In 2005, Al Bonnifield, an armorer for the 1st Battalion, 125 Field Artillery, witnessed a significant moment when Command Sergeant Major Tim Walz deliberated whether to retire from the National Guard to run for Congress. Walz was uncertain and sought input from his colleagues, revealing his struggle with the decision.
This moment, which Bonnifield describes as pivotal, set Walz on a path that would eventually lead him to become the Democratic nominee for vice president. However, Walz’s decision has been marred by controversy and accusations of avoiding duty.
Critics, particularly from Trump-supporting circles, have accused Walz of retiring to evade a potential deployment to Iraq. They allege that Walz knew of an impending deployment and left to avoid it, which has fueled accusations of stolen valor. Bonnifield, however, argues that at the time of Walz’s retirement, no formal alert had been issued for deployment, and many others were making similar decisions. He contends that these criticisms are unfounded.
Walz has faced criticism from political opponents who accuse him of misrepresenting his military service. JD Vance, Trump’s running mate and a Marine Corps veteran, has specifically called out Walz for allegedly lying about his service and knowledge of a deployment. However, Walz’s military record, showing 24 years of service in various roles, reflects a career of significant achievement and dedication.
From Soldier to Controversy Tim Walz Military Debate Amid Vice-Presidential Campaign
Walz’s service history includes enlisting at 17, training as an infantryman, and later transferring to the Texas and Nebraska National Guards, where he served in multiple capacities. His roles ranged from infantry to field artillery, and he eventually joined the 1st Battalion, 125th Field Artillery in Minnesota. His service record includes numerous awards and medals, reflecting his extensive and varied military experience.
Accusations of stolen valor, which involve falsely claiming military honors for personal gain, have been leveled against Walz, but they do not hold under legal scrutiny. Walz’s campaign has adjusted the language to avoid claims of being a retired command sergeant major, though critics argue these adjustments are politically motivated. The legal definition of stolen valor does not cover Walz’s misstatements, which have been clarified by his campaign.
Veterans’ groups and commentators have criticized the politicization of Walz’s service record. Jacob Thomas from Common Defense argues that the focus should be on the fact that Walz served honorably rather than on the specifics of his service. The negative attention surrounding his military career is seen as an inappropriate and misleading attempt to discredit him.
Walz’s service included deployment in support roles to Italy and Turkey, qualifying him for several medals. Despite some confusion over which specific medals he earned, his service in support of Operation Enduring Freedom is clear. His promotion to command sergeant major, and subsequent retirement before completing certain advanced courses, aligns with standard military procedures and does not imply dishonorable conduct.
The attacks on Walz’s service are compared to the 2004 Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign against John Kerry. Critics argue that the controversy around Walz’s retirement is driven more by political motives than by genuine concerns about his military record. Mike Lavigne of VoteVets emphasizes that after 24 years of service, Walz’s retirement is well within the norm and should not be subjected to such intense scrutiny.
Bonnifield, who has defended Walz, has faced backlash for his support and was invited to speak at the Democratic National Convention. He chose to send a video instead, reflecting his reluctance to further involve himself in the contentious political landscape surrounding Walz’s military service.
