager who was the actual architect of the campaign. For what it's worth, "swiftboating" will have a minimal impact on the Harris/Walz campaign for a number of reasons. First and contrary to the narrative that Walz retired to avoid deployment a very strong case can be made that he retired from the National Guard to run for Congress in 2004, not to avoid deployment; he applied to retirement months before his unit received orders to deploy to Iraq and his retirement was already finalized when the unit received formal orders; and perhaps most significantly unlike John Kerry in 2004 Tim Walz is not at the top of the Democratic ticket while the guy was is at the top of the Republican ticket has considerably more baggage on the issue including his famous bone spurs deferment, his disparaging remarks regarding veterans, and his feeble joke that his personal Vietnam was the avoidance of STDs. I suspect that a lot of Vietnam veterans see very little humor in the fact that they were risking their lives for their country while Trump was in NYC screwing multiple women.
Sure thing: (I’ll also note that the article you linked had it wrong for the entire day yesterday, they “corrected” it only after RCP ran an article noting that the Harris campaign kept issuing a statement saying he chaired Veterans Affairs, which obviously isn’t true, and the RNC Research Twitter account made a post mocking their Instagram post.)
He ran for Congress in a 2006 election and didn’t file paperwork to enter the race until February of 2005. No one knows when he filed his retirement papers, because his spokespeople won’t answer the media inquiries about that. But, as @CaptUSMCNole noted, the Army doesn’t promote people who are about to retire to Command Sergeant Major - it’s the senior enlisted soldier in the unit and a critical leadership role (and comes with extensive additional training that the Army has to pay for), so they put people who are going to actually meaningfully perform the role in it. And it’s pretty clear that his retirement almost certainly didn’t follow the normal process since that would have required him to satisfy outstanding service commitments (including those resulting from promotions) before he would be eligible to have his retirement paperwork processed, which didn’t happen. And the only people being fooled by the “well it was before his orders to deploy came” are folks with blue waves in their social media handles - his own campaign website confirms he knew the deployment was coming while he was still in the Guard, the Army normally gives notifications to guard units 1.5-2 years before the formal orders so they can begin preparing for a potential mobilization and deployment (a guard unit can’t just be sent to war in a heartbeat, it requires substantial preparation), and members of his own unit far more junior than him have come out and said they were aware in mid-2004 that an Iraq deployment was coming. The idea that the CSM was unaware that a deployment was coming until they got mobilization orders doesn’t begin to pass the smell test.
Like everything else, the entire issue has morphed into who you want to win. The half of Twitter that wants Harris (and those who don’t want Trump) have purported military swearing they are absolutely cool with everything Walz. The other side has military swearing Walz should be imprisoned in Guantanamo. And so the expected Pub attack was entirely successful— instead of us talking couches and cat ladies — and instead of us talking about Trump’s friggin bizarre news conference yesterday— we are debating whether a guy who served (about) 25 years and retired to take a seat in Congress embarked upon the sin of stolen valor.
These people used the same trick to promote the unsubstantiated dossier about Trump. One fake news org publishes it, then another news agency uses that fake news org as reason to justify its voracity. They credential each other's lies... and call it facts.
It’s really hard to find sympathy for Trump when he’s the one that conceived the whole Birther lie (followed up by some many others)
Lol... more lies. Hillary Clinton used that phrase way before Trump picked up on it. Now... tell us about Kamala's achievements, and any rational reason to qualify her to be POTUS?
To me, the first and most glaring and rational reason to vote for Kamala is that she will be the only one on the ballot for me to choose. Having said that, before she was the nominee, I really did not like her or the perceived hyper-liberal leanings. In the very brief time since she’s been the nominee, she is growing on me and I am starting to like her. That COULD BE because I want to like her and I’ve convinced myself, or she has grown as a politician; I don’t know yet. But, speaking only for rational choices, she’s the only one running for President that my eyes will see on the ballot.
She's NOT the "nominee" she has been illegitimately placed there because of a Democrat coup, led by Nancy Pelosi and the Dems...
