John Kolb, a retired Minnesota National Guard colonel, knew Tim Walz by reputation as an “excellent leader” who adroitly guided the enlisted troops in his field artillery battalion. But Kolb was stunned by what he saw when Walz left the military and entered politics.
Walz retired from the National Guard in 2005 to run for Congress just before his unit received an order to mobilize for the war in Iraq. Then during the campaign, Walz overstated the rank he held at the point he left the service.
“That is not the behavior I would expect out of a senior noncommissioned officer,” Kolb said in an interview.
Those two sides of Walz’s service have been in the spotlight now that the Minnesota governor is the Democratic nominee for vice president. Supporters have lauded Walz’s 24 years of service in the National Guard, where he rose through the enlisted ranks and received an honorable discharge.
What You Need To Know
- Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz retired from the National Guard in 2005 to run for Congress just before his unit received an order to mobilize for the war in Iraq
- Then during the campaign, Walz overstated the rank he held at the point he left the service
- Supporters have lauded Walz’s 24 years of service in the National Guard, where he rose through the enlisted ranks and received an honorable discharge
“What I know about Tim Walz is he did his job diligently,” said retired Minnesota National Guard Brig. Gen. Jeff Bertrang. “He was in charge of troops under him, and he made sure they were taken care of.”
Republicans have seized on criticism by Guard veterans as a major line of attack on Walz and Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris. Some of that criticism, like Kolb’s, is measured. Others offer harsher appraisals.
It’s far from clear whether Republicans can turn Walz’s military record into a liability. His decades of service stand in contrast with former President Donald Trump, the Republican presidential nominee who received a series of deferments to avoid serving in Vietnam, including one attained with a physician’s letter stating that Trump suffered from bone spurs in his feet.
Trump’s running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, was a Marine Corps corporal, including six months as a military journalist in Iraq. After four years, he left the military for college and later a career in venture capital and as a best-selling author. Vance has led the criticism of Walz.
For many Democrats, the GOP salvos are an eerie reprise of the tactics used to sully their 2004 presidential candidate, John Kerry, by questioning his leadership as a swift boat commander in Vietnam, even though Kerry was a decorated combat veteran and his Republican opponent, President George W. Bush, did not fight in the war.
But the criticism stems not so much from Walz’s service record but from how he has characterized his time in uniform and how he ended his tenure.
An Associated Press review of Walz’s statements as a congressional candidate, congressman and governor shows that Walz has toggled between being precise and careless about key details.
Walz’s supporters reject the criticism as politically motivated and say it denigrates the sacrifices he and other troops have made. The Harris campaign provided a letter signed by hundreds of veterans and military family members that said Vance’s broadsides against Walz are not surprising given reports that Trump expressed disdain for those who served. Trump has denied the claim.
“After 24 years of military service, Governor Walz retired in 2005 and ran for Congress, where he was a tireless advocate for our men and women in uniform — and as vice president of the United States he will continue to be a relentless champion for our veterans and military families,” the campaign said.
In a speech this past week at the Democratic National Convention, Walz said he “proudly wore our nation’s uniform for 24 years.” He made no reference to his rank or the circumstances of his retirement, framing his service as part of a larger urge to “contribute” to the nation.
Distinction with a difference
“I’m a retired command sergeant major,” Walz said in 2006 as he campaigned to unseat the six-term Republican incumbent in Minnesota’s 1st Congressional District.
But that statement was not true.
Walz served briefly as a command sergeant major, but that was not the rank he held at retirement. It is not clear whether Walz repeated the exact claim after he won the House race, but he did not object when colleagues put the honorific before his name during House debates to underscore his gravitas on military matters.
That distinction -– serving as a command sergeant major, but not retiring in that position -– may seem minor to civilians. But to those in uniform, it is not.
Rank is revered in the Army.
Known as an E-9 in military parlance, a command sergeant major is the pinnacle of achievement in the Army’s enlisted corps. Command sergeant majors are the backbone of a unit, acting as mentors and disciplinarians to the enlisted troops and trusted advisers to their commanding officers. Sergeant majors often stay in their units for long stretches, providing a deep well of institutional knowledge. Commissioned officers typically move on to new posts every few years.
“There’s a reason why there’s so much angst about this among military members that maybe is lost on the rest of the population,” Kolb said. “The rank of command sergeant major, that E-9 rank, is sacred. It’s rare.”
Walz was command sergeant major of the Minnesota Guard’s 1st Battalion, 125th Field Artillery for less than a year, according to the Guard’s personnel office. His rank was reduced for benefit purposes to master sergeant, a step below, when he left the Guard because Walz had not completed all the coursework necessary to hold the rank in retirement.
Facing questions about Walz’s record, the Harris campaign replaced the phrase “a retired command sergeant major” from Walz’s online biography with wording that says he served as one. But Walz’s official biography on the Minnesota governor’s website is still misleading. That biography places “retired from” a Guard battalion after the phrase “Command Sergeant Major Walz.”
“He’s a retired master sergeant,” Kolb said. “And that’s what he should say.”
The campaign also acknowledged that Walz misspoke in a 2018 video posted on social media that recorded him saying “weapons of war that I carried in war.” Vance seized on the comment to accuse Walz of lying about being in a combat zone when he never was. Walz and other Guard troops were sent to Italy in 2003 to provide base security in support of Operation Enduring Freedom, the Pentagon’s name for the war in Afghanistan.
Questions about Walz mischaracterizing his personal story have not been limited to military service. He is also facing scrutiny for how he has described his family’s struggle with infertility. He has implied that he and his wife used in vitro fertilization to conceive, drawing a connection between their experience and efforts to limit the procedure. But they actually used intrauterine insemination treatments, a different process that has attracted less controversy.
