The Shocking Reality of Project 2025
Summary
TLDRProject 2025, a Heritage Foundation initiative, is often misconstrued as a blueprint for authoritarianism. Contrary to sensationalist claims, it's a collection of policy recommendations for a potential Republican administration, similar to those provided since Reagan's era. The real focus is reforming the administrative state to ensure a more efficient and responsive government. Despite critics' fears, the project doesn't aim to undermine democracy but rather to address the entrenched bureaucracy that can hinder policy implementation, regardless of the party in power.
Takeaways
- 🗳️ Project 2025 is a plan by the Heritage Foundation to provide policy recommendations and a roster of potential appointees for the next Republican administration.
- 📚 The 'Mandate for Leadership' is a 1,000-page document outlining conservative policy suggestions, but it is not an official Trump campaign document.
- 🔄 Despite claims, the 'Mandate for Leadership' is a recurring publication by the Heritage Foundation since the Reagan era and is not a new phenomenon.
- 🤔 The central goal of Project 2025 is to reform the administrative state by providing a list of skilled and loyal appointees for a Republican administration.
- 😲 The script suggests that the administrative state, filled with unelected bureaucrats, can act as a roadblock to presidential policies and needs reform.
- 🇺🇸 The idea of reforming the administrative state is not a new concept and has been a concern for both Republicans and Democrats.
- 🔄 The script points out that executive power has varied historically in the United States, with periods of strong and weak executive power.
- 📉 The administrative state has grown increasingly disconnected from the electorate and has become less efficient and harder to hold accountable.
- 🔱 Project 2025 aims to make the next Republican administration more effective by preparing a roster of trained staffers and proposing reforms to the administrative state.
- 🚫 There is no evidence in the script to suggest that Project 2025 is a plan for establishing a dictatorship or a theocracy.
Q & A
What is Project 2025 and why has it generated controversy?
-Project 2025 is a plan by the Heritage Foundation to provide a list of policy recommendations and a roster of skilled, loyalist appointees for the next Republican Administration. It has generated controversy because some perceive it as an attempt to establish a dictatorship, abolish constitutional rights, or even establish a theocracy.
What is the 'Mandate for Leadership' and how is it related to Project 2025?
-The 'Mandate for Leadership' is a 1,000-page guide developed by the Heritage Foundation that outlines plans, studies, and justifications for various conservative policies. It is related to Project 2025 as it is a part of the policy recommendations provided by the Heritage Foundation, but it is not the central focus of Project 2025.
Why has the 'Mandate for Leadership' been a point of concern for some?
-The 'Mandate for Leadership' has been a point of concern because it includes policy suggestions that some view as radical, such as greater restrictions on abortion, crackdowns on DEI and gender programs, and rolling back business regulations. Critics worry these could be alarming if implemented.
Is there an official connection between the Trump campaign and the 'Mandate for Leadership'?
-No, there is no official connection between the Trump campaign and the 'Mandate for Leadership'. The Heritage Foundation has produced these guides regularly since the Reagan Administration, and while Trump may have some overlap with the positions, he is not obliged to follow them.
What is the main goal of Project 2025, according to the video?
-The main goal of Project 2025 is to gut the administrative state and provide the next Republican Administration with a catalog of skilled, loyalist appointees who can effectively carry out the administration's agenda.
What is the administrative state and why is it a concern for conservatives?
-The administrative state refers to unelected government officials or bureaucrats who manage daily governance and often wield significant influence. It is a concern for conservatives because they believe it can undermine the president's agenda and lead to inefficiencies and a lack of accountability.
How has the role of executive power in the United States changed over time?
-Executive power in the United States has varied widely, with periods of strong executives like FDR and Lincoln, and more restrained executives like Thomas Jefferson. In recent history, there has been a trend towards weaker executive power, but the Trump and Biden administrations have marked a shift back towards a more activist executive.
What is the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 and why was it significant?
-The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 was an attempt to modernize federal employment practices and improve the efficiency of the government workforce. However, it weakened the merit-based standards established under the Pendleton Act, making it more difficult to hold civil servants accountable and leading to a stagnation in the civil service.
What are some proposals for reforming the administrative state mentioned in the video?
-Some proposals for reforming the administrative state include reclassifying jobs to make them more easily replaceable, placing them under the jurisdiction of an efficiency commission, and shrinking the size of the executive branch while giving the president more direct control over its functions.
How does the video suggest the Democratic party has reacted to Project 2025?
-The video suggests that organizations aligned with the Democratic party have demonized Project 2025 as something much worse than it actually is, possibly out of fear that the strategies used by the Heritage Foundation could lead to significant changes in Republican favor.
Outlines
🔍 Investigating Project 2025 and the Heritage Foundation's Role
The video script begins by addressing the public's concern over Project 2025, a plan that has been sensationalized as a potential blueprint for establishing a dictatorship. The narrator, Mr. Z, delves into the Heritage Foundation's 'Mandate for Leadership,' a comprehensive guide for conservative policies. Despite the sensationalism, the narrator clarifies that the 'Mandate for Leadership' is a regular publication by the Heritage Foundation since the Reagan era and is not directly tied to Trump's campaign. The video aims to provide a deeper understanding of Project 2025 and its actual implications, focusing on the Heritage Foundation's role and the nature of the 'Mandate for Leadership.'
📚 The Heritage Foundation's Mandate for Leadership: Misunderstandings and Context
Paragraph two discusses the misunderstandings surrounding the Heritage Foundation's 'Mandate for Leadership.' It clarifies that the document is a set of policy recommendations for Republican administrations, not an official agenda. The narrator points out that while Trump has acknowledged facing resistance from the administrative state, the 'Mandate for Leadership' is not a direct reflection of his campaign promises. The paragraph also touches on the history of executive power in the United States, highlighting the fluctuating strength of the executive branch and the role of the administrative state in shaping national policy.
🏛️ The Administrative State: A Historical Overview and Current Concerns
Paragraph three provides a historical overview of the administrative state, explaining its growth during FDR's New Deal era and the subsequent concerns about its efficiency and accountability. The narrator discusses the impact of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 on the merit-based standards of the civil service, leading to a less efficient and more entrenched bureaucracy. The paragraph emphasizes the need for reform in the administrative state, which has become a significant force in the U.S. government, often operating with little oversight and influence over national policies.
🛠️ Project 2025's Focus on Reforming the Administrative State
The final paragraph summarizes the core focus of Project 2025, which is to reform the administrative state and provide a trained roster of loyal appointees for the next Republican administration. It contrasts the sensationalized views of Project 2025 with the actual goals of the project, which include making the executive branch more effective and responsive to the president's agenda. The narrator also addresses the criticisms and comparisons with similar efforts by Democratic-aligned organizations, emphasizing that the need for administrative state reform is a bipartisan issue.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Project 2025
💡Heritage Foundation
💡Administrative State
💡Mandate for Leadership
💡Partisanship
💡Deep State
💡Executive Power
💡Civil Service Reform Act of 1978
💡Transition Project
💡Policy Blueprints
Highlights
Project 2025 has been sensationalized as a blueprint for establishing a dictatorship or theocracy, but a deeper look reveals different intentions.
The Heritage Foundation's 'Mandate for Leadership' is a guide for conservative policies, not a direct Trump agenda.
The 'Mandate for Leadership' has been a regular publication by the Heritage Foundation since Reagan's era, not a new phenomenon.
Project 2025's central goal is to provide a catalog of skilled, loyalist appointees for the next Republican administration.
The administrative state, with its unelected bureaucrats, can undermine presidential policies and needs reform.
Presidential power has varied historically, with periods of strong and weak executive power in the United States.
The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 contributed to the current issues within the administrative state by weakening merit-based standards.
Project 2025 aims to reform the administrative state to make the government more efficient and responsive to the electorate.
The Heritage Foundation and organizations aligned with the Democratic party both create policy blueprints and transition projects.
Critics argue that Project 2025 is an attempt to consolidate power within the executive branch, but this is not unprecedented.
The real concern for Democrats may be the effectiveness of a Republican administration empowered by Project 2025's transition project.
Project 2025 is not an authoritarian plan but a push for government efficiency and accountability.
Reforming the administrative state is a bipartisan issue, with both parties recognizing the need for change.
The video concludes that Project 2025 is about improving government representation and policy implementation, not authoritarianism.
