Dorothy Gasque responds.

I received (about a half hour ago) a response from Dorothy Gasque personally. I apologize to her for taking this amount of time (2 hours and 5 minutes from when her email was sent; roughly 30 minutes from when I found out about it) to get this up.

The message is as follows:

Hi K.J,

I apologize for any delay. I had to drag out my service paperwork to track down some evidence to satisfy you. I am still working on a public statement as all of this has broken just a few days ago. Until then, I have attached the documentation for the Army Accommodation[sic] Medal I earned from the 155th BCT. If you would like to sit down and talk to me, feel free to reach out. Note the award is issued under my maiden name, as I chose not to change my last name until after leaving the service. 

Dorothy Gasque  

dorothyforcongress.com

facebook.com/dorothy4congress

twitter.com/dorothy4house

Attached were two PDF's, front and back, of a DA Form 638 (NOV 94) Recommendation for Award.

The recommendation was for an Oak Leaf Cluster to an ARCOM (Army Commendation Medal) to cover the service she provided from January 9, 2005 through December 6, 2005.  This appears to be an End of Tour award.

This did not include the Combat "V" Device for Valor, but that is neither here nor there.

The relevant part of the recommendation states this:

The claims made by Gasque as stated on her web site and other locations include the following:

That she deployed to Iraq with 2/11ACR.

That is the case.

That "she was often asked to lead combat patrols."

The recommendation indicates that she "participated in 10 combat patrols."  I had expressed doubt that she had any such involvement in "combat patrols" per se', clearly she did; I also indicated that it was highly unlikely that as someone completely untrained in combat operations, small unit leadership, tactics and operations that she would hold a leadership position per se' in a combat environment.

That said, the recommendation does not indicate that she held a leadership position of any kind during a combat patrol.

That she "organize(d) traffic checkpoints."  The recommendation indicates that she "participated" in "10 traffic control points," as opposed to the verbiage she used, which was to "organize" said points;

And that she "manage(d) base security."  The recommendation indicates that she served as "Sergeant of the Guard" at FOB Kalsu."  It does not indicate that she in any way managed any aspect of "base security."

Having served as a "Sergeant of the Guard" on several occasions, the specific mission of someone in that position is not to "manage base security," it is, instead, to enforce it and to supervise the troops actually engaging in guard duty for that specific period of time.

Sergeant of the Guard is a roster duty, as is guard duty itself.

To me, of additional import is the recommendation indicates that she also participated in 3 raids and that she was "instrumental in the searching and processing of female suspects during cordon and knock operations."

The handling of female suspects has always been a touchy situation.  It bears some likelihood that her primary function in this environment was to do just that.  However, I have no evidence to suggest that was the case like she has provided no evidence to prove she was ever leading missions where female suspects would be encountered.

So, what does it all mean?

Had she stuck to the language of the recommendation, I likely wouldn't have had any issue with it.

The form itself speaks highly of her and her efforts as well as her professionalism in doing her duties.  The claims made on her campaign website are at least partially backed by the recommendation form for the ARCOM (which was also approved, I might add); however, the differences in her description of what she said she did in Iraq and the description of what her commanders said she did there appear to be slightly different... concerning critical verbiage such as "lead combat patrols" and "organize traffic checkpoints" and "manage base security."

I urge her to ratchet her verbiage down to reflect the recommendation.  I also urge her to include the verbiage of the raids as well as her additional duties of handling female suspects, which was left out.

I will be sending this information out for review and will be commenting on any responses by those in the know which I get back.

Fair is fair: she has, in fact served in Iraq (Her name change, as she pointed out, was after she completed her time in the military and thus was not reflected in the actual form) and she has, in fact, participated in "combat patrols" and other field duties to include at least 3 officially recognized raids, which is inarguably combat duty.

I appreciate her response and her service to this country.