‘100-year timeframe': how Project 2025 is guiding Trump's attack on government
David A Graham doesn't say he read Project 2025 so you don't have to, but it might be inferred.
The Atlantic staff writer's new book, The Project: How Project 2025 Is Reshaping America, is a swift but thorough overview of the vast far-right plan for a second Trump administration that achieved notoriety last year. Over just 138 pages, a passing dream next to the Heritage Foundation's 922-page doorstop, Graham considers the origins of Project 2025, its aims and effects so far.
There's a reason Project 2025 came out so long.
'They're looking at a 100-year timeframe,' Graham said. 'They're looking at things from the New Deal and saying, 'This is where the government went wrong, and we need to fix these things. We need to change them permanently and reframe what the government does and what its relationship with every American is.''
The New Deal is the name given to the vast expansion of the federal government under Franklin D Roosevelt in the 1930s, in response to the Great Depression and laying the foundation of the modern US state.
Project 2025 was published in 2023. As the 2024 election loomed, Democrats raised alarms about its hardline policy recommendations on issues including climate, LGBTQ+ rights, reproductive healthcare and more. Incendiary rhetoric raised awareness too. Kevin Roberts, Heritage president and author of the Project 2025 foreword, said he and his allies were 'in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be', then peppered his own book with images of fire and destruction. In praise of Roberts, JD Vance, Donald Trump's running mate, said it was time to 'load the muskets'.
To Graham, such bellicose rhetoric was 'terrifying' but also, in retrospect, a clear signpost to things to come. 'To say that publicly before the election is really a strange public relations choice. It's such a chilling thing to say. But you know, it told us what they wanted.'
Amid controversy, Trump tried to distance himself from Project 2025 and its authors. But then he won the election. At the outset of his second term, he duly unleashed slashing cuts to federal staffing and budgets and a barrage of executive orders advancing policies directly linked to Project 2025 or firmly in its spirit.
•••
Graham is an award-winning reporter, used to working fast. He started writing The Project 'at the very end of November', weeks after Trump defeated Kamala Harris, 'and turned the book in in mid-January'.
He wrote the book, he said, because 'we the press, we the American public, had talked a lot about Project 2025 during the election, and it felt like it had kind of gone away – but it remained really relevant. And I felt like there was a lot in it that I didn't understand, and a lot that had been missed.'
During the 2024 election, experts did indeed advise that such policy plans for possible administrations have existed for decades but have rarely been enacted. The sheer size of Project 2025 might also have lulled some into a false sense of security. Like many reporters, Graham 'had dabbled in parts of it'. Unlike many, he found 'it was a different experience to read the whole thing altogether.
'I think it is both more radical in some ways than it came across – like, when you're just reading atomized policies, you don't get what a social program it is – [but] one of the other things that I think is interesting is how there are ideas that I think are either [only] fairly objectionable or might have widespread appeal, right next to ones that are totally out in right field. You'll be in the same paragraph or in the same chapter.
'And the third thing I think is interesting is the way there are disagreements within the text, either between the authors or between the authors and Donald Trump. Those cleavages within the right I think are worth paying attention to now.'
Trump opponents looking for cleavages will not find them in the influential office of management and budget, now directed by Russ Vought, a Christian nationalist, advocate of 'traumatizing' political enemies, and Project 2025 co-author. The original director of Project 2025, Paul Dans, fell victim to political necessity in 2024, forced out of the Heritage Foundation as Trump came under pressure – but remains a true believer, recently declaring Trump's actions in office to be beyond his 'wildest dreams'.
But there is also Elon Musk. The world's richest man has led Trump's so-called department of government efficiency, or Doge, in attacking federal agencies and departments with startling speed and recklessness.
'This is one of the places I have been most surprised,' Graham said, 'because I think the methods that they lay out [in Project 2025] are really important. I thought that an important part of this was going to be how deeply people like Russ Vought had thought about, 'OK, how can we work within the bounds of the law to achieve these things? How can we rework the bureaucracy?' And in fact, Musk came in and just blasted right through it and made it a lot easier for them, and a lot faster. I certainly didn't expect that. It's not contemplated in the book or in the original document.'
Nor are Trump's beloved tariffs much loved by Project 2025 and its free-trade-loving authors.
Graham said: 'There are these big differences within Project 2025. The most obvious place is the chapters on tariffs … they [also] disagree with Trump on Ukraine. They're much more hawkish on Ukraine, and anti-Russia. You have this sort of standard, 'We stand up for Israel, We oppose Iran,' sort of thing, but foreign policy is barely mentioned. It's all about China. And Trump talks the talk on China, but then many of the things he's doing, like tariffs, which are discussed in Project 2025 but not as a major priority, are alienating the rest of the world, which makes it very hard to take on China.
'But then, even something as small as how to handle childcare, you have different people having different views [within Project 2025]. One of the things that jumps out at me is they did a really good job of figuring out how to meld these longstanding social and religious conservative priorities on to Maga. They find places where they can work with Trump.
Trump is very interested in talking about trans rights and Democrats, and men are very interested in fighting back much more broadly on gender norms, LGBTQ+ rights, and so … Project 2025 becomes sort of like a tip of the spear to get Trump's attention. They care about 'wokeness', and DEI, maybe for different reasons than he does, but they'll attack that, and it gets him onboard.
On another key issue of Trump's second term, Graham sees the White House and the ideologues of Project 2025 much more closely aligned.
Project 2025 is 'very focused on illegal immigration, but also on legal immigration. Overall, the point is to have fewer people who are born overseas in the US, by whatever means necessary. And so they talk about mass deportation, and they talk about detention centers, but they also talk about reducing the number of visas that people get and trying to … find people who have lied on their citizenship applications, to revoke citizenship, denaturalization.
'There are things where you see maybe not a direct correlation but the same spirit. So we see in Project 2025 an argument that we need to crack down on student visas from quote, unquote, unfriendly countries, and use student visas as a sort of tool of political warfare.'
•••
Trump may not be implementing Project 2025 word for word but its authors have much to delight them. Conversely, Graham's book is sprinkled with lines that prompt grim laughter.
Consider the case of James Sherk, a Trump adviser on civil service and labor issues in the first term who drafted 'Schedule F', a proposal to reclassify about 50,000 civil service jobs as political, thereby allowing a president to fire such people at will. Under Joe Biden, Schedule F was shelved. Ahead of Trump's second term, Project 2025 advocated putting it swiftly to use.
Last year, Sherk spoke to ProPublica. 'The notion we're going to can 50,000 people is just insane,' he said. 'Why would you do that? That would kneecap your ability to implement your agenda.'
Under Trump, more than 260,000 government workers have been fired, taken buyouts or retired early.
The Project is published in the US by Random House
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Los Angeles Times
11 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
The legal issues raised by Trump sending the National Guard to L.A.
The Trump administration announced Saturday that National Guard troops were being sent to Los Angeles — an action Gov. Gavin Newsom said he opposed. President Trump is activating the Guard by using powers that have been invoked only rarely. Trump said in a memo to the Defense and Homeland Security departments that he was calling the National Guard into federal service under a provision called Title 10 to 'temporarily protect ICE and other United States Government personnel who are performing Federal functions.' Title 10 provides for activating National Guard troops for federal service. Such Title 10 orders can be used for deploying National Guard members in the United States or abroad. Erwin Chemerinsky, one of the nation's leading constitutional law scholars, said 'for the federal government to take over the California National Guard, without the request of the governor, to put down protests is truly chilling.' 'It is using the military domestically to stop dissent,' said Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law. 'It certainly sends a message as to how this administration is going to respond to protests. It is very frightening to see this done.' Tom Homan, the Trump administration's 'border czar,' announced the plan to send the National Guard in an interview on Fox News on Saturday as protesters continued confronting immigration agents during raids. 'This is about enforcing the law,' Homan said. 'We're not going to apologize for doing it. We're stepping up.' 'We're already ahead of the game. We were already mobilizing,' he added. 'We're gonna bring the National Guard in tonight. We're gonna continue doing our job. We're gonna push back on these people.' Newsom criticized the federal action, saying that local law enforcement was already mobilized and that sending in troops was a move that was 'purposefully inflammatory' and would 'only escalate tensions.' The governor called the president and they spoke for about 40 minutes, according to the governor's office. Critics have raised concerns that Trump also might try to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807 to activate troops as part of his campaign to deport large numbers of undocumented immigrants. The president has the authority under the Insurrection Act to federalize the National Guard units of states to suppress 'any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy' that 'so hinders the execution of the laws' that any portion of the state's inhabitants are deprived of a constitutional right and state authorities are unable or unwilling to protect that right. The American Civil Liberties Union has warned that Trump's use of the military domestically would be misguided and dangerous. According to the ACLU, Title 10 activation of National Guard troops has historically been rare and Congress has prohibited troops deployed under the law from providing 'direct assistance' to civilian law enforcement — under both a separate provision of Title 10 as well as the Posse Comitatus Act. The Insurrection Act, however, is viewed as an exception to the prohibitions under the Posse Comitatus Act. In 1958, President Eisenhower invoked the Insurrection Act to deploy troops to Arkansas to enforce the Supreme Court's decision ending racial segregation in schools, and to defend Black students against a violent mob. Hina Shamsi, director of the ACLU's National Security Project, wrote in a recent article that if Trump were to invoke the Insurrection Act 'to activate federalized troops for mass deportation — whether at the border or somewhere else in the country — it would be unprecedented, unnecessary, and wrong.' Chemerinsky said invoking the Insurrection Act and nationalizing a state's National Guard has been reserved for extreme circumstances where there are no other alternatives to maintain the peace. Chemerinsky said he feared that in this case the Trump administration was seeking 'to send a message to protesters of the willingness of the federal government to use federal troops to quell protests.' In 1992, California Gov. Pete Wilson requested that President George H.W. Bush use the National Guard to quell the unrest in Los Angeles after police officers were acquitted in the beating of Rodney King. That was under a different provision of federal law that allows the president to use military force in the United States. That provision applies if a state governor or legislature requests it. California politics editor Phil Willon contributed to this report.

15 minutes ago
Trump attends UFC championship fight in NJ, taking a break from politics, Musk feud
NEWARK, N.J. -- President Donald Trump walked out to a thunderous standing ovation just ahead of the start of the UFC pay-per-view card at the Prudential Center on Saturday night, putting his public feud with tech billionaire Elon Musk on hold to instead watch the fierce battles inside the cage. Trump was accompanied by UFC President Dana White and the pair headed to their cageside seats to Kid Rock's 'American Bad Ass.' Trump and White did the same for UFC's card last November at Madison Square Garden, only then they were joined by Musk. Trump shook hands with fans and supporters — a heavyweight lineup that included retired boxing champion Mike Tyson — on his way to the cage. Trump was joined by his daughter Ivanka Trump and her husband, Jared Kushner, along with son Eric Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Trump shook hands with the UFC broadcast team that included Joe Rogan. Rogan hosted Trump on his podcast for hours in the final stages of the campaign last year. UFC fans went wild for Trump and held mobile devices in their outstretched arms to snap pictures of him. Trump arrived in time for the start of a card set to include two championship fights. Julianna Peña and Merab Dvalishvili were scheduled to each defend their 135-pound championships. UFC fighter Kevin Holland won the first fight with Trump in the building, scaled the cage and briefly chatted with the President before his post-fight interview.
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
LA immigration protests live updates: Trump deploys 2,000 National Guard members
The Trump administration is deploying the California National Guard in response to protests in Los Angeles that begin Friday evening over immigration enforcement operations that have resulted in some clashes between demonstrators and authorities, the White House said in a statement. President Donald Trump signed a memorandum "deploying 2,000 National Guardsmen to address the lawlessness" in California as demonstrations opposing Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations continue in the state, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement Saturday evening. Earlier Saturday, California Gov. Gavin Newsom said the federal government was moving to "take over the California National Guard," calling the move "purposefully inflammatory" and saying it will "only escalate tensions."Jun 7, 11:07 PMHegseth says National Guard being mobilized immediately, active-duty Marines on 'high alert' Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the Defense Department is "mobilizing the National Guard IMMEDIATELY to support federal law enforcement in Los Angeles."Hegseth said if violence continues, "active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton will also be mobilized — they are on high alert." Jun 7, 11:07 PMTrump memo deploying National Guard calls LA protests 'rebellion' The memo that President Donald Trump signed Saturday night directing the National Guard to California said that the current protests "constitute a form of rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States."Trump utilized his authority under "10 U.S.C. 12406 to temporarily protect ICE and other United States Government personnel," according to the presidential memorandum also said that the 2,000 service members could be deployed for 60 days or "at the discretion" of the defense memo adds that the secretary of defense "may employ any other members of the regular Armed Forces as necessary to augment and support the protection of Federal functions and property in any number determined appropriate in his discretion."-ABC News' Michelle Stoddart Click here to read the rest of the blog.