@amuse Profile picture
Aug 6 3 tweets 7 min read Read on X
In my experience if you want to understand someone talk to the men he served with in the military. The men who served with Tim Walz describe his service as Traitorous, fraudulent, and shameful. Read their open letter from 2019 (before he was running as Kamala Harris's vice president):

The Truth About Tim Walz

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 unit's 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. Between the time the warning order was given and his "retirement," he told the Brigade Command Sergeant Major not to worry, that he would be going on the mission. It appears that was a lie.

On May 16th, 2005 he quit, betraying his country, 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 slithered out the door and 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 fundraise for the battalion’s bus trip home over Christmas that year. The same Soldiers he had abandoned just months before, trying to buy their votes.

The 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion was deployed for 22 ½ 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. It dishonors those brave American men and women who did answer their nation’s call and who continue to serve, fight and unfortunately die in harm’s way for us.

Here is part of Tim Walz’s 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 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. On top of that, he failed to uphold the seven Army Values: Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless-Service, Honor, Integrity, and Personal Courage.

Traitorous, fraudulent, and shameful.

Signed,

Thomas Behrends
Command Sergeant Major (Retired)
78739 320th Ave
Worthington, MN 56187
Paul Herr
Command Sergeant Major (Retired)
12435 Old Highway 169
Hibbing, MN 55746

h/t @PoliticalShortThe Truth About Tim Walz 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 Minne...
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 unit's 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 s...
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 fundraise for the battalion’s bus trip home over Christmas that year. The same Soldiers he had abandoned just months before, trying to buy their votes.  The 1-12...
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 c...
Former National Guardsmen: Tim Walz Is Misleading The Public About His Time In Service. Former members of the Minnesota National Guard are raising concerns over the discrepancies in Walz’s story, saying he is misleading the public on his service.
alphanews.org/former-nationa…
In an open letter, retired Cmd Sgt Majors Thomas Behrends and Paul Herr outlined how Tim Walz failed the Army, his fellow Soldiers, and lacked Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless-Service, Honor, Integrity, and Personal Courage. facebook.com/thomas.behrend…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with @amuse

@amuse Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @amuse

Aug 4
TSA WEAPONIZATION🧵: Bombshell reporting by @tracybeanz and @wmahoney5 reveals that a TSA whistleblower informed @LaboscoSonya, Executive Director of the Air Marshal National Council, that Tulsi Gabbard is actively under surveillance via the TSA's Quiet Skies Program.In an exclusive breaking story, several Federal Air Marshal whistleblowers have come forward with information showing that former U.S. Representative and Presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard is currently enrolled in the Quiet Skies program. Quiet Skies is a TSA surveillance program with its own compartmentalized suspected terrorist watchlist. It is the same program being weaponized against J6 defendants and their families. Quiet Skies is allegedly used to protect traveling Americans from suspected domestic terrorists. The photo below is a screenshot from the actual Target Package used by th...
TSA WEAPONIZATION🧵: If the TSA whistleblower's report is accurate and the Biden admin has weaponized the Quiet Skies Program against a former member of Congress and presidential candidate, the next question should be: Which other political enemies is the president monitoring?The whistleblowers first shared the information with Sonya LaBosco, the Executive Director of the Air Marshal National Council (AMNC), a national advocacy group for the Federal Air Marshals (FAMs). According to LaBosco, at least one of the whistleblowers is ready to go on the record with pertinent documentation. LaBosco shared that Gabbard is unaware she has two Explosive Detection Canine Teams, one Transportation Security Specialist (explosives), one plainclothes TSA Supervisor, and three Federal Air Marshalls on every flight she boards. LaBosco has attempted to contact Gabbard and her sta...
TSA WEAPONIZATION🧵: @UncoverDC - Federal Air Marshal Whistleblowers Report Tulsi Gabbard Actively Under Surveillance via Quiet Skies Program.
uncoverdc.com/2024/08/04/fam…
Read 5 tweets
Jul 31
🧵A declassified FBI document confirms longstanding suspicions of the agency's active involvement with Patriot Front for years. With 950 pages of details (heavily redacted), it’s evident that numerous federal assets are deeply embedded within the organization. Interestingly, the group's only documented criminal activity appears to be the illegal placement of posters on public and private property. I'll post links to the FBI's documents (again, not terribly interesting given the fact they've been heavily redacted).The FBI's heavily redacted 950-page declassified document reveals the agency's involvement with the group through undercover assets and confidential human sources. The only criminal activity highlighted is the illegal placement of stickers and posters on public and private property. Notably, the document fails to explain why the FBI blocked the prosecution of Patriot Front leader Thomas Ryan Rousseau.
🧵The FBI declassified two packages of documents on the suspected federal front group Patriot Front on Monday:



vault.fbi.gov/patriot-front/…
vault.fbi.gov/patriot-front/…
🧵FLASHBACK: The FBI Blocked the Conviction of Patriot Front's Frontman Thomas Ryan Rousseau.
Read 4 tweets
Jul 16
This story keeps getting more bizarre. CNN is reporting Crooks bought 50 rounds of ammo, a 12' ladder from Home Depot and walked a mile to the rally with his father's AR-15, the ammo, and the ladder in tow. Nobody noticed him or stopped him? Image
UPDATE: So there is much debate about where the car was parked and how far he walked. Here is what I can parse from all of the reporting -

The shooter went to Home Depot to buy the telescoping ladder. He either left his car at Home Depot and walked about a mile as the crow flies (two miles via road) or he drove closer to the rally, parked, and walked a shorter distance. I went back and reviewed the CNN reporting and it isn't clear which they meant. They simply said he bought the ladder and walked to the rally - they may have omitted the short drive down the road in their reporting.

At the end of the day, we know that the shooter walked some distance - a mile, a half mile, a quarter mile - carrying a ladder, an AR-15, and ammo.Image
Read 5 tweets
Jul 12
PROJECT 2025🧵: While Trump is not involved with Project 2025 there are concerns that he will follow some of the paper's recommendations. This thread will outline the ones most likely to be implemented. First, it will bring back the Atari 2600 in every home.Project 2025 will resurrect the legendary Atari 2600, the iconic video game console that revolutionized home entertainment in the late 1970s and early 1980s with its cartridge-based games. This initiative aims to blend nostalgic gaming experiences with modern technology, allowing a new generation to enjoy classic titles on an updated platform.
PROJECT 2025🧵: Project 2025 is set to make parachute pants, the iconic baggy trousers made of lightweight synthetic fabric that gained massive popularity in the 1980s, required on Fridays.Image
PROJECT 2025🧵: Project 2025 will mandate that all music played on the radio must be from the 1980s. This initiative aims to revive the era's iconic tunes, bringing back the decade's unique sound and nostalgia to modern airwaves.Image
Read 8 tweets
Jul 12
FLASHBACK: A NYC jury determined E. Jean Carroll was lying. The Democrats who funded her lawsuit were so desperate to be able to call Trump a 'r pist' they decided they didn't care that the jury exonerated the former president - they keep repeating the lie.
FACTCHECK: A NYC Jury Exonerated Trump in Determining he did NOT 'R_pe' E. Jean Carroll.
FLASHBACK: A New York jury of Democrats who hate Trump found E. Jean Carroll’s 'r pe' claims were not credible. The jury determined that Trump did NOT 'r pe' her - it is in black and white on the verdict form.Image
Read 10 tweets
Jun 27
SCOTUS DECISION🧵: The first case - Ohio v. EPA

Case Summary:
The Supreme Court ruled on the "good neighbor" policy case concerning the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and its regulations to limit cross-state air pollution. The central issue was whether the EPA had the authority to enforce stringent rules on states to curb air pollution that affects neighboring states.

Opinion:
The Supreme Court granted applications for a stay, effectively halting the enforcement of the EPA's "good neighbor" policy. The decision underscores the limits of the EPA's regulatory authority, emphasizing state sovereignty in managing local environmental issues.

Majority Opinion:
Justice Neil Gorsuch delivered the opinion of the Court. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh joined Gorsuch in the majority. The Court's decision reflects a conservative approach to federal regulatory power, aligning with principles of state autonomy and limited federal intervention.

Dissenting Opinion:
Justice Amy Coney Barrett filed a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. The dissent argued in favor of the EPA's authority to implement the "good neighbor" policy, highlighting the importance of federal oversight in addressing interstate environmental challenges.

Vote:
The decision was a 5-4 split.

supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf…
SCOTUS DECISION🧵: The second case - Harrington v. Purdue Pharma

Case Summary:
The Supreme Court reviewed the case involving Purdue Pharma L.P., the company notorious for its role in the opioid crisis. The central issue was whether the bankruptcy court had the authority to approve a settlement that granted immunity from opioid-related lawsuits to the Sackler family, owners of Purdue Pharma, as part of the company's bankruptcy proceedings.

Opinion:
The Supreme Court reversed the lower court's decision and remanded the case for further proceedings. This decision effectively blocks the proposed settlement that would have shielded the Sackler family from liability.

Majority Opinion:
Justice Neil Gorsuch delivered the opinion of the Court, with Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Amy Coney Barrett, and Ketanji Brown Jackson joining. The majority opinion emphasized the limits of bankruptcy courts in approving settlements that extend immunity beyond the bankrupt entity itself, ensuring accountability for those responsible for the opioid crisis.

Dissenting Opinion:
Justice Brett Kavanaugh filed a dissenting opinion, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. The dissent argued that the settlement was a practical solution to compensate victims and address the fallout from the opioid crisis, and that blocking the settlement could delay or reduce compensation for those affected.

Vote:
The decision was a 5-4 split, with the majority favoring the reversal and remand, while the dissent supported upholding the settlement.

supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf…
SCOTUS DECISION🧵: The third case - SEC v. Jarkesy

Case Summary:
The Supreme Court reviewed the case involving the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and George Jarkesy, a hedge fund manager accused of securities fraud. The central issue was whether the SEC's administrative law judges (ALJs) have the constitutional authority to adjudicate such enforcement actions, or if these cases must be heard in federal court.

Opinion:
The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's decision and remanded the case for further proceedings. This ruling upholds the constitutionality of the SEC's use of administrative law judges for enforcement actions.

Majority Opinion:
Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court, with Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett joining. The majority opinion supports the SEC's current practice, emphasizing that the use of ALJs is consistent with the Constitution and essential for the efficient enforcement of securities laws.

Concurring Opinion:
Justice Neil Gorsuch filed a concurring opinion, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas. The concurrence highlighted specific constitutional principles supporting the majority decision, particularly the importance of maintaining the separation of powers and the role of administrative agencies.

Dissenting Opinion:
Justice Sonia Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. The dissent argued that the SEC's use of ALJs undermines the constitutional right to a jury trial and proper judicial oversight, asserting that such enforcement actions should be handled by federal courts.

Vote:
The decision was a 6-3 split.

supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf…
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(