JD Vance 'Stolen Honor' Smear of Tim Walz a Classic Case of 'Quibbling' and 'Swiftboating'

Tim Walz as a new recruit in the Army National Guard in 1981. (Photo: U.S. Army)

JD Vance and Republicans are engaging in a classic case of quibbling over Tim Walz’s military service to support their damning Swiftboating charges of “stolen valor.”

Military personnel who engage in quibbling are in violation of the military code of conduct, which holds that the practice is undesirable and unbecoming of officers and enlisted men.

Quibbling is defined as raising objections about a trivial matter or citing technicalities designed to obscure the truth.

Vance, a Marine veteran, should know that better than anyone.

Donald Trump, who receive five deferments from the Vietnam-era draft — the last for (ahem) “bone spurs” — never served, so probably not. Yet, he’s an inveterate quibbler.

In the case of Walz, Vance and Republicans are parsing words and assigning them with precise technical meanings to make a case that just isn’t there.

For example, they are making an issue out of a Walz statement that he “carried a weapon in war.”

The direct quote was this: “We can make sure those weapons of war, that I carried in war, are only carried in war.”

To say Walz was never in a war is false.

He was deployed as part of “Operation Enduring Freedom” when the United States was “at war” in Afghanistan. His deployment to Italy instead of in country was beyond his control, but he was still part of the war effort.

It’s like saying an intelligence officer who never left his office buried deep below London was not part of World War II. What’s more, the government recognized his contribution to the operation, as well as others similarly situated, with a commendation medal.

In addition, you have to consider the context. Walz was talking about gun control and made a general statement about military grade weapons when he used the phrase.

To parse that and try to apply a narrow, precise meaning to the words “in war” to falsely suggest he meant he was in combat is not only out of context it’s… quibbling.

As for his rank, there is no question that he was promoted and served as a Command Sergeant Major while on active duty. Through bureaucratic red tape and a technicality related to retirement, he was discharged with benefits one grade below as a master sergeant.

So was he a Command Sergeant Major when he retired? Yes, he was. Did he receive the benefits of a Master Sergeant after he retired? Yes, that’s true too. But how does that equate to “stolen valor?”

Again, Republicans are quibbling.

As for his retirement, it’s hard to argue that someone was dodging deployment to Iraq who spent 24 years in the military and even reupped after Sept. 11 when he already had 20 years in.

Walz had put in for retirement nearly a year before his unit received orders to deploy. It was almost another year after that before it actually went to Iraq. Vance and Republicans claim, he likely knew about the possibility of deployment before that.

In the military, that’s called “scuttlebutt.” It’s another word for gossip and rumor. Walz had already made the decision to run for Congress. It makes no sense that he would change his mind based on scuttlebutt.

The fact that his commanding officer could have blocked his retirement and didn’t speaks volumes.

In the military, once things are put in motion, its damn hard to reverse them.

Finally, there is the issue of his age. The average age of a combat solider in Enduring Freedom was 25-years-old. At 41, Walz’s deployment in a combat role would have been problematic.

If there is any foul here, it lies with the Republicans.

This underhanded political tactic is known as “Swiftboating.” a name derived from the 2004 presidential campaign.

John Kerry, the Democratic nominee was a Vietnam veteran and Swift Boat commander. The small armored boats plied rivers in the Mekong Delta, seeking to engage the enemy.

Although Kerry was a decorated war hero, Republicans organized groups of Vietnam veterans to discredit his service in a smear campaign based on false allegations because of his later anti-war activities.

The term became part of political nomenclature to describe unfair or untrue political attacks, and has been used in subsequent presidential campaigns as well.

Vance and his cohorts have engaged in a classic case of “swiftboating”. It’s reprehensible and needs to stop.