Skip to content

What Does Project 2025 Say?

Share this page:

On November 5, 2024, the United States Elected Donald J. Trump to a second term. The day after that, his allies gleefully admitted that Project 2025 was their – and his – agenda the entire time.

This is what we’re up against.

Topic: Warfare

“We also are witnessing a transformation in the character of war. The democratization of technology and the collapse of time and space require dramatic, thoughtful changes in how we defend, deter, and fight.”

Citation: Project 2025, Section 2.1: Department of Defense, Christopher Miller, page 124, paragraph 2
Context:

This one is interesting to unpack (and I do, in the analysis.) Miller here is referring to the shift from traditional, large-scale conflicts to more hands-off and complex types of warfare, including cyber attacks, et al.

Full contextual analysis of Section 2.1: Department of Defense here.

Share this quote from Project 2025:

  1. Reestablish a culture of command accountability, nonpoliticization, and warfighting focus.
  2. Transform our armed forces for maximum effectiveness in an era of great-power competition.
  3. Provide necessary support to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) border protection operations. Border protection is a national security issue that requires sustained attention and effort by all elements of the executive branch.
  4. Demand financial transparency and accountability.
Citation: Project 2025, Section 2.1: Department of Defense, Christopher Miller, page 124, paragraph 3
Context:

These are Miller’s four main priorities for the military as a whole going forward. You’re not crazy – that third one is federally sanctioning using the United States Military to patrol the border.

Full contextual analysis of Section 2.1: Department of Defense here.

Share this quote from Project 2025:

“The most severe immediate threat that Beijing’s military poses, however, is to Taiwan and other U.S. allies along the first island chain in the Western Pacific. If China could subordinate Taiwan or allies like the Philippines, South Korea, and Japan, it could break apart any balancing coalition that is designed to prevent Beijing’s hegemony over Asia. Accordingly, the United States must ensure that China does not succeed. This requires a denial defense: the ability to make the subordination of Taiwan or other U.S. allies in Asia prohibitively difficult.”

Citation: Project 2025, Section 2.1: Department of Defense, Christopher Miller, page 125, paragraph 3
Context:

Miller acknowledges that Russia, Iran, and North Korea also pose threats to the U.S. He goes on to argue for expanding the U.S. nuclear arsenal, and spending more money on defense in order to meet the goal of “ensuring that China does not succeed”.

He then goes into specific reforms he recommends. Among them are increasing defense burden-sharing amongst our allies, sustaining support for Israel (who is currently committing a genocide), and expanding our nuclear arsenal in order to compete with Russia and China.

Full contextual analysis of Section 2.1: Department of Defense here.

Share this quote from Project 2025:

“Informal congressional notification or “tiered review” is a hinderance to ensuring timely sales to our global partners. The tiered review process is not codified in law; it is merely a practice by which the Department of State provides a preview of prospective arms transfers before Congress is formally notified.”

Citation: Project 2025, Section 2.1: Department of Defense, Christopher Miller, page 133, paragraph 3
Context:

He’s arguing here for ending the tiered review process, which would result in the President being able to unilaterally transfer or sell arms to other nations without Congressional approval. This is a horrifying recommendation. He continues, “Use the tiered review process only when unanimous congressional support is guaranteed in order to eliminate the “weaponization” by select Members of Congress that has prevented billions of dollars of arms sales from moving into formal congressional notification.” (Project 2025, Section 2.1: Department of Defense, Christopher Miller, page 133, paragraph 5.)

If you’re only using the review process when congressional support is “guaranteed”, that’s a completely pointless review process.

Full contextual analysis of Section 2.1: Department of Defense here.

Share this quote from Project 2025:

“There is great concern about the vulnerability of undersea cable trunks that make up the Internet cloud. The vast majority of global Internet traffic — 95 percent — is transmitted through these cables, including news transmissions and Presidential Transition Project web-based content produced by the USAGM’s broadcast networks.”

Citation: Project 2025, Section 2.5; Media Agencies: U.S. Agency for Global Media, Mora Namdar, pages 274 and 275
Context:

That the cables “make up the internet cloud” is inaccurate. The cables carry information, they don’t store it. It’s also not news that these cables are vulnerable. They experience about 200 outages a year and the vast majority of these are human-caused (mostly by fishing equipment or anchors). The reason we don’t hear about the outages is that there is almost always a backup route of transmitting information, especially for crucial infrastructure.

Full contextual analysis of Section 2.5: Media Agencies: U.S. Agency for Global Media & Corporation for Public Broadcasting here.

“When President Trump wanted to implement steel and aluminum tariffs, he had a willing servant in Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross. However, Secretary of Defense James Mattis resisted. Mattis simply did not understand a key tenet of the Trump Administration: Economic security is also national security. Without vibrant steel and aluminum industries, it will be difficult for America to provide the Pentagon with the kind of weapons it needs to defend the homeland.”

Citation: Project 2025, Section 4.6: Trade, Peter Navarro, page 827, paragraph 4
Context:

Since the effects of Trump’s steel tariffs were provably detrimental, it would seem General Mattis understood things just fine.

Full contextual analysis of Section 4.6: Trade here.

Share this quote from Project 2025: