Head of Project 2025 Fired!

[BeaverFever]

Back on topic:

 

In undercover interview, Project 2025 architect gets candid on the initiative’s radical goals and connections to Trump
 

 

 

 

In an undercover interview with reporters from the British non-profit organization Centre for Climate Reporting, Project 2025 architect and MAGA ally Russ Vought admitted to the project's strong ties to former President Donald Trump and provided a clear view into a possible second Trump term.

Vought thought that he was meeting with relatives of wealthy potential donors; in reality, he was secretly being recorded in a Washington, D.C., hotel room. During the interview, Vought disavowed Trump’s distancing from Project 2025, candidly explained draconian policies he hopes Trump will implement in a second administration, praised Trump’s running mate JD Vance, and outlined the “second phase” of Project 2025.

Vought, who is reportedly in line for a high-ranking position in a second Trump term, is a key architect of Project 2025 — the conservative movement’s extremist platform for a potential second Trump White House. The project extensively outlines potential approaches to governance for the next would-be Republican president, including replacing federal employees with extremists and Trump loyalists and attacking LGBTQ rights, abortion, contraception, and labor unions. Project 2025 describes extreme policies like dismantling the federal agency that tracks hurricanes, upending Medicare as we know it, enacting inflationary tariff policies, and dramatically raising taxes on everyday Americans.
 

…

Vought told the reporters that Trump’s distancing and disavowal of Project 2025 is only for the public. 

“I expect to hear ten more times from the rally the president distancing himself from the left’s boogeyman of Project 2025,” Vought said. “I’m not worried about it.” 

“He’s running against the brand. He is not running against any people. He is not running against any institutions,” Vought added. “It’s interesting, he’s in fact not even running opposing himself to a particular policy.” 

Vought continued, saying, “He’s been at our organization, he’s raised money for our organization, he’s blessed it. … He’s very supportive of what we do.”

…

• Vought touted the secret plan for seizing control of independent government agencies and using the military to silence political dissent

  Vought explained part of his secretive 180-day playbook to take control of independent government bureaucracies.

  “Eighty percent of my time is working on the plans of what’s necessary to take control of these bureaucracies, and we are working doggedly on that,” Vought said. “Whether it’s destroying agencies’ notion of independence, that they’re independent from the president.”

  Vought also explained to the reporters his belief that Trump will be able to use the military to silence political dissent and protests.

  “George Floyd was obviously not about race. It was about destabilizing the Trump administration,” Vought said. “We put out, for instance, a 50-page paper designed for lawyers to know that the president has, you know, the ability to both, along the border and elsewhere, to maintain law and order with the military. And that’s something that is going to be important for him to remember and his lawyers to affirm.”

  ..

  https://www.mediamatters.org/russ-vought/undercover-interview-project-2025-architect-gets-candid-initiatives-radical-goals-and
   

   

  And then there’s the leaked Project 2025 training video they made for training new Trump administration staff  and government officials after they’ve purged the government departments of all non-believers and infidels.   29 of 34 people in the video are former Trump administration employees  Daily Show does a good job of actual hilarious commentary  

   

   

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

LMAO what??  There is nothing “irrelevant” or “spam” about the abundance of articles that directly support the theme of this thread,

But they don't. And they don't support your point. 

Here's the thing kid -  the worse you're losing, the longer your spam threads get. It's like a tell or nervous tick. Rather than make arguments you just post more and more nonsense because YOU CAN"T MAKE A SINGLE POINT. 

Trump has no ties at all to the project, he's been quite clear.  And 10,000 words of nonsense speculating and trying desperately to pretend he even cares about it when he doesn't won't change that. 

Trump isn't remotely interested in 2025, it's not any part of his policy, he's been very clear and there's absolutely no indication that it is.  Period. 

This is right up there with "trump promised to be a dictator if elelcted' and "trump promised blood in the streets if he loses' and all the other nonsense lies the dems have come up with. 

And based on how long your last post was  you know i'm entirely right     What's this reply going to be? 1 meter? Two meters of nonsense?

[Michael Hardner]

Trump's denials are suspect, given the proximity of the participants to his past activities.  

Given that Chud conspiracies have tied Canadian MPs (including Poilievre) to the WEF, it would be consistent if they also tied Trump to this one.

 

It's also far more specific and targeted than, say, "sustainable cities".

[User]

6 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Trump's denials are suspect, given the proximity of the participants to his past activities.  

How does that make them suspect?

The fact that Trump and Conservatives and Republicans in general know and collaborate with the organization and its members, because we all have shared common goals and policies, doesn't then mean Trump had anything to do with Project 2025. 

Seriously, you claim to be a Conservative, you follow Americna politics and are here frequently commenting on them, so you knew about Project 2025 development and support it too, right? Right? Guilt by association, no?

 

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, User said:

How does that make them suspect?

The fact that Trump and Conservatives and Republicans in general know and collaborate with the organization and its members, because we all have shared common goals and policies, doesn't then mean Trump had anything to do with Project 2025. 

Seriously, you claim to be a Conservative, you follow Americna politics and are here frequently commenting on them, so you knew about Project 2025 development and support it too, right? Right? Guilt by association, no?

 

Paul Ryan is conservative.  Trump is not.

I didn't say he had anything to do with the policy development, but I believe he will be open to implementing some of it despite his denials.

[CdnFox]

8 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Trump's denials are suspect, given the proximity of the participants to his past activities.  

not even a little bit.   That's the same as saying that Harris is an advocate of drunk driving because of who's she's got for e VP.  

Trump hired people for their skills, they may have their own belief and despite how you feel about that it's fine in a free society. But that in no way shape or form suggests trump buys into them at all. 

And your argument is based entirely on the idea that  trump would really believe something is a good idea and then pretend it wasn't.  Trump.  The man who openly advocated for resaerch to determine if bleach injections were an effective way to fight covid. That guy. That guy is just toooo afraid to say if he likes an idea.  You're a doorknob. 

[User]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

Paul Ryan is conservative.  Trump is not.

I didn't say he had anything to do with the policy development, but I believe he will be open to implementing some of it despite his denials.

Well, even this is a specious argument. 

Project 2025 is like 800 pages long covering a wide variety of subject and topics. There might be some overlap that naturally occurs, but to the point of this thread, there is no association between Trump and Project 2025. 

It is also comical that you are criticizing Trump as not Conservative when his record is far more Conservative than from what I have seen of yours here... 

[CdnFox]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

Paul Ryan is conservative.  Trump is not.

I didn't say he had anything to do with the policy development, but I believe he will be open to implementing some of it despite his denials.

Well that's a fantasy then.  that's not based on reality.  He "Might" be "Open" to "Some" of it  maybe. 

Harris "Might" be willing to "be open" to "nuclear war with russia" maybe.  I mean sure she SAYS she won't but .. how can we know?  Prove me wrong. 

It's lazy  thinking and it's not reasonable. 

[Michael Hardner]

54 minutes ago, User said:

1. ...there is no association between Trump and Project 2025. 

2. It is also comical that you are criticizing Truwmp as not Conservative when his record is far more Conservative than from what I have seen of yours here... 

1. Given he IS associated with the architects I would disagree but it's arguable.

2. Mine?  Pray tell what is*my* record? 🤔

[User]

36 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Given he IS associated with the architects I would disagree but it's arguable.

You can disagree, but have no real argument. 

37 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Mine?  Pray tell what is*my* record?

What you post here, what you like here. 

[Michael Hardner]

6 minutes ago, User said:

1. You can disagree, but have no real argument. 

2. What you post here, what you like here. 

1. My argument is that someone is associated to a policy document architected by their associates, by definition.

2. I like posts based on the content of the post, not because I agree with the points.  That's the zero sum game I have talked about.  I respected Nationalist's position on trade though I disagree.

Some can't get their heads around that idea.

 

Edited August 16, 2024 by Michael Hardner

[User]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

1. My argument is that someone is associated to a policy document architected by their associates, by definition.

That is an assertion, with no reasoning. 

How is it that someone is associated to a policy document just because someone they associate created it?

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

2. I like posts based on the content of the post, not because I agree with the points.  That's the zero sum game I have talked about.  I respected Nationalist's position on trade though I disagree.

Some can't get their heads around that area.

Oh, that is funny. So, you want to argue Trump has something to do with Project 2025 because someone he associates with on occasion created it... but you want to claim you have nothing to do with the content of the posts you routinely like. 

 

[Michael Hardner]

6 minutes ago, User said:

1. That is an assertion, with no reasoning. 

How is it that someone is associated to a policy document just because someone they associate created it?

2.  you want to claim you have nothing to do with the content of the posts you routinely like. 

 

1. I would say that if my cabinet members developed something, the definition says I'm associated.

2. I'm associated with those posts, yes.

...

I don't think that there's much more to discuss here, as we're getting down to arguing semantics.  So I'd rather not continue.  If you want to say that I'm running away, then go ahead.

 

Cheers...

[User]

8 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I would say that if my cabinet members developed something, the definition says I'm associated.

Trump is not President. This was not created by his cabinet member. You are having a real problem here understanding that disconnect. Yeah, you keep showing how Trump is associated with one of the dudes who created Project 2025, but you don't even show the connection to Project 2025. 

9 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I don't think that there's much more to discuss here,

Ah yes, classic. You want to make the assertions, just not defend them. 

[impartialobserver]

16 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I would say that if my cabinet members developed something, the definition says I'm associated.

2. I'm associated with those posts, yes.

...

I don't think that there's much more to discuss here, as we're getting down to arguing semantics.  So I'd rather not continue.  If you want to say that I'm running away, then go ahead.

 

Cheers...

They run away every day when they eventually go to sleep or gasp!.. have something meaningful to do. and when you say, "I have said all that I am going to say".. this is apparently code for being cowardly. Someone will eventually get the last word...

Edited August 16, 2024 by impartialobserver

[Michael Hardner]

8 minutes ago, User said:

  You want to make the assertions, just not defend them. 

I have defended them as much as I can. That's the point. I don't want to keep replying, replying, replying replying.. 

 

I lost I guess.

[Chrissy1979]

The guy literally says in the video he's crafted hundreds of executive orders for Trump. How could anyone try to pretend he didn't say what he said? How stupid are you guys?

[BeaverFever]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

But they don't. And they don't support your point. 

Here's the thing kid -  the worse you're losing, the longer your spam threads get. It's like a tell or nervous tick. Rather than make arguments you just post more and more nonsense because YOU CAN"T MAKE A SINGLE POINT. 

Yes they do, and in fact I’ll wager you have no idea what my point is. 
 

Here’s the thing grandpa, the worse you’re losing the more you bullshit and pretend things are the opposite of reality. You”ll pretend the calling someone  “Marxist” is totally different from calling someone a “communist” but that saying Trump should pay for his own security is no different from calling for him to be assassinated. You’ll say that an article whose headline says “baseless” 2000 mules has “no evidence” and shreds the sham documentary in every line is actually saying 2000 mules made a compelling argument with ample evidence. You’ll pretend the fact that a republican hack convicted of felony election fraud for Republicans is completely irrelevant to his credibility regarding current attempts of election fraud for Republicans.  You’’ll make false claims with no evidence that “the left” openly admired Hitler and it was mostly Republicans who opposed him when in reality the opposite is true.   You’ll make claims that the BudLight boycott was not Konservative Kancel Kulture but justified because “they knew conservatives would eventually hear about it and wouldn’t like it”.   Recently I saw you arguing with another member that capitalist countries like ours are basically unregulated. You just turn into a shit-shoveling machine whenever you got nothing. 
 

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Trump has no ties at all to the project, he's been quite clear

1) Trump is a compulsive liar who will say anything and often contradicts himself 

2) Trump has extensive ties to nearly 150 people involved in the project, especially its leaders and funders, many if not most of whom were in his previous administration and are widely expected to be in his next one if he’s elected 

3) The leaders of project 20205 keep saying Trump has approved, that they are in coordination with Trump’s team and while Trump disavows, he  doesn’t call them liars or attack them or even call them out by name, which is something he loves to do. . Don’t you find that strange?

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

This is right up there with "trump promised to be a dictator if elelcted' and "trump promised blood in the streets if he loses' and all the other nonsense lies the dems have come up with.

Nope it’s more solid than those

 

 

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

And based on how long your last post was  you know i'm entirely right     What's this reply going to be? 1 meter? Two meters of nonsense?

They’re miles long because there’s miles of evidence, genius. 

Edited August 16, 2024 by BeaverFever

[User]

32 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

They run away every day when they eventually go to sleep or gasp!.. have something meaningful to do. and when you say, "I have said all that I am going to say".. this is apparently code for being cowardly. Someone will eventually get the last word...

No, it is like you coming here saying 3+3 = 7. I ask you to explain how, and you just keep insisting that it does. But yeah, totally, it is just that someone has to have the last word... 

 

[BeaverFever]

2 hours ago, User said:

there is no association between Trump and Project 2025. 

That’s like a housewife saying  “there is no association between myself and my husband’s multimillion dollar business”. Its technically true, but only to an extent. Obviously the housewife is going to protect her husband’s business if she were to become president  

Even if Trump has no interest in P2025, simply hiring any of those people and placing them in positions of power in his government is effectively endorsing the project, which those people will then carry out to the best of their abilities in their new government position  

In order to convincingly denounce P2025 Trump needs to denounce the people and groups behind it BY NAME which is something he loves to do, and vow not to hire any in his administration but of course he won’t do that.  

[Five of swords]

On 8/1/2024 at 12:45 PM, Rebound said:

The Heritage Foundation has fired Project 2025 leader Paul Dans. While they will candy-coat his departure in all sorts of flowery terms, the truth is obvious: The Harris Campaign has successfully discredited the horrible Project 2025, causing Trump to distance himself from the project. Heritage Foundation, in an effort to save face with the campaign, cut ties with the head of Project 2025, who had previously served as Trump's Chief of Staff of Personnel Management at the White House... a role intended to ensure that loyalty to Trump was the main requirement for government employment, not loyalty to the Constitution or qualifications.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4800942-project-2025-director-departs/

Just somebasic logic here. If loyalty to the constitution were a requirement for government service, then ammendments would not be possible. In fact, Black people would not be us citizens.

[User]

11 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

The guy literally says in the video he's crafted hundreds of executive orders for Trump. How could anyone try to pretend he didn't say what he said? How stupid are you guys?

Was the discussion point or title of this thread:

Does Trump work with the dude on executive orders? 

Nope. 

 

1 minute ago, Five of swords said:

Just somebasic logic here. If loyalty to the constitution were a requirement for government service, then ammendments would not be possible. In fact, Black people would not be us citizens.

Huh?

The Amendment process is part of the Constitution... 

[impartialobserver]

7 minutes ago, User said:

No, it is like you coming here saying 3+3 = 7. I ask you to explain how, and you just keep insisting that it does. But yeah, totally, it is just that someone has to have the last word... 

 

So in the short.. the "win" however hollow it is comes from out-persisting the other and getting the last word. 

[User]

4 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

In order to convincingly denounce P2025 Trump needs to denounce the people and groups behind it BY NAME which is something he loves to do, and vow not to hire any in his administration but of course he won’t do that.  

This is such a lame argument, it is the you agree 100% with all and everything or nothing. That is not how anything works in life. 

When a restaurant hires someone to bus their tables, they are hiring them to bus their tables. That doesn't mean the busser can now implement all his own plans and thing the restaurant never dreamed of. 

Just as when a President is picking people to help run the administration, they are picked for particular reasons. 

3 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

So in the short.. the "win" however hollow it is comes from out-persisting the other and getting the last word. 

Well, the alternative is for the person trying to say 3+3=7 to just admit they can't actually prove that out or that they were wrong... that is always an option too. 

 

[Matthew]

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Trump isn't remotely interested in 2025, it's not any part of his policy, he's been very clear and there's absolutely no indication that it is.

I don't think this is the real issue though. Trump has a casual, from the gut approach to politics that is light on facts and policy specifics.

His first presidency was marked by an extremely inept lack of preparedness in terms of the logistics in achieving anything.

This project 2025 business isn't about trump specifically, its about republicans being more prepared to actually get stuff done this time.

In a sense, its a fairly subversive attempt by heritage foundation conservatives to bypass trump and organize their own takeover of the bureaucracy and federal policymaking.