Transcripts
by now you've probably heard about
project 2025 with the election coming up
there's been a lot of Hysteria
surrounding the plan that some have
called Trump's blueprint for
establishing a dictatorship abolishing
constitutional rights or even
establishing a theocracy obviously
there's going to be some sensationalism
in hyperbole but still could project
2025 really be that bad with election
Cycles being the turbulent Torance of
accusations and partisanship that they
are I thought it worthwhile to actually
do some deeper digging on the project to
see what it was really all about what I
found was genuinely shocking and I think
you're all going to want to stick around
for the truth behind project 2025 hello
audience Mr Z here with another video
for you if you're new to the channel
welcome we have videos like this every
week where we talk about history and
politics so be sure to subscribe leave
us a comment about what you'd like to
see next and stay tuned for more if
you'd like to join the community we do
have a public Discord server Linked In
the description along with a community
made subreddit loaded with memes charts
maps and more and of course if you'd
like to help support the channel
directly consider becoming a channel
member or donating to us on patreon
having dealt with censorship and
demonetization in the past especially
when covering more sensitive topics your
support really goes a long way to
keeping the channel going all members do
gain access to a separate membersonly
Discord server where you can speak with
me directly now let's get back to our
regularly scheduled program now of
course I wanted to see what it was
everybody was talking about with this
what it was everybody was concentrating
on that was so crazy the central star of
the project 2025 discussion repeatedly
appeared to be the Heritage foundation's
lengthy 1,000 page mandate for
leadership it's an extensive guide or
more of a textbook developed by experts
gathered by the foundation for the
purpose of laying out plans studies and
justifications for various conservative
policies for the next Republican
Administration in short it's meant to be
a huge list of policy recommendations
for the next Republican who takes office
skimming through the book it's
understandable why left Wingers would be
alarmed by some of the policy
suggestions laid out here from placing
greater restrictions on aard cracking
down on Dei and gender programs and
rolling back regulation on business
practices it's definitely a pretty
hardcore Republican agenda but here's
the kicker the Mandate for leadership
isn't actually Central to project 2025
at all heck it's more of a red herring
than anything else the Mandate for
leadership is nothing new for the
Heritage Foundation they've actually
made these regularly since the Reagan
Administration in 1981 and Trump even
had an addition of this back in 2016
sometimes presidents implement the
suggested policy sometimes they don't
most only use about half of what's
actually in these if they use it at all
the claim that this book represents
everything Trump officially wants to do
however is false now officially there's
no connection whatsoever between the
Trump campaign and the Heritage
Foundation who put the book together but
of course Trump knows people who work at
the Heritage Foundation many people in
politics do tend to know each other
especially when they belong to the same
party or faction and of course the
Heritage Foundation has communicated
with Republican campaigns in the past
Trump's included but the fact is that
the Mandate for leadership is not
Trump's agenda these are a bunch of
suggestions Heritage is making and Trump
while he has spoken positively about
Heritage in the past and probably has
some overlap with these positions he
could genuinely do nothing from the
Mandate if he really chooses to it's not
a list of his campaign promises and
there's actually reason to believe that
he might disregard this altogether he's
been open about a lot of his policy and
some of it even conflicts with the
policy suggestions in the book like the
part about raising defense spending and
maintaining a strong military stance
against Russia China Iran and North
Korea when Trump himself has repeatedly
emphasized his desire to end foreign
interventionism the Mandate for
leadership is nothing new it's a lot
less impactful than we think and it's
not even the point of project 2025 from
what I heard actually reaching out to
the Heritage Foundation to answer some
questions it was kind of just tacked on
at the last minute since they already
give one of these to the Republican
presidents anyway okay so if the Mandate
doesn't matter what the heck is the
point of project 2025 it's actually
something that just about everyone seems
to be overlooking or not giving much
attention to and that is the training
and talent roster or the right-wing
LinkedIn as some people have called it
project 2025 is first and foremost about
gutting the administrative State and
providing the next Republican
Administration with a catalog of skilled
loyalist appointees that is the central
goal and purpose of the project but why
a major concern that the Heritage
Foundation and many American
conservatives have for that matter is
that that even if Trump were to win
re-election what's going to stop the
so-called deep State specifically in
this case the hundreds of unelected
bureaucrats operating several agencies
which directly influence and shape
National policy with little to no
scrutiny what's stopping them from just
sabotaging the next potential Republican
Administration during Trump's first term
he faced Massive Resistance from the
administrative State including from his
own appointees leading to presidential
policies that were never put into action
political decisions which were never
authorized by the president and a whole
lot of Deadlock now Trump himself has
personally accepted some responsibility
for this acknowledging that he entered
office without Clarity on who was
actually on his side and who actually
shared his policy Vision but more than
anything he recognized that he faced
significant challenges using executive
power from within the executive branch
okay but why gut the administrative
State isn't this just Trump trying to
seize more power for himself isn't it
good that parts of the executive branch
are able to reign in the power of the
president the reality has been
incredibly OB fiscated by the fact that
most people aren't familiar with the
history of executive power in the United
States the role of the administrative
state or Civil Service nor what the
state of civil service has become in the
modern day let's start by talking about
executive power throughout US History
executive power varied widely you had
strong Executives who maximized what the
president could do say Andrew Jackson
Abraham Lincoln Theodore Roosevelt but
you also had more restrained Executives
who prefer to adopt a more passive role
and defer to Congress the state
governments the free market Etc men such
as Thomas Jefferson Warren Harding and
Ronald Reagan the real peak of executive
power was probably FDR's Administration
some might argue Lincoln given his
wartime Powers but FDR also assumed
similar Powers once America entered
World War II and even prior to this was
given card blanch by Congress to tackle
the Great Depression as though it was a
war to be won some even proposed
granting him temporary dictatorial
powers specifically to legislate without
the need of Congress until the
Depression was solved with his decisions
only veto by a super majority vote from
Congress of course those dictatorial
Powers were never granted but FDR did
expand the abilities of the executive
branch to Greater Heights than ever
before so much so that he needed to
delegate some of those additional powers
to other members of the branch but we'll
get to that momentarily after FDR passed
his followers in the New Deal coalition
attempted to continue FDR's policies
with a similar degree of executive power
but with the depression solved in the
Second Great War One the need for a
powerful executive was waning and the US
presidents wielded it with less success
president Johnson was probably the last
major gasp of this new deal style
Executive before Nixon took office and
both intentionally and unintentionally
diminished executive power not only did
Nixon seek to cut back the role of the
Federal Government in general in the
lives of Americans but his handling of
the Watergate scandal fractured The
Prestige of the executive and saw many
cry out for greater oversight and
limitation on executive power as a
result Carter's shortcomings would
further diminish executive Prestige with
his crisis of confidence Reagan would
aim to further decentralize power and
shrink the role of the Federal
government and ever since then US
presidents have generally followed suit
operating with less and less direct
power than their predecessors with
Donald Trump and Joe Biden arguably
being the first president since Reagan
to break this trend a more powerful
executive especially one in line with
the powers demonstrated by the past
Trump and Biden administrations is
nothing out of the ordinary in US
history rather we have simply been in a
long period of relatively weak executive
power and whether it be on the left or
the right we are seeing a significant
reorientation toward a more activist
executive in the mold of past presidents
like FDR Theodore Roosevelt Taft and
McKinley now while we have lived in an
age of a relatively weak executive this
is not to mean we live in an age of
relatively small government somehow the
government of today can feel
overbearingly involved yet totally
useless at providing the basic Services
many want and expect especially when we
consider that most middle class and
lower class Americans are facing
taxation not far off from what they had
during FDR's ter Z had enjoy very few of
the same benefits provided during that
time well this is where we get into the
issue of the administrative State the
bureaucrats who in many cases are
responsible for ensuring that the Public
Services provided by the government do
what they're supposed to do are run well
and run efficiently but very obviously
are not the administrative State refers
to a collection of unelected government
officials or bureaucrats who manage
daily governance and often wield
significant influence the sector has
become a substantial force in the US
government during the New Deal era under
FDR and in response to the Great
depression the federal government
expanded dramatically new agencies like
the Social Security Administration the
Securities and Exchange Commission were
created to address economic and social
crises with this growth the
administrative state became essential to
implementing National policies and
regulations these agencies were run by
skilled officials who were loyal to
FDR's New Deal agenda and for a time
this model worked relatively well
bureaucracies were seen as key Tools in
governing the complex Machinery of the
country however over the decades as the
administrative state continued to grow
so too did concerns over its efficiency
and accountability after World War II
and especially in the 1970s faith in the
system started to erode scandals such as
Watergate feely damaged public trust in
government leading to calls for reforms
and how the executive branch and its
agencies operated Congress began
increasingly exerting control over
federal agencies often resulting in a
more fragmented system where executive
control became deluded this shift is
important because it exemplifies how the
balance of power moved toward Congress
and undermined the president's influence
over the bureaucracy this growing
tension between Congress and the
executive made the bureaucracy less
responsive to direct presidential
oversight creating more inefficiencies
over time a significant blow to the
quality of the administrative State came
with the civil service reform Act of
1978 under Jimmy Carter the intention
was to modernize federal employment
practices and improve the efficiency of
the government Workforce however in
practice the reforms made it difficult
to hold civil servants accountable the
ACT abolished the Civil Service
Commission in favor of new agencies like
the office of personnel management and
the Merit systems protection board which
in turn weakened the rigorous
merit-based standards established under
the Pendleton Act way back in 1883 which
set the standard for a professional and
meritocratic civil service and created
the unique conditions where over 90% of
federal employees were held to
merit-based standards which allowed FDR
to have the administrative State he did
but in one Fell Swoop Carter had
eradicated that as a result firing or
disciplining underperforming employees
became more difficult leading to the
stagnation of the civil service we see
today with 15 executive federal agencies
and hundreds of sub agencies below them
run by unelected officials shaping how
Commerce Justice energy housing
education defense Health transportation
agriculture and more are managed and
with little to no quality control or
ability to hold these officials
accountable this is something that
Americans should be concerned about even
more so given the fact that despite
being nested under the Executive Branch
the executive has little control over
these departments and their subp
departments whose officials would be
protected from removal to prevent a
spoil system yet are no longer held to
the merit-based criteria of the past
creating an entrenched bureaucracy which
is extremely difficult to reform and
very difficult to hold to high standards
once again thousands of unelected
officials that you've probably never
heard of are making some of the most
vital decisions shaping how life in
America works and there's very little
ensuring that they're actually doing a
good job at it further these departments
receive some $4 trillion do in funding
annually where is it all going should we
really trust this system as it runs
right now with all that money now over
time the bureaucracy has additionally
grown more disconnected from the
electorate civil servants will regularly
Outlast presidential administrations
creating a layer of governance that
remains entrenched regardless of which
party holds power this consistency and
Independence while beneficial for
long-term projects also results in the
administrative State being insulated
sluggish and unresponsive to change
including those necessary reforms and up
making it more efficient and
meritocratic if a president is doing a
lousy job you can blame him and you can
vote him out of office if a congressman
is doing a lousy job you can blame him
and vote him out of office you can't
vote members of the administrative State
out of office but that might finally
change once again project 2025 or more
specifically the Mandate for leadership
has a lot of very very partisan stuff
that's just not going to fly with the
other side it reads like a strictly
Republican agenda but the biggest
highlight something I think that most
Americans can get behind is the idea of
reforming the administrative State and
both Trump and project 2025 have
independently made different proposals
for how to tackle the issue of the
administrative State everything from
reclassifying these jobs into ones which
could be more easily replaceable to
placing them under the jurisdiction of
an efficiency commission to shrinking
the size of the executive branch while
giving the president more direct control
over the functions of these executive
departments in essence consolidating the
powers of the cabinet into the executive
himself none of these measures are
particularly radical or extreme when we
consider how much of a roadblock the
administrative state has been to
policymaking and despite what some
people have claimed this doesn't include
anything that would hinder congress's
influence over the presidency some of
the oversight that Congress would have
over those departments is going to be
rescinded just because those departments
wouldn't exist anymore or would be
Consolidated under the executive himself
but there's still going to be checks and
balances between the branches of
government the only thing that's talked
about is a consolidation within the
executive branch this isn't the
executive consolidating powers that are
typically given to Congress or to the
Supreme Court this is the executive
gaining more control over the Executive
Branch whether you are a Republican or a
Democrat you must be able to acknowledge
that we vote for our candidates because
we want them to fulfill their promises
we want them to make America better in
whatever form that might be but what
happens when they get into office try to
push that change only for it to be held
back by an unseen in manipulative body
of unelected officials we elect
representatives to represent us that's
what we signed up for not a bureaucratic
oligarchy so when people do point to
this aspect of project 2025 as a scheme
to give Trump dictatorial Powers I don't
buy it whether it was the Heritage
Foundation or the center for American
progress saying that we need to reform
the administrative State it's it's true
it's an institution that needs reform
now speaking of the center for American
progress they were among the loudest in
earliest challenges of project 2025
which is ironic considering that they
were founded as a direct rival to the
Heritage Foundation and as you might
expect from arrival they also create
Blueprints and transition projects for
Democratic administrations every
election and they essentially had their
own liberal versions of project 2025 for
Biden 2020 and Obama in 2008 it's even
been said of the organization quote not
since the Heritage Foundation helped
guide Ronald Reagan's transition in 1981
has a single outside group held so much
Sway and that it is quote the most
influential think tank of the Biden era
now Heritage as I said puts together the
so-called blueprints for Republican
administrations every election and tries
to work with the administrations if they
win but project 2025 is the first time
Heritage has actually undertaken an
effort to have pre-trained staffers
ready for the president on such a large
scale again the Mandate for leadership
is kind of Superfluous if it wasn't
alarm for it would have been raised
during past Republican administrations
who also got similar books is the
Mandate a bit extreme sure but once
again they're really just suggestions
that most presidents barely adopt half
of if any what most of these Democrat
aligned organizations are probably most
concerned about is the actual training
and transition project as well as the
plan to reform the administrative State
because it would make the next
Republican Administration actually
effective at carrying out its agenda
which again is defined by Trump not by
the Heritage Foundation and its mandate
for leadership I mean they don't even
try to hide that they do this themselves
to quote the capap sister organization
capap action quote long before the
election this team worked closely
together almost as a shadow government
to exercise cooperation work on specific
problems and develop initiatives that
would be implemented soon upon President
Obama's inauguration this model was
highly successful in ensuring critical
members of the president's staff were
prepared to work together in the best
interest of the country and the
president once they began serving in the
white house now I think you have an
instance here of democratic factions
recognizing Republican attempts to
implement simil successful strategies
they themselves have used and are
fearful that this will amount to actual
major change in Republican favor it's
not really a transition project but they
even have a project called progress 2050
which literally sounds like something
that was invented to oneup project 2025
let's summarize all of this one the
Heritage Foundation has been involved in
working with past Republican
administrations and we might expect it
to have some influence in a second Trump
Administration though Trump has
attempted to distance himself from the
organization two the foundation's
mandate for leadership though it does
contain some pretty radical republican
policy is actually nothing new since
they've literally published these every
few years to advise Republican
presidents on policy actions and somehow
the book has never raised alarm in the
past even when one was published for
Trump's 2016 presidency three Trump has
no obligation to abide by anything in
the Mandate for leadership which at
times does explicitly conflict with his
own stated agenda Trump is also much
less willing to take advice from outside
groups this time around having felt as
though he was misled during his first
term for the core of project 2025 is
actually the transition project aimed at
recruiting and training staffers in the
event of a republican Victory and
working to get the administrative State
five criticism of the administrative
state by the Heritage Foundation in all
fairness does hold weight and this is
something which does need reform six
while a consequence of gutting the
administrative state would be a more
effective executive this does not reach
anything on the scale of an American
dictatorship likely bringing executive
power back to what it had been around
the late 1800s and early 1900s but not
nearing the peak it had reached under
FDR seven organizations and groups
aligned with the Democratic party have
incentive to demonize project 2025 as
something much worse than it actually is
when in reality it is nearly identical
to much of what those organizations do
for the Democratic party already from
drafting a policy blueprints overseeing
Transitions and recruiting staffers to
ensure a more effective Administration
altogether I don't think project 2025 is
the terrifying and authoritarian plan
many people have made it out to be and
while I doubt Trump is going to do
anything with the Mandate for leadership
if he wins I do think it's good that one
of the overlaps between his agenda and
the agenda Heritage put forward
reforming the administrative state in
one way or another has remained a key
part of his platform as government
inefficiency has been a massive issue
plaguing the US for years and being able
to have a government actually
representative of the country and
interested in pushing the policy that
people vote for should be fundamental to
how our system works but those are just
my thoughts let me know what you think
in the comments below like the video If
you enjoyed it and subscribe for more Mr
Mr Z out
関連動画をさらに表示
Project 2025: The New Fascist Playbook
Project 2025: The Radical Conservative Plan to Reshape America Under Trump | WSJ
What is Project 2025? | what you should probably know about it
Project 2025: The Guardian Reports | FFRF’s Ask An Atheist
L'eurodeputato Danti: "C'è bisogno degli Stati Uniti d'Europa, non di tornare alle piccole patrie"
Undercover in Project 2025
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)