wnd--2020-08-18--The scary war game over Taiwan that U.S. loses

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Investigations . ]
Around a large table with a map and icons representing ships , submarines , planes , missile batteries , land-based forces , space-based sensors , and other apparatuses of modern warfare , officials from the Pentagon and the Rand Corp. fight a thus far unimaginable conflict .
The Red Team , composed of experts on the Chinese military , aims to use all available forces to capture Taiwan , the island 90 miles off the coast that China regards as a renegade province and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , by force if necessary .
TRENDING : The burning question : Are there enough lampposts ?
The Blue Team , made up U.S. military personnel with operational experience — fighter pilots , cyber warriors , space experts , missile defense specialists – must try to defeat the Chinese invasion .
It does n't generally go well for the Blue Team .
“ It 's had its a -- handed to it for years , ” David A. Ochmanek , a former deputy assistant secretary of defense for force development and now a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ For years the Blue Team has been in shock because they did n't realize how badly off they were in a confrontation with China.
” War game simulations are not the real world , of course , where an array of economic , diplomatic and cultural considerations inform a country 's military decisions and actions .
And few experts on China seem to think that the country will actually go to war over Taiwan anytime soon .
But as the U.S. seeks a closer alliance with Taiwan – illustrated by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Alex Azar there last week , the highest-level official U.S. delegation to the island in 40 years – the possibility of war between the two superpowers may be more than theoretical : A bill now before both houses of Congress , the Taiwan Defense Act , would end the long-held American policy of “ strategic ambiguity ” – which aims to keep China guessing as to the U.S. response to any attempt to take Taiwan by force – and require the U.S. “ to delay , degrade , and ultimately defeat ” an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ force to seize control of Taiwan.
” The proposed legislation reflects strong bipartisan support for Taiwan in Congress .
But it 's hard to predict .
whether public opinion , already tired of long American wars in Asia , would support the faraway island , where the U.S. maintains has no U.S. military presence now although it maintains forces in the region .
Nonetheless , if passed the measure would be far more than a tough talk statement of belief – it would impose serious legal obligations that would demand action .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are now asking : What would happen if China launched an all-out military effort to seize Taiwan ?
Does the United States possess the wherewithal to meet the obligations of the Taiwan Defense Act ?
These questions are hotly debated among military specialists and within the Pentagon , but at a time of national preoccupations over COVID-19 and the looming presidential election , they have received scant notice in the mainstream press .
And yet , given the rise of tensions with China , they are perhaps among the most important facing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Mainland China in 1949 , when the defeated Nationalist forces retreated to the island , 90 miles off China 's southeast coast , and set up a rival government .
Over the years , even as every major country has officially recognized Beijing as the rightful government of all of China , Taiwan has become a full-fledged democracy , with public opinion there overwhelmingly opposed to any formula that would reattach the island to the mainland and its authoritarian ways .
Despite China ’ s often warlike rhetoric and its continuous efforts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it , for example , to participate in World Health Organization meetings even during the coronavirus pandemic – most analysts think it does not want to use military force against Taiwan .
In the short term China seems to be hoping that the Trump administration 's hard line is more a matter of electoral politics than a permanent American position .
U.S. intelligence has also concluded that Beijing hopes Trump loses in November to former Vice President Joe Biden ( who faces criticism over his son Hunter 's lucrative deals in China .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ relations , not just with the U.S. but many Western nations , are not rooted in electoral politics .
There is a more general alarm over aggressive Chinese policies , including the mass detention of Uighurs ; its claims in the South China Sea ; its crackdown on Hong Kong 's traditional freedoms ; its cyberattacks against other governments ; and fears that it is using high-tech products it exports to spy on citizens of other countries .
China shows no sign of moderating its policies , especially in areas that it regards @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and no core interest is more important to it than establishing its sovereignty over Taiwan .
As China faces more criticism , there 's no question that achieving what Beijing calls the “ reunification of the motherland ” would be a crowning glory for the Chinese Communist Party and its authoritarian leader , Xi Jinping .
Senior Chinese officials continually issue warnings that they are ready to use force if other means of achieving reunification fail , and that is the reason for China 's massive military buildup , which , as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has created a new and unprecedented challenges for the United States .
As several military analysts put it , the days of unfettered American military superiority in the Western Pacific are over .
China has , the analysts say , achieved what 's called anti-access area denial , or A2/AD , which would prevent American forces from being able to penetrate anywhere near Taiwan once a war there started .
Given this capability , China , with its 2-million-strong military , might directly attack Taiwan , with a standing force of 220,000 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the conflict .
But the U.S. would have powerful reasons for not allowing that to happen .
Aside from the destruction of a friendly democracy , a Chinese seizure of Taiwan would enormously expand China 's power and position in Asia , especially if combined with its absorption of the entire South China Sea into its maritime territory .
This would be a major step forward for China , now clearly a strategic revival and an enemy of democracy , in its goal of replacing the U.S. as the dominant power in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the U.S. would intervene , military planners from the Pentagon and Rand who have gamed out scenarios believe a war over Taiwan would most likely begin with a massive attack by advanced Chinese missiles against three American targets : its bases on Okinawa and Guam , its ships in the Western Pacific , including aircraft carrier groups , and its air force squadrons in the region .
Military analysts predict the American side would initially counter with Patriot anti-missile missiles .
But the sheer number of Chinese missiles would mean that hundreds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American submarines operating near Taiwan would be able to sink some Chinese ships , including amphibious landing craft bringing the Chinese invading force to Taiwan .
But the number of submarines near enough to the battle zones at the time of the Chinese strike would , analysts say , be around 20 or 25 , each armed with about 12 torpedoes and 10 or so Harpoon missiles , not nearly enough to overcome China 's flood-the-zone strategy .
Military analysts seem to agree that in the first day or two , there would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the loss of billions of dollars ’ worth of materiel .
“ We 're playing an away game against China , ” Rand ’ s Ochmanek said .
“ When bases are subjected to repeated attacks , it makes it exponentially more difficult to project power far away.
” “ The casualties that the Chinese could inflict on us could be staggering , ” said Timothy Heath , a senior international defense researcher at Rand and formerly a China analyst at the U.S. Pacific Command headquarters in Hawaii .
“ Anti-ship cruise missiles @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; surface-to-air missiles could destroy our fighters and bombers.
” China would have its own challenges .
At the same time as it worked to keep the U.S. out of the battle zone it would have to address the trickier and riskier part of the operation : getting an invasion force , consisting of tens of thousands of troops , across the 90 miles separating Taiwan from the Mainland .
“ They are giving off a lot of signals about how this campaign would unfold , ” Lyle J. Goldstein , a China @ @ @ @ @ @ @ College in Rhode Island , told RCI .
“ They 're talking a lot about airborne assault in two varieties , by parachute and by helicopters .
It 's what 's called vertical envelopment .
Amphibious assault is old school .
It may be necessary but it 's not the main military effort .
The new school is to bring lead elements over by air , secure the terrain and then bring in more forces over the beach .
The intensity and scale of training in the Chinese military now for airborne assault @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ There would be 15 , maybe 20 different landings on the island , east , west , north , and south , all at once , some frogmen , some purely airborne troops , ” Goldstein continued , saying he was expressing his own views , not official assessments of the U.S. “ The Chinese high command would watch these bridgeheads to see which of them is working , while the Taiwan command is looking at this amid decapitation attempts and massive rocket and air assaults .
The Chinese would seize several @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would come into play in deploying specialized floating dock apparatuses to ensure a steady flow of supplies and reinforcements—a key element .
My appraisal is that Taiwan would fold in a week or two.
” In short , China 's strategy would be to get an invasion fleet across the Taiwan Strait before the U.S. could come to its ally ’ s aid .
“ And once that happens we 'd face an Iwo Jima situation , ” Ochmanek said , referring to the small Japanese-held island in the Pacific that the U.S @ @ @ @ @ @ @ battles of World War II .
“ Once Taiwan was occupied , the option of retaking it with an amphibious assault of our own would be very unattractive.
” Goldstein has likened an American commitment to defend Taiwan , of the sort that would be required by the proposed Taiwan Defense Act , to be a kind of Cuban Missile Crisis in reverse , a reference to the 1962 confrontation between the U.S. and the Soviet Union , which ended when the Soviets backed away from its effort to put nuclear missiles on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The overwhelming American advantage on Cuba then mirrors what Goldstein sees as an overwhelming Chinese advantage on Taiwan today – “ vast conventional superiority ” in a region of the world far closer to it than to the U.S. , combined with “ the wide recognition that the island 's fate is a 'core interest ' that united Chinese citizens behind the cause.
” China also seems aware of the comparison .
A typical statement earlier this month in Global Times , the nationalist mouthpiece of the Chinese Communist Party , put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has many cards , including military cards , and it is very important that our will to play those cards at critical moments will be far better than Washington's.
” Other experts , however , believe that the situation is not quite as bleak as the war games would indicate , or at least that it can be remedied .
They argue : 1 ) that the American deterrent even now is still strong enough to make China very hesitant to use force on Taiwan , and 2 ) that the U.S. can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with new weapons and new tactics that would enable the country to prevail if it did come to an armed confrontation .
According to most analysts , the key to defending Taiwan would require stopping China ’ s ability to transport a large occupying force the 90 miles across the Taiwan Strait .
Chinese military publications are full of pictures of what such an assault would look like – hundreds of amphibious tanks landing on Taiwan 's beaches , troops arriving on new landing craft called 075 units ( now being built ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the country at night .
They have also been heralding the use of helicopters flying below Taiwan 's radar to land advance troops .
Some analysts say that the U.S. could counter that threat by shifting from a reliance on aircraft carriers and long-range bombers to weapons such as stand-off missiles – that is , missiles fired from beyond the range of any Chinese attack , especially a new generation of long-range anti-ship missiles , or LRASMs , that can be fired from ships as far as 600 miles away .
A second @ @ @ @ @ @ @ space-based reconnaissance using artificial intelligence to locate enemy targets , which the LRASMs would hit ; a third would be an American version of flooding the zone , with unmanned undersea drones that could fire torpedoes at Chinese landing craft .
“ All of these things are doable , ” Ochmanek said .
“ There 's no magic here , no technological breakthroughs.
” He estimates that the Defense Department could make the needed changes if it diverted about 5 percent of its budget— about $ 35 billion -- a year .
Taiwan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ move away from the glamorous , showy weapons , like F-16 fighter planes , that it buys from the United States .
“ The F-16s are not going to get off the ground once the war starts , ” Ochmanek said .
“ They need anti-ship cruise missiles , sea mines , mobile artillery , mobile air defenses , unmanned aerial vehicles .
“ It comes down to sinking about 300 Chinese ships in about 48 hours , ” he said .
Analysts believe Taiwan could spend more on defense than it does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year , which is a small fraction of the estimated $ 225 billion to $ 260 billion that the mainland spends .
But , they say , it already possesses sea mines and coastal missile defenses that could take a heavy toll on a Chinese invading force – assuming they are n't wiped out in an initial Chinese missile attack .
It could shoot down helicopters with Stinger missiles , which the U.S. has agreed to sell Taiwan .
“ What both sides can do is turn the sea and air space around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Heath said .
“ China could do that , but we could make it very hard for any surface ship to survive near Taiwan , including Chinese transport vessels loaded with troops .
That alone might stop an invasion.
” And if it does n't ?
China would face the risk of a larger war with the United States , which might involve nuclear weapons and an outcome Beijing could not guarantee .
“ The biggest threat to China is that a regional anti-China coalition forms , ” Heath said .
“ And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in building its alliances in Asia , that would be a powerful deterrent , because China ca n't afford to go to war with Asia.
” Others , like Goldstein , fully agree that China would be reluctant to go to war , but they argue also that if war should happen , it 's unrealistic — indeed , Goldstein says it ’ s dangerously self-deluding – to think that the combined forces of Taiwan and the U.S. would prevail .
`` I do n't agree that all we 'd have to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
“ Chinese war planners would expect to lose a thousand ships .
They would put 10,000 boats , ferries , barges and fishing craft into the water , with thousands of decoys , far more than there would be LRASMs or submarines to sink them.
” [ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Investigations . ]

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Investigations.]
By Richard Bernstein
Real Clear Investigations
Around a large table with a map and icons representing ships, submarines, planes, missile batteries, land-based forces, space-based sensors, and other apparatuses of modern warfare, officials from the Pentagon and the Rand Corp. fight a thus far unimaginable conflict.
The Red Team, composed of experts on the Chinese military, aims to use all available forces to capture Taiwan, the island 90 miles off the coast that China regards as a renegade province and that it has repeatedly vowed to retake, by force if necessary.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The Blue Team, made up U.S. military personnel with operational experience — fighter pilots, cyber warriors, space experts, missile defense specialists – must try to defeat the Chinese invasion.
It doesn't generally go well for the Blue Team.
“It's had its a-- handed to it for years,” David A. Ochmanek, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense for force development and now a defense analyst at Rand, told RealClearInvestigations. “For years the Blue Team has been in shock because they didn't realize how badly off they were in a confrontation with China.”
War game simulations are not the real world, of course, where an array of economic, diplomatic and cultural considerations inform a country's military decisions and actions. And few experts on China seem to think that the country will actually go to war over Taiwan anytime soon.
But as the U.S. seeks a closer alliance with Taiwan – illustrated by the visit of Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar there last week, the highest-level official U.S. delegation to the island in 40 years – the possibility of war between the two superpowers may be more than theoretical: A bill now before both houses of Congress, the Taiwan Defense Act, would end the long-held American policy of “strategic ambiguity” – which aims to keep China guessing as to the U.S. response to any attempt to take Taiwan by force – and require the U.S. “to delay, degrade, and ultimately defeat” an attempt by China “to use military force to seize control of Taiwan.”
The proposed legislation reflects strong bipartisan support for Taiwan in Congress. But it's hard to predict. whether public opinion, already tired of long American wars in Asia, would support the faraway island, where the U.S. maintains has no U.S. military presence now although it maintains forces in the region. Nonetheless, if passed the measure would be far more than a tough talk statement of belief – it would impose serious legal obligations that would demand action. This adds an urgency to the questions officials are now asking: What would happen if China launched an all-out military effort to seize Taiwan? Does the United States possess the wherewithal to meet the obligations of the Taiwan Defense Act?
These questions are hotly debated among military specialists and within the Pentagon, but at a time of national preoccupations over COVID-19 and the looming presidential election, they have received scant notice in the mainstream press. And yet, given the rise of tensions with China, they are perhaps among the most important facing the country.
Taiwan became a separate entity from Mainland China in 1949, when the defeated Nationalist forces retreated to the island, 90 miles off China's southeast coast, and set up a rival government. Over the years, even as every major country has officially recognized Beijing as the rightful government of all of China, Taiwan has become a full-fledged democracy, with public opinion there overwhelmingly opposed to any formula that would reattach the island to the mainland and its authoritarian ways.
Despite China’s often warlike rhetoric and its continuous efforts to isolate Taiwan diplomatically – not allowing it, for example, to participate in World Health Organization meetings even during the coronavirus pandemic – most analysts think it does not want to use military force against Taiwan.
In the short term China seems to be hoping that the Trump administration's hard line is more a matter of electoral politics than a permanent American position. U.S. intelligence has also concluded that Beijing hopes Trump loses in November to former Vice President Joe Biden (who faces criticism over his son Hunter's lucrative deals in China.)
Still, China’s tense relations, not just with the U.S. but many Western nations, are not rooted in electoral politics. There is a more general alarm over aggressive Chinese policies, including the mass detention of Uighurs; its claims in the South China Sea; its crackdown on Hong Kong's traditional freedoms; its cyberattacks against other governments; and fears that it is using high-tech products it exports to spy on citizens of other countries. China shows no sign of moderating its policies, especially in areas that it regards as its “core interests,” and no core interest is more important to it than establishing its sovereignty over Taiwan.
As China faces more criticism, there's no question that achieving what Beijing calls the “reunification of the motherland” would be a crowning glory for the Chinese Communist Party and its authoritarian leader, Xi Jinping. Senior Chinese officials continually issue warnings that they are ready to use force if other means of achieving reunification fail, and that is the reason for China's massive military buildup, which, as the Pentagon’s war games show, has created a new and unprecedented challenges for the United States.
As several military analysts put it, the days of unfettered American military superiority in the Western Pacific are over. China has, the analysts say, achieved what's called anti-access area denial, or A2/AD, which would prevent American forces from being able to penetrate anywhere near Taiwan once a war there started.
Given this capability, China, with its 2-million-strong military, might directly attack Taiwan, with a standing force of 220,000, hoping that the U.S. would stay out of the conflict. But the U.S. would have powerful reasons for not allowing that to happen. Aside from the destruction of a friendly democracy, a Chinese seizure of Taiwan would enormously expand China's power and position in Asia, especially if combined with its absorption of the entire South China Sea into its maritime territory. This would be a major step forward for China, now clearly a strategic revival and an enemy of democracy, in its goal of replacing the U.S. as the dominant power in all of Asia.
If China felt that the U.S. would intervene, military planners from the Pentagon and Rand who have gamed out scenarios believe a war over Taiwan would most likely begin with a massive attack by advanced Chinese missiles against three American targets: its bases on Okinawa and Guam, its ships in the Western Pacific, including aircraft carrier groups, and its air force squadrons in the region.
Military analysts predict the American side would initially counter with Patriot anti-missile missiles. But the sheer number of Chinese missiles would mean that hundreds of them would reach their targets. American submarines operating near Taiwan would be able to sink some Chinese ships, including amphibious landing craft bringing the Chinese invading force to Taiwan. But the number of submarines near enough to the battle zones at the time of the Chinese strike would, analysts say, be around 20 or 25, each armed with about 12 torpedoes and 10 or so Harpoon missiles, not nearly enough to overcome China's flood-the-zone strategy. Military analysts seem to agree that in the first day or two, there would likely be thousands of American deaths and the loss of billions of dollars’ worth of materiel.
“We're playing an away game against China,” Rand’s Ochmanek said. “When bases are subjected to repeated attacks, it makes it exponentially more difficult to project power far away.”
“The casualties that the Chinese could inflict on us could be staggering,” said Timothy Heath, a senior international defense researcher at Rand and formerly a China analyst at the U.S. Pacific Command headquarters in Hawaii. “Anti-ship cruise missiles could knock out U.S. carriers and warships; surface-to-air missiles could destroy our fighters and bombers.”
China would have its own challenges. At the same time as it worked to keep the U.S. out of the battle zone it would have to address the trickier and riskier part of the operation: getting an invasion force, consisting of tens of thousands of troops, across the 90 miles separating Taiwan from the Mainland.
“They are giving off a lot of signals about how this campaign would unfold,” Lyle J. Goldstein, a China and Russia specialist at the Naval War College in Rhode Island, told RCI. “They're talking a lot about airborne assault in two varieties, by parachute and by helicopters. It's what's called vertical envelopment. Amphibious assault is old school. It may be necessary but it's not the main military effort. The new school is to bring lead elements over by air, secure the terrain and then bring in more forces over the beach. The intensity and scale of training in the Chinese military now for airborne assault is, to me, shocking.
“There would be 15, maybe 20 different landings on the island, east, west, north, and south, all at once, some frogmen, some purely airborne troops,” Goldstein continued, saying he was expressing his own views, not official assessments of the U.S. “The Chinese high command would watch these bridgeheads to see which of them is working, while the Taiwan command is looking at this amid decapitation attempts and massive rocket and air assaults. The Chinese would seize several beachheads and airports. Their engineering prowess would come into play in deploying specialized floating dock apparatuses to ensure a steady flow of supplies and reinforcements—a key element. My appraisal is that Taiwan would fold in a week or two.”
In short, China's strategy would be to get an invasion fleet across the Taiwan Strait before the U.S. could come to its ally’s aid. “And once that happens we'd face an Iwo Jima situation,” Ochmanek said, referring to the small Japanese-held island in the Pacific that the U.S took in one of the most casualty-heavy battles of World War II. “Once Taiwan was occupied, the option of retaking it with an amphibious assault of our own would be very unattractive.”
Goldstein has likened an American commitment to defend Taiwan, of the sort that would be required by the proposed Taiwan Defense Act, to be a kind of Cuban Missile Crisis in reverse, a reference to the 1962 confrontation between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, which ended when the Soviets backed away from its effort to put nuclear missiles on the island just 90 miles from Florida.
The overwhelming American advantage on Cuba then mirrors what Goldstein sees as an overwhelming Chinese advantage on Taiwan today – “vast conventional superiority” in a region of the world far closer to it than to the U.S., combined with “the wide recognition that the island's fate is a 'core interest' that united Chinese citizens behind the cause.”
China also seems aware of the comparison. A typical statement earlier this month in Global Times, the nationalist mouthpiece of the Chinese Communist Party, put it this way: “The Mainland has many cards, including military cards, and it is very important that our will to play those cards at critical moments will be far better than Washington's.”
Other experts, however, believe that the situation is not quite as bleak as the war games would indicate, or at least that it can be remedied. They argue: 1) that the American deterrent even now is still strong enough to make China very hesitant to use force on Taiwan, and 2) that the U.S. can and should adapt to China's capacity with new weapons and new tactics that would enable the country to prevail if it did come to an armed confrontation.
According to most analysts, the key to defending Taiwan would require stopping China’s ability to transport a large occupying force the 90 miles across the Taiwan Strait. Chinese military publications are full of pictures of what such an assault would look like – hundreds of amphibious tanks landing on Taiwan's beaches, troops arriving on new landing craft called 075 units (now being built), and thousands of troops parachuting into the country at night. They have also been heralding the use of helicopters flying below Taiwan's radar to land advance troops.
Some analysts say that the U.S. could counter that threat by shifting from a reliance on aircraft carriers and long-range bombers to weapons such as stand-off missiles – that is, missiles fired from beyond the range of any Chinese attack, especially a new generation of long-range anti-ship missiles, or LRASMs, that can be fired from ships as far as 600 miles away.
A second component of a Taiwan defense would be space-based reconnaissance using artificial intelligence to locate enemy targets, which the LRASMs would hit; a third would be an American version of flooding the zone, with unmanned undersea drones that could fire torpedoes at Chinese landing craft.
“All of these things are doable,” Ochmanek said. “There's no magic here, no technological breakthroughs.” He estimates that the Defense Department could make the needed changes if it diverted about 5 percent of its budget— about $35 billion -- a year. Taiwan, he said, also needs to move away from the glamorous, showy weapons, like F-16 fighter planes, that it buys from the United States. “The F-16s are not going to get off the ground once the war starts,” Ochmanek said. “They need anti-ship cruise missiles, sea mines, mobile artillery, mobile air defenses, unmanned aerial vehicles.
“It comes down to sinking about 300 Chinese ships in about 48 hours,” he said.
Analysts believe Taiwan could spend more on defense than it does – currently about $13 billion a year, which is a small fraction of the estimated $225 billion to $260 billion that the mainland spends. But, they say, it already possesses sea mines and coastal missile defenses that could take a heavy toll on a Chinese invading force – assuming they aren't wiped out in an initial Chinese missile attack. It could shoot down helicopters with Stinger missiles, which the U.S. has agreed to sell Taiwan.
“What both sides can do is turn the sea and air space around Taiwan into a no-go zone,” Heath said. “China could do that, but we could make it very hard for any surface ship to survive near Taiwan, including Chinese transport vessels loaded with troops. That alone might stop an invasion.”
And if it doesn't? China would face the risk of a larger war with the United States, which might involve nuclear weapons and an outcome Beijing could not guarantee. “The biggest threat to China is that a regional anti-China coalition forms,” Heath said. “And so if the United States can succeed in building its alliances in Asia, that would be a powerful deterrent, because China can't afford to go to war with Asia.”
Others, like Goldstein, fully agree that China would be reluctant to go to war, but they argue also that if war should happen, it's unrealistic — indeed, Goldstein says it’s dangerously self-deluding – to think that the combined forces of Taiwan and the U.S. would prevail.
"I don't agree that all we'd have to do is sink 300 ships,” he said. “Chinese war planners would expect to lose a thousand ships. They would put 10,000 boats, ferries, barges and fishing craft into the water, with thousands of decoys, far more than there would be LRASMs or submarines to sink them.”
[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Investigations.]


wnd--2020-08-18--See candidate's viral ad showing 'Democrats don't care about black lives'

`` Do you care about black lives ? ''
asks congressional candidate Kimberly Klacik as she strolls through Baltimore in red high heels and a red dress .
`` The people that run Baltimore do n't , '' she says in a video ad for her campaign for Maryland 's 7th District seat .
`` I can prove it .
Walk with me .
They do n't want you to see this . ''
Klacik , the Republican nominee , unsuccessfully challenged former NAACP CEO Kweisi Mfume in a special election in April for the seat vacated with the death @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faces him again .
She garnered just 27 % of the vote last spring in the Democratic stronghold .
`` This is the reality for black people every single day , crumbling infrastructure , abandoned homes , poverty and crime , '' she says in the ad , with boarded up buildings in the background .
TRENDING : The burning question : Are there enough lampposts ?
`` Baltimore has been run by the Democrat Party for 53 years .
What is the result of their decades of leadership ? ''
she asks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one of the five most dangerous in the nation .
The murder rate is 10 times the U.S. average , and the poverty rate is over 20 % while homicide , drug and alcohol deaths are skyrocketing .
Klacik charges Democrats have `` betrayed the black people of Baltimore . ''
`` If the politicians walked the streets like I do , they would see exactly how their policies and corruption affect us , '' she says .
`` But they do n't want to see it .
They do n't want you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black residents who they are adamantly against defunding the police .
`` The worst place for a black person to live in America is a Democrat-controlled city , '' she says .
`` It 's 2020 .
Name a blue city were black people 's lives have gotten better .
Try .
I 'll wait . ''
She says Democrats `` think black people are stupid and that we 'll keep voting for them forever , despite what they 've done to our families and our communities . ''
Klacik is known for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ city , which prompted President Trump to issue his tweet about `` rat infested Baltimore . ''
That opened the door for her to run for Congress .
In an interview in June with WJZ-TV , Klacik admitted she is fighting an uphill battle to defeat Mfume .
She said her priorities include courting more businesses to Baltimore , more job training , school choice and allowing for over-the-counter sales of birth control .
She was asked what she would `` bring to the table '' that Mfume does n't bring .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would say , I ’ ve been using that term unbought and unbossed .
I get a lot of money across the nation , a lot of small donors , '' she said .
`` I don ’ t have anyone in my back pockets .
I don ’ t have anyone ... no special interest groups where I owe them any favors .
I am strictly here for the people . ''

