Rep. Waltz Torches Walz On CNN: ‘If He’s So Damn Proud,’ Why Does He ‘Embellish’ And ‘Lie’?

Rep. Mike Waltz (R-FL) got into a heated debate with CNN’s Brianna Keilar on Wednesday over Governor Tim Walz (D-MN) and his repeated efforts to embellish or even outright lie about his time serving in the Army National Guard.

Walz is scheduled to make a speech at the Democratic National Convention officially accepting the party’s nomination for the vice presidency, and Waltz was one of a number of Republicans who signed an official letter condemning the Minnesota Democrat’s exaggerations, implications, and lies regarding his time in service.

Keilar asked Waltz about the letter during a Wednesday segment, repeatedly accusing Waltz and other Republicans of attacking Walz’s service — Waltz was quick to explain that it was not the service itself that anyone was attacking, but rather the lies about it.

WATCH:

We’re NOT attacking Tim Walz’s service. We just want to know, if he is “damn proud” of it, why has he continued to misrepresent and lie about it his entire career?

The veterans community is waiting for his answer. pic.twitter.com/rh6XQSscUE

— Rep. Mike Waltz (@michaelgwaltz) August 21, 2024

Keilar began by saying that the letter was an attack on Walz’s military service, adding, “Why are you doing that?”

“No, I disagree. I’m sorry, Brianna –” Waltz pushed back.

“You were attacking — well, I read the letter — so then, OK, you are attacking his representation of –” Keilar tried again.

Tickets for “Am I Racist?” are on sale NOW! Buy here for a theater near you.

“I am attacking the lies about his service,” Waltz clarified.

“Let me say what’s in the letter. The comment about the gun, the weapon of war that he obviously didn’t carry into war, and he should answer a question about that,” Keilar said. “And how he represented his retired rank, which was obviously different than what he was promoted to and what he retained after retirement. But also that issue of whether he abandoned his unit for a deployment to Iraq and did not go.”

Keilar then played a clip of one veteran who had served with Walz — who did not necessarily share his political views — but defended his military record. She did not play clips of others who have spoken out after serving with Walz — including the Command Sergeant Major who ultimately replaced him on the deployment in question — who have repeatedly stated that he left his men high and dry.

“I mean, that man hates Tim Walz’s politics, despises them, is not going to vote for him. But he served with him and he knows his service,” Keilar pressed. “So why are you and other Republicans doing this?”

“Well, I want to be clear and correct your characterization,” Waltz said again. “I’m not attacking his service … He said he’s proud of that service. If he’s so damn proud about it, why does he have to continue to embellish it and to lie about it? Because the facts are clear. He was promoted to sergeant major, but he didn’t do the things necessary to retire at that rank and was demoted. And yet there is ample — hundreds, hundreds of incidences where he is describing himself as a retired command sergeant major. That may sound like semantics to some, but to veterans, and particularly enlisted veterans, that matters. It’s a lie, it’s a misrepresentation and exaggeration, and he should account for that. I can tell you as —”

“It’s not stolen — it’s not stolen valor,” Keilar insisted. “I just want to be clear, and the letter, I’m reading this, I’m reading this, Mike and quote ‘abandoning the men and women under your leadership, just as they were getting ready to deploy, was certainly not honorable either.’ That is an attack on his service.”

“That is attack on the decision to not go to combat with his unit as a leader,” Waltz rebutted.

The conversation continued until Waltz finally said, “Brianna, you know, rather than defending these decisions, I wish you would interview him and ask him those questions, or that he would at least sit down and answer for these inconsistencies. The other thing we say in the letter is repeatedly he was described in front of him, introduced at events, described in articles, as a combat veteran and he did nothing to correct it. And he still today is doing nothing to correct it. So he clearly implied and allow others to describe himself as a combat veteran, and he clearly exaggerated his service, which he shouldn’t have done for political gain. That is unacceptable to the veterans community. It’s an insult to those who did what it took to be a command sergeant major and retire.”

“That goes to both his judgment and Harris’ judgment when he’s going to be a heartbeat away as commander-in-chief and likely the only person with any military experience in the room,” Waltz added.

“Yeah, look, he has some questions to answer for —” Keilar agreed, adding, “I don’t know if it’s worth burning down 24 years of service.”

“I wish he would sit down instead of me or JD Vance and answer those questions. The American people deserve it, the veterans community certainly deserve it,” Waltz shot back.