24 Comments

There is a new podcast called “Trump’s Project 2025: Up Close and Personal”. It’s a dramatized exploration of what Project 2025 would mean for real people. The first chapter was on Deportation and the second chapter, released 9/25/24, is on The Threat to IVF. The production values are high and the scenarios are faithful to the written documents and statements by leaders in the movement.

Expand full comment

I just listened to the podcast, and it was chilling. Meanwhile, on this very thread, I have stupid people making absurd comments on this very thread like, "More police on the streets would be a good thing!" Total lunacy. These individuals have no understanding of history and should be ashamed of their ignorance. Can you even imagine the kind of police state we'd be plunged into if such deportation policies were put in place? I'm talking about violent, door-to-door Gestapo-like raids lasting for years, turning our lives into a permanent state of unrest. Have you seen how police operate in this country? Many of them are already totally unhinged and kill innocent people left and right. If they were emboldened, this country would be over. And let's not forget, it's not just immigrants—many of whom are not even undocumented—who live in these communities. Americans live amongst them, too. We’d all be caught up in this oppressive system, not just immigrants or 'illegal immigrants.'

These are the actual policies of Project 2025, and if given the chance, they would be enacted. These are radical tyrants. Yet, many people are so blinded by the "The left are commies!" rhetoric that they can't think logically or rationally. To my knowledge, every authoritarian regime throughout history has always been far right, just like what's trying to take hold again now. The threat never goes away.

Expand full comment

The Trump campaign put out a very strange official statement concerning Project 2025 yesterday. It even appears to include a threat "it will not end well for you" for anyone who continues to link Trump and Project 2025.

Trump Campaign Statement on Project 2025’s Demise

July 30, 2024

"President Trump’s campaign has been very clear for over a year that Project 2025 had nothing to do with the campaign, did not speak for the campaign, and should not be associated with the campaign or the President in any way.

Reports of Project 2025’s demise would be greatly welcomed and should serve as notice to anyone or any group trying to misrepresent their influence with President Trump and his campaign— it will not end well for you."

— Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita

Expand full comment

Update: I need to address this news. Laura Loomer, the classless Trump lackey, has now echoed Trump's remarks that Kamala Harris is not black. This 'stable' genius cannot read. Harris's birth certificate clearly states her father is Jamaican and her mother is Indian, making her half African and half Indian. The fact that her certificate does not explicitly say she’s black is irrelevant. These people are not only insane but also racist.

https://x.com/LauraLoomer/status/1818732213669884124

Expand full comment

Loomer also came up with this gem of a Tweet:

"Donald Trump lifted the ban on blacks and Jews coming to country clubs in Palm Beach, Florida.

He also has a Fulton County mug shot, his own sneaker line, and 3 baby mamas.

Trump is blacker than @KamalaHarris will ever be!"

Expand full comment

Her father is Afro-Jamaican, indicating that she has a significant African heritage, and part Indian from her mother. Why would Trump draw attention to her Indian heritage, suggesting she isn't Black, unless his intention was to sow discord, cast aspersions on her heritage, and provoke his followers to spew the most outrageous and racially charged comments?

I’ve seen some truly absurd comments on Twitter about this. Most of them are just parroting Trump’s statements, like mindless parrots repeating whatever he says; cult.

Expand full comment

By the way, I'm not sure if you saw these: https://gettrumpsneakers.com/products/fight-fight-fight-high-top-sneaker

He is pushing these on his Truth Social platform. He gets a portion of the sales from each product using his name and image. Again.... truly bizarre but very revealing of his true character.

Expand full comment

Yes, I saw that. It's another blatant lie. The director of Project 2025 either stepped aside or got a promotion yesterday. They're trying to bury the story before it gains traction because people are worried. For Trump to distance himself from Project 2025, he'd have to drop his VP, Bannon, the two dozen-plus members from his administration mentioned in the blueprint, and his own Agenda 47, which replicates Project 2025's plans exactly. He's a liar and I can't believe people take him at face value. It's truly bizarre.