"Do you care about black lives?" asks congressional candidate Kimberly Klacik as she strolls through Baltimore in red high heels and a red dress.
"The people that run Baltimore don't," she says in a video ad for her campaign for Maryland's 7th District seat. "I can prove it. Walk with me. They don't want you to see this."
Klacik, the Republican nominee, unsuccessfully challenged former NAACP CEO Kweisi Mfume in a special election in April for the seat vacated with the death of Democrat Elijah Cummings last October and faces him again. She garnered just 27% of the vote last spring in the Democratic stronghold.
"This is the reality for black people every single day, crumbling infrastructure, abandoned homes, poverty and crime," she says in the ad, with boarded up buildings in the background.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
"Baltimore has been run by the Democrat Party for 53 years. What is the result of their decades of leadership?" she asks.
She points out the city is one of the five most dangerous in the nation. The murder rate is 10 times the U.S. average, and the poverty rate is over 20% while homicide, drug and alcohol deaths are skyrocketing.
Klacik charges Democrats have "betrayed the black people of Baltimore."
"If the politicians walked the streets like I do, they would see exactly how their policies and corruption affect us," she says. "But they don't want to see it. They don't want you to see this."
She features black residents who say they are adamantly against defunding the police.
Baltimore isn't unique, she points out.
"The worst place for a black person to live in America is a Democrat-controlled city," she says.
"It's 2020. Name a blue city were black people's lives have gotten better. Try. I'll wait."
She says Democrats "think black people are stupid and that we'll keep voting for them forever, despite what they've done to our families and our communities."
Klacik is known for rallying people to help clean up her city, which prompted President Trump to issue his tweet about "rat infested Baltimore." That opened the door for her to run for Congress.
'Unbought and unbossed'
In an interview in June with WJZ-TV, Klacik admitted she is fighting an uphill battle to defeat Mfume.
She said her priorities include courting more businesses to Baltimore, more job training, school choice and allowing for over-the-counter sales of birth control.
She was asked what she would "bring to the table" that Mfume doesn't bring.
"I would say innovative ideas and I would say, I’ve been using that term unbought and unbossed. I get a lot of money across the nation, a lot of small donors," she said. "I don’t have anyone in my back pockets. I don’t have anyone ... no special interest groups where I owe them any favors. I am strictly here for the people."


wnd--2020-08-17--Tell the truth about Kamala Harris and you're a racist

Democrats were like a cancerous mutation of skin rot even when they were almost palatable .
Today they 've metamorphosed into something far more damaging , i.e.
, a pernicious cabal of double standards .
I offer into evidence the now darling Democratic devil doll Kamala Harris , whom one can observe as giving credibility to the character played by Julia Roberts next to Richard Gere sans `` Pretty '' preceding `` Woman '' in the title .
In brief , a woman of low morals , or in the case of Harris a woman of zero morals , can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with married political power brokers .
Democrats are quick to attack as racist anyone who dares speak the truth about Harris .
And , the truth is : Harris is an immoral , conscienceless individual who wears the stench of moral turpitude as a tiara of accomplishment .
Her political rise is not based upon talent , brilliance or compelling personal accomplishment .
It 's based upon her malleability of morals with Willie Brown , arguably one of the most powerful political figures in the history of California politics .
Brown also remains @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dishonest politicians in the history of California .
But the incogitant dilettantes representing themselves as Democrats , who are in reality the very definition of poseur , feign insult and squeal racism when the unflattering truths are revealed about Harris .
TRENDING : The burning question : Are there enough lampposts ?
It 's not racist to point out that when confronted with the question of how to ascend the political ladder , Harris employed the one skill her kind have at their disposal .
She has lied about the late Tupac Shakur @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were inconsequential , and should never have become part of her political dialogue .
In what scenario could she have thought lying about doing drugs and listening to crude vulgarity set to a catchy rhythm would make her a woman of the people ?
What matters is that she 's more supportive of the murdering of babies than was Obama .
She used her position as prosecutor in an unprecedented attempt destroy the life of David Daleiden of the Center for Medical Progress when he released undercover videos fully exposing Planned Parenthood 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tissue .
She engaged in a scorched-earth vendetta against Mr. Daleiden juxtaposed to holding Planned Parenthood 's illegal baby body-part industry responsible for trafficking in the tissue of murdered babies .
Further , Harris viciously attacked and maligned nominees to the federal judiciary based upon their religious beliefs .
It 's not just that Harris is a liar ; she is an unmitigated stupid liar .
She lies about things more easily exposed as lies than it is to prove the sun is shining on a sunny day .
Not least of which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Here claim is a pure canard unless she 's going to redefine what it is to be `` black , '' separate from what the identity ethnicists consider `` African American '' in this country .
Her great-grandfather was a white Jamaican of either Irish or English descent .
He was a landowner and wealthy exporter prior to his death in 1936 .
This is significant , because Jamaica did not gain independence until 1962 .
It 's important to note because unlike in America – where there were free slaves owning property @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wealthy black slave owners in the South and New Orleans prior to the Emancipation Proclamation in 1865 – native Jamaicans enjoyed no such privilege under British governance .
Even though Snopes , the left-wing fact-checking site running cover for Harris , claims it 's inconclusive that Harris is the direct descendant of a massively wealthy slave owning family , the site is being typically dishonest .
It 's not inconclusive when Harris ' father and family freely acknowledge their slave-owner background – a wealthy slave-owning family , who were so in the immediate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 1962 , no less .
( See : `` Kamala Harris ' Jamaican Heritage , '' updated Jan. 14 , 2019 . )
Snopes and Democratic malfeasants , including their administrators of agitprop in the media , can attack Dinesh D'Souza all they want ; her father and relatives support what he says regarding Harris ' ancestral history .
( See : `` Kamala Harris ' Ancestors Were Slave Owners – Will the Left Cancel Her ? ''
Andrew J. Sciascia , Western Journal News , Aug. 12 , 2020 . )
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ does n't produce American black , any more than a curly-mop-top hairdo and a fallacious claim make the white woman Rachel Dolezal black , even though she self-identifies that way .
Harris is the abortionist 's abortionist .
She advocates for the most extreme abortion policies and practices imaginable .
She voted against every pro-life piece of legislation she could , including bills with bipartisan support .
Her presidential campaign bid was dogged by near non-responsive fundraising efforts over the year and credible allegations from field-tested veteran campaign people who charged her with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and strategy .
State operations director Kelly Mehlenbacher wrote in her resignation letter that as a veteran of three presidential campaigns : `` [ She had ] never seen an organization treat its staff so poorly . ''
Harris was one of the earliest to resign a presidential bid , with single-digit numbers .
( See : `` Kamala Harris Drops Out of 2020 Presidential Race , '' Mark Moore , New York Post , Dec. 3 , 2019 . )
And yet , the wild-eyed equivalents of chattering zinjanthropines in the Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ point these things out about Harris .
Obviously , their definition of racist is anyone exposing the Jamaican-Indian running mate of Joe Biden .
OK , fine .
Just call me a racist then .
Order Mychal Massie 's new book , `` I Feel the Presence of the Lord , '' a collection of devotions intended to encourage the reader to seek and see the Lord in every aspect of life .

Democrats were like a cancerous mutation of skin rot even when they were almost palatable. Today they've metamorphosed into something far more damaging, i.e., a pernicious cabal of double standards.
I offer into evidence the now darling Democratic devil doll Kamala Harris, whom one can observe as giving credibility to the character played by Julia Roberts next to Richard Gere sans "Pretty" preceding "Woman" in the title. In brief, a woman of low morals, or in the case of Harris a woman of zero morals, can gain political standing by trading adult favors with married political power brokers.
Democrats are quick to attack as racist anyone who dares speak the truth about Harris. And, the truth is: Harris is an immoral, conscienceless individual who wears the stench of moral turpitude as a tiara of accomplishment.
Her political rise is not based upon talent, brilliance or compelling personal accomplishment. It's based upon her malleability of morals with Willie Brown, arguably one of the most powerful political figures in the history of California politics. Brown also remains allegedly one of the most underhanded and dishonest politicians in the history of California.
But the incogitant dilettantes representing themselves as Democrats, who are in reality the very definition of poseur, feign insult and squeal racism when the unflattering truths are revealed about Harris.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
It's not racist to point out that when confronted with the question of how to ascend the political ladder, Harris employed the one skill her kind have at their disposal. She has lied about the late Tupac Shakur and about smoking dope – things that were inconsequential, and should never have become part of her political dialogue. In what scenario could she have thought lying about doing drugs and listening to crude vulgarity set to a catchy rhythm would make her a woman of the people?
What matters is that she's more supportive of the murdering of babies than was Obama. She used her position as prosecutor in an unprecedented attempt destroy the life of David Daleiden of the Center for Medical Progress when he released undercover videos fully exposing Planned Parenthood's illegal sale and profiteering from aborted baby tissue. She engaged in a scorched-earth vendetta against Mr. Daleiden juxtaposed to holding Planned Parenthood's illegal baby body-part industry responsible for trafficking in the tissue of murdered babies.
Further, Harris viciously attacked and maligned nominees to the federal judiciary based upon their religious beliefs.
It's not just that Harris is a liar; she is an unmitigated stupid liar. She lies about things more easily exposed as lies than it is to prove the sun is shining on a sunny day. Not least of which is her lies about being black.
Here claim is a pure canard unless she's going to redefine what it is to be "black," separate from what the identity ethnicists consider "African American" in this country. Her great-grandfather was a white Jamaican of either Irish or English descent. He was a landowner and wealthy exporter prior to his death in 1936. This is significant, because Jamaica did not gain independence until 1962. It's important to note because unlike in America – where there were free slaves owning property in Richmond, Virginia, and extremely wealthy black slave owners in the South and New Orleans prior to the Emancipation Proclamation in 1865 – native Jamaicans enjoyed no such privilege under British governance. Even though Snopes, the left-wing fact-checking site running cover for Harris, claims it's inconclusive that Harris is the direct descendant of a massively wealthy slave owning family, the site is being typically dishonest. It's not inconclusive when Harris' father and family freely acknowledge their slave-owner background – a wealthy slave-owning family, who were so in the immediate years leading up to Jamaica's independence in 1962, no less. (See: "Kamala Harris' Jamaican Heritage," updated Jan. 14, 2019.)
Snopes and Democratic malfeasants, including their administrators of agitprop in the media, can attack Dinesh D'Souza all they want; her father and relatives support what he says regarding Harris' ancestral history. (See: "Kamala Harris' Ancestors Were Slave Owners – Will the Left Cancel Her?" Andrew J. Sciascia, Western Journal News, Aug. 12, 2020.)
A part-white Jamaican father and Asian-Indian mother doesn't produce American black, any more than a curly-mop-top hairdo and a fallacious claim make the white woman Rachel Dolezal black, even though she self-identifies that way.
Harris is the abortionist's abortionist. She advocates for the most extreme abortion policies and practices imaginable. She voted against every pro-life piece of legislation she could, including bills with bipartisan support.
Her presidential campaign bid was dogged by near non-responsive fundraising efforts over the year and credible allegations from field-tested veteran campaign people who charged her with political incompetence pursuant to operation, discipline and strategy. State operations director Kelly Mehlenbacher wrote in her resignation letter that as a veteran of three presidential campaigns: "[She had] never seen an organization treat its staff so poorly." Harris was one of the earliest to resign a presidential bid, with single-digit numbers. (See: "Kamala Harris Drops Out of 2020 Presidential Race," Mark Moore, New York Post, Dec. 3, 2019.)
And yet, the wild-eyed equivalents of chattering zinjanthropines in the Democratic legions scream that it's racist to point these things out about Harris. Obviously, their definition of racist is anyone exposing the Jamaican-Indian running mate of Joe Biden.
OK, fine. Just call me a racist then.
Order Mychal Massie's new book, "I Feel the Presence of the Lord," a collection of devotions intended to encourage the reader to seek and see the Lord in every aspect of life.


wnd--2020-08-17--Mao Zedong ID'd as 'favorite' for Biden senior adviser

A senior advisor to Joe Biden ’ s presidential campaign said Chinese dictator Mao Zedong was one of her “ favorite political philosophers ” during a speech to graduating high schoolers in 2009 .
Anita Dunn , who was temporarily granted effective control of Biden ’ s campaign in February and now serves as a senior advisor , said Mao and Mother Teresa were “ the two people that I turn to most ” when she needs to encourage others to break from the mold and blaze their own trail in life .
“ In 1947 , when Mao Zedong @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on his plan to basically take China over … the nationalist Chinese held the cities , they had the army , they had the air force , they had everything on their side , ” Dunn told the audience .
“ And people said how could you win ?
How could you do this ?
” TRENDING : The burning question : Are there enough lampposts ?
“ And Mao Zedong said , ‘ You fight your war and I ’ ll fight mine , ' ” Dunn said .
“ Think about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t have to accept the definition of how to do things , and you don ’ t have to follow other people ’ s choices and paths .
You fight your own war , you lay out your own path.
” Dunn was serving as acting White House Communications Director under former President Barack Obama when she was recorded making the comments about Mao .
Dunn announced her resignation from her post in November 2019 , less than a month after former Fox News host Glenn Beck first reported her comments .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ led to the deaths of an estimated 45 million Chinese people from 1958 to 1962 , earning him the dubious distinction of being one of the biggest mass murderers in recorded human history .
Dunn said her reference to Mao in conjunction with Mother Teresa was intended to be ironic after her comments first surfaced in 2009 .
“ The Mao quote is one I picked up from the late Republican strategist Lee Atwater from something I read in the late 1980s , so I hope I don ’ t get my progressive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told CNN in 2009 .
“ The use of the phrase ‘ favorite political philosophers ’ was intended as irony , but clearly the effort fell flat — at least with a certain Fox commentator whose sense of irony may be missing , ” she added in reference to Beck .
Dunn has served as an advisor to Biden since he launched his 2020 presidential campaign .
In February , when Biden ’ s campaign was in the doldrums , the former vice president temporarily granted Dunn final decision-making authority over his campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York Times .
“ She will be working closely with us on campaign strategy and overall coordination on budget and personnel as we build a bigger campaign for the next phase , ” read a campaign email announcing Dunn ’ s expanded role obtained by The Times .
Dunn returned to her role as a senior advisor to Biden in March after the former vice president named Jen O ’ Malley Dillon as his campaign manager , according to The Washington Post .
The Biden campaign did not immediately return a request @ @ @ @ @ @ @ published by the Daily Caller News Foundation .
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience .
For licensing opportunities of our original content , please contact [ email protected ]

By Andrew Kerr
Daily Caller News Foundation
A senior advisor to Joe Biden’s presidential campaign said Chinese dictator Mao Zedong was one of her “favorite political philosophers” during a speech to graduating high schoolers in 2009.
Anita Dunn, who was temporarily granted effective control of Biden’s campaign in February and now serves as a senior advisor, said Mao and Mother Teresa were “the two people that I turn to most” when she needs to encourage others to break from the mold and blaze their own trail in life.
“In 1947, when Mao Zedong was being challenged within his own party on his plan to basically take China over … the nationalist Chinese held the cities, they had the army, they had the air force, they had everything on their side,” Dunn told the audience. “And people said how could you win? How could you do this?”
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
“And Mao Zedong said, ‘You fight your war and I’ll fight mine,'” Dunn said. “Think about that for a second. You don’t have to accept the definition of how to do things, and you don’t have to follow other people’s choices and paths. You fight your own war, you lay out your own path.”
Dunn was serving as acting White House Communications Director under former President Barack Obama when she was recorded making the comments about Mao. Dunn announced her resignation from her post in November 2019, less than a month after former Fox News host Glenn Beck first reported her comments.
Mao’s Great Leap Forward policy led to the deaths of an estimated 45 million Chinese people from 1958 to 1962, earning him the dubious distinction of being one of the biggest mass murderers in recorded human history.
Dunn said her reference to Mao in conjunction with Mother Teresa was intended to be ironic after her comments first surfaced in 2009.
“The Mao quote is one I picked up from the late Republican strategist Lee Atwater from something I read in the late 1980s, so I hope I don’t get my progressive friends mad at me,” Dunn told CNN in 2009.
“The use of the phrase ‘favorite political philosophers’ was intended as irony, but clearly the effort fell flat — at least with a certain Fox commentator whose sense of irony may be missing,” she added in reference to Beck.
Dunn has served as an advisor to Biden since he launched his 2020 presidential campaign. In February, when Biden’s campaign was in the doldrums, the former vice president temporarily granted Dunn final decision-making authority over his campaign, two senior Biden officials told The New York Times.
“She will be working closely with us on campaign strategy and overall coordination on budget and personnel as we build a bigger campaign for the next phase,” read a campaign email announcing Dunn’s expanded role obtained by The Times.
Dunn returned to her role as a senior advisor to Biden in March after the former vice president named Jen O’Malley Dillon as his campaign manager, according to The Washington Post.
The Biden campaign did not immediately return a request for comment.
This story originally was published by the Daily Caller News Foundation.
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].


wnd--2020-08-17--Former Medal of Honor Society president: Trump epitomizes American exceptionalism

