7 Comments

You would think the corporate media would at least attempt to hide their bias better, even just for the sake of their own credibility. You are what the fact checkers should actually be.

Expand full comment

Thanks for doing the heavy lifting

Expand full comment

Great work!

Expand full comment

LOL at all of this. Both sides are nitpicking garbage. Who cares if he didn't correct someone else introducing him. Also, most if this article is about how the media is covering what he said. Who cares what they think?

Expand full comment

I was in the Army stateside during multiple conflicts (Panama, Desert Storm, Somalia) and even deployed to Bosnia which was technically a combat zone where I carried a weapon, but I would never say (or let it be said in my presence) that I have “been to war” because there was no actual fighting during my deployment. Walz was never anywhere near a combat zone, but has made statements and omissions indicating that he is a combat veteran, likely for political gain. He is indeed guilty of stolen valor and his abandonment of his unit just before a combat deployment is a disgrace. He is not fit for the office of Vice President.

Expand full comment

I dunno - there’s so much more that is wrong about Walz, this is not super important. I wish people would stop misusing the term stolen valor. It’s not stolen valor when someone else claims that you are an Afghanistan veteran if you were technically in the unit. I can claim that I was in an army of occupation, which is true but I was not in combat (hardly anyone in my age cohort was, and I am pretty close in age to Walz). Also the right needs to stfu about Iraq and Afghanistan. Stupid forever wars started by neoclowns.

Expand full comment

So good! Thank you! Walz’ reliance on equivocation is sleazy, sloppy, and dishonest.

Expand full comment