Expand full comment

I was curious to see what pro-Trumpers had to say about Project 2025. I found a Russell Brand video from about 10 days ago titled "The Truth About Project 2025 That No One's Talking About".

The video begins with a short clip from Joy Reid where she says "The only thing that matters in this election is keeping Donald Trump and Project 2025 out of power." Brand characterizes this statement as "hysteria" and refers to "Cassandra-like hyperbole". He has to know Joy Reid is one person MAGA greatly enjoys hating and predictably the comments are full of racist and misogynistic attacks against Reid.

Brand squeaks "What IS Project 2025?" he then reads some damning facts about Project 2025 from a New York Times article. Brand dismisses Heritage Foundation as just another think tank that has been around since the Reagan administration and implies it won't have much impact. He says Project 2025 contains quite traditional conservative tropes. He points out the Democrats have think tanks too and nobody is alarmed about them.

Then there are excerpts from a July 10, 2024 House Judiciary Committee hearing, presumably about Project 2025, where Eric Swalwell is questioning pundit Ben Shapiro about whether homosexuality is a sin and deportation of illegal immigrants. Shapiro makes the really silly statement that the IRS should be able to assess whether immigrants are contributing enough to society to be allowed to stay in the country. Shapiro says Project 2025 is being used by Democrats who think, like Peter Pan and Tinker Bell, if they say "Project 2025" often enough their presidential candidate will become alive again.

I'm not at all sure what the "truth no one's talking about" refers to because as far as I could tell Brand didn't talk about it.

Expand full comment

I consider Shapiro to be a degenerate with highly political motives. Similarly, Brand is another extreme 'conspiracy theorist' who consistently gets his facts wrong. The whitewashing within the 'conservative' movement is absurd. It's evident in the video I made that this is a very serious issue.

Their agenda is to keep their audience from questioning anything their own side does. This is likely why Project 2025 isn’t widely discussed on outlets like Fox News. If it is discussed, it's never in truthful terms. They appeal to 'Christian' voters, and never fully represent issues like this.

Trump's disavowal of his connections to it will silence many people, even though it's a highly serious issue. If this groups gains power through Trump, they would be far worse than any Democrat or left-leaning party—far more. This is why I find it amusing when people call me a leftist for questioning all of this. They have no idea what’s coming and I'm disappointed that so many people do not get it.

J.D. Vance's connection to Project 2025 is also significant. Trump chose him because of these ties. Vance wrote the foreword for a book by Kevin Roberts, the architect of Project 2025, originally titled Dawn's Early Light: Burning Down Washington to Save America. They've since changed the title to Dawn's Early Light: Taking Back Washington to Save America to better obscure their radical agenda. They wrap their agenda in rhetoric about 'doing what is right' and 'restoring moral values,' but their actions are the exact opposite.

Expand full comment

I looked up the "Dawn's Early Light" book on Amazon. The book image has the updated title but the Amazon page still uses the more incendiary version. One sentence from the book description: "Just as a controlled burn preserves the longevity of a forest, conservatives need to burn down these institutions if we’re to preserve the American Way of life."

The book will be released September 24, 2024.

Expand full comment

Thanks for that information. Very telling.

𝐇𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐪𝐮𝐨𝐭𝐞 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐓𝐫𝐮𝐦𝐩 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬:

(Dec. 2022)

"Trump asks on his Truth Social account if the “revelation of MASSIVE & WIDESPREAD FRAUD & DECEPTION in working closely with Big Tech Companies, the DNC, & the Democrat Party, do you throw the Presidential Election Results of 2020 OUT and declare the RIGHTFUL WINNER, or do you have a NEW ELECTION?”

Trump continued, “A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude 𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐫𝐮𝐥𝐞𝐬, 𝐫𝐞𝐠𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐬, 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. Our great ‘Founders’ did not want, and would not condone, False & Fraudulent Elections!”

Monday morning, Trump appeared to walk back his comments. “The FAKE NEWS is actually trying to convince the American People that I said I wanted to ‘terminate’ the Constitution. This is simply more DISINFORMATION & Lies ... What I said was that when there is ‘MASSIVE & WIDESPREAD FRAUD & DECEPTION,’ as has been irrefutably proven in the 2020 Presidential Election, steps must be immediately taken to RIGHT THE WRONG.”

Now, just in the past few days, he stated, “Get out and vote. Just this time. You won’t have to do it anymore. In four years, you don’t have to vote again, we’ll have it fixed so good you’re not going to have to vote.”

It's like he can't help himself—he tells the truth, then has to walk it back the next day. He's done this with nearly everything he says. He did the same with Project 2025, claiming he has no involvement. His name is in the 900+ page playbook 312 times, and he spoke at the Heritage Foundation about the plan. And he just coincidentally picked J.D. Vance as his VP, who has strong ties to Kevin Roberts, the architect of Project 2025.

Expand full comment

By the way, the reason they want to implement one-day voting is to deter voters who aren't devoted to Trump from participating, either by staying home or being discouraged by long lines. Imagine the chaos when a courthouse or polling station is overrun with hundreds or thousands of people on a single day. It's asinine.

He also aims to eliminate mail-in voting, which would disenfranchise those unable to leave their homes.

The 2020 election wasn't rigged—Trump made these claims before the election even took place to justify his loss and actions thereafter, which eventually led to the Capitol riots on January 6th.

A subsequent documentary, "2000 Mules," was released, filled with multiple lies claiming the election was stolen, and his followers believed it without evidence. The film includes dramatizations and staged reenactments that are not clearly distinguished from actual footage. Additionally, it falsely claims that its producers helped solve a murder, which was later proven untrue.

This assertion was debunked as law enforcement confirmed that the suspects turned themselves in well before True the Vote contacted authorities with any information, which means their data played no role in the case​. They previously used this to help substantiate their false claims that their data on voters is accurate, when it is not.

Now, Trump is planting the same seed in the minds of his followers by claiming the 2024 election will be rigged, which could lead to a violent outcome if he loses in four months.

Expand full comment

Project 2025 is so dangerous and yet most people don't know anything about it. I asked five coworkers if they were aware of Project 2025. Four had no idea what it was. The fifth thought it was a Democrat deep state plot.

Here is more from Trump on his plans for *you* and the country.

"Speaking to Christians at the Turning Point Action Believers’ Summit in West Palm Beach, Florida, Donald Trump made his plans to become a strongman clear: “Get out and vote. Just this time. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four more years, you know what: it’ll be fixed, it’ll be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians…. Get out, you’ve got to get out and vote. In four years, you don’t have to vote again, we’ll have it fixed so good you’re not going to have to vote.”

Expand full comment

Marty, he has lost his mind and is more desperate than ever. People don't want to hear what I'm saying. They're lashing out at me just for speaking out on this subject. It's astonishing that they can't see the dangers of what's happening. This isn't even a political issue anymore; it's an extreme ideology detached from reality.

Here's the video Marty is referring to if anyone wants to see it: https://youtu.be/FOGTCKQklPQ?si=mcNFuu48Khq4Bxc4

Expand full comment

Thanks ,Jeff that`s most helpful info. l think your point regarding deforestation is highly pertinent . The Amazon rain forest is in dire need of protection . For the last 40 years ,the "slash n burn" cultivation of crops has had a seemingly measurable effect on this area. There are, I see , many who activate against the idea of anthropogenic causes proposing instead that it is natural change - including the Sun`s activity and earth movements - having subtle and long term effects not immediately obvious. Indeed ,these things might be playing a part in causing some of the changes emerging globally but clearly, we cannot ignore the immediate and pernicious impact on our world had from industrial and technological activity over the last 200 years -particularly today ,pollution of vast areas of the oceans. I don`t believe the Gulf of Mexico has fully recovered yet from the last major oil spill?

Ted

PS forgive my confusing "morphic" with "genic" !

Expand full comment

Thanks, Ted. The effects of solar variations cannot account for the long-term climate changes observed on Earth. Solar phenomena, like sunspots, are short-term and do not have a lasting impact. On the other hand, data and graphs show a steady increase in global temperatures since the Industrial Revolution, showing an undeniable link between human activity and greenhouse gases from pollution and deforestation.

Also, some may underestimate a 1-degree change in temperature, but a 1-degree increase in global temperature can have profound and widespread effects on ecosystems and the environment.

In regard to human health, increased temperatures can lead to health issues, such as an increase of viral illnesses. And air pollution, among other things, can weaken respiratory health. Studies now show that areas with higher levels of air pollution have higher infection rates of coronavirus.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7673673/

"Numerous scientific studies reviewed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have linked fine particles (PM2.5; particles with diameter, ≤ 2.5 μm) to a variety of adverse health events (1) including death (2). It has been hypothesized that because long-term exposure to PM2.5 adversely affects the respiratory and cardiovascular systems and increases mortality risk (3–5), it may also exacerbate the severity of COVID-19 symptoms and worsen the prognosis of this disease (6)."

Expand full comment

Hi Jeff. Fascinating and worrying equally. Not wishing to seem to cavil ; the issue is not frivolous but would you be good enough to cite for me the primary , factual evidence for anthropomorphic climate change that you will presumably be aware of ? Oddly, I am so far still unable to discover where it is held ?

Expand full comment

Here's a graph, and some information: https://globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange1/current/lectures/kling/climate_models/recent_trends.png

https://globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange1/current/lectures/kling/climate_models/climate_models.html

It is relatively straightforward to deduce the anthropogenic causes of climate change. The volume of pollution emitted from industrial activities over recent decades has profoundly impacted the atmosphere. This encompasses effects on wildlife, ocean pollution, air quality, and more. These factors collectively contribute to climate change. Deforestation exacerbates this issue by increasing atmospheric CO2 levels, as trees act as significant carbon sinks, absorbing more CO2 than they emit.

Even minor environmental changes can lead to significant imbalances. Climate change denialists often overlook the fact that, while the climate naturally fluctuates, current observations indicate a sustained and long-term trend of rising temperatures and altered weather patterns. This trend, persisting over many years, is not merely a natural cycle but is largely driven by human activities.

Expand full comment

Repeated talking points straight out of the oligarchal media hoax machine.

Project 2025 is some pretty tame stuff from a conservative think-tank that's been around for 50 years. Each political side commonly has dozens of think-tanks that compile similar wish-lists, most of which never become policies and many which are much more radical. It does contain reforms that the current regime finds threatening, so the oligarchal propaganda agents are out in full force right now trying to make the public afraid of it.

The oligarchal media apparatus constantly manipulates the public through fear. They are the ones that brought you the population boom scare, the AIDS scare, the Climate Change scare, the Y2K bug scare, the War on Terror, Covid and variety of other world-ending pandemic scares, etc, etc.

Here's some recent independent coverage without the hysteria:

From "System Update", a left-leaning independent media programme:

"Project 2025: Untangling Fact from Fiction with Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HluiHpSLag4

From "The Culture War with Tim Pool", a right-leaning libertarian independent media programme:

"The Truth About Project 2025" with Project 2025 Director Paul Dans

Links to the source document, including their own true and false fact page about their proposed policies:

https://www.project2025.org/truth/

Instead of being stuck forever in WWII and endlessly warning about the "the next Hitler" (and irresponsibly providing fodder and inspiration for the next political assassin, by the way) let's instead consider the historical parallels to the current late American Republic to the late Roman Republic 2150 years ago.

Back then there were two factions, the Optimates (noblemen) and the Populares (populists). Whereas once Roman society was based on small family farms and these farmers made up the military, the wealthy had grabbed the land and consolidated it into huge slave plantations while the soldiers were abroad fighting in the Punic Wars. This led to unemployed veterans pouring into the cities looking for work, and the wealth gap causing a steady decline.

In came two populist reformers, Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus, who proposed re-distributing the land (among other reforms). This threatened the wealthy land owners in control of the Senate. The Optimates faction complained that the Gracchis only cared about themselves and their own personal power, and that their populist sentiments were only and act to hide their own demagoguery, and that their inflammatory rhetoric was destabilising. They were also labelled seditionists. When their reforms were blocked and the Gracchis tried to push them through by bypassing the Senate, this was seen as a dangerous move that undermined the traditional checks and balances of Roman governance. After many political and legal battles, they were both assassinated.

Julius Caesar, who entered politics about 50 years later, was also a Populares.

In my view, Trump is a modern version of a Populares, along with politicians like Nigel Farrage, Viktor Orban, Javier Milei, and Nayib Bukele. They are political reformers with popular support who threaten the status quo, which is why they are constantly smeared by the legacy media owned by the modern Optimates as racists, liars, traitors and power-seeking fascists.

Expand full comment

Trump lacks an understanding of the US Constitution and seeks to suspend it at his discretion. Listen to his own words. He has expressed a desire to suspend articles and amendments of the Constitution if he suspects a 'fraudulent election,' a claim he has already made without evidence. He has a history of lying about elections and is already asserting that the 2024 election will be 'rigged.' If he loses, he has primed his followers to react violently, even without any supporting evidence.

"The oligarchal media apparatus constantly manipulates the public through fear."

No, you can't scapegoat this as relying on "oligarchal media" sources. Many of these are direct quotes from Trump himself. Moreover, media sources are relevant when they provide unbiased evidence and report on existing facts.

"Project 2025 is some pretty tame stuff from a conservative think-tank that's been around for 50 years."

Tame? They plan to dismantle the FBI, abolish the department of education, deregulate environmental protections, install Trump loyalists in the Supreme Court and federal government, push a pseudo-Christian nationalist agenda that merges church and state, thereby violating the founder's vision of America and constitutional rule of law. They also aim to place anti-science individuals in scientific branches. The list is extensive and highly concerning.

Have you actually read about the plans these people have if elected? Or, as it appears, are you just citing their own sources from their own lying mouths?

"They are political reformers with popular support who threaten the status quo."

Except he's not challenging the status quo—he embodies it. Trump is a billionaire elite who has long associated with the very people he claims to oppose and continues to do so. He epitomizes the elite, even more so than those he criticizes.

These aren't 'leftist' talking points I'm raising. People from all walks of life are questioning Trump and his intentions. It's absurd how devoted Trump supporters find every way possible to defend him, as if he doesn't mean what he says, always twisting his words with excuses like, "Oh, he didn't mean that." or "He meant something else." Take him at face value for what he says and act accordingly.

All the points made on the Project 2025 site are easily refuted by examining the playbook and its language, as well as listening to what its proponents actually intend to do via their own words. Honestly, how can you, with a clear conscience, justify this blatant anti-constitutional garbage?

Both of your sources are highly biased because they are directly from Project 2025 advocates and from the founder himself; pure naivety of the highest order.

Also, explain this video: https://youtu.be/FOGTCKQklPQ?si=pCAoVvE1YezM40SG

Expand full comment

When I cite a media source it can be ignored because it's biased (you dismiss them as coming from "advocates", which they aren't), but when you cite a media source the bias doesn't matter. Hypocrisy alert!

Let's focus on the first two areas of concern you bring up, the Dept of Education and FBI. Speaking generally, the Project 2025 document does not recommend eliminating any of these government functions, but moving them to other departments, cutting bureaucratic bloat (run-of-the-mill 'we want smaller government' right-wing stuff), and to de-politicise them in order to restore the public's trust.

It does recommend getting rid of the Dept of Education and Homeland Security (not the FBI, that's false. Where did you get that?). These are the most recently created agencies that the document criticises for failing at their mission, not being fit for purpose, being wasteful and needing reforms.

Giving each state authority over education would make it just like some other western countries…Canada has no federal body that oversees public education, for example. Is that idea somehow fascist or something? Totalitarians of all stripes would want strong central control, but Project 2025 recommends the opposite, it recommends decentralisation. The white paper argues that the Carter Administration promised the DOE would make education spending more efficient, but the opposite happened while US national education standards dropped, so it recommends reforms like more school choice and empowering parents.

The chapter on the DOJ cites examples from recent history of the FBI and DOJ being used as weapons against right-wing political opponents, and stresses the importance that federal law enforcement be fair and impartial to regain public trust (it's says 46% of Americans see them as "too political, corrupt, and not to be trusted"). In the chapter on the Intelligence Community, it even criticises right-wing bias in the CIA during the Iraq War, which damaged the CIA's reputation. It does not say anything about eliminating all federal law enforcement, nor to turn the tables and start using these agencies as agencies as weapons against the political opponents of conservatives. They seem like sensible and stabilising ideas to me, and I see why the current regime might be threatened by them. The modern Optimates like using these agencies as weapons, thank you very much! They don't want to give up that power.

Why are these reforms so alarming to you? What's so shocking? Please cite from the document.

Expand full comment

The problem is that your sources are directly from the founder, yet you claim they aren't highly biased. That's disingenuous, and your comparison is erroneous. Additionally, some elements on my list may or may not be covered in the Project 2025 blueprint and must be traced back to the statements of the plan's architects themselves. One must also listen to Trump's own plan, since he would be the sitting president in power that would enable Project 2025 and its leaders.

𝐒𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠:

Firstly, in the United States, education is primarily under state control already. The Constitution does not specifically mention education, so the authority over public education falls largely to the states.

While states have primary authority over education, they are also subject to federal regulations—for a good reason.

The federal government influences state education systems through various laws and regulations, primarily by: Federal Funding, Civil Rights Protections, Education Standards, Special Education, Teacher Quality.

"𝐆𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐚𝐮𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐞𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐦𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐢𝐭 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐰𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬"

For one, educational disparities: When each state has its own total authority over education, there would be significant disparities in educational standards, curricula, and resources.

Second, Different states would most assuredly emphasize different historical narratives, scientific theories, and cultural 'ideas', leading to a fragmented national understanding. There would be no federal guidelines or protections. Federal school laws in the United States have evolved primarily to ensure educational equity, quality, and civil rights protection across the nation.

The founders originally give the states the rights in regard to education, but were silent on the matter. At the time, the United States consisted of a relatively small number of states with more homogenous populations. The Founders envisioned local control as more manageable and reflective of local values and needs. In our modern time, there is an awareness of the potential for state and local governments to enact policies that might violate constitutional rights or reflect ideological biases. This means that states who want to push a particular political or religious ideology on school children will be given unfettered access to do so, thereby joining church and state, ultimately violating constitutional rights and principles.

𝐅𝐁𝐈 & 𝐃𝐎𝐉:

𝐈𝐧 𝐫𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐫𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐁𝐈 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐬:

Project 2025 aims to significantly restructure the FBI and the Department of Justice (DOJ). The plan involves removing the FBI from direct supervision by the Deputy Attorney General and placing it under the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division. This change is intended to enhance political oversight and diminish the FBI’s operational independence.

What does this mean? It means the FBI will be a political task force for the president and his friends, instead of an independent body.

𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟓 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐬, "𝑰𝒕 𝒊𝒔 𝒆𝒔𝒔𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒊𝒂𝒍 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒏𝒆𝒙𝒕 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒆𝒓𝒗𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒗𝒆 𝑨𝒅𝒎𝒊𝒏𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒑𝒍𝒂𝒄𝒆 𝒂 𝒉𝒊𝒈𝒉 𝒑𝒓𝒊𝒐𝒓𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒐𝒏 𝒓𝒆𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒎𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑫𝑶𝑱 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒊𝒕𝒔 𝒄𝒖𝒍𝒕𝒖𝒓𝒆 𝒕𝒐 𝒂𝒍𝒊𝒈𝒏 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒅𝒆𝒑𝒂𝒓𝒕𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒊𝒕𝒔 𝒄𝒐𝒓𝒆 𝒑𝒖𝒓𝒑𝒐𝒔𝒆𝒔 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒂𝒅𝒗𝒂𝒏𝒄𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒏𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒂𝒍 𝒊𝒏𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒕. 𝑪𝒓𝒊𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒍𝒍𝒚, 𝒕𝒉𝒊𝒔 𝒎𝒖𝒔𝒕 𝒊𝒏𝒄𝒍𝒖𝒅𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑭𝑩𝑰. 𝑨𝒏𝒚𝒕𝒉𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒐𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒓 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒏 𝒂 𝒕𝒐𝒑-𝒕𝒐-𝒃𝒐𝒕𝒕𝒐𝒎 𝒐𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒉𝒂𝒖𝒍 𝒘𝒊𝒍𝒍 𝒐𝒏𝒍𝒚 𝒇𝒖𝒓𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒓 𝒆𝒓𝒐𝒅𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒕𝒓𝒖𝒔𝒕 𝒐𝒇 𝒔𝒊𝒈𝒏𝒊𝒇𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒏𝒕 𝒑𝒐𝒓𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑨𝒎𝒆𝒓𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒏 𝒑𝒆𝒐𝒑𝒍𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒉𝒂𝒓𝒎 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒚 𝒇𝒂𝒃𝒓𝒊𝒄 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒉𝒐𝒍𝒅𝒔 𝒕𝒐𝒈𝒆𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒓 𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒕𝒊𝒕𝒖𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒂𝒍 𝒓𝒆𝒑𝒖𝒃𝒍𝒊𝒄. 𝑨𝒕 𝒂 𝒑𝒓𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒍 𝒍𝒆𝒗𝒆𝒍, 𝒏𝒐𝒕 𝒓𝒆𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒎𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑫𝒆𝒑𝒂𝒓𝒕𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝒐𝒇 𝑱𝒖𝒔𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒆 𝒘𝒊𝒍𝒍 𝒂𝒍𝒔𝒐 𝒈𝒖𝒂𝒓𝒂𝒏𝒕𝒆𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒇𝒂𝒊𝒍𝒖𝒓𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒆𝒓𝒗𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒗𝒆 𝑨𝒅𝒎𝒊𝒏𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏’𝒔 𝒂𝒈𝒆𝒏𝒅𝒂 𝒊𝒏 𝒄𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒕𝒍𝒆𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒓 𝒘𝒂𝒚𝒔. 𝑺𝒖𝒄𝒄𝒆𝒔𝒔𝒇𝒖𝒍 𝒓𝒆𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒎 𝒘𝒊𝒍𝒍 𝒓𝒆𝒒𝒖𝒊𝒓𝒆 𝒎𝒐𝒓𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒏 𝒎𝒊𝒏𝒐𝒓 𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒊𝒑𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒍 𝒂𝒅𝒋𝒖𝒔𝒕𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒔." - 𝒑.547

The Trump administration will seek to implement policies to enable a more expansive authority, allowing for alterations in legal frameworks that will favor their lawless objectives and minimize or eliminate accountability for actions that might otherwise warrant scrutiny. This move will undermine mechanisms of oversight and balance. Historically, the FBI has been led by individuals who are Republican, as opposed to Democratic ones. The assertions made by Project 2025 lack merit and are unfounded.

Like other Trump supporters, you're missing the overarching picture. This strategy, aimed at replacing a significant portion of federal employees with loyalists selected based on the Heritage Foundation's criteria, will only allow entry to those who pass rigorous tests. Consequently, the federal workforce will lose its checks and balances, becoming solely dedicated to one party. This will lead to the dismantling of agencies and the imposition of a radical agenda across all government functions. Take them at face value.

They aim to erode fundamental rights, such as those guaranteed by the First Amendment, and restrict access to healthcare and highly limit those choices. They want to be in the doctor's office with you, in the privacy of your own home, and in the family, and on the internet. Many of their stated intentions on their website, which they claim they will not do, are precisely what they've promised to implement. Thus, their assurances are deceptive.

Again, these are radical Christo-fascist extremists who must be defeated and not be allowed to take power. I've only touched on a minor segment of the broader scope of their insane agenda, and most of the points you raise are very minor in the larger scheme of the totality of their agenda.

Given that you're not accurately reflecting their plan according to their own statements, I see no reason to continue this discussion. You are merely parroting what they are claiming, instead of accurately reflecting what they are conveying in their own words and in their blueprint.

Expand full comment

Other readers who've spent time reading the source documents can judge whether I've reported on Project 2025 accurately or not. I have not endorsed or condemned it, but have argued here that much of current coverage about it is false, misleading and hysterical. Agreed it's impossible to have a productive conversation about anything in the middle of this hysteria, which I believe is mass-media generated.

Expand full comment