Editor 's note : Maj. Gen. Patrick Henry Brady is a Medal of Honor recipient and former president of the Medal of Honor Society .
As a Medal of Honor recipient , I speak to many audiences across America .
A popular subject is `` American exceptionalism .
`` As hard as it would have been to believe in previous eras , too many Americans today do n't believe our nation is exceptional .
American exceptionalism is defined in the Encyclopedia of American Foreign Policy as : `` a term used to describe the belief that the United States is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to play in human history ; a nation that is not only unique but superior . ''
I do believe we meet that definition , that we are exceptional , that we are hardwired , because of our Declaration of Independence and Constitution , differently than other peoples .
I believe we have played a special role in history , that we are unique and superior as a nation and that we are a gift to the world .
That is not just a sentiment ; it is supportable by facts .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exceptional ; we are indeed the last , best hope of mankind .
Does anyone believe any other nation is the last , best hope of mankind ?
TRENDING : The burning question : Are there enough lampposts ?
Alexis de Tocqueville in the 19th century was the first to call America exceptional – he also said America is great because America is good .
Goodness is the indispensable element of our exceptionalism and ties the other three together .
And what are the other three elements of our exceptionalism ?
We are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compassionate people and an exceptionally competitive people – and we have been a good people .
It necessarily follows that we can not be an exceptional nation if we are not peopled by , and grow , exceptionally courageous , compassionate and competitive citizen .
If we look at our history , and the great people who made us exceptional , we will find that they were indeed courageous , compassionate and competitive .
It is hard to name one truly great American who did not possess these qualities .
It also follows @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we will cease to be exceptional .
Tragically , there has never been a time in my life when we were in such danger as we are now .
If we just focus on courage , are we as courageous as past generations ?
Find a `` snowflake '' in past generations .
What generation was `` triggered , '' turned to mush by words , and needed `` safe spaces '' for protection ?
Can you imagine the Greatest Generation being told certain words were `` hate speech '' and they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that some wanted to take their guns away ?
Good luck with that .
We are evolving from a nation of laws to a nation of cowards .
Name one courageous politician , fearless before the tyrants in the media .
I know one .
Our current dishonest media is clearly an enemy of the people ; indeed , I would say an enemy to our future as a Republic .
The two most important guarantors of our future are the media and the military ; one keeps us secure and the other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because of our great military .
The media , once an impartial honest trustee , is long gone .
Our freedom is at risk .
They now support and promote the Marxist cabal that is destroying our country .
We have to restore the media to its rightful role or we are lost .
Our media are also the cruelest , ugliest bullies in our society .
Remember the guy in school who took on the local bully ?
He became an instant hero to the rest of us .
We have one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bullies in the media .
He is the only politician that has the courage to confront and rehabilitate these bullies .
He is President Donald Trump .
And he meets personally those three qualities that make us an exceptional nation .
Before I explain this , I will pause to acknowledge that he is human .
This bothers some who care more about personality than policy .
This is deadly to our survival , but we do have such people , mostly in the media .
The Apostle Peter was flawed , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his church .
Trump is no saint , but neither are any of the great leaders I have known .
Trump 's policies indeed trump his personality .
Consider the courage of this man .
No politician , perhaps no human , in recent history has faced the assaults on his character , his policies , his very being such as have been leveled at Trump .
He has stood up to barrage after bombardment of lies , slander and character assassination without retreat .
I do n't believe there is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ face what this president has faced and still have prevailed .
Courage , we believe , is a function of faith , and this man has faith in God , the American people , our heritage and our Constitution .
Surely there has never been a president as investigated as President Trump .
And through it all he has not been found to have done anything illegal .
He is totally free from the tentacles of the lobbyists that strangle and seduce many politicians .
He may be the most honest , open @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We are measurably the most compassionate people in the world .
Americans give billions annually to charities , at home and across the world .
No individuals give more than the Americans .
We also adopt more children than the rest of the world combined .
Who is at the forefront of every natural disaster on this planet ?
Who gives more in response to the medical needs and poverty of all peoples ?
Has there ever been a more compassionate president than President Trump ?
What president has given more , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
His generosity as a businessman was legendary .
As president he has donated from his salary , and personal funds , to veterans , veteran cemeteries , historic sites , needy children , caregivers , public health , alcohol and opioid addiction , hurricane relief and leadership training – and on and on .
He may be the only president in our history who leaves office poorer than when he entered .
Look at the wealth of Clinton , Obama and Biden pre- and post- holding high office .
I wonder what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , while in office ?
President Trump also understands the difference between compassion , help to the genuinely needy , and government bribing , which leads to addiction and eventually to socialism , the precursor to communism .
It forms a relationship between our people and our government that is similar to that between a drug dealer and an addict .
A controlling government is like a dope peddler : They seek to grow the addiction of the people , to build their dependence which grows the power , the ultimate aphrodisiac of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – for votes .
We are an exceptionally competitive people .
More so than any other nation , we have been a meritocracy that fosters and is souled by competition .
We are a people who believe we should be free to pursue happiness , but we also find happiness in the pursuit – in pure , unfettered , joyful competition .
Winners are courageous and competitive .
Our Constitution frees us to compete as equals in the marketplace of ideas and industry .
Success in America has been a function of ability @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compete more so than any other factors .
Competition belies victimhood , identifies cowards and exposes the lies of socialism and communism .
President Trump has excelled in America 's competitive business environment .
Now he competes for America .
We are his corporation , so to speak .
His bottom line is our success .
God help any nation , anyone or anything who gets in the way of his drive for our welfare .
And President Trump firmly believes the key to a successful future is a strong belief in our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our heroes , our flag and the keystone of it all – our Constitution .
He teaches that we can not survive unless we continue to grow patriots , young people who believe in our exceptionalism , who prove their love for America by supporting and defending her .
In the past , America has produced the right man in critical times to lead this nation .
We are in critical times .
The right man is President Trump .
He is an exceptionally courageous man , an exceptionally compassionate man and an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he prevails over the socialist cabal that controls Joe Biden .
Our future depends on it .
If we fail , it will be because we commit suicide , we lose our courage and become cowards , we lose our compassion and become greedy and self-centered , and we lose our competitiveness and become socialists .
But we will lose all these only if we lose our goodness and abandon the God who has so richly blessed our undertaking .

Editor's note: Maj. Gen. Patrick Henry Brady is a Medal of Honor recipient and former president of the Medal of Honor Society.
As a Medal of Honor recipient, I speak to many audiences across America. A popular subject is "American exceptionalism."As hard as it would have been to believe in previous eras, too many Americans today don't believe our nation is exceptional.
American exceptionalism is defined in the Encyclopedia of American Foreign Policy as: "a term used to describe the belief that the United States is an extraordinary nation with a special role to play in human history; a nation that is not only unique but superior."
I do believe we meet that definition, that we are exceptional, that we are hardwired, because of our Declaration of Independence and Constitution, differently than other peoples. I believe we have played a special role in history, that we are unique and superior as a nation and that we are a gift to the world. That is not just a sentiment; it is supportable by facts.
In fact, I believe Americans are beyond exceptional; we are indeed the last, best hope of mankind. Does anyone believe any other nation is the last, best hope of mankind?
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Alexis de Tocqueville in the 19th century was the first to call America exceptional – he also said America is great because America is good. Goodness is the indispensable element of our exceptionalism and ties the other three together. And what are the other three elements of our exceptionalism?
We are an exceptionally courageous people, an exceptionally compassionate people and an exceptionally competitive people – and we have been a good people.
It necessarily follows that we cannot be an exceptional nation if we are not peopled by, and grow, exceptionally courageous, compassionate and competitive citizen. If we look at our history, and the great people who made us exceptional, we will find that they were indeed courageous, compassionate and competitive. It is hard to name one truly great American who did not possess these qualities.
It also follows that if our people lose these qualities, we will cease to be exceptional. Tragically, there has never been a time in my life when we were in such danger as we are now.
If we just focus on courage, are we as courageous as past generations? Find a "snowflake" in past generations. What generation was "triggered," turned to mush by words, and needed "safe spaces" for protection? Can you imagine the Greatest Generation being told certain words were "hate speech" and they were forbidden to use them, or that some wanted to take their guns away? Good luck with that. We are evolving from a nation of laws to a nation of cowards. Name one courageous politician, fearless before the tyrants in the media. I know one.
Our current dishonest media is clearly an enemy of the people; indeed, I would say an enemy to our future as a Republic. The two most important guarantors of our future are the media and the military; one keeps us secure and the other keeps us free. We are secure because of our great military. The media, once an impartial honest trustee, is long gone. Our freedom is at risk. They now support and promote the Marxist cabal that is destroying our country. We have to restore the media to its rightful role or we are lost.
Our media are also the cruelest, ugliest bullies in our society. Remember the guy in school who took on the local bully? He became an instant hero to the rest of us. We have one politician who refuses to cower before the bullies in the media. He is the only politician that has the courage to confront and rehabilitate these bullies. He is President Donald Trump.
And he meets personally those three qualities that make us an exceptional nation. Before I explain this, I will pause to acknowledge that he is human. This bothers some who care more about personality than policy. This is deadly to our survival, but we do have such people, mostly in the media. The Apostle Peter was flawed, but Jesus picked him to be the leader of his church. Trump is no saint, but neither are any of the great leaders I have known. Trump's policies indeed trump his personality.
Consider the courage of this man. No politician, perhaps no human, in recent history has faced the assaults on his character, his policies, his very being such as have been leveled at Trump. He has stood up to barrage after bombardment of lies, slander and character assassination without retreat. I don't believe there is a politician alive who has the courage to face what this president has faced and still have prevailed. Courage, we believe, is a function of faith, and this man has faith in God, the American people, our heritage and our Constitution.
Surely there has never been a president as investigated as President Trump. And through it all he has not been found to have done anything illegal. He is totally free from the tentacles of the lobbyists that strangle and seduce many politicians. He may be the most honest, open and upright president in our history.
We are measurably the most compassionate people in the world. Americans give billions annually to charities, at home and across the world. No individuals give more than the Americans. We also adopt more children than the rest of the world combined. Who is at the forefront of every natural disaster on this planet? Who gives more in response to the medical needs and poverty of all peoples?
Has there ever been a more compassionate president than President Trump? What president has given more, and given up more, for our people? His generosity as a businessman was legendary. As president he has donated from his salary, and personal funds, to veterans, veteran cemeteries, historic sites, needy children, caregivers, public health, alcohol and opioid addiction, hurricane relief and leadership training – and on and on.
He may be the only president in our history who leaves office poorer than when he entered. Look at the wealth of Clinton, Obama and Biden pre- and post- holding high office. I wonder what they donated, of their personal funds, while in office?
President Trump also understands the difference between compassion, help to the genuinely needy, and government bribing, which leads to addiction and eventually to socialism, the precursor to communism. It forms a relationship between our people and our government that is similar to that between a drug dealer and an addict. A controlling government is like a dope peddler: They seek to grow the addiction of the people, to build their dependence which grows the power, the ultimate aphrodisiac of evil, the power of the government – for votes.
We are an exceptionally competitive people. More so than any other nation, we have been a meritocracy that fosters and is souled by competition. We are a people who believe we should be free to pursue happiness, but we also find happiness in the pursuit – in pure, unfettered, joyful competition. Winners are courageous and competitive. Our Constitution frees us to compete as equals in the marketplace of ideas and industry. Success in America has been a function of ability and hard work and a willingness to compete more so than any other factors. Competition belies victimhood, identifies cowards and exposes the lies of socialism and communism.
President Trump has excelled in America's competitive business environment. Now he competes for America. We are his corporation, so to speak. His bottom line is our success. God help any nation, anyone or anything who gets in the way of his drive for our welfare.
And President Trump firmly believes the key to a successful future is a strong belief in our exceptionalism. He trumpets our heritage, our heroes, our flag and the keystone of it all – our Constitution. He teaches that we cannot survive unless we continue to grow patriots, young people who believe in our exceptionalism, who prove their love for America by supporting and defending her.
In the past, America has produced the right man in critical times to lead this nation. We are in critical times. The right man is President Trump. He is an exceptionally courageous man, an exceptionally compassionate man and an exceptionally competitive man. It is imperative that he prevails over the socialist cabal that controls Joe Biden. Our future depends on it.
If we fail, it will be because we commit suicide, we lose our courage and become cowards, we lose our compassion and become greedy and self-centered, and we lose our competitiveness and become socialists. But we will lose all these only if we lose our goodness and abandon the God who has so richly blessed our undertaking.


wnd--2020-08-17--Handbook on how to rig an election outcome

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics . ]
The 2020 election could be the biggest gamble in the history of the United States , starting with the huge consequences at stake but made even more uncertain because of two huge question marks at the front and back ends of the voting itself .
Think of this election as a giant roulette wheel , except instead of red or black , you are betting on red or blue — Republican or Democrat .
TRENDING : The burning question : Are there enough lampposts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sees that gamble : If the spinning ball falls into a red slot , you get four more years of Donald Trump appointing conservative judges , empowering minorities through a strong economy , negotiating peace in the Middle East and fighting back against unconstitutional abuse of power represented by James Comey , John Brennan and James Clapper .
If the election result comes up blue , you get four years of President Kamala Harris — oops , I mean Slow Joe Biden — grabbing power back for the entrenched elites while at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the door to illegal immigrants , raising taxes to bail out failed cities and states , and encouraging lawlessness by attacking the police .
Democrats , of course , would turn that equation on its head — worrying about four years of unregulated tweeting from Putin-puppet Trump and imagining a new era of hope and prosperity under the Biden-Harris ticket .
Either way , only a fool would call the winning color just when the wheel is set in motion , yet the polls and pundits have settled on Democrat blue as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parties ’ virtual conventions have been held .
How can that be ?
We haven ’ t had a single debate yet , and thanks to COVID-19 , we haven ’ t even seen any real campaigning for votes .
When President Trump held a test rally in Oklahoma , he was roundly criticized for campaigning during the pandemic , and then mocked for not filling the arena thanks to — yep — the selfsame pandemic .
So if the major media and the Democrats are so certain that Trump is going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you don ’ t ?
It can ’ t just be the polls because , as everyone knows , the polls showed candidate Trump losing badly to Hillary Clinton consistently during the 2016 campaign .
Whether it ’ s because of bias in the polls themselves or simply because of “ shy ” Trump voters rejecting participation in them or actively lying to confound the results , something causes Trump to underperform in these surveys .
I ’ m betting that Democrats are banking on two election provisions — one long-term and one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the results toward Biden .
The long-term change in voting habits that could benefit Democrats is early voting .
Let ’ s face it : Donald Trump is counting on winning the side-by-side comparison with Joe Biden .
There will not be any better opportunity to highlight differences between the candidates than the three presidential debates , yet at least 16 states will allow early voting before the first debate , on Sept. 29 , takes place .
That means millions of votes could be locked in five weeks before Election Day , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden gets to lose his train of thought , repeatedly , on a national stage .
Whether you agree with President Trump that the resulting election will be “ rigged ” or not , you still have to question whether there is something fundamentally wrong with encouraging people to vote before they have a chance to hear from the candidates — or from the Fourth Estate , if the press would ever do its job and fairly vet the candidates on both sides of the aisle .
Maybe Joe Biden won ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be President Trump who gets confused and starts to call God “ the thing ” the way Biden did back in March .
But whoever starts to act like he has lost his crackers , the voters ought to be able to know it before they send in their ballots .
Of course , Democrats and their media allies have been encouraging early voting for decades , presumably on the assumption that uninformed voters will likely be safe votes for Democrats .
But this year it ’ s more important than ever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to cast their ballot , they will have had way too many chances to figure out that Biden is running on empty .
However , just in case even those early voters are informed enough to know that Biden wants to fundamentally transform America into a great big version of anarchist Portland or violent Chicago , the Democrats have an insurance policy .
This is where things get interesting .
All-mail voting goes hand-in-hand with early voting since the ballots go out early and can be sent back early , thus contributing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But there is a more nefarious component to universal mail-in ballots , which President Trump has vigorously condemned .
Unlike absentee ballots or early voting , which require active participation by the voter , universal mail-in voting means that every registered voter will be sent a ballot whether they want one or not — heck , even whether they are alive or not .
Democrats argue that nothing can go wrong , but these are the same people who want to give illegal immigrants free health care and consider people throwing Molotov @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Fact of the matter is that cheating on mail ballots is child ’ s play .
Here , off the top of my head , are four ways to monkey with the vote : 1 ) A hard-core Democrat union-rep mailman is collecting mail from households in a neighborhood that skews Republican .
He dutifully collects the ballots left for him , but then dumps them in the trash or ( smarter ) burns them in his fire pit later that night .
What is the protection against this happening ?
Or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 ) A hard-core Democrat nurse 's aide making 10 bucks an hour decides to monkey-wrench the system that she thinks is exploiting her .
When she collects the ballots from 120 residents in the nursing home where she works , she volunteers to drop them at the post office `` to make sure they are secure , '' but then heads home and buries them in the backyard .
3 ) A pizza delivery guy enters an apartment building with a large pepperoni and leaves with a carton of blank ballots that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the residents .
The pizza guy happens to be a member of antifa and he has no problem filling out all the ballots against President Trump and the Republicans .
Even if the fraud is discovered , it is highly unlikely that all the ballots will be disqualified .
4 ) A Democratic campaign aide who is working to `` get out the vote '' in a neighborhood with a high proportion of older people knocks on doors and offers to help voters mark their ballots .
Not a citizen ?
No @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Not sure who to vote for ?
How about that nice Democrat !
And if you do happen to vote Republican , no problem — I will deliver it for you ... right to the Dumpster !
You can think of more on your own .
It ’ s not that hard .
But perhaps even more worrisome is the possibility that votes will not be counted on election night .
Some states are allowing ballots to come in by mail for days after the official election .
In some cases , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Day , but in other cases the ballots will be sent out with prepaid postage , meaning there will be no postmark and no way to know if the ballots were mailed before or after the deadline .
Suppose the results on election night are inconclusive .
Biden and Trump are both short of the majority of electoral votes needed to win , and close races are reported in Arizona , Colorado , Nevada , Minnesota , North Carolina and Michigan .
Many ballots are uncounted , and it looks like the vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Nevada have universal mail ballots , so if either candidate needs those electoral votes for the win , they will target the states with lawyers , lawsuits , and protesters .
Imagine the chaos when peaceful protests turn into riots , and then boxes of uncounted ballots are mysteriously discovered in a county courthouse in Las Vegas .
Imagine what happens when those ballots favor Joe Biden by a margin of three to one , giving him just enough votes to win Nevada ’ s six electoral votes and assure him of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take to the streets and demand justice , or maybe not .
Maybe they would just let Las Vegas decide what has been called the most important election in U.S. history with a coin toss .
Now , that would be a storybook ending to our tale , wouldn ’ t it ?
The biggest gamble in election history gets settled in the gambling capital of the United States .
You pays your money and you takes your chance .

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics.]
By Frank Miele
Real Clear Politics
The 2020 election could be the biggest gamble in the history of the United States, starting with the huge consequences at stake but made even more uncertain because of two huge question marks at the front and back ends of the voting itself.
Think of this election as a giant roulette wheel, except instead of red or black, you are betting on red or blue — Republican or Democrat.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Here’s how a Republican sees that gamble: If the spinning ball falls into a red slot, you get four more years of Donald Trump appointing conservative judges, empowering minorities through a strong economy, negotiating peace in the Middle East and fighting back against unconstitutional abuse of power represented by James Comey, John Brennan and James Clapper. If the election result comes up blue, you get four years of President Kamala Harris — oops, I mean Slow Joe Biden — grabbing power back for the entrenched elites while at the same time weakening our economy, opening the door to illegal immigrants, raising taxes to bail out failed cities and states, and encouraging lawlessness by attacking the police.
Democrats, of course, would turn that equation on its head — worrying about four years of unregulated tweeting from Putin-puppet Trump and imagining a new era of hope and prosperity under the Biden-Harris ticket.
Either way, only a fool would call the winning color just when the wheel is set in motion, yet the polls and pundits have settled on Democrat blue as the prohibitive favorite, even before the two parties’ virtual conventions have been held. How can that be? We haven’t had a single debate yet, and thanks to COVID-19, we haven’t even seen any real campaigning for votes. When President Trump held a test rally in Oklahoma, he was roundly criticized for campaigning during the pandemic, and then mocked for not filling the arena thanks to — yep — the selfsame pandemic.
So if the major media and the Democrats are so certain that Trump is going to lose, what do they know that you don’t? It can’t just be the polls because, as everyone knows, the polls showed candidate Trump losing badly to Hillary Clinton consistently during the 2016 campaign. Whether it’s because of bias in the polls themselves or simply because of “shy” Trump voters rejecting participation in them or actively lying to confound the results, something causes Trump to underperform in these surveys.
I’m betting that Democrats are banking on two election provisions — one long-term and one specific to 2020 — that will skew the results toward Biden. The long-term change in voting habits that could benefit Democrats is early voting. Let’s face it: Donald Trump is counting on winning the side-by-side comparison with Joe Biden. There will not be any better opportunity to highlight differences between the candidates than the three presidential debates, yet at least 16 states will allow early voting before the first debate, on Sept. 29, takes place. That means millions of votes could be locked in five weeks before Election Day, and before Joe “Big Gaffe” Biden gets to lose his train of thought, repeatedly, on a national stage.
Whether you agree with President Trump that the resulting election will be “rigged” or not, you still have to question whether there is something fundamentally wrong with encouraging people to vote before they have a chance to hear from the candidates — or from the Fourth Estate, if the press would ever do its job and fairly vet the candidates on both sides of the aisle.
Maybe Joe Biden won’t implode in the debates, maybe it will be President Trump who gets confused and starts to call God “the thing” the way Biden did back in March. But whoever starts to act like he has lost his crackers, the voters ought to be able to know it before they send in their ballots.
Of course, Democrats and their media allies have been encouraging early voting for decades, presumably on the assumption that uninformed voters will likely be safe votes for Democrats. But this year it’s more important than ever because if voters wait till Nov. 3 to cast their ballot, they will have had way too many chances to figure out that Biden is running on empty.
However, just in case even those early voters are informed enough to know that Biden wants to fundamentally transform America into a great big version of anarchist Portland or violent Chicago, the Democrats have an insurance policy.
This is where things get interesting. All-mail voting goes hand-in-hand with early voting since the ballots go out early and can be sent back early, thus contributing to the problem of voting prior to campaigning. But there is a more nefarious component to universal mail-in ballots, which President Trump has vigorously condemned.
Unlike absentee ballots or early voting, which require active participation by the voter, universal mail-in voting means that every registered voter will be sent a ballot whether they want one or not — heck, even whether they are alive or not.
Democrats argue that nothing can go wrong, but these are the same people who want to give illegal immigrants free health care and consider people throwing Molotov cocktails into federal courthouses “peaceful protesters.”
Fact of the matter is that cheating on mail ballots is child’s play. Here, off the top of my head, are four ways to monkey with the vote:
1) A hard-core Democrat union-rep mailman is collecting mail from households in a neighborhood that skews Republican. He dutifully collects the ballots left for him, but then dumps them in the trash or (smarter) burns them in his fire pit later that night. What is the protection against this happening? Or any of the remaining scenarios below?
2) A hard-core Democrat nurse's aide making 10 bucks an hour decides to monkey-wrench the system that she thinks is exploiting her. When she collects the ballots from 120 residents in the nursing home where she works, she volunteers to drop them at the post office "to make sure they are secure," but then heads home and buries them in the backyard.
3) A pizza delivery guy enters an apartment building with a large pepperoni and leaves with a carton of blank ballots that were left in the lobby for pickup by the residents. The pizza guy happens to be a member of antifa and he has no problem filling out all the ballots against President Trump and the Republicans. Even if the fraud is discovered, it is highly unlikely that all the ballots will be disqualified.
4) A Democratic campaign aide who is working to "get out the vote" in a neighborhood with a high proportion of older people knocks on doors and offers to help voters mark their ballots. Not a citizen? No problem. That's been waived. Not sure who to vote for? How about that nice Democrat! And if you do happen to vote Republican, no problem — I will deliver it for you ... right to the Dumpster!
You can think of more on your own. It’s not that hard. But perhaps even more worrisome is the possibility that votes will not be counted on election night. Some states are allowing ballots to come in by mail for days after the official election. In some cases, the ballots need to be postmarked by Election Day, but in other cases the ballots will be sent out with prepaid postage, meaning there will be no postmark and no way to know if the ballots were mailed before or after the deadline.
Suppose the results on election night are inconclusive. Biden and Trump are both short of the majority of electoral votes needed to win, and close races are reported in Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, Minnesota, North Carolina and Michigan. Many ballots are uncounted, and it looks like the vote could drag on for weeks. Colorado and Nevada have universal mail ballots, so if either candidate needs those electoral votes for the win, they will target the states with lawyers, lawsuits, and protesters.
Imagine the chaos when peaceful protests turn into riots, and then boxes of uncounted ballots are mysteriously discovered in a county courthouse in Las Vegas. Imagine what happens when those ballots favor Joe Biden by a margin of three to one, giving him just enough votes to win Nevada’s six electoral votes and assure him of victory. Maybe for once Republicans would take to the streets and demand justice, or maybe not. Maybe they would just let Las Vegas decide what has been called the most important election in U.S. history with a coin toss.
Now, that would be a storybook ending to our tale, wouldn’t it? The biggest gamble in election history gets settled in the gambling capital of the United States. You pays your money and you takes your chance.


wnd--2020-08-18--Nunes 'shocked' FISA judge assigned Clinesmith case

( WASHINGTON EXAMINER ) -- A top House Republican said he was `` shocked '' when he saw the name @ @ @ @ @ former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith is expected to plead guilty in the first criminal case @ @ @ @ @ John Durham 's inquiry into the Russia investigation .
Rep. Devin Nunes , the ranking @ @ @ @ @ Committee , told Fox Business host Lou Dobbs on Monday he has no idea how @ @ @ @ @ presiding judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court , ended up being in charge of @ @ @ @ @ FISA surveillance of a former Trump campaign aide .
`` I saw that today .
@ @ @ @ @ shocked , '' the California Republican said .
This was after Dobbs , a staunch @ @ @ @ @ stern critic of the Russia investigation , asked if it was `` a little bit @ @ @ @

(WASHINGTON EXAMINER) -- A top House Republican said he was "shocked" when he saw the name of the judge before whom former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith is expected to plead guilty in the first criminal case arising out of U.S. Attorney John Durham's inquiry into the Russia investigation.
Rep. Devin Nunes, the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, told Fox Business host Lou Dobbs on Monday he has no idea how Judge James Boasberg, the presiding judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, ended up being in charge of a case related to the FISA surveillance of a former Trump campaign aide.
"I saw that today. I was a little bit shocked," the California Republican said. This was after Dobbs, a staunch ally of President Trump and stern critic of the Russia investigation, asked if it was "a little bit screwed up."
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-08-18--Trump cites 'greatest economy,' saving 'millions of lives'

( FOX NEWS ) -- President Trump on Tuesday hit back at former first lady Michelle Obama , saying he @ @ @ @ @ elected “ if it weren ’ t for the job done ” by her husband @ @ @ @ @ .
Trump ’ s tweets come after the former first lady slammed the president and @ @ @ @ @ night of the 2020 Democratic National Convention , saying that his White House operates in @ @ @ @ @ “ empathy , '' while urging voters to cast their ballots for Joe Biden like @ @ @ @ @ .
`` Somebody please explain to @ MichelleObama that Donald J. Trump would not be @ @ @ @ @ White House , if it weren ’ t for the job done by your husband @ @ @ @ @ Trump tweeted early Tuesday .

(FOX NEWS) -- President Trump on Tuesday hit back at former first lady Michelle Obama, saying he wouldn’t have been elected “if it weren’t for the job done” by her husband, former President Barack Obama.
Trump’s tweets come after the former first lady slammed the president and his administration during the first night of the 2020 Democratic National Convention, saying that his White House operates in "chaos” and without “empathy," while urging voters to cast their ballots for Joe Biden like their lives depend on it.
"Somebody please explain to @MichelleObama that Donald J. Trump would not be here, in the beautiful White House, if it weren’t for the job done by your husband, Barack Obama," Trump tweeted early Tuesday.
Read the full story ›