Comments by "Jimicus Atticus" (@TheJimicus) on "New York Post" channel.

That man can't actually answer a question to save his life.
16
 @IronskullGM Yea, with WWIII a brewin', let's leave the most powerful alliance on earth. Great plan Napoleon!
6
Jesus the hypocrisy of that statement is mind blowing. Your candidate is Donald Trump.
5
@NENboss5150 he phrased it poorly one time in 2018. He's been transparent about not serving in combat. There was no intentional lie involved. Just people flipping out about a poor choice of words one single time.
5
And plenty he served with directly don't. Imagine the audacity of putting service in quotes like that. I hope you never claim republicans are pro military.
5
No, that was me. I farted
4
 @MnShootingSports he had already applied for retirement and announced his run for office. He didn't "abandon" anyone.
4
 @Kirsdarke Jesus man step down off your ivory tower. Most of what you said is deliberate misrepresentation and dramatic language.
4
@blksbth1 he served in that rank and the guard has said it's appropriate for him to state it that way. He has been clear in interviews about his not serving in combat aside form a misstatement one single time.
4
@Kirsdarke what you have said is false. You're the one adding "tone" with your melodramatic posts. You've misrepresented every point you've made. Men he served with have plainly said he didn't abandon them. His statement about serving in war was a single time olin 2018 when he misspoke. In multiple interviews he's been clear that he didn't serve in combat. If it was deliberate stolen valor that wouldn't be the case.
4
@edenbarton-bh4ns no he didn't. He was promoted and retired a CSM. The demotion was administrative and after he had retired. His statement about being in war was a single misstatement from 2018. He's been clear in multiple interviews about not serving in combat. He's not lying about his service.
4
@GrizzlyAdams71 besides, from what sources say Trump's the one that smells lol
3
@GrizzlyAdams71 besides, from what sources say Trump's the one that smells lol
3
 @BigMikeRuinedBrokebackBarack how about you try and rebut anything she said?
3
That was sarcasm right?
3
 @blksbth1 the weapons are literally identical except for the fire control group. Don't act like he was comparing an M249 to a Red Ryder.
3
 @shawncosmos5431 the one who never even served with him?
3
@edenbarton-bh4ns "In describing his time in the military, Walz has never claimed to have served in any combat role. He makes this point explicit in nearly all published interviews on the subject. Speaking during his 2009 Library of Congress interview about his unit's deployment in a support role during Operation Enduring Freedom, for example, Walz described some of his men's disappointment at their noncombat assignment: "We were under the assumption we could fire artillery [during Operation Enduring Freedom]. That's what we had trained for. … All of us, first and foremost, were infantry and all of us did need to provide whatever was required of us. So we ended up providing part of the … base security for Air Force bases. … And I think in the beginning, many of my troops were disappointed."
3
@Halfsteptheory Ok, here's one who served with him "Joseph Eustice, a 32-year veteran of the guard who led the same battalion as Walz, said the governor fulfilled his duty. "He was a great soldier," Eustice said. "When he chose to leave, he had every right to leave." Eustice said claims to the contrary are ill-informed and possibly sour grapes by a soldier who was passed over for the promotion to command sergeant major that went to Walz."
3
@ClassicFIHD WRONG! (isn't yelling fun?) He retired as an acting CSM. The reduction in rank was an administrative action that took place after he retired.
3
@ClassicFIHD Why do you keep typing in all caps boomer? "The dispute about Walz's rank is, at its core, a semantic one. When Walz was promoted to command sergeant major on Sept. 17, 2004, his promotion was conditional on his completing certain training. It is not uncommon for such promotions to precede the required training. He began, but did not complete, training for this role at that time, as described by the military-focused media outlet Task and Purpose: Regardless, Walz served for seven months as command sergeant major. When he decided to retire, he left without completing that training. As a result, his official retirement rank is a step lower. The demotion occurred after he left, and it was administrative, not punitive. The change primarily affects Walz's military-retirement package."
3
 TheMessiahPraiseMe that's not remotely accurate.
2
 @Emotionalsavage281 That was by design. Do you people honestly know nothing of the past 70 years? We set things up this way. It was never supposed to be equal. That's part of US hegemony.
2
@blksbth1 No, not really. Particularly when you're generally advices to use single shots anyway which completely nullifies any difference. And he disnt lie, he misspoke one single time in 2018. He's been perfectly clear in multiple interviews about not serving in combat. If he were lying he wouldn't openly state otherwise now would he?
2
 @Kirsdarke no you're not, you're being dramatic while spitting propaganda. At least spend a few minute fact checking what you're posting.
2
@blksbth1 1) Yes, I guarantee that a semi auto AR is at least 90$ as effective in that scenario. Do you shoot? I'd wagter anyone that's actually spent time with an AR or similar rifle would say the same if they're honest. If they're so ineffective, why do so many want them? 2) That's absolutely incorrect. Literally, everything you just said is false and demonstrably so. He didn't lie about his rank. He served and retired as a CMS.He didn't lie about his service record as I've a;ready explained. If you chose to be deliberately obtuse that's on you. He didn't lie to his unit as clarified by men in his actual unit. They disagree with you. You're just wrong. Because of responding to people like you I've been forced to look this stuff up and he comes out looking better, not worse. Could he have worded things differently from time to time? Sure. But claiming stolen valor or deliberate lies are simply wrong. Either through ignorance or spite. As to my last line: if he's consciously trying to misrepresent his record, why does he openly state that he didn't serve in combat? Shouldn't he try to hide the truth? Stick to his lie? He's completely transparent except for one sentence 6 years ago.
2
Temporarily, to buy votes
2
 @pauls2613 lol, no, he literally didn't. What was his darkest moment?
2
 FelixFederov-u4y "But Bonnifield vehemently pushed back on the assertion that Walz abandoned his unit, calling it “wrong” and “bulls‑‑‑.”
2
Who did? That's not what I've read regarding their statements.
1
@Emotionalsavage281 That's not even how NATO works. No, we didn't fund 80%. The "Funding" for NATO is just the admin costs and such, of which we funded about 22%. NATO is a military alliance Most of what you think of as "funding" is how much each nation spends on it's military and no, it's not 80% us. You trumpers belive anything you're told don't you?
1
@TexanAstarte "Google" doesn't disprove anything. It's a search engine. Learn how the internet works. What specifically did you supposedly disprove and through what source?
1
@narzq Nonsense. That was always an excuse. Why dso you thin Russia has changed their reason for invading like 5 times?
1
@narzq Man, you guys are just strasight russian shills now huh? Nato ran? Are you implying you wanted a full scale conflict between Nato and Russia? Granted, it would have been over much faster as Russia's military would have been reduced to spears and foul language by week two. At various times, Russia has claimed the invasion was to protect the ethnic RUssians of the Donbas, to "de-nazify" ukraine (because Zelensky is apparently one of those famous Jewish Nazis), to regain land that Putin considers part of Russia and as a defensive measure to NATO getting too close (despite NATO already bordering Russia), or to simply prevent Ukraine from making it's own decisions and become a satellite state. So which is it? What's the excuse this week for the dictator to invade a neighbor?
1
@GrizzlyAdams71 "Fake Joe?" Do you idiots always use name calling like trump? You people are such children.
1
@kevinchambers1101 no he didn't. If you don't want to accept that he misspoke then fine but if he was lying, as in, intending to deliberately misrepresent his service, he wouldn't be so clear about not serving in combat in other interviews. That wouldn't make any sense. He's been transparent about the lack of combat deployment for years except for that one single time and even then didn't say combat. He was discussing the weapons, not his service directly, and just said "carried in war." It just doesn't fit the narrative your trying to illustrate.
1
He didn't enter politics until his 40s. He was a teacher. And yes, trump is a politician. That's what you call people in politics like, y'know, the president? Also,trump praised his job during the riots. Seems like trump can't figure out his story I guess.
1
That's a great "crazy guy who lives in a shed in the woods" costume.
1
 @pamyonash9624 to be fair, Trump IS the other ticket here so it's relevant.
1
@MnShootingSports Jesus, you people are obsessed with CNN. Look it up. The info is all over the place. Along with quotes from men he serves with: "Bonnifield vehemently pushed back on the assertion that Walz abandoned his unit, calling it “wrong” and “bulls‑‑‑.”
1
@Kirsdarke sweetheart? Are you coming on to me? I'm straight dude.
1
@Kirsdarke no question you know more about that than I do. I'm not saying that's all that's used but most of your description was suppressing fire. Since I'm comparing it with civilian rifles I'm referring to shooting at one or more targets, not suppression during movement as that's not terribly relevant to, for example, a mass shooter. I'll agree that in the right context full auto and burst fire is perfectly appropriate.
1
 @Crazson34 he made one statement in 2018 about carrying g it in war. He's been very clear in other interviews about not serving in combat. And he retired as a CSM.
1
He had already filed for retirement.
1
@edenbarton-bh4ns absolutely false. According to the men he served with.
1