Will Project 2025 Make a Difference?

Letters from O'Brien #60

Dear Mr Smith,

Some time ago I wrote that the biggest threat to a Trump presidency was not defeat but a corrupted staff. The past two weeks have vindicated my claim. The recent assassination attempt on Trump has virtually guaranteed victory, even in spite of swing voters, divide over Israel-Gaza allegiance, and the highly pro-liberal woman vote. So, with Trumps victory almost a given, I feel it is imperative to assess the bureaucrats who will be around him once he is in power.

In a strange series of events - which are too long and nuanced to completely catalogue in this letter - Trumps team began a slow process of disavowing the proposed Project 2025. Over the course of several weeks, it was revealed that various right-wing influencers had been paid by a Trump Campaign-associated firm to denounce Project 2025 and state that it had no connection to Trump and his ambitions. This was primarily done through the social media management agency Influenceable. This campaign eventually reached Trump himself, who recently came out to disavow Project 2025 in a Truth Social post.

OVERTON WINDOW AND MEDIA TARGETING

The best way to engage with the idea of Project 2025 is to first understand who is against it, and why. I will briefly highlight what it is, but it is worth first noting who is targeting it…

One must remember the relentless media attacks and deliberate targeting of Trump in 2015/16 and later in 2020. He was regularly painted as a ‘second Hitler’, which in the liberal mind is the worst of insults. The media attention he received as an individual outstripped any mockingbird media op, suggesting that the media apparatus (remember, both conservative and liberal media attacked him) truly perceived him and his ambitions as a threat.

Today, however, the media landscape is changing. In fact, liberal-leaning publications are now coming out calling a democratic victory unlikely, and a potential catastrophe, whilst simultaneously writing about how a Trump presidency may not be ‘that bad’. This is a serious shift, which indicates that the apparatus knows that something has fundamentally changed.

WHAT IS PROJECT 2025

So, what is Project 2025 about? There are many specifics, but in essence the projects aim is to aid in the presidential transition to ensure that the right people are established in the right places. As I mentioned in my previous letter on the subject, the reason this is important is because bad actors within the Trump administration pose far more of a threat to a conservative leadership than a democratic rival could. This is because it subverts attention, resources, and decision making, sapping the leadership of its power and authority through subterfuge.

The project is not perfect, but it’s by far the best option on the table which has any chance of securing a sound conservative government. This is why it is currently the primary target of scrutiny on both the mainstream right and liberal left. It poses an actual threat to regime control, since it disrupts the networks which currently exist to direct energy.

Now, while this is the public face of the project, you may remember the initial promises from 2015/16; that Trump and his team would hire real Americans to fill the White House. The goal was to rid the White House of the same old neocons and nepotists who had served in the elite arms of the government for decades. In fact, this was where the whole notion of ‘draining the swamp’ actually came from.

Unfortunately, this was never realised, and many of the same neocons and foreign influencers remained in the system. The result was a heavily stalled term in office, in which very little was achieved compared to the potential at Trumps fingertips. It seemed many staff worked against him; many were connected to Peter Thiel, while the others were essentially nepotist hires. Only during the final months of the presidency - with the arrival of John McEntee - did progress begin to occur, but by that point it was essentially too late.

In this way, Project 2025 can be understood as a spiritual successor to this original goal. It seeks the same end; to rid the White House of foreign influence, corporate influence, and nepotists, and replace them with the most capable American patriots. For all the talk of ‘meritocracy’ we here from the ‘political right’, surely this project would be perceived as a positive, right?

THE NEW NARRATIVE

Considering the ambitions of the project, it is easy to see why Project 2025 has become the primary target for both establishment media and the control networks which are used to exert a perception of public opinion.

As mentioned, amongst conservatives it is under a form of artificially motivated criticism. Amongst the liberal media, it is essentially receiving the harsh backlash that Trump did during the previous two election cycles. Again, when the apparatus is thrown into overdrive like this, it suggests something seriously threatening, and I believe that is exactly what it is.

I mentioned in a previous letter that I see Trump at an impasse; it is almost certainly the case that if he loses the coming election, he will likely be imprisoned, and all his assets could be liquidated and seized (such is the vengeful posture of the left). Thus, he has two options; accept the Republican narrative, which itself means considering the will of the donors (many are not America-first, and others are literally technocrats) - enslaving himself to the system. The other option is to use the latter as a springboard to truly go all in on a revolutionary America-first movement that he promised in 2016. As it currently stands, I feel he is stuck in the first category. While the Republican Party threw him under the bus after January 2021, his miraculous return to the spotlight following the whole legal debacle last year, essentially forced the republican party to reconsider him, begrudgingly I imagine. Now he exists in what I believe is an extremely difficult situation – one in which he need to throws off the chains of an established technocracy. To his credit taking up the Republican offer was the best move… but only to exploit as a springboard. The next logical choice as far as I can see, is to avow Project 2025 - against the will of the Republican institution.

Trump’s campaign manager Chris LaCivita told Politico the right-wing project doesn’t speak for the campaign and denouncing it as a “pain in the ass.”

For the liberal agenda it is obvious why they hate this proposed project; it seeks to expand presidential power and authority, allowing for radical reforms at the federal and state level. It is also a fundamentally Christian project - as evidenced by the organisations backing it. If successful, it would almost certainly result in a select few changes which conservatives have been pushing forever; abortion restrictions, law enforcement reforms, loosened firearm laws, and most importantly a complete rollback on the previous six years of immigration. The last point is arguably the most threatening to the liberal government; as I noted during the UK election, regime-liberal parties’ benefit from mass migration directly, as these immigrants usually translate directly into votes.

As for the establishment republican right, it is clear that a Trump White House staffed by patriotic America-first Christians would also pose a threat. Why is that? One needs only look at the priorities of the current establishment on the right. Just as the left is captured by globalist institutions and banking families, the mainstream Republican right appears heavily influenced by two groups; Zionists and Silicon Valley technocrats. And why would I think that? Look at the names… Thus far Trumps biggest donors include Miriam Adelson - widow of Sheldon Adelson - an Israeli national and proud Israel-first Zionist. The latter group overlaps with the other major group I mentioned, Silicon Valley technocrats. Namely, Peter Thiel and his network of associates, which include JD Vance (now to be VP), Curtis Yarvin, Richard Grenell, and the list goes on. Thiel himself said that the CIA is a ‘front for Palantir’, his digital security firm, whilst in the past he has advocated for a ‘techno-monarchy’.

These are the types of characters who will be staffing the White House if all goes to their plan. It basically happened the first time and look how that played out. If it is allowed to occur again, I believe it will probably be worse; foreign actors will request financial and military aid to Israel and others nations, possibly resulting in a war with Lebanon and Iran which the United States will be obliged to - given its power - get involved. Meanwhile, who knows what the Silicon Valley types will do. They desire digital mass surveillance and control of information outlets, under the guise of conservatism. It’s basically ‘anything goes’, with these guys selling the roughly 6,000 positions in the next administration off to the highest bidder. The recent confirmation of JD Vance as VP pick is not a good sign in regard to Project 2025. It is almost certain that Vance will not approve a Project 2025-aided presidential transition.

On the topic of immigration, Vance took the appeasing stance that ‘violent illegals’ will be deported. I’m not sure how meaningful this rhetoric is; Trump did that the first time, and even Biden does that now. Almost 10 million immigrants entered the US in four years, while 40 million illegals live in the US in total. I’m not sure Vance’s stance is going to translate into robust action to solve the immigration issues in the US. I hope I’m wrong.

Geopolitically there are other things to be concerned about. Vance (in his Hannity interview during the RNC) spoke about the importance of ‘hitting Iran’, and that the benefit Trump offered was that he was willing to hit Iranian military commanders. I think he’s completely missing the strength of his leader here. Trumps greatest geopolitical strength was powerful negotiations and unbiased cooperation. He did this in the boardrooms of big business, and he's done it on the world stage. The Iran strike was arguably one of the worst decisions Trump made. Beyond this, the recent RNC speeches have highlighted how disconnected the general establishment is on other geopolitical issues. Practically all speeches regarding economics (thus far, as of Wednesday) merely call for tax cuts and fracking. Yes, energy is important, but what about tariffs? What about increased nationalisation of industries? For all the fear mongering over China, there has been practically zero effort to nationalise the production of goods and restart necessary industries. The CHIPS Act doesn’t count - it was pure idiocy which only denigrated US-China relations - and recently it was revealed that the actual act itself failed; it was found that because of DEI requirements, they could neither effectively build nor staff a state-of-the-art US-based semiconductor foundry that could compete with TSMC… so now they’ve just offshored it to South Korea. It is all a joke, but the solutions are simple; invest in nationalisation, perhaps even at the expense of the service-providers who lobby against domestic production and the increased manufacturing costs which come with it. The US is now a services-based economy, and those in power fear re-incorporating manufacturing into the economy, but in the long run there is no other option.

Regardless, the MAGA movement was always about nationalism, conservatism, and the individual that is Trump. The entire reason the movement gained traction was because it challenged the prevailing narrative, it offered an alternative which promised radical change, and it cut through the dialectic of Republican vs Democrat. There have been movements like this in the past - which disrupt the left-right narrative in favour of the people - and these movements have either been neutralised or subverted. The MAGA movement is at a crucial impasse. It is in danger of ideological decline and regime take-over, yet the true outward force remains the character of Trump. So long as he lives on, he can trust that the movement (as in the actual people and not the foreign control networks) will back him. This requires a radical step of faith for Trump, who likely fears the repercussions of truly going all-in on a radical patriotic movement which prioritises the people over the corporations, foreign governments, bankers, and agents. It is possible that this leap of faith could happen, and it is on the American people to truly call out the corruption, call for change, and support those who make the leap. So much hangs in the balance!

Given the recent assassination attempt, he is more popular than ever in his political career. The movement is still all about him. If there ever was a time for him to throw off his shackles and go all in on America-first (against the will of the establishment Republicans) it is now. I have no doubt, the people will back him. This is the time for heroes.

Sincerely yours,

O’Brien