Duncan Hunter knows a heck of a lot more about the inner workings of the military and the Pentagon than Giuliani does. There is no doubt about that.
Yesterday someone mentioned Duncan Hunter and that the Department of Justice was investigating him for involvement in conspiracy or bribery. No one seemed to know for sure. Was it him or were they mistaken and it was someone else?
That is undoubtedly true.
I'm not sure that equates to being a better Commander-in-Chief. The President doesn't run the military. He hires someone to head it up. Donald Rumsfeld had three years of active duty in the military during peacetime. Dick Cheney was Secretary of Defense with no military experience.
Were either of them unqualified?
Being an effective Commander-in-Chief requires seeking the advice of able people who offer good advice, and making decisions accordingly. That's what any good executive does. You have a vision of what you'd like to accomplish. You listen to the experts who tell you whether it can be accomplished or not and at what cost or risk.
Expertise in any particular aspect is helpful but not even remotely essential. It's whether you've got the intelligence to weigh dissenting opinions in a rational manner and whether you have a vision.
Yeah, including giving his pals contracts that they could NOT do, so they OUTSOURCED it to India; all the while screaming his PROTECT AMERICA AND AMERICAN JOBS.