Trump ‘Stocking Administration’ With ‘Project 2025’ Operatives – The Left Has Its 19th Nervous Breakdown
Trump’s pledge to dismantle the deep state was one of the reasons he won the election. He campaigned on this message.
One of the biggest surprises since President-elect Donald Trump’s sweeping victory over Vice President Kamala Harris has been the absence of liberals warning voters, without evidence, that “he is a threat to our democracy.” The empty phrase had been a mantra for Democratic politicians and pundits throughout the election cycle, something they felt compelled to say before they could move on.
Once ubiquitous, after Trump was declared the winner, that talking point went the way of the Harris campaign’s joy and good vibes. Even former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley, who once allegedly told Washington Post writer Bob Woodward that Trump was a “fascist” and “the most dangerous person to this country,” said “America’s going to be okay.”
But the Left always has to vilify Trump for something, and it appears they have found it. Right on cue, here comes their nineteenth nervous breakdown.
The legacy media, in unison, is promoting the narrative that “Trump lied” during his campaign when he distanced himself from Project 2025, an initiative coordinated by The Heritage Foundation (the largest conservative think tank in America).
In a July post on Truth Social, Trump wrote: “I know nothing about Project 2025. … I disagree with some of the things they’re saying and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal.”
The creators of Project 2025 describe it as “a historic movement, brought together by over 100 respected organizations from across the conservative movement, to take down the Deep State and return the government to the people. Its Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, published in April 2023, is a product of more than 400 scholars and policy experts from around the country.”
Conversely, the ACLU sees it as a “roadmap for how to replace the rule of law with ring-wing [sic: right-wing] ideals.” The initiative “threatens to erode our civil rights and civil liberties during a second Trump term.”
Several of Trump’s nominees and appointees were indeed involved with Project 2025. But it was Trump’s choice of Russell Vought for Director of the Office of Management and Budget on Friday that had Democrats frothing at the mouth. In Trump’s announcement, he noted that Vought had served in this role during his first term and “he did an excellent job.” Touting Vought’s previous service, Trump said, “We cut four Regulations for every new Regulation.”
But Democrats don’t care that Vought focused on reducing the federal government’s role in U.S. businesses. In fact, they like government oversight.
They are melting down because Vought authored a chapter in Project 2025’s “Mandate for Leadership.” As previously mentioned, more than 400 individuals collaborated on the final product which was 920-pages long. While it may contain some far right-wing rhetoric, the parts of it that the media have focused on, particularly those relating to abortion, have been taken wildly out of context.
At any rate, the press is seeing red over Trump’s choice of Vought for OMB. The headline in Rolling Stone reads, “Trump is stocking his administration with the people behind Project 2025.” The article notes, “The incoming president is pulling appointees and nominations from the pool of conservatives who worked on the draconian policy project.”
Trump Is Stocking His Administration With the People Behind Project 2025
The incoming president is pulling appointees and nominations from the pool of conservatives who worked on the draconian policy project.
Story: https://t.co/uHHRNT9rkg pic.twitter.com/5q4Tf53y9y
— Rolling Stone (@RollingStone) November 22, 2024
The New York Times calls Vought a “key figure in Project 2025” and reports that he “has spent the last four years making plans to rework the American government to enhance presidential power.”
The Times writes: “Among other things, Mr. Vought helped come up with the idea of having Mr. Trump use emergency power to circumvent Congress’s decision about how much to spend on a border wall.” You may recall then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s flat refusal to allocate funds for a wall in early 2019. She didn’t want to hand Trump a win, and besides, a border wall would have made it too difficult for illegals to enter the country.
The article cites Vought’s recent interview with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson in which he said that Trump “’has to move executively as fast and as aggressively as possible, with a radical constitutional perspective, to be able to dismantle’ the power of federal agencies and civil servants.”
Vought added, “The American people currently are not in control of their government, and the president hasn’t been either. We have to solve the woke and the weaponized bureaucracy and have the president take control of the executive branch.”
I would argue that Trump’s pledge to dismantle the deep state was one of the reasons he won the election. He campaigned on this message. And unlike the legacy media, a majority of voters want Trump to eradicate the systemic corruption that has taken root at the highest echelons of our government agencies.
President-elect Trump has picked a leading figure in Project 2025 to head the Office of Management and Budget. The would-be nominee, Russell Vought, has spent the last four years making plans to rework the American government to enhance presidential power. https://t.co/q3GYjdQOzJ pic.twitter.com/Pddp44f1T3
— The New York Times (@nytimes) November 23, 2024
For her part, Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-NM) called Vought “one of the chief architects of Project 2025,” said “He [Trump] lied [when he pretended not to know anything about Project 2025],” and that “It’s crystal clear, this is the blueprint for the coming administration.”
This week Donald Trump quietly named Russ Vought to be head of OMB—one of the chief architects of Project 2025.
Yes … THE Project 2025, which Donald Trump pretended to know nothing about. He lied.
It’s crystal clear, this is the blueprint for the coming administration. pic.twitter.com/uzs2p7Mydg
— Rep. Melanie Stansbury (@Rep_Stansbury) November 22, 2024
These points were repeated by far-Left Fox News co-host Jessica Tarlov and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY).
BREAKING: Jessica Tarlov just slammed Donald Trump for lying to the American people by claiming to not know what Project 2025 is and now hiring all the individuals responsible for writing it. Make sure every American sees this.pic.twitter.com/INHTEjiGbc
— Democratic Wins Media (@DemocraticWins) November 19, 2024
A major author of Project 2025 was just named to lead the powerful Office of Management and Budget.
Is anyone surprised?
— Hakeem Jeffries (@RepJeffries) November 23, 2024
On Saturday, Trump announced his nomination of Brooke Rollins for Secretary of Agriculture. She is the current president and CEO of the America First Policy Institute. The Washington Post was quick to report that the AFPI “has put together proposals for a second Trump term. The institute … was launched in 2021 by a group of Trump administration veterans.”
Next, the Post compares the AFPI to Project 2025:
Like the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, AFPI has sought to provide policy recommendations for the next Republican presidential administration to efficiently stand up an executive branch that will swiftly undo President Joe Biden’s legacy. The organization’s work has comparatively flown under the radar and has not been as publicly scrutinized by Democrats as Project 2025.
Democrats can try as they will to gaslight the public. They’ve been demonizing Trump for the past nine years. And after the debacle of what was essentially former President Barack Obama’s third term, the American people just voted to send Trump back to the White House.
In the meantime, the Democratic Party and its communications team, the legacy media, continue to disgrace themselves. And publishing weak tea like this surely will not restore the public’s trust in them.
[Language Warning Below]
[Headline reference: The Rolling Stones, 19th Nervous Breakdown]
Elizabeth writes commentary for The Washington Examiner. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation and a member of the Editorial Board at The Sixteenth Council, a London think tank. Please follow Elizabeth on X or LinkedIn.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Oblique musical references are always appreciated.
This one works too for today’s Ds,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AULOC–qUOI&t=1s
Just Dropped In To See What Condition My Condition Was In,
I fondly remember watching Kenny Rogers sweat through a performance of this derivative psychedelic cringer on (Ed Sullivan?) before discovering that his actual life calling was in Country & Western.
How about: “Your under my thumb . . . “
What a drag, getting old!
Oblique? Why, you whippersnappin’ Ding Dong Daddy!
The Stones would be pleased. Dems must be in nervous breakdown always because if they aren’t then they have no reason to exist..
Mother’s Little Helper is there to ease the pain.
But don’t take four at a time.
.
The Heritage Foundation is arguably THE preeminent conservative think tank out there. It’s published a series of papers titled “Mandate for leadership” every few years since 1981, over four decades. The so called 225 project is just the most recent iteration of that. No (R) President or presidential candidate has ever proposed or tried to implement, or actually implemented every single proposal on the hodge podge of included proposals. Even Reagan only supported aprox. 2/3rds of the project proposals during his time in office.
So the meme that Trump personally authored or will salute every blessed flag the current paper runs up the flag pole is just another (D) or mass media (but I repeat myself) lie.
Further, the editors of the paper tried to be inclusive of the range of conservative punditry. No silencing of less popular but arguably still mainstream thoughts. Hence, some of the flavors of proposals will conflict if you tried to implement them 100%.
The paper definitely does NOT include proposals to (say) draft fertile handmaidens to bear children for infertile rich couples or many other of the daft things the loony left claimed a Trump election would usher in.
It does include a proposal to ban porn entirely I understand, but considering the popularity of porn I wouldn’t worry too much.
The (D)s seem to think it’s reasonable to criticize a Trump job nomination if the nominee belongs to the heritage foundation, or authored (say) a paragraph in this 920 page conglomeration, or served in Trump’s previous admin, or was a target of lawfair. Basically, unless he nominates someone Biden would have nominated, he’s (again) literaly Hitler.
I personally would prefer nominees that don’t become famous for being incompetent like our transportation secretary, or for behavior that would cost a soldier his/her security clearance like his luggage thief DEI hire, or anyone who’s a nominee just to check off a “first ever” box.
The Left has demonized the Project 2025 document so much that somebody who wrote a single paragraph on page 756 about elderly pet care will be lumped in with some idea the left loathes deeply or just plain makes up in order to smear all the authors with an enormously huge brush.
“The paper definitely does NOT include proposals to (say) draft fertile handmaidens to bear children for infertile rich couples”
______
OK, it’s not perfect.
Nothing the Left does seems to work; it only seems to make matters worse. But oh, who’s to blame?
What will they do to save the party? Parcheesi? Charades or a scavenger hunt?
Wait till they find out about Project 26 and Project 28. Who boy!
The left will have heart failure regardless what Trump and any member of his team and administration does. Well, welcome, lefties.
We have a chance to get the USA back to its ideals. We’ve got to support Trump and his team. Otherwise, the goofy intellectuals and worldwide billionaires will wreck the planet.
I do volunteer work at church (heaven forbid). On Nov. 6, I walked into the church office for something – one of the staffers asked me how I felt about the election results – “ESTACTIC” I exclaimed – turns out that staffer had also voted for Trump. When our best neutral employee entered the office I calmed down, but she knew.
An aside – Marc Elias lost – after the Coleman robbery, I was ecstatic.
When you are evil, like these authoritarian fascists, projecting your goals and motives onto others would necessarily be terrifying. You’d be fearful for your life, given what you want to do to them.
I would never even have heard of Project 2025 except for liberals screeching about it. Something tells me I would approve mightily. Lol
Wouldn’t the news be her not screaming at the clouds every time the right does anything?
When he distanced himself from the project I thought he went much farther than he had to, and I was worried that he would deliberately avoid it and its recommendations. I’m glad to see that’s not happening.
I believe he was correct to avoid getting drawn into defending something he didn’t initiate or author. The Left wanted to get him busy answering a series of “is it true you’ve stopped beating your wife?” questions. Questions where a yes/no response assumes guilt and a proper nuanced response bores listeners and doesn’t satisfy detractors.
Whatever else Trump is, he’s good at driving the conversation, and avoiding gimmes that let opponents grab the steering wheel from him.
Yes, he was right to say “Look, this has nothing to do with me”. But I think he went too far when he said it had some wacky ideas that he was against. He should have been much more neutral. Something like, “I understand some very smart people have written up some ideas for my next term. None of them have consulted me or told me what they wrote. I haven’t read it yet, and don’t plan to until after the election, so I can’t comment on it until then.”
So they’re saying Trump is going to “fundamentally transform” the country?
If only someone had told them that “elections have consequences.”
Trump should remind them, “I won.”
Wait… I think I’ve heard something like this before…
Good, seen a few administration picks lately some are worried about.
The leftists are in a tizzy b/c Trump is appointing populist oriented outsiders to undo the damage the establishment of both d/prog and GoP have done from the WH this century. This is exactly what folks voted for and if the basic thrust of MAGA populist policies overlaps with some aspects of Project 25 that’s how the cookie crumbles. Elections have consequences we were told.
Speaking of “overlap,” there’s a great deal of it between the retribution Trump wants to bring to his political enemies and good ole, honest-to-God justice. In fact, nearly a complete overlap, as nearly all of his enemies have actually broken a law or three in their zeal to bring down DJT. Naturally, this overlap is never mentioned by the MSM.
Trump is stocking his administration with people who have more loyalty to the country and the people than to the bureaucracy.
The ACLU says Project 25 “threatens to erode our civil rights and civil liberties during a second Trump term.”
Uh, the ACLU supported the Biden regime’s assault on “our civil rights and civil liberties.”
The awful, terrible, horrible Project 2025 is a blueprint to reverse the Soros/Obama/Biden neocommunism and neofascism. In other words, it’s a conservative document. “Elections have consequences.”
What Leftists lost sight of is that even if Trump is “the most dangerous person to this country,” Americans have a right to elect dangerous people. “Danger” is relative, and the Left has regularly fielded arguably “dangerous” candidates of their own, and they never think twice about it. Convincing voters of the “danger” posed by a candidate isn’t necessarily persuasive.
Someone on X commented that Trump should try to behave more “normally.” I commented:
They’ve been telling us for years that Trump is unhinged, now they’re demanding “normal” from him? No. We voted for abnormal. We demand it!
Is Trump dangerous? By God, I hope so. It’s one of the reasons I voted for him.
You can pick a qualified person for an office and have it not indicate anything other than that person is the best for the position. I don’t think that screeching about Project 2025, which I guarantee none of the leftist talking heads has read, is going to have the same impact as Russia Russia Russia.
Project 2025 turned me into a newt!
(I got better!)
Look, I read the chapter of Project 2025 that dealt with my particular point of expertise. It was a well thought out, rational and defensible critique of that particular agency and other than the part about sacrificing virgins into a volcano, I was completely in sync with what was said.
If you don’t want to sacrifice them into volcanos, where are we supposed to sacrifice them?
You have to find them first!
President who ran on an America first, pro constitution platform is stocking his administration with America first, pro constitution people?
Quick, to the fainting couches!
I wish someone would just flat out ask one of these libs “What’s so bad about Project 2025? Show your work.”
Reap the whirlwind.