Leaving the Guard
By military standards, Walz’s 24 years of service is substantial. He could have retired almost three years earlier. But it is the circumstances surrounding the retirement and how it overlapped with his political ambitions that have drawn scrutiny.
In January 2005, Walz attended a boot camp of sorts in Minnesota for people interested in careers in progressive politics. Walz, a teacher and avid pheasant hunter with blue-collar roots, stood out as a candidate who might win in the state’s strongly Republican 1st Congressional District.
Minnesota Democratic party officials had already begun to take notice of Walz.
Mike Erlandson, the party’s state chair at the time, recalled the enthusiasm one of his aides brimmed with after meeting with Walz in Mankato, a town about 70 miles southwest of Minneapolis where Walz taught high school geography.
“He came barging into my office at the state party, saying, ’Mike, this guy Tim is the real deal,’ and was very excited about Tim Walz and the prospect of him running for Congress,” Erlandson said.
By February, Walz announced that he was considering a run for Congress. But thousands of miles away, the war in Iraq had entered its third year and hopes for a speedy U.S. withdrawal were evaporating. In mid-March, Walz’s battalion was notified of a possible deployment to Iraq.
In a campaign news release, Walz said he would stay in the congressional race “whether I am in Minnesota or Iraq.” He had a responsibility, the release said, to ready his battalion for war “but also to serve if called on.”
Less than two months later, on May 16, 2005, Walz retired from the National Guard. His departure was not unusual. More than 730 senior enlisted soldiers with 24 years of service retired in 2005 when the U.S. was heavily engaged in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to Defense Department statistics.
But Doug Julin, a Minnesota Guard command sergeant major senior to Walz, told CNN on Aug. 8 that Walz had assured him just weeks before that Walz would be going forward with the battalion. Julin, who did not respond to requests for comment from The Associated Press, said he was surprised to learn Walz left the Guard without first discussing the decision with him.
Kolb picked Tom Behrends, who has emerged as Walz’s most biting critic, to replace Walz as the 1st Battalion’s command sergeant major. The unit received an alert order for mobilization to Iraq in mid-July 2005 and a few months later headed to Mississippi for training. The unit shipped to Iraq in March 2006 where it would spend the next 16 months.
Later that year, Walz, unopposed in the Democratic primary, would pull off an upset, beating Republican Rep. Gil Gutknecht.
Questions about Walz’s military record had percolated during that campaign. A letter to the editor in the Mankato Free Press newspaper from a person identified as Maj. Walter Gates said information about Walz’s military career strongly suggested that Walz had fought in Iraq or Afghanistan. To which country did Walz “deploy downrange”? Gates asked.
Walz responded by saying the letter appeared to be an attempt to “slander my good name.” Walz wrote, incorrectly, that he retired as a command sergeant major, but accurately specified that he served on three NATO training missions and in Italy. Walz was equally clear about his wartime service in a 2009 interview with the Library of Congress’s Veterans History Project.
Gates did not respond to multiple messages from the AP so it is unclear what information he was referring to.
Walz, in the early 2005 campaign news release, did not mention Italy when he said he deployed for eight months in support of Operation Enduring Freedom, phrasing that could imply he served in Afghanistan. A 2006 congressional campaign ad described Walz as a soldier who had served for two decades and was “ready when they attacked.”
Joe Eustice, who took over for Behrends as the 1st Battalion’s top enlisted soldier, said Walz was entitled to leave the Guard when he did.
“When you’ve given 24 years of your life, you get to decide, and your reasoning can be whatever you want it to be,” said Eustice, who retired in 2014.
But he is troubled by Walz’s statements after he left the Guard.
“He should answer to the fact that he said he carried a weapon in war and explain why he’s been saying he’s a retired sergeant major,” Eustice said. “Those two things are not true, and he should know better.”
A longtime foe
Almost two decades have passed since Behrends hurriedly took Walz’s place as the 1st Battalion’s senior enlisted soldier. Yet time has not eased Behrends anger at his predecessor. As Walz’s political career flourished, Kolb advised Behrends to let go of the resentment.
But Behrends could not. Not when he read and heard Walz inaccurately referred to as a retired command sergeant major – and Walz failed to set the record straight. After yet another local newspaper elevated Walz’s retirement rank, Behrends wrote to the then-congressman.
“It saddens me that after your long career in the National Guard, that you did not fulfill the conditions of your promotion to command sergeant major,” he told Walz. “I would hope that you haven’t been using the rank for political gain, but that is how it appears.”
Behrends said he did not get a reply. When Walz ran for governor two years later, Behrends went public with much stronger criticism.
A self-described “down-home country boy,” Behrends did not like Walz personally. They are at opposite ends of the political spectrum. Behrends is a conservative who donated $250 to Trump’s 2020 presidential campaign and supported Walz’s Republican opponents in Minnesota.
While they were both still in uniform, Behrends grew weary of what he said were Walz’s frequent monologues that at times veered into hot-button issues like abortion.
“It was like listening to a long-winded preacher,” he said.
Shortly before votes were cast in Minnesota’s gubernatorial election, Behrends hung a large yellow banner from a grain bin on his farm that read, “Walz Is A Traitor.” Behrends and a fellow retired command sergeant major, Paul Herr, paid to publish a letter in a Minnesota newspaper claiming that Walz had for years “embellished and selectively omitted facts and circumstances” about his military career.
In an interview, Behrends said his personal distaste for Walz and his liberal politics played no role in his decision to openly denigrate the vice presidential nominee. Behrends said he would have done the same to a friend if he believed that friend had stepped out of line.
