Project 2025 Blueprint Versus The Second Trump Administration: A Narrative Comparison of Consequences

Editor’s Note: I struggled with Google’s NotebookLLM to get a decent comparison. I am learning its functions. It fails often. Anyway, here’s a comparison to real world events since Trump’s inauguration until now, and how any of those actions parallel the Project 2025 document from the Heritage Foundation (his Playbook). I made some edits, and my formatting. –DrWeb

Project 2025 Blueprint Versus The Second Trump Administration: A Narrative Comparison of Consequences

The philosophical premise driving the actions of the second Trump administration is rooted in the belief, articulated in the Mandate for Leadership 2025 document, that the American political elite has steered the nation toward decline. The authors assert that the federal government itself is a “behemoth, weaponized against American citizens and conservative values“, and the existing bureaucratic system is “not even close to the worst example of this corruption”. Therefore, the entire purpose of the transition effort is framed as the necessary deconstruction of the current system to restore the Republic to its “original moorings”.

This mandate translated directly into aggressive action immediately following the January 20, 2025, inauguration of Trump. Analyses confirmed a high degree of correlation between the blueprint and the administration’s policies. Within the first 100 days, analysts noted that more than 30 out of 47 initial executive actions matched or partially aligned with Project 2025 proposals. Furthermore, in less than a year, the administration began implementing almost half of Project 2025’s domestic policy To-Do List.

I. The Systematic Dismantling of the Administrative State

The primary goal of Project 2025—to dismantle the Administrative State—was executed through rapid and comprehensive personnel and structural changes:

The key mechanism for deconstructing the federal bureaucracy was the reinstatement of the concept behind the Trump administration’s previous “Schedule F” proposal. This was accomplished through the immediate signing of the order “RESTORING ACCOUNTABILITY TO POLICY-INFLUENCING POSITIONS WITHIN THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE,” aimed at stripping civil service protections from policy-influencing career roles. The Project 2025 blueprint views the federal workforce, where the dismissal rate is historically well below 1 percent, as lacking accountability relative to the private sector.

The execution of this mission was entrusted largely to the controversial Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by Elon Musk. While Project 2025 proposed detailed, structural reforms, DOGE’s approach was often described as hasty and chaotic. DOGE eliminated entire agencies, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and USAID. This drive toward efficiency resulted in the layoff or planned layoff of 280,253 federal workers and contractors across 27 agencies, an action described in the sources as exceeding the specific, detailed methods recommended in the policy blueprint. The appointment of Russ Vought, an author of part of the Project 2025 guide, to lead the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), provided direct policy linkage, fulfilling the demand that political leaders, not careerists, must drive agency agendas.

II. Cultural, Educational, and Regulatory Rollbacks

The administration also moved swiftly to implement cultural policies outlined in the blueprint:

On Day One, the administration signed an executive order ending all Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs within the federal government. This aligns precisely with Project 2025’s demand to delete DEI, abortion, and gender equality “from every federal rule, agency regulation, contract, grant, regulation, and piece of legislation”. Regarding healthcare and gender policy, the administration was directed to withdraw March 2022 guidance on gender-affirming care and issued an order effectively barring transgender people from serving in the armed forces. Furthermore, a directive was issued to the Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security to reinstate service members discharged for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine and to restore their rank.

In education, the goal was to cripple public education. The administration took steps to dismantle the Department of Education via executive order, aligning with the Project 2025 goal of replacing federal oversight with state and local control. The administration also targeted academic funding. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced it would unilaterally cap the amount of funding for “indirect costs” at 15% for federally funded research. This fulfilled a specific Project 2025 goal to reduce taxpayer “subsidization of leftist agendas” in universities.

III. Energy, Environmental Policy, and Targeted Agency Actions

Deregulation and the reversal of climate policy were immediate priorities, consistent with the blueprint’s assertion that regulations threaten American communities:

The administration formally initiated the withdrawal of the U.S. from the Paris Climate Accords and UNESCO, reflecting the blueprint’s goal of abandoning international organizations that erode sovereignty. Deregulatory actions immediately targeted environmental efforts by eliminating incentives for electric vehicles. A key target was the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Project 2025 explicitly called for NOAA to be “dismantled,” asserting that its Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) component was the “source of much of NOAA’s climate alarmism”. The administration subsequently attacked NOAA and dismissed scientists compiling the National Climate Assessments. The administration went beyond weakening regulations by pursuing repealing greenhouse gas standards altogether for fossil-fueled power plants.

IV. Addressing Specific High-Consequence Actions

The below specific real-world consequences were analyzed against the Project 2025 agenda:

• Forced Deployment of National Guard Troops: The administration federalized the California National Guard and deployed them along with Marines to Los Angeles against the wishes of the governor and mayor, and federal forces were sent to Memphis. While Project 2025 specifically mentioned using federal forces for border operations, this action aligns with the spirit of Project 2025 to assert maximalist federal control over domestic security issues, particularly in response to civil unrest.
• Threat to Resume Nuclear Testing: The administration’s policy position is in Direct Alignment and Implementation of the Project 2025 defense policy proposal. The blueprint recommends the President reject ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and signal a willingness to conduct nuclear tests in response to adversary developments, further directing the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to move to immediate test readiness.
• Aggressive Immigration Enforcement (ICE and Deportation): The administration initiated procedures for mass deportations (37,660 people were deported in the first month). It expanded detention capacity, including the Guantanamo Migrant Operations Center and “Alligator Alcatraz”. These actions align with the blueprint’s goal to end illegal immigration and drastically expand detention centers to 100,000 beds daily. Furthermore, the administration issued daily deportation quotas for ICE officers and ended the policy that restricted immigration arrests in “sensitive areas” such as courthouses, schools, and churches.
• Refugee Policy and Favoring White South Africans: The administration implemented a suspension of refugee entry under the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program. This fulfilled the Project 2025 goal of “rightsizing refugee admissions”. The administration was specifically criticized for fast-tracking the applications of 59 white South African refugees.
• Demolition of the White House East Wing: The demolition is related to the privately funded White House State Ballroom. This action is categorized as Outside the direct policy mandates of Project 2025, as the blueprint focuses on structural executive branch policy, not physical construction projects.
• Political Targeting and Ethics: Although actions like the unprecedented targeting of law firms and the alleged repeal of ethics rules are Outside the explicit policy mandates of Project 2025, they align with the administration’s overall focus on retribution and the maximalist assertion of executive power over perceived political enemies.

The sources confirm that the administration’s execution of its agenda since January 20, 2025, represents a powerful convergence with the detailed policy framework of Project 2025. The blueprint provided the conservative ideology and policy menu, and the administration’s actions provided the rapid, often radical, implementation.

Works Cited – Primary Volume

Primary Volume Entry

The Heritage Foundation, editor. Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise. The Heritage Foundation, 2023. ISBN 978-0-89195-174-2.

Individual Chapter Entries (Citations– by Author)

Berry, Jonathan. “Department of Labor and Related Agencies.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 581.

Burke, Lindsey M. “Department of Education.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 319.

Carmack, Dustin J. “Intelligence Community.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 201.

Carson, Benjamin S., Sr. “Department of Housing and Urban Development.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 503.

Cuccinelli, Ken. “Department of Homeland Security.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 133.

Dearborn, Rick. “White House Office.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 23.

Devine, Donald, et al. “Central Personnel Agencies: Managing the Bureaucracy.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 69.

Furchtgott-Roth, Diana. “Department of Transportation.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 619.

Gilman, Thomas F. “Department of Commerce.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 663.

Gunasekara, Mandy M. “Environmental Protection Agency.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 417.

Hamilton, Gene. “Department of Justice.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 545.

McNamee, Bernard L. “Department of Energy and Related Commissions.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 363.

Miller, Christopher. “Department of Defense.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 91.

Pendley, William Perry. “Department of the Interior.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 517.

Primorac, Max. “Agency for International Development.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 253.

Severino, Roger. “Department of Health and Human Services.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 449.

Skinner, Kiron K. “Department of State.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 171.

Tucker, Brooks D. “Department of Veterans Affairs.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 641.

Vought, Russ. “Executive Office of the President of the United States.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 43.

Walton, William L., et al. “Department of the Treasury.” Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, edited by The Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, p. 691.

#eos #executiveOrders #heritageFoundation #mandateForLeadership #news #newsCoverage #parallelsWithProject2025 #project2025 #theConservativePromise #trump

US federal government shutdown 2025 | The Guardian

US federal government shutdown 2025

The US government shut down on 1 October 2025 after Congress failed to reach a funding agreement by the midnight deadline.

Editor’s Note: Sharing this page. Keep up with the Shutdown 2025. The Guardian has great coverage!

11 October 2025

• Trump says military members will be paid despite government shutdown 15.53 EDT
• Democrats refuse to fold over shutdown as Republican outrage builds 09.00 EDT

10 October 2025

• US politics live with Shrai PopatAfter uproar, Pete Hegseth clarifies Qatari air force facility in Idaho is not a foreign base – as it happened Oct 10 2025 22.03 EDT
• White House announces federal worker layoffs as shutdown nears third week Oct 10 2025 21.44 EDT

9 October 2025

• Senate still deadlocked over shutdown as Trump reiterates threat to DemocratsSeventh round of votes fails to yield breakthrough while president threatens to cut funds for ‘Democrat programs’ Oct 9 2025 15.35 EDT

8 October 2025

• US politics live with Shrai PopatWhite House gives platform to conservative influencers to air grievances during ‘antifa roundtable’ – as it happened Oct 8 2025 22.13 EDT
• IRS to furlough nearly half its workforce due to government shutdown Oct 8 2025 17.24 EDT
• US shutdown deadlock deepens as senators reject competing bills Oct 8 2025 14.27 EDT
• US airport staffing shortages expected to cause more delays amid shutdown Oct 8 2025 12.14 EDT

• Democrats introduce bill to help federal workers cover childcare costs during shutdown Oct 8 2025 06.00 EDT
• Gold price tops $4,000 for first time as investors seek safe haven Oct 8 2025 05.20 EDT

Editor’s Note: The page has more days and information. Bookmark and follow.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: US federal government shutdown 2025 | The Guardian

#2025 #America #Coverage #DonaldTrump #Education #FederalGovernmentShutdown #GOP #Health #History #Libraries #LibraryOfCongress #NewsCoverage #Opinion #Politics #Republicans #Resistance #Science #TheGuardian #Trump #TrumpAdministration #USFederalShutdown2025 #UnitedStates

A lot said about how #media does or does not cover #news - See how it's really done!

Behind the Scenes of ‘Meet the Press’ https://nbcuacademy.com/how-meet-the-press-is-made/

#journalism #newscoverage #TVproduction #research #interviews #factchecking

BBC witnesses settlers attack on Palestinian farm in West Bank

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cewy88jle0eo

#HackerNews #BBC #Settlers #Attack #PalestinianFarm #WestBank #NewsCoverage #CurrentEvents

Bill Melugin Biography, Height, Age, Family, Girlfriend, Net Worth and Career

Bill Melugin was born on February 26, 1985, in Orange County, California, USA. He is 40 years old as of 2025.

https://www.biographygen.com/bill-melugin-age-married-father-salary/

#BillMelugin #Journalism #NewsReporter #BreakingNews #InvestigativeJournalism #FoxNews #MediaPersonality #CurrentEvents #NewsCoverage #LiveReporting #PoliticalNews #LocalNews #NewsAnchor #Storytelling #MediaInfluencer #ReportersLife #NewsUpdates #OnTheGround