SHARE
SHARE
Project 2025 is a 920-page plan spearheaded by the powerful and extreme far-right Heritage Foundation. More than 100 organizations support this blueprint for autocracy. Their stated goal is to create an “ideal” America that would see women, LGBTQ+ people, immigrants, people of color, and others deprived of their hard-won constitutional rights and the erosion of environmental and education protections. It also advocates for a frightening centralization of power in the executive branch. Rooted in hate and Christian Nationalism, the plan promises to “rescue the country.” Read GPAHE’s full analysis of Project 2025 and the groups behind it.
GPAHE tracks the activities of those behind Project 2025, and their plans for an authoritarian and Christian Nationalist America, no matter who is president, and the groups in this extremist movement are relentlessly implementing initiatives at local, state, and federal levels.
This week we look at how Stephen Miller of America First Legal has disassociated from Project 2025, a new documentary focusing on victims of Project 2025 supporter TPUSA’s “Professor Watchlist,” a secretive Christian Nationalist funding network backing Project 2025, and the devastating impact Project 2025 would inflict on veterans.
Stephen Miller’s Project 2025 Exit: A Shift in Conservative Strategy?
In a move that has sent shockwaves through conservative circles, Stephen Miller, the controversial former Trump advisor and immigration hardliner, has announced his departure from Project 2025, ABC News reported on July 12, 2024. This unexpected exit marks a significant shift in the landscape of right-wing policy planning and raises questions about the future direction of the influential initiative.
Project 2025, launched by the Heritage Foundation and which listed Miller’s America First Legal Foundation as a supporter and advisory board member, has been widely regarded as a blueprint for the next conservative administration. It outlines sweeping changes to federal agencies and policies, reflecting Miller’s hardline stances on immigration, education, and cultural issues.
Miller’s departure comes at a critical juncture, as the plan receives a significant amount of mainstream media attention. His exit has sparked speculation about potential disagreements within the project’s leadership or a possible strategic realignment in response to changing political winds.
Sources close to the matter suggest that Miller’s uncompromising positions may have clashed with efforts to broaden the project’s appeal, ABC News reported. While his hard-right views on immigration and cultural issues have energized the base, they have also been a lightning rod for criticism from moderates and independents.
For his part, Miller has remained characteristically tight-lipped about the reasons behind his exit. In a brief statement, he reaffirmed his commitment to “America First” principles but gave no indication of his future plans or any potential rifts with Project 2025 leadership.
Miller’s absence will undoubtedly be felt. His influence on immigration policy, anti-DEI lawsuits, and his skill at crafting politically potent messaging have been central to the project’s identity.
Republican National Committee chair Michael Whatley also distanced his party from the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, according to Spectrum News, despite the fact that the Heritage Foundation sponsored the Republican National Convention, holding a “Policy Fest” event at the convention as well as hosting a social event.
“We have absolutely nothing to do with Project 2025. That project is a complete standalone entity,” Whatley said in an interview on July 15, 2024. “There may or may not be some good ideas in there, but right now, we’re focused on our platform, which we adopted at the RNC and is going to be taken up by the convention.”
As the dust settles on this surprising development, one thing is clear: the conservative movement is at a crossroads. Miller’s exit from Project 2025 may signal a new chapter in right-wing strategy — one that could have far-reaching implications for the future of American politics.
Ziklag: Funding Project 2025 and the Christian Nationalist Network
In the shadows of American politics, a powerful alliance is forming between wealthy Christian donors and conservative think tanks, united by a shared vision of reshaping the nation according to their interpretation of Christian values.
At the center of this movement are two key players: Ziklag, a secretive charity with deep pockets, and Project 2025. Together, they represent the vanguard of a new wave of Christian Nationalism that aims to fundamentally transform American government and society, a report by ProPublica reveals.
Ziklag, named after a biblical city that served as a refuge for King David, has emerged as a formidable force in conservative circles. As Documented reported in 2023, Ziklag’s own documents describe it as a “private, confidential, invitation-only community of high-net-worth families” who have enjoyed “success in business,” have at least $25 million, and are “influencers within our society.”
With annual revenues approaching $12 million and a membership roster featuring some of America’s wealthiest right-wing families, the organization, registered with the IRS as USATransform, has positioned itself as a key funder and strategist for the Christian Nationalist movement.
Their mission, according to internal documents, is to “take dominion over the Seven Mountains” of society: government, business, media, arts and entertainment, education, family, and religion.
This vision aligns closely with the goals of Project 2025, which seeks to prepare a conservative administration to quickly take control of the executive branch. Both initiatives draw from the same well of Christian Nationalist ideology, which rejects the notion of separation of church and state and argues that America should be governed according to biblical principles.
The connections between Ziklag and Project 2025 run deep, with overlapping networks of supporters and allied organizations. For instance, Ziklag has provided significant funding to the Conservative Partnership Institute, which in turn supports various “election integrity” efforts. The Conservative Partnership Institute is also deeply involved in Project 2025, contributing policy recommendations and potential personnel for a future conservative administration.
Similarly, Ziklag’s plans to mobilize conservative pastors for voter outreach will coordinate with groups like Project 2025 supporter Turning Point USA and the Faith and Freedom Coalition. These organizations are also expected to play key roles in implementing Project 2025’s vision should a sympathetic administration take power.
In the realm of education, both Ziklag and Project 2025 advocate for dramatically reducing federal involvement and expanding school choice programs. Ziklag’s education chair has stated that their goal “is to take down the education system as we know it today,” a sentiment echoed in Project 2025’s proposals for the Department of Education.
The legal world represents another area of significant overlap. Ziklag has been a major funder of the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), the Christian legal group that led the overturning of Roe v. Wade. As Documented reported in 2023, Ziklag worked with the ADF as far back as 2021 on a proposal aimed to create a Parent’s Rights Legal Team within ADF, a Project 2025 advisory board member.
This would be made up of approximately 5 lawyers and support. The approximate budget would be $2,000,000 to $3,000,000 for an 18-month to three-year effort. 18 months to three years is the estimated time for the cases to work their way to the Supreme Court. The first four to six cases could be in the trial courts by the fall of 2021,” the strategy proposal states.
“The goal would be to secure a ruling from the Supreme Court that declares the public school’s method of mandating a narrow and particular thought and belief system (CRT, LGBTQ, BLM) is unconstitutional. Since every educational model must be based upon a particular belief system, the remedy is to allow choice of schools by allowing the money to follow the student.”
Project 2025 shares the goal of dismantling the Department of Education, and also places heavy emphasis on reshaping the federal judiciary and Department of Justice to advance a conservative legal agenda.
For the 2024 election, Ziklag has outlined an ambitious strategy that includes funding “election integrity” