Post from Truth Social

A Montana endorsement off the same day's template

This is at least the sixth congressional endorsement posted on October 26, and its structure matches the others almost clause for clause. Each one praises the candidate's biography, lists the same policy items ("Cut Taxes and Regulations, Promote MADE IN THE U.S.A., Unleash American Energy DOMINANCE, Keep our Border SECURE, Stop Migrant Crime"), and then gives the opponent one paragraph that opens with the same sentence: "a Radical Left Democrat who is opposed to NO TAX ON TIPS, NO TAX ON OVERTIME, and NO TAX ON SOCIAL SECURITY and, if he and the Dumocrats ever got in, all of these things will be terminated." The De La Cruz post from the same afternoon uses that sentence word for word. Only the names, the district, and the biographical details change, so the post says more about how the midterm endorsement operation works than about the subject's state of mind that day.

Who wrote it

The post went up at 20:48 UTC. Daylight time was still in effect (it ends November 1), so that is 4:48 p.m. Eastern, in the middle of the working day, while he was between midterm rally trips run from Washington. The prose is clean and modular. The military details are specific ("Lieutenant Colonel," "Iraq and Afghanistan," "two Bronze Stars"), there is a family line ("a wonderful wife, Jessica, and three beautiful children"), and it closes with the "President DONALD J. TRUMP" signature block and a campaign URL. These are staff-drafting markers. The house style he is known for is all there: random capitalization of nouns ("Great State," "Farmers and Ranchers"), the "Complete and Total Endorsement" formula, "Dumocrats." But it is supplied by the template, so it is no evidence that he typed this one. The double space in "people of

Montana's" looks like the seam where text was pasted into a template slot. At most he approved a slate. The text keeps to the template's order from first line to signature, and that steadiness is the clearest sign against his having typed it: his own posts tend to wander at least once into a grievance or a remark about himself.

"Mutilization" is a non-standard form of "mutilation." Because it sits in reusable template text, it says nothing about how he produces language in real time, and it does not count as a cognitive marker.

The split between the two candidates

The emotional structure is idealization set against devaluation, with nothing in between. Flint gets only praise: "distinguished Combat Veteran," "served our Nation with Honor," "HE WILL NEVER LET YOU DOWN!" Forstag gets a list of charges, most of which have no stated link to anything he has done: "massive Tax Increases, Open Borders, Men playing in Women's Sports, and Transgender Mutilization of your Children," ending in the three-part "Reckless, Radical, and Dangerous!" This is splitting in the descriptive sense, with the opponent made to stand for the whole Democratic agenda. "Dumocrats" is a playground-style insult aimed at the party as a whole. "Our always under siege Second Amendment" adds a note of standing threat but names no one.

The Forstag paragraph leans on fear and on moral panic about children. "Transgender Mutilization of your Children" is the most charged phrase in the post, and its target is a policy category. The only instruction to readers is "GET OUT AND VOTE." That is ordinary electoral mobilization, and the ballot box is the only remedy the post offers against Forstag or anyone else.

Self, archetype, and order

He barely appears in the post, apart from granting the endorsement. Power works through patronage here: his "Complete and Total Endorsement" is the valuable thing being given out, and the post assumes his approval is what makes a candidate legitimate. That is the King archetype handing down favor, with the Warrior's language borrowed for the attack paragraph. The order/chaos framing is order restorer. Flint will "Safeguard our Elections" and keep the border "SECURE," while the opposition stands for disorder. Status goes up for the "amazing people of Montana" and for the veteran-rancher image, and down for "Radical Left" Democrats. A few days after he talked about suing over Alaska Senate results if the GOP loses, "Safeguard our Elections" fits his ongoing theme of preparing to contest losses. In this post, though, it appears as a stock item in the template's list.

What the claims rest on

The checkable claims fall into three groups. The first is Flint's biography: fifth-generation Montanan, Lieutenant Colonel, deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, two Bronze Stars. These came from the campaign and were not checked independently here. The second is the description of the tax policy. The 2025 reconciliation law created temporary deductions for tips and overtime. It did not end federal tax on Social Security; it added a temporary deduction for seniors of up to $6,000. So "NO TAX ON SOCIAL SECURITY," presented as an existing policy Forstag opposes, overstates what the law did. The third is the charges against Forstag, which are partisan characterizations attached to a candidate who, as a state legislator, never voted on the federal law.

Fact Verification

Outside the campaign:

• Montana Free Press (Tom Lutey, April 13, 2026) says in its own voice that Flint joined the Montana National Guard as a University of Montana ROTC student in 2002, was deployed to both Iraq and Afghanistan, and "was awarded two Bronze Stars during his time in the Guard and Army Reserves." A later MTFP profile (Oct. 15, 2026) lists deployments to Iraq, Afghanistan, the Horn of Africa and the Arabian Peninsula.
• An older board bio from the veterans' group Warriors & Quiet Waters calls him a lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserve. It says he first deployed as an infantry platoon leader in Ramadi, Iraq, in 2005-06 and later served on an embedded training team in Afghanistan.
• A 2018 Yellowstone County News item says he had just come back from an Army National Guard deployment, his fourth overseas assignment.
• KULR8/Cowles and other outlets describe him as a retired Army lieutenant colonel with two Bronze Stars.

