photo #7204509

WASHINGTON POST ON MN GOV WALZ'S PART OF CNN INTERVIEW WITH VP HARRIS: Walz said that he speaks plainly and sometimes passionately, and he cast questions about the veracity of some of his comments as partisan attacks. -END- How is it a partisan attack to point out the inarguable disconnect between his earlier repeated claims and the universally published facts exposing their falsehoods? He did not retire at the rank he claimed, and he did not "carry weapons of war into war" as he additionally boasted. He can't excuse those things by simply asserting that he's being victimized by partisan attacks for speaking plainly. How could he be more self-invalidating?