Head of Project 2025 Fired!

[Black Dog]

13 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

It says most of hitler's programs weren't racist, and that's true...  but what you claimed i said was Hitler wasn't racist. 

And where does that say that hitler wasn't racist? 

Oh yeah it doesn't 

Thanks for admitting  you lied.  It's big of you to man up to it     LOLOLOLL 

Yeah you said it, sorry little buddy, that's just the way it is.

"Most of Hitler's programs weren't racist" is also a very comical and stupid thing to say of a man who was completely obsessed with race.

 

 

Edited August 3, 2024 by Black Dog

[CdnFox]

12 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

Yeah you said it, sorry little buddy, that's just the way it is.

 

You literally just posted proof that i didn't and that it wasn't the way it is    You posted that, not me  

What the hell is the matter with you left wing nutbars that  you constantly provide proof that YOU"RE wrong?  

You get the idea that you're supposed to prove YOUR case, not mine, right?   LOLOL

Most of the nazi's policies had nothing to do with race. Hitler was a racist.  Two things can be true  

 

Sorry doggie, looks like you rolled in your own sh*t again, (which makes sense seeing as you're so fond of talking about sh*t   )  LOLOL 

Keep trying kiddo, maybe one day you'll find a subject you don't lose at. 

[Black Dog]

17 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

You literally just posted proof that i didn't and that it wasn't the way it is    You posted that, not me  

What the hell is the matter with you left wing nutbars that  you constantly provide proof that YOU"RE wrong?  

You get the idea that you're supposed to prove YOUR case, not mine, right?   LOLOL

Most of the nazi's policies had nothing to do with race. Hitler was a racist.  Two things can be true  

Wow now you're straight up denying reality, you should see a psychologist because this is concerning.

Literally everything the Nazis did was motivated by their racial beliefs. It was the central pillar of their world view as this handy video explains.

Quote

At its core, the Nazi world view was racist and biological, positing that the so-called “Aryan” race – primarily the North Europeans – was the superior race of human beings. Their superiority granted the Aryans the right and obligation to rule over other races and peoples, for the benefit of humankind. The Jews, in complete contrast, were seen as a kind of “anti-race”, dangerous inhuman beings in seemingly human form. They were viewed alternatively as microbes and parasites, or as devils, that is, inhuman creatures with superhuman power.

But again, I'm sure some retarded keyboard jockey is gonna know more about this from watching a Prager U video than actual scholars of Nazism and the holocaust lol. You're an embarrassment. 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Black Dog said:

Wow now you're straight up denying reality, you should see a psychologist because this is concerning.

LOL-  talking to your mirror again?  

 

2 hours ago, Black Dog said:

Literally everything the Nazis did was motivated by their racial beliefs

Nope. Their belief in military expansion had nothing to do with racial beliefs, Even their persecution of the jews wasn't 'racial', it was ethnic.  Their belief that the communists and "Socialists" were evil had nothing to do with race. Their desire to put an end to france, the primary author of the treaty of versilles had nothing to do with race.  They didn't come to power on race, they came to power opposing communism.  

Hitlers huge monetary policies to revalue the mark had nothing to do with race.. While he thought aryans were the best he also liked other races quite a bit, including the english which he spoke glowingly of and tried hard to avoid invading, and the italians.

You're just plain wrong.  Very little of what they did or their policy had anything to do with race in the slightest, and even their persecution of the jews was because hitler looked at the jews as being the front to some huge conspiracy and financial power (not surprising after what they did to his mom and dad).  Jews after all weren't a 'race', and he famously shouted at one subordinate that he would be the one to say who was jewish and who was not when one of his people was found to have had jewish parents but hitler liked him. 

What hitler did to the jews  is one of the things WE think of as a big part of ww2 but remember that nobody even knew it was happening till the end of the war. 

Very very little nazi policy addressed racism.  Even when they didn't like jazz it wasn't that the blacks were inferior racially it was they were immoral and indecent as a culture.  And the jews were about antisemitism, there were jews of Aryan decent as well after all.  

There's no doubt that hitler was a racist, and that the nazi's were a party that embraced racism and that many german people were racist.  But it really wasn't something they spent a lot of time actually 'doing' anything about. 

Swing and a miss AGAING loser   I'd say you were out but  it's about strike 56 for you and you just keep swinging  

 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Black Dog said:

Wow now you're straight up denying reality, you should see a psychologist because this is concerning.

Literally everything the Nazis did was motivated by their racial beliefs. It was the central pillar of their world view as this handy video explains.

But again, I'm sure some retarded keyboard jockey is gonna know more about this from watching a Prager U video than actual scholars of Nazism and the holocaust lol. You're an embarrassment. 

Oh, and i almost forgot.  I've already proven you were wrong of course,  but none of that is really relevant. 

What is relevant is you claimed that i said Hitler wasn't racists. 

I never said anything of the kind at all  

So the relevant part here is you lied yet again because you KNEW you were wrong and now you're trying to change the channel.  

The nazis were racists, but most of their actions and poilcy wasn't about racism. 

[Black Dog]

On 8/3/2024 at 5:52 PM, CdnFox said:

Nope. Their belief in military expansion had nothing to do with racial beliefs, Even their persecution of the jews wasn't 'racial', it was ethnic. 

LMAOOOOOO Right that's why he was constantly referring to "the Jewish race"

Quote

Their belief that the communists and "Socialists" were evil had nothing to do with race.

According to Hitler, Marxism was a Jewish strategy to subjugate Germany. Alfred Rosenberg, the considered one of the main authors of key Nazi ideology, said Bolshevism was "the revolt of the Jewish, Slavic and Mongolian races against the German (Aryan) element in Russia". 

Quote

Very very little nazi policy addressed racism.  Even when they didn't like jazz it wasn't that the blacks were inferior racially it was they were immoral and indecent as a culture. 

That's racism you retarded baboon.

Quote

And the jews were about antisemitism, there were jews of Aryan decent as well after all.

No you dipshit, in the Nazi worldview Jews and Aryan were completely separate categories. You couldn't be a Jewish Aryan.

Quote

There's no doubt that hitler was a racist, and that the nazi's were a party that embraced racism and that many german people were racist.  But it really wasn't something they spent a lot of time actually 'doing' anything about. 

They systematically murdered like 8 million people because of their racial beliefs you jizzrag.

Its amazing you can be this wrong about something as extensively documented and as central as Hitler and the Nazis' views on race lol, no hope for you.

 

Edited August 6, 2024 by Black Dog

[CdnFox]

21 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

LMAOOOOOO Right that's why he was constantly referring to "the Jewish race"

 

That's the translation most often taken    But the reality is that the jews aren't a race.     You know that right? You know that there's all kinds of people who are jewish? You don't need me to go into details right?

 

Quote

According to Hitler, Marxism was a Jewish strategy to subjugate Germany. Alfred Rosenberg, the considered one of the main authors of key Nazi ideology, said Bolshevism was "the revolt of the Jewish, Slavic and Mongolian races against the German (Aryan) element in Russia". 

Sure.  Iike i said, he was a "racist" in that he hated jews.  But he hated the communists and socialists for a lot of reasons. 

Quote

That's racism you retarded baboon.

Well no, that's a claim that an ethnic group is conspiring against your nation.  But whatever - lets call it racism, we'll go on to the grade 12 level stuff when you're a little older. 

The point is, so what?  Nobody has claimed hitler wasn't racist.  But - that has nothing to do with their policy. They actually made a bunch of secret deals with the communists - so their policy was in odds with their prejudice. They didn't attack russia because of 'jews' or 'socailsm', they attacked because they wanted the living space and the oil. 

Again - what i said was that racism/antisematism did not make up much of the nazi's policies. You're kind of proving mhy point. 

Quote

No you dipshit, in the Nazi worldview Jews and Aryan were completely separate categories. You couldn't be a Jewish Aryan.

Sure you could - there were lots of people who were of mixed Aryan and non Aryan heritage and as i noted hitler "Decided" who was jewish and who wasn't. 

 

Quote

They systematically murdered like 8 million people because of their racial beliefs you jizzrag.

Sure.  And they started a war that wound up killing about 54 million other people.  But the fact is that as far as policy goes - the extermination of the jews was a very very small part of their policies and happend late in their political time. As i said it made up a small amount of their efforts and time and policy.  The whole death camp thing really woudln't have happened if it wasn't for them being desperate after some of their other policies (world domination) wasn't going so well. 

Quote

Its amazing you can be this wrong about something as extensively documented and as central as Hitler and the Nazis' views on race lol, no hope for you.

Talking to your mirror again i see  

In fact this IS VERY well documented. The problem is you very clearly did not read the documents. 

Hitler and his buddies were racist. There's little doubt about that.  But - in terms of policy race had very little to do with the vast majority of the nazi policies and in fact those policies often flew in the face of their racism. 

 

 

[Black Dog]

7 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

That's the translation most often taken    But the reality is that the jews aren't a race.     You know that right? You know that there's all kinds of people who are jewish? You don't need me to go into details right?

Hitler considered them a race.

Quote

Sure.  Iike i said, he was a "racist" in that he hated jews.  But he hated the communists and socialists for a lot of reasons. 

Because of the Jews, mainly.

Quote

Well no, that's a claim that an ethnic group is conspiring against your nation.  But whatever - lets call it racism, we'll go on to the grade 12 level stuff when you're a little older. 

LOl now you're trying to be autistic about the difference between racism and hating an "ethnicity". (They're the same thing btw).

Quote

The point is, so what?  Nobody has claimed hitler wasn't racist.  But - that has nothing to do with their policy.

It has everything to do with their policies.

Quote

They didn't attack russia because of 'jews' or 'socailsm', they attacked because they wanted the living space and the oil. 

I already told you how lebensraum was rooted in their racial beliefs and you're going to keep pretending it had nothing to do with it because you're retarded. Oh well.

Quote

Sure you could - there were lots of people who were of mixed Aryan and non Aryan heritage and as i noted hitler "Decided" who was jewish and who wasn't. 

oh yeah the nazis loved mixed-race people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mischling

Quote

Sure.  And they started a war that wound up killing about 54 million other people.  But the fact is that as far as policy goes - the extermination of the jews was a very very small part of their policies and happend late in their political time. As i said it made up a small amount of their efforts and time and policy.  The whole death camp thing really woudln't have happened if it wasn't for them being desperate after some of their other policies (world domination) wasn't going so well. 

The extermination of the Jews was the logical end point of their campaign against the Jews, Roma and other "undesirables" that started from day one. Because it was the Nazis' central pillar.

Quote

 

Talking to your mirror again i see  

In fact this IS VERY well documented. The problem is you very clearly did not read the documents. 

Hitler and his buddies were racist. There's little doubt about that.  But - in terms of policy race had very little to do with the vast majority of the nazi policies and in fact those policies often flew in the face of their racism. 

 

What continues to fascinate me about you is your ability to confidently state shit that is so obviously and transparently wrong and not even attempt to back it up with any sources or citations. Nothing just pure bluster, this is the unearned the confidence of a very stupid person.

Edited August 6, 2024 by Black Dog

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

Hitler considered them a race.

 

it's arguable that hitler was wrong about a few things  

But we're not talking about whether hitler thought of himself as a 'racist'.

Quote

Because of the Jews.

Nope.  For a lot of reasons. 

 

Quote

LOl now you're trying to be autistic about the difference between racism and hating an "ethnicity". (They're the same thing btw).

ROFLMAO!!!! No,  no race and ethnicity is NOT the same thing  LOLOLOL!!!!

Quote

It has everything to do with their policies.

Well as i've shown not only does it not have to do with many of their policies, some of their policies actually fly in the face of it.

Quote

I already told you how lebensraum was rooted in their racial beliefs 

And you're wrong. 

To be honest, i wonder if you're ever right sometimes. 

In fact - it wasn't even a 'nazi' idea. Lebenstraum was a popular idea long before the nazis came into existance and was one of the driving forces leading to ww1. 

Lebensraum (German pronunciation: [ˈleːbənsˌʁaʊm] ^ⓘ, living space) is a German concept of expansionism and Völkisch nationalism, the philosophy and policies of which were common to German politics from the 1890s to the 1940s. First popularized around 1901,^[2] Lebensraum became a geopolitical goal of Imperial Germany in World War I (1914–1918), as the core element of the Septemberprogramm of territorial expansion.^[3] The most extreme form of this ideology was supported by the Nazi Party and Nazi Germany. Lebensraum was a leading motivation of Nazi Germany to initiate World War II, and it would continue this policy until the end of the conflict.^[4

 

So nope - you wrong again little guy  

[Black Dog]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

it's arguable that hitler was wrong about a few things  

Whether he's wrong or not is utterly irrelevant. Hitler considered Jews a race and belief informed his entire worldview.

Quote

ROFLMAO!!!! No,  no race and ethnicity is NOT the same thing  LOLOLOL!!!!

To the Nazis they were. Thats the point you dumbf*ck.

Quote

Well as i've shown not only does it not have to do with many of their policies, some of their policies actually fly in the face of it.

Yeah the nazis, like everyone else, frequently made ideological compromises to achieve their broader goals, this doesn't change anything.

Quote

In fact - it wasn't even a 'nazi' idea. Lebenstraum was a popular idea long before the nazis came into existance and was one of the driving forces leading to ww1. 

What a surprise you didn't read past the first paragraph lol. What a dummy.

Following Adolf Hitler's rise to power, Lebensraum became an ideological principle of Nazism and provided justification for the German territorial expansion into Central and Eastern Europe.^[5] The Nazi policy Generalplan Ost (lit. 'Master Plan for the East') was based on its tenets. It stipulated that Germany required a Lebensraum necessary for its survival and that most of the populations of Central and Eastern Europe would have to be removed permanently (either through mass deportation to Siberia, extermination, or enslavement), including Polish, Ukrainian, Russian, Czech, and other Slavic nations considered non-Aryan. The Nazi government aimed at repopulating these lands with Germanic colonists in the name of Lebensraum during and following World War II.^[6][7][8][9] Entire populations were ravaged by starvation; any agricultural surplus was used to feed Germany.^[6] The Jewish population was exterminated outright.

Generalplan Ost:

The Generalplan Ost (German pronunciation: [ɡenəˈʁaːlˌplaːn ˈɔst]; English: Master Plan for the East), abbreviated GPO, was Nazi Germany's plan for the genocide, extermination and large-scale ethnic cleansing of Slavs, Eastern European Jews, and other indigenous peoples of Eastern Europe categorized as "Untermenschen" in Nazi ideology.

 

Edited August 6, 2024 by Black Dog

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Black Dog said:

Whether he's wrong or not is utterly irrelevant.

 

It  is entirely relevant.  How many different kinds of stupid are you?  We, today, are having a talk about whether or not hitler and his policies were racist or something else.  What HE thought isn't relevenat, what's relevant is whether or not he was. 

Like - how do i even have to explain that to you? It's so obvious it's insane. 

1 hour ago, Black Dog said:

What a surprise you didn't read past the first paragraph lol. What a dummy.

Following Adolf Hitler's rise to power, Lebensraum became an ideological principle of Nazism and provided justification for the German territorial expansion into Central and Eastern Europe.^[5] The Nazi policy Generalplan Ost (lit. 'Master Plan for the East') was based on its tenets. It stipulated that Germany required a Lebensraum necessary for its survival and that most of the populations of Central and Eastern Europe would have to be removed permanently (either through mass deportation to Siberia, extermination, or enslavement), including Polish, Ukrainian, Russian, Czech, and other Slavic nations considered non-Aryan. The Nazi government aimed at repopulating these lands with Germanic colonists in the name of Lebensraum during and following World War II.^[6][7][8][9] Entire populations were ravaged by starvation; any agricultural surplus was used to feed Germany.^[6] The Jewish population was exterminated outright.

Sigh proves my point not yours stupid. 

THey didn't invade because they didn't like the other guys, they did so because of the TENANTS OF LEBENSRAUM.  BECAUSE GERMANY NEEDED SPACE FOR IT"S SURVIVAL. 

Not because the other guys were inferior. 

You literally just posted proof i was right. The policy, which had been around since before the nazis, was based on the idea that germany needed more space.  Not racism.  Hitler intended to take that space and get rid of it's current population.  Because germany needed more space. 

 

Goddamn you're an !diot.  You must be the special kind of stupid to have not realized it makes my point perfectly. 

[Nationalist]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Adolf_Hitler's_directives

Those are a list of Hitlers directives. I don't see "Kill the Jews" in there...

[Rebound]

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

That's the translation most often taken    But the reality is that the jews aren't a race.     You know that right? You know that there's all kinds of people who are jewish? You don't need me to go into details right?

 

Sure.  Iike i said, he was a "racist" in that he hated jews.  But he hated the communists and socialists for a lot of reasons. 

Well no, that's a claim that an ethnic group is conspiring against your nation.  But whatever - lets call it racism, we'll go on to the grade 12 level stuff when you're a little older. 

The point is, so what?  Nobody has claimed hitler wasn't racist.  But - that has nothing to do with their policy. They actually made a bunch of secret deals with the communists - so their policy was in odds with their prejudice. They didn't attack russia because of 'jews' or 'socailsm', they attacked because they wanted the living space and the oil. 

Again - what i said was that racism/antisematism did not make up much of the nazi's policies. You're kind of proving mhy point. 

Sure you could - there were lots of people who were of mixed Aryan and non Aryan heritage and as i noted hitler "Decided" who was jewish and who wasn't. 

 

Sure.  And they started a war that wound up killing about 54 million other people.  But the fact is that as far as policy goes - the extermination of the jews was a very very small part of their policies and happend late in their political time. As i said it made up a small amount of their efforts and time and policy.  The whole death camp thing really woudln't have happened if it wasn't for them being desperate after some of their other policies (world domination) wasn't going so well. 

Talking to your mirror again i see  

In fact this IS VERY well documented. The problem is you very clearly did not read the documents. 

Hitler and his buddies were racist. There's little doubt about that.  But - in terms of policy race had very little to do with the vast majority of the nazi policies and in fact those policies often flew in the face of their racism. 

 

 

The Nazis require proof that none of your four grandparents were Jewish, or else you went to the concentration camps.  They did not give Jews the opportunity to convert to Christianity.  The Jews were clearly treated as a race.  
 

Your petty distinction between “race” and “ethnicity” is irrelevant.  

Edited August 6, 2024 by Rebound

[Black Dog]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

It  is entirely relevant.  How many different kinds of stupid are you?  We, today, are having a talk about whether or not hitler and his policies were racist or something else.  What HE thought isn't relevenat, what's relevant is whether or not he was. 

LOl how on earth are the personal beliefs of the chief architect of Nazi Germany's policies not relevant to the question of the extent to which the Nazi's racial beliefs influenced their policies? You are fantastically stupid!

Quote

 The policy, which had been around since before the nazis, was based on the idea that germany needed more space.  Not racism.

From your own link.

Quote

In Deutschland und der Nächste Krieg (1911; Germany and the Next War), General von Bernhardi developed Friedrich Ratzel's Lebensraum concept as a racial struggle for living space, explicitly identified Eastern Europe as the source of a new, national habitat for the German people, and said that the next war would be expressly for acquiring Lebensraum—all in fulfillment of the "biological necessity" to protect German racial supremacy. Vanquishing the Slavic and the Latin races was deemed necessary because "without war, inferior or decaying races would easily choke the growth of healthy, budding elements" of the German race—thus, the war for Lebensraum was a necessary means of defending Germany against cultural stagnation and the racial degeneracy of miscegenation.^[

Damn son, owned again.

2 hours ago, Nationalist said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Adolf_Hitler's_directives

Those are a list of Hitlers directives. I don't see "Kill the Jews" in there...

Oh well I guess it didn't happen then phew!

Edited August 6, 2024 by Black Dog

[Nationalist]

23 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

Oh well I guess it didn't happen then phew!

Nobody said that. Stop being so fcking childish.

[Black Dog]

4 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Nobody said that. Stop being so fcking childish.

Trying making an actual argument for once.

[Rebound]

On 8/2/2024 at 7:48 PM, Reg Volk said:

LOL - Leftists giving leftists awards for lying.  This is on par with "peer reviewed studies" - two losers signing off on each others' lies. 

Don't know what Frontline is as I never watch the lying bums on PBS, or the lying bums on NPR.  As I said, both of those far Left propaganda organs remind me too much of our CBC.

You’re wrong, so you attack the source as “liberal” and tell us about your alternative facts. You’re pathetic. 

[CdnFox]

6 hours ago, Rebound said:

The Nazis require proof that none of your four grandparents were Jewish, or else you went to the concentration camps.  

Not quite. 

the original neurenburg law, which said someone was officially a jew if they had one jewish parent or grandparent who was a practicing jew. Which was the law till about 1935, and then new laws were brought in that mentioned jews but no definition. 

This became a major problem and the final resolution was messy as hell.  See below from wikipedia for the 'new' jewish test for the nazis, 

Part one

The first part of the test is implemented by setting up three categories as follows:

• A person with 3 or more Jewish grandparents is considered to be a Jew.
• A person with exactly two Jewish grandparents is considered to be either a Jew or a Mischling of the first degree^[9] (discussed below, second part of test)
• A person with only one Jewish grandparent is considered to be a Mischling of the second degree.^[10]

Part two

The remaining problem was the treatment of a person with two Jewish and two non-Jewish grandparents. This leads to the second part of the test, which has four subdivisions. A person with exactly two Jewish grandparents was deemed a Jew (specifically, a Geltungsjude)^[11] if either:

• (a) he is a member of the Jewish religious community on 14 November 1935 or later becomes a member; or
• (b) he is married to a Jew on 14 November 1935 or later marries a Jew; or
• (c) his parents were married on or after 17 September 1935, and one of his parents is Jewish; or
• (d) he is born out of wedlock after 31 July 1936, and one of his parents is Jewish.^{[citation needed]}

If such a person is not classified as a Jew under any of these four subtests, then he is a Mischling of the 1st degree (by the terms of Part One).

A Mischling is someone of mixed aryian and non aryian race.  But not a jew.  No gas chamber. 

There were even stricter rules for those serving within the nazi party of course. 

But hitler often made exceptions even then.  As i noted he's famous for his outburst about how He alone will decide who is Jewish  when one of his subordinates didn't make the criteria. 

Emil Maurice - Wikipedia

Hitler made emil and his brothers "honourary aryans" and let them stay in the SS. 

 

[BeaverFever]

JD Vance writes glowing foreword to Project 2025 leader’s upcoming book

Vance praises Roberts for using his perch as the president of the Heritage Foundation, a rightwing DC thinktank, to advance a more radical conservative vision rather than resting on the foundation’s laurels.

“The Heritage Foundation isn’t some random outpost on Capitol Hill; it is and has been the most influential engine of ideas for Republicans from Ronald Reagan to Donald Trump,” Vance writes. “Yet it is Heritage’s power and influence that makes it easy to avoid risks. Roberts could collect a nice salary, write decent books, and tell donors what they want to hear. But Roberts believes doing the same old thing could lead to the ruin of our nation.”
..

In order to create the America Roberts and Vance envision, conservatives need to go on offense – not just remove policies they don’t like, but rebuild the country in what Roberts has referred to as a “second American Revolution”.

“The old conservative movement argued if you just got government out of the way, natural forces would resolve problems – we are no longer in this situation and must take a different approach,” Vance writes. “As Kevin Roberts writes, ‘It’s fine to take a laissez-faire approach when you are in the safety of the sunshine. But when the twilight descends and you hear the wolves, you’ve got to circle the wagons and load the muskets.’

“We are now all realizing that it’s time to circle the wagons and load the muskets. In the fights that lay [sic] ahead, these ideas are an essential weapon.”

 

https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/30/jd-vance-project-2025-book-foreword

 

Project 2025 leader’s book with JD Vance introduction delayed until after election
 

A JD Vance-introduced book by a leader of Project 2025, the vast and controversial hardline rightwing plan for a second Trump administration, will be delayed until after the 2024 election.

“There’s a time for writing, reading, and book tours – and a time to put down the books and go fight like hell to take back our country,” the book’s author, Kevin Roberts, told RealClearPolitics, which first reported the news.

“That’s why I’ve chosen to move my book’s publication and promotion to after the election.”

 

Roberts is president of the Heritage Foundation, a hard-right Washington thinktank. His book, Dawn’s Early Light: Taking Back Washington to Save America, was due to be published in September. It will now come out on 12 November, a week after Donald Trump and Kamala Harris square off on election day.

As Project 2025 has attracted sustained fire from Democrats, over its 900-plus pages of plans for far-reaching government reform including attacks on reproductive rights, LGBTQ+ rights, labor rights and other progressive priorities, so Roberts’s book quickly became a magnet for controversy of its own.

Trump and his campaign have sought to distance themselves from Project 2025 – efforts undermined when it became known Vance, the hardline populist Ohio senator Trump picked as his running mate, had written an introduction to Roberts’s book.

Last week, the New Republic obtained Vance’s introduction, in which he called Roberts’s ideas “an essential weapon” for “the fights that lay [sic] ahead”.

He also wrote: “We are now all realizing that it’s time to circle the wagons and load the muskets.”

News of such violent imagery in Vance’s writing followed news that Roberts’s book was initially called Dawn’s Early Light: Burning Down Washington to Save America, and featured a match on the cover.

…

At the same time, Vance told RealClearPoliticsProject 2025’s 900 pages contained “some ideas I like and lot of ideas I dislike”.

But in his introduction to Roberts’s book, Vance called the Heritage Foundation “the most influential engine of ideas for Republicans from Ronald Reagan to Donald Trump”.

 

https://amp.theguardian.com/books/article/2024/aug/07/project-2025-roberts-jd-vance-introduction
 

Trump is trying to distance himself from Project 2025 -- but its architects helped shape his RNC party platform

The conservative Project 2025 seeks to overhaul the federal government.
 

https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/trump-distance-project-2025-architects-helped-shape-rnc/story?id=111759747
 

 

Russell Vought, a Project 2025 architect, likely in line for high-ranking post if Trump wins 2nd term
 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/russell-vought-a-project-2025-architect-likely-in-line-for-high-ranking-post-if-trump-wins-2nd-term
 

Trump claims not to know who is behind Project 2025. A CNN review found at least 140 people who worked for him are involved
 

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/07/11/politics/trump-allies-project-2025
 

 

 

Republicans call Trump’s move to distance himself from Project 2025 ‘preposterous’

Trump’s claim to ‘know nothing’ about radical plan recognizes it could sink campaign, ex-Pence adviser says
 

Olivia Troye, a former White House adviser to Mike Pence who sat in on policy sessions during Trump’s first presidency, said Trump’s attempt to distance himself from Project 2025 was driven by a recognition that its deeply controversial policy prescriptions could sink his election bid.

“This is preposterous if you look at the collaborators and the authors of this plan,” she told CNN when asked whether Trump’s denial was credible. “A lot of these people…served in Trump’s cabinet during his administration. There are people that I worked with. I sat in those policy meetings with them.”

Troye identified various figures – including John McEntee, who was Trump’s director of White House personnel, Stephen Miller, a senior adviser in his first administration, Ben Carson, the housing and urban development secretary in his cabinet, and Ken Cuccinelli, a former deputy secretary of homeland security – as among the project’s leading architects.

Carson has been “out there on the campaign trail” with Trump, she said.

“I think what this is telling us is that Donald Trump knows that what is written in this plan is so extreme that it is damaging to his possibility of getting elected, and that’s what he’s concerned about.”

“Exactly how do you ‘disagree’ with something you ‘know nothing about’ or ‘have no idea’ who is behind, saying or doing the thing you disagree with?” said former RNC chair and current MSNBC host Michael Steele in echoing Troye’s derision.

“And how exactly don’t you know that Project 2025 director Paul Dans served as your chief of staff at the Office of Personnel Management, and associate director Spencer Chretien served as your special assistant and associate director of presidential personnel?”
 

https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/08/trump-project-2025

 

 

 

Edited August 7, 2024 by BeaverFever

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

 

JD Vance writes glowing foreword to Project 2025 leader’s upcoming book

 

Vance praises Roberts for using his perch as the president of the Heritage Foundation, a rightwing DC thinktank, to advance a more radical conservative vision rather than resting on the foundation’s laurels.

“The Heritage Foundation isn’t some random outpost on Capitol Hill; it is and has been the most influential engine of ideas for Republicans from Ronald Reagan to Donald Trump,” Vance writes. “Yet it is Heritage’s power and influence that makes it easy to avoid risks. Roberts could collect a nice salary, write decent books, and tell donors what they want to hear. But Roberts believes doing the same old thing could lead to the ruin of our nation.”
..

In order to create the America Roberts and Vance envision, conservatives need to go on offense – not just remove policies they don’t like, but rebuild the country in what Roberts has referred to as a “second American Revolution”.

“The old conservative movement argued if you just got government out of the way, natural forces would resolve problems – we are no longer in this situation and must take a different approach,” Vance writes. “As Kevin Roberts writes, ‘It’s fine to take a laissez-faire approach when you are in the safety of the sunshine. But when the twilight descends and you hear the wolves, you’ve got to circle the wagons and load the muskets.’

“We are now all realizing that it’s time to circle the wagons and load the muskets. In the fights that lay [sic] ahead, these ideas are an essential weapon.”

 

https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/30/jd-vance-project-2025-book-foreword

 

Project 2025 leader’s book with JD Vance introduction delayed until after election
 

A JD Vance-introduced book by a leader of Project 2025, the vast and controversial hardline rightwing plan for a second Trump administration, will be delayed until after the 2024 election.

“There’s a time for writing, reading, and book tours – and a time to put down the books and go fight like hell to take back our country,” the book’s author, Kevin Roberts, told RealClearPolitics, which first reported the news.

“That’s why I’ve chosen to move my book’s publication and promotion to after the election.”

 

Roberts is president of the Heritage Foundation, a hard-right Washington thinktank. His book, Dawn’s Early Light: Taking Back Washington to Save America, was due to be published in September. It will now come out on 12 November, a week after Donald Trump and Kamala Harris square off on election day.

As Project 2025 has attracted sustained fire from Democrats, over its 900-plus pages of plans for far-reaching government reform including attacks on reproductive rights, LGBTQ+ rights, labor rights and other progressive priorities, so Roberts’s book quickly became a magnet for controversy of its own.

Trump and his campaign have sought to distance themselves from Project 2025 – efforts undermined when it became known Vance, the hardline populist Ohio senator Trump picked as his running mate, had written an introduction to Roberts’s book.

Last week, the New Republic obtained Vance’s introduction, in which he called Roberts’s ideas “an essential weapon” for “the fights that lay [sic] ahead”.

He also wrote: “We are now all realizing that it’s time to circle the wagons and load the muskets.”

News of such violent imagery in Vance’s writing followed news that Roberts’s book was initially called Dawn’s Early Light: Burning Down Washington to Save America, and featured a match on the cover.

…

At the same time, Vance told RealClearPoliticsProject 2025’s 900 pages contained “some ideas I like and lot of ideas I dislike”.

But in his introduction to Roberts’s book, Vance called the Heritage Foundation “the most influential engine of ideas for Republicans from Ronald Reagan to Donald Trump”.

 

https://amp.theguardian.com/books/article/2024/aug/07/project-2025-roberts-jd-vance-introduction
 

Trump is trying to distance himself from Project 2025 -- but its architects helped shape his RNC party platform

The conservative Project 2025 seeks to overhaul the federal government.
 

https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/trump-distance-project-2025-architects-helped-shape-rnc/story?id=111759747
 

 

Russell Vought, a Project 2025 architect, likely in line for high-ranking post if Trump wins 2nd term
 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/russell-vought-a-project-2025-architect-likely-in-line-for-high-ranking-post-if-trump-wins-2nd-term
 

Trump claims not to know who is behind Project 2025. A CNN review found at least 140 people who worked for him are involved
 

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/07/11/politics/trump-allies-project-2025
 

 

 

Republicans call Trump’s move to distance himself from Project 2025 ‘preposterous’

Trump’s claim to ‘know nothing’ about radical plan recognizes it could sink campaign, ex-Pence adviser says
 

Olivia Troye, a former White House adviser to Mike Pence who sat in on policy sessions during Trump’s first presidency, said Trump’s attempt to distance himself from Project 2025 was driven by a recognition that its deeply controversial policy prescriptions could sink his election bid.

“This is preposterous if you look at the collaborators and the authors of this plan,” she told CNN when asked whether Trump’s denial was credible. “A lot of these people…served in Trump’s cabinet during his administration. There are people that I worked with. I sat in those policy meetings with them.”

Troye identified various figures – including John McEntee, who was Trump’s director of White House personnel, Stephen Miller, a senior adviser in his first administration, Ben Carson, the housing and urban development secretary in his cabinet, and Ken Cuccinelli, a former deputy secretary of homeland security – as among the project’s leading architects.

Carson has been “out there on the campaign trail” with Trump, she said.

“I think what this is telling us is that Donald Trump knows that what is written in this plan is so extreme that it is damaging to his possibility of getting elected, and that’s what he’s concerned about.”

“Exactly how do you ‘disagree’ with something you ‘know nothing about’ or ‘have no idea’ who is behind, saying or doing the thing you disagree with?” said former RNC chair and current MSNBC host Michael Steele in echoing Troye’s derision.

“And how exactly don’t you know that Project 2025 director Paul Dans served as your chief of staff at the Office of Personnel Management, and associate director Spencer Chretien served as your special assistant and associate director of presidential personnel?”
 

https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/08/trump-project-2025

 

 

 

So you're saying trump still isn't interested in it and you're having trouble showing he is. 

well - it's not like you can promote harris's personality or anything  sure, go with this   

[BeaverFever]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

So you're saying trump still isn't interested in it and you're having trouble showing he is. 

well - it's not like you can promote harris's personality or anything  sure, go with this   

Trump is such a narcissist he isn’t really interested in anything except himself. As long as you bend the knee, kiss his ring and funnel money to his enterprises he could really care less if you want to ban all abortions or offer free abortions for all. He will support your agenda if you support his ego and quest for power. The project 25 cabal are just some of the grifters and fascists surrounding Trump and planning to take advantage of that.,

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Trump is such a narcissist he isn’t really interested in anything except himself.

That's arguably true, but it doesn't help your argument that he's somehow committed to someone else's 1000 page plan that he's never read  

[BeaverFever]

On 8/7/2024 at 6:03 PM, CdnFox said:

That's arguably true, but it doesn't help your argument that he's somehow committed to someone else's 1000 page plan that he's never read  

The man famously doesn’t read anything. Most of the policies he takes credit for are are really the policies of others

And most of the policies that actually come from him are actually just half-baked rantings of a know-nothing which his staff either have to either work to transform into something coherent or distract him from. For example Trump’s suggestion on injecting disinfectant to cure covid. At the press conference his staffer responded with something like “We will definitely look into that Mr president” while managing to keep a straight face but I assure you nobody followed up on that one. 

Anyway, if Trump’s elected the Project 2025 people will be in the White House and they will pursue their agenda. Trump’s obvious lie that he doesn’t know these people isn’t fooling anyone.  But anyway Trump’s actual official agenda must be written by project 2025 people because it’s highly similar 
 

Trump Busted Cozying Up to Extremist Leader He Claims to Not Know

Donald Trump insists he knows nothing about Project 2025 or who is behind it, but a newly revealed photo indicates otherwise.

 

Donald Trump has spent weeks trying to disavow Project 2025 since it became clear just how deeply unpopular the christo-nationalist agenda is among American voters. He even went as far as to claim that he knew “nothing about Project 2025” after the leader of the group organizing it, Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts, called for a “bloodless” revolution. But new evidence shows that Trump did know about the plan—and Roberts—as early as April 2022, when the two were photographed on a private flight together, smiling.

“I personally have talked to President Trump about Project 2025,” Roberts told The Washington Post that month, “because my role in the project has been to make sure that all of the candidates who have responded to our offer for a briefing on Project 2025 get one from me.”
 

 

 

Trump and Roberts took that flight, which the Heritage Foundation had chartered, from Trump’s home in Palm Beach, Florida, to the annual Heritage Foundation conference on the state coast. Trump was the conference’s keynote speaker.

“They’re going to lay the groundwork and detail plans for exactly what our movement will do,” Trump said in his speech.

…The two share political philosophies and key allies, including former Trump advisers Stephen Miller and John McEntee. In fact, at least 140 Trump staffers currently work for Project 2025. And as much as Trump wants to distance himself from the apparatus, Project 2025 has been thoroughly involved in staffing a future Trump presidency: Roberts has claimed the project has already “trained and vetted” more than 10,000 people to replace executive branch employees should the presumptive GOP presidential candidate win in November. But they may have more on the way—in November, Trump allies claimed they were looking to install as many as 54,000 pre-vetted Trump loyalists to the executive branch via a “Schedule F” executive order.

“Never before has the entire movement … banded together to construct a comprehensive plan to deconstruct the out-of-touch and weaponized administrative state,” Project 2025’s former director, Paul Dans, told Axios at the time.

Another architect of Project 2025, Russel Vought—whose simmering extremism has been fueled by year-long partnerships with renowned Christian nationalists—“is likely” to be appointed to a high-ranking position in a second Trump administration, the Associated Press reported Monday.

Regardless, senior Trump advisers have warnednews outlets against reporting on the connections, repeatedly insisting that Project 2025 has no affiliation or involvement with the Trump campaign, and have instead pointed to Agenda47 as Trump’s official platform. They do not offer an explanation as to why Agenda47 is almost identical to Project 2025.

 

https://newrepublic.com/post/184682/donald-trump-photo-project-2025-kevin-roberts

Edited August 9, 2024 by BeaverFever

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

The man famously doesn’t read anything. Most of the policies he takes credit for are are really the policies of others

And most of the policies that actually come from him are actually just half-baked rantings of a know-nothing which his staff either have to either work to transform into something coherent or distract him from. For example Trump’s suggestion on injecting disinfectant to cure covid. At the press conference his staffer responded with something like “We will definitely look into that Mr president” while managing to keep a straight face but I assure you nobody followed up on that one. 

 

First off -  everyone here knows that YOU know you're in the wrong when you mass spam irrelevant articles that don't address your point.  So maybe stop that   I already know you realize you can't make an argument here just watching you do that, it's basically your 'tell'. 

Back to the tiny bit that was worth reading... 

Like what?  Which of his policies specifically are things someone else came up with that he didn't believe in or weren't his policies? Give me specific examples and who's they were. 

And again - like what. Which of the policies were 'His' and were half baked and worked over by his staff or others?  I mean - virtually every single presidential policy since the 30's gets looked over and vetted by the various departments obviously but give me examples of his where they had to have this 'Extra" treatment you mentioned. 

Betcha can't  

And sure - trump says a lot of stupid stuff.  I remember the 'bleach' interview, it wasn't a staffer it was a doctor and she wasn't trying to hold back a smile in the slightest, she looked like she was pollaxed and stunned but sure    "My button is bigger than yours and it works" was hilarious but not very presidential  Telling russian to go ahead and invade anyone who's not paying their nato bills isn't very statesmanlike  

But you know - for the most part he did or tried to do what he campaigned on.  Boosted the economy with lower taxes and signficiantly increased growth in the 3 years before covid, got more nato people paying their bills, did the first mid east peace deal in forever, etc etc. 

Now he's saying that this is NOT his plan. 

Guess what. It's not his plan. 

[BeaverFever]

On 8/8/2024 at 11:16 PM, CdnFox said:

First off -  everyone here knows that YOU know you're in the wrong when you mass spam irrelevant articles that don't address your point.  So maybe stop that   I already know you realize you can't make an argument here just watching you do that, it's basically your 'tell'. 

LMAO what??  There is nothing “irrelevant” or “spam” about the abundance of articles that directly support the theme of this thread, which is that the former (and potentially future) Trump administration has close deep ties to project 2025. Your “tell” is that when you have no facts or evidence to support your claims you revert to bullshit mode, claiming articles say the exact opposite of what they actually say, that synonyms are jot synonyms and that article that are 100% relevant and on-topic are not. 
 

On 8/8/2024 at 11:16 PM, CdnFox said:

Like what?  Which of his policies specifically are things someone else came up with that he didn't believe in or weren't his policies? Give me specific examples and who's they were. 

IPfft take your pick.   Not only does he take credit for things that his administration had nothing to do with  but he famously takes PERSONAL credit for work done by his staffers or the bureaucracy that  he would obviously have had little direct involvement in.   For example although routine annual military pay raises  occur every year, Trump  in 2018 randomly declared that he personally got them their first pay raise in ten years and “it was a big one” even though there was nothing unusual about the increase that year. 
 

Another example is the pay Paycheque Protection Program launched after the start of COVID.   Trump took PERSONAL credit for it however the program’ was actively collaborative effort of various government departments and financial institutions involving many individuals and institutions from public and private sectors well beyond the President’s direct actions.

He also regularly attempted to take personal credit for  government response to various natural disasters, which in reality have little direct involvement from  the White House  eg Hurricane Florence, 2018

 

I will provide you with more evidence, which you will surely falsely call irrelevant spamming true to your form. First He PERSONALLY takes credit for things that people administration did that obviously a President wouldn’t be closely involved with

Trump Takes Credit For Vaccine Created By Others, Including Immigrants

…In the Oval Office, Trump said, “The vaccines – and by the way, don’t let Joe Biden take credit for the vaccine. . . . Don’t let him take credit for the vaccines, because the vaccines were me.” (Emphasis added.)

The evidence shows Donald Trump had no role in creating the vaccines to fight Covid-19. There is nothing in the record that warrants him taking “credit” for the vaccines. A review of events shows immigrants and immigrant-led companies created the vaccines….

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2020/12/01/trump-takes-credit-for-vaccine-created-by-others-including-immigrants/
 

 

10 of the most questionable things Trump's claimed credit for

 

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/01/02/politics/donald-trump-took-credit-for-what

 

Fact-checking what Trump has taken credit for

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/fact-checking-what-trump-has-taken-credit-for/

 

 

‘I did the insulin’: Trump tries to take credit for bill signed by Biden

 

 

Trump takes credit for legislation signed by Obama

https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/trump-takes-credit-for-legislation-signed-by-obama-205384773596
 

Trump Claims Credit For Record Stock Market Using Bogus Reasoning

Former President Donald Trump is attempting to take credit for a healthy stock market despite having been out of office for a full three years now.

https://sg.news.yahoo.com/trump-claims-credit-record-stock-221003729.html
 

Followed recently by…

 

Donald Trump No Longer Trying to Take Credit for Stock Market

Former President Donald Trump laid blame for poor stock market performance on the current administration, despite previously taking credit for record highs under President Joe Biden's leadership.

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-credit-stock-market-1934632

And on it goes 

 

On 8/8/2024 at 11:16 PM, CdnFox said:

And again - like what. Which of the policies were 'His' and were half baked and worked over by his staff or others?  I mean - virtually every single presidential policy since the 30's gets looked over and vetted by the various departments obviously but give me examples of his where they had to have this 'Extra" treatment you mentioned. 

I am so so so glad you asked  There were so many examples to comb through I asked Chat GPT to list them for me  Here you go

 CHAT GPT:  Give examples of Trump White House staff attempting to make sense of incoherent instructions from president trump

Response::

There are several reported instances where White House staff under President Trump had to interpret or clarify his sometimes vague or contradictory instructions. One notable example comes from the handling of policy statements and tweets related to U.S. military policy.

Example 1: The Transgender Military Ban Announcement

On July 26, 2017, President Trump unexpectedly announced on Twitter that the U.S. government would no longer allow transgender individuals to serve in the military, citing potential costs and “disruption.”  According to reports, many senior officials, including those in the Department of Defense, were caught off guard by the announcement. There was no prior consultation or clear directive given to the Pentagon or relevant agencies about how to implement the policy.  Following the tweets, White House and Defense Department officials scrambled to understand the President’s intentions. The tweets were vague and did not provide specific guidance on how the ban would be implemented, what would happen to transgender individuals already serving, or how the policy would be enforced.  Legal advisors and military officials had to assess the legality of the proposed ban and its implications on ongoing service members. This required significant interpretation and internal discussion, as the tweets lacked detail. The White House communications team had to develop a coherent narrative to explain the President’s decision, despite the lack of clear internal direction. They had to ensure that the messaging was consistent while awaiting formal policy guidance, which was eventually issued later.In this case, White House staff had to work intensively to turn a spontaneous and somewhat ambiguous public statement into actionable policy, navigating the challenges posed by the initial lack of coherence in the directive.

 

Another example occurred in December 2018 when President Trump abruptly announced the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Syria via Twitter, which caught many of his advisers and military leaders off guard.

Example 2: The Announcement of U.S. Troop Withdrawal from Syria

On December 19, 2018, President Trump tweeted that the U.S. would be withdrawing all of its troops from Syria, declaring that ISIS had been defeated:

    •    Trump’s Tweet: “We have defeated ISIS in Syria, my only reason for being there during the Trump Presidency.”

The tweet surprised many senior officials, including military leaders and key allies, who had not been fully briefed on the decision beforehand. Secretary of Defense James Mattis and other key figures reportedly opposed the withdrawal and believed that a continued U.S. presence was necessary to prevent a resurgence of ISIS and to protect Kurdish allies. The lack of prior planning and communication created significant confusion. White House staff and the Pentagon had to quickly develop a plan

 

Another example involves President Trump’s approach to handling the 2018 California wildfires, particularly his statements about forest management and threats to withhold federal funding from California.

Example 3: Threats to Withhold Federal Funding Over Forest Management

During the devastating California wildfires in November 2018, President Trump made a series of statements and tweets criticizing California’s forest management practices and threatening to withhold federal funding if the state did not improve its efforts.

    •    Trump’s Tweet: On November 10, 2018, President Trump tweeted, “There is no reason for these massive, deadly and costly forest fires in California except that forest management is so poor. Billions of dollars are given each year, with so many lives lost, all because of gross mismanagement of the forests. Remedy now, or no more Fed payments!”

Challenges for the White House Staff:

    •    Factually Inaccurate Statements: The President’s statements were criticized for being factually inaccurate and overly simplistic. Many experts pointed out that the wildfires were exacerbated by a range of factors, including climate change, drought, and the fact that many of the fires occurred in areas that were not forests but rather grasslands and urban areas. White House staff had to navigate these inaccuracies while managing the public’s perception.
    •    Clarifying and Walking Back Remarks: The White House communications team and other officials were put in a difficult position of having to clarify the President’s remarks. They needed to ensure that federal aid to California would continue despite the President’s threats, while not directly contradicting him. This involved softening the rhetoric and emphasizing that the administration was committed to helping victims of the wildfires.
    •    Relations with California Officials: The President’s tweets strained relationships with California state officials, who were already dealing with a crisis. White House staff had to manage these tensions, often working behind the scenes to ensure that disaster response efforts were not hindered by the political dispute. They also had to work to reassure state and local officials that federal support would not be withdrawn despite the President’s public threats.
    •    Public Communication: The communications team had to address public and media concerns about the potential withdrawal of federal aid. This involved multiple rounds of messaging to clarify the administration’s position and to reassure the public that federal assistance would continue.
    •    Internal Friction: Internally, there was likely tension among the President’s advisers and between different agencies (such as FEMA and the Department of the Interior) as they tried to reconcile the President’s statements with the ongoing disaster response efforts.

This example highlights how White House staff had to interpret and manage the fallout from President Trump’s off-the-cuff and often controversial statements, ensuring that the federal response to a major disaster remained effective and that public communication did not escalate the crisis further.

 

Another notable example occurred during the controversy surrounding the U.S. intelligence community’s assessment that Russia had interfered in the 2016 presidential election. President Trump’s contradictory statements about this issue often left White House staff scrambling to clarify his position.

Example 4:  The Helsinki Summit with Vladimir Putin (July 2018)

During a joint press conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki on July 16, 2018, President Trump appeared to side with Putin’s denial of Russian interference over the conclusions of U.S. intelligence agencies. When asked if he believed the U.S. intelligence community or Putin regarding Russian interference, Trump responded:

    •    Trump’s Statement: “My people came to me, Dan Coats [Director of National Intelligence] came to me, and some others. They said they think it’s Russia. I have President Putin; he just said it’s not Russia. I will say this: I don’t see any reason why it would be.”

This statement, effectively casting doubt on the U.S. intelligence community’s findings, sparked immediate backlash from lawmakers, the public, and even some within his administration.

Challenges for the White House Staff:

    •    Immediate Backlash and Confusion: Trump’s remarks were widely criticized as undermining the credibility of U.S. intelligence agencies and seeming to support the Russian narrative. This put White House staff in a difficult position, as they had to address the criticism while maintaining the President’s support for the intelligence community.
    •    Damage Control and Clarification: The day after the press conference, on July 17, 2018, Trump attempted to walk back his comments by claiming that he had misspoken. He said he meant to say, “I don’t see any reason why it wouldn’t be Russia” instead of “would be.” White House staff had to quickly prepare this clarification and ensure that it was communicated effectively, though the damage had already been done.
    •    Managing Relationships with Intelligence Officials: The President’s comments caused significant tension between the White House and the intelligence community. Staff had to work behind the scenes to reassure intelligence officials and the public that the administration still valued their work and trusted their assessments.
    •    International Implications: Trump’s statements at the Helsinki Summit had serious international implications, particularly concerning U.S. relations with its allies and adversaries. White House staff and diplomats had to manage the fallout with NATO allies, who were concerned about the U.S. President appearing to side with Russia, a country seen as a major threat to Western security.
    •    Internal Tension: Within the administration, Trump’s comments likely exacerbated existing tensions between those who supported a hardline stance against Russia and those who advocated for improved relations with Moscow. White House staff had to navigate these internal divisions while trying to present a unified front publicly.
    •    Public Communication Strategy: The communications team had to balance defending the President while also mitigating the negative impact of his statements. This involved issuing carefully crafted statements and coordinating with other officials to emphasize that the U.S. remained committed to confronting Russian interference.

This example underscores the challenges faced by White House staff when President Trump made statements that conflicted with established U.S. policy or intelligence assessments, requiring them to engage in significant damage control and clarification efforts.

 

Another significant example occurred in March 2020 during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic when President Trump made public statements promoting the use of hydroxychloroquine as a potential treatment for the virus.

Example 5: Promoting Hydroxychloroquine as a COVID-19 Treatment

Throughout March and April 2020, President Trump repeatedly promoted hydroxychloroquine, an anti-malarial drug, as a potential “game changer” in the fight against COVID-19, despite limited evidence supporting its efficacy. During a press briefing on March 19, 2020, Trump stated:

    •    Trump’s Statement: “I think it’s going to be very exciting. I think it could be a game changer, and maybe not. And maybe not. But I think it could be, based on what I see. It could be a game changer.”

Challenges for the White House Staff:

    •    Lack of Scientific Consensus: At the time of Trump’s statements, there was no solid scientific evidence that hydroxychloroquine was effective in treating COVID-19. In fact, subsequent studies suggested that the drug could have serious side effects, especially for patients with certain health conditions. White House staff, along with health officials like Dr. Anthony Fauci, were put in a position where they had to temper expectations and emphasize that more research was needed.
    •    Public and Media Reaction: The President’s promotion of hydroxychloroquine led to a surge in demand for the drug, causing shortages for patients who needed it for approved treatments, such as lupus or rheumatoid arthritis. The media and public health experts expressed concern about the President endorsing a treatment without sufficient evidence, leading to widespread confusion and debate.
    •    Internal Friction: Within the administration, there were differing views on how to handle the President’s statements. Health officials, including those from the FDA and CDC, were cautious about endorsing unproven treatments, while some of Trump’s political advisors supported his optimistic stance. White House staff had to navigate these internal conflicts while trying to present a unified message.
    •    Clarifying Public Health Messaging: White House staff and public health officials had to repeatedly clarify that hydroxychloroquine had not been proven to be effective against COVID-19 and that it should not be used outside of clinical trials or under medical supervision. This was particularly challenging given the President’s high-profile promotion of the drug.
    •    International Repercussions: The promotion of hydroxychloroquine by the U.S. President had international implications, as other countries took notice and some followed suit in recommending or stockpiling the drug. This required U.S. officials, including those at the WHO and the State Department, to manage the global response and mitigate any potential harm from the widespread use of an unproven treatment.
    •    Balancing the Narrative: The communications team had to balance the President’s optimism with the cautious approach of public health experts. This involved carefully crafting statements and press releases that acknowledged the potential of hydroxychloroquine while emphasizing the need for further study and caution.

This example highlights the complex dynamics within the Trump White House, where staff often had to reconcile the President’s public statements with the best available scientific evidence, while also managing public expectations and ensuring that health messaging remained as accurate and clear as possible.

 

On 8/8/2024 at 11:16 PM, CdnFox said:

But you know - for the most part he did or tried to do what he campaigned on. 

No he didn’t. He didn’t campaign on many specifics to begin with.  He campaigned on slogans like “make America green again” which he obviously didn’t. He didn’t declare China  a currency manipulator like he promised or end the trade deficit with China as he promised. He didn’t invent magical health insurance that covered every person for everything and doesn’t cost anyone any money.  He didn’t build a border wall and make Mexico pay for it. He didn’t “drain the swamp” and in fact his White House was cesspool of cronyism. He didn’t materially renegotiate or withdraw from NAFTA, USMCA being more of a tweak than anything. He did not  “bring back manufacturing jobs” to the USA like he promised…sure there were small but noticeable increases in specific sectors but not enough to actually change anything in the bigger picture like he had promised 

 

Most of the promises trump kept are promoting the fossil fuel industry because the political right in North America is a wholly owned subsidiary of the global fossil fuel industry.  And tax cuts for the rich, he kept those promises too.