By Charles M. Blow / The New York Times
On Sunday, Dustin Grage, a columnist for the conservative website Townhall and a Republican strategist who describes himself as a “Minnesota GOP hype man,” posted on X a clip from a 2012 speech by Tim Walz to the American Legion. In the clip, Walz says: “When I was in Afghanistan, you know what our troops were worried about? They were worried about their family’s health care, and they were worried about their pensions.”
Grage’s post said Walz claiming he was in Afghanistan was “another example of Stolen Valor.”
But Walz did, in fact, visit Afghanistan and speak with troops as part of a congressional delegation in 2008. Grage concedes as much in a “note” that was later appended to the post, complaining that Walz didn’t “specify” that he was referring to “the trip four years prior.”
But Grage didn’t remove the “stolen valor” post, which has been viewed more than 340,000 times. The note, on the other hand, has been viewed only about 4,000 times. This differential is how misinformation spreads.
Some legitimate questions have arisen about statements that Walz made about his service, but four veterans who specialize in investigating cases of deception about service told The New York Times last month that “they do not believe Walz engaged in stolen valor, but that he did misrepresent his record at times or, at the very least, has not always been precise.”
The “stolen valor” claim isn’t true, and it isn’t sticking, but that hasn’t stopped conservatives from using it. They will try anything that they think might shift the narrative.
We have entered the scrounging-for-scandals stage of the presidential race. The battle is asymmetrical. Donald Trump is plagued by so many scandals that they start to blend together and people become numb to them, while videos keep emerging of his running mate, J.D. Vance, repeatedly vilifying people, particularly women, for not having children.
Scandal can work two ways in a campaign. It can reinforce a negative impression. That is what the “stolen valor” attacks are meant to do, to cement the idea that Walz — and Kamala Harris, to a degree — are not what they seem, that they are inflated beyond their actual accomplishments.
The Vance revelations and incidents like Trump’s disastrous visit to the Arlington National Cemetery and his Play-Doh-like message shaping and reshaping on reproductive rights do it too, underscoring the idea that the Trump-Vance ticket lacks compassion and respect for certain people, like women and veterans.
The other way scandal can work is on a larger, more race-altering level, where it lands with such weight and so close to the election that there isn’t enough time for the subject to adjust for it. These are seismic events, and they are rare.
This race has already had two seismic events: the attempted assassination of Trump, which has receded in prominence, and the replacement of President Joe Biden with Harris, which has completely shifted the race.
The October surprises came in July. The race climaxed too early. Now it seems to be settling into a new normal, on a glide path to November. That is not to say that the next two months will be uneventful or that we can confidently predict an outcome. Surprises are not only still possible; they are likely. For instance, the first — and possibly only — presidential debate between Harris and Trump is set for next week.
But will any of those surprises rise to a “But her emails!” level? Will any of them fundamentally change the race? All we can say for sure is that the clock is ticking and the enthusiasm has shifted.
This has produced a panic in Trump world. And Trump panics aggressively. Desperation increases an instinct to play dirty. Days after the “Access Hollywood” tape leaked in 2016, Trump held a news conference with several women who had accused former President Bill Clinton of inappropriate sexual behavior. Trump then planned to seat them close to the stage at that night’s debate with Hillary Clinton.
Harris has embraced her candidacy and is owning it. I’m sure that she really wants to win. But Trump’s motivation is different and deeper. For him, winning is existential. He is running to prevent or delay some very serious prosecutions that could end with prison time. He is driven by an embittered instinct for self-preservation and retribution.
Trump needs a scandal that makes a moment, and he won’t stop trying until he finds one that works.
This article originally appeared in The New York Times, c.2024.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