No outlet, opponent or fact-checker has challenged the record. The Forstag campaign's attacks on Flint focus on other issues.

Three caveats keep this from a full true rating:

• No award citation or DD-214 is public, so the Bronze Stars rest on the campaign and on press reports that don't cite records.
• He is a retired lieutenant colonel, not a serving one.
• The post says the medals were "for Bravery." The Bronze Star is given for either heroic or meritorious service in a combat zone, and no source says his carried the "V" valor device, so that framing is unconfirmed. |

| "Aaron Flint is a fifth-generation Montanan" | Mostly True | The exact generation count traces back to the campaign, but the family history behind it shows up independently and years earlier. The campaign's About page calls Flint "a fifth-generation Montanan." It says his family homesteaded near Opheim (Valley County, north of Glasgow) and Niarada (Sanders County, on the Flathead Reservation), and that he grew up in Glasgow and the Flathead.

Independent support:

• In a March 24, 2018 announcement for his radio show on KMPT, eight years before he ran for office, Flint said, "My dad's side of the family goes back to the homesteading days in the Flathead."
• Montana Free Press reports, without attributing it to the campaign, that he grew up in Glasgow on the Hi-Line, calls him "the grandson of Glasgow newspaper publishers," and identifies his mother, Karen Link.

The timeline also fits. He entered the University of Montana in 2002, so he was born around 1983-84. The Flathead Reservation and the Hi-Line opened to homesteaders in the 1910s, which would put great-great-grandparents on the land at about the right time for five generations.

No outlet has disputed the claim. I found no public genealogy confirming the count itself, so the rating is mostly true rather than true. | | "Sam Forstag opposes no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, and no tax on Social Security" | Mostly False | The same sentence appears word for word in other endorsements posted the same day, which suggests it was not based on Forstag's own statements. As a Montana state legislator he cast no vote on the 2025 federal reconciliation law. The law created temporary deductions for tips and overtime. It did not eliminate tax on Social Security; it added a temporary senior deduction of up to $6,000. So the 'no tax on Social Security' policy he is said to oppose does not exist as described. | | "If Democrats won, no tax on tips, overtime, and Social Security would all be terminated" | Mostly False | This is a prediction, but every premise it rests on can be checked, and they don't hold up.

The breaks already end on a schedule Republicans wrote:

• The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed July 4, 2025, created deductions for qualified tips (up to $25,000) and for the premium half of overtime pay (up to $12,500, or $25,000 for joint filers). The IRS says both apply to tax years 2025 through 2028.
• FactCheck.org (Oct. 8, 2026) confirms that all three provisions expire after 2028. They lapse under current law whoever wins in November, unless Congress extends them.

There is no "no tax on Social Security" to terminate. The law added a $6,000 deduction for people 65 and older, whether or not they collect benefits, phasing out above $75,000 of income ($150,000 for couples). FactCheck.org says the law did not eliminate tax on benefits, and the Tax Policy Center found it helps fewer than half of older adults.

A Democratic win in the Nov. 3, 2026 midterms could not end these breaks. Repeal needs a bill the president signs or a two-thirds override. Trump is in office until Jan. 20, 2029, three weeks after the deductions expire.

The Democrats in question say they want to keep the breaks:

• Flint's opponent, Sam Forstag, told KRTV: "let's keep no tax on overtime, let's keep no tax on tips, let's keep no tax on Social Security." He also complained that these provisions "expire in 4 years."
• In May 2025 the Senate passed the No Tax on Tips Act 100-0 by unanimous consent, at the request of Democrat Jacky Rosen and co-sponsored by Catherine Cortez Masto.
• FactCheck.org lists Democrats who back extending or making the breaks permanent: Ruben Gallego, Chris Pappas, Roy Cooper and others. Democrats have also introduced the You Earned It, You Keep It Act to permanently end federal tax on Social Security benefits.

FactCheck.org and Media Bias/Fact Check both rate the GOP line that Democrats oppose these breaks as misleading, because the Democratic "no" votes were against the whole bill over its Medicaid and SNAP cuts and its tax benefits for high earners.

The only part that can't be settled yet is whether a future Congress extends the breaks past 2028. But the claim pins a built-in sunset on Democrats, invents a Social Security tax exemption, and contradicts the opponent's own stated position. | | "Forstag wants massive tax increases, open borders, men in women's sports, and transgender mutilation of children" | Mostly False | These are partisan characterizations attached to the opponent paragraph in many of the day's endorsements. None is linked to a specific statement or vote by Forstag, and 'open borders' and 'mutilation of your children' misrepresent mainstream Democratic positions. |

Overall Veracity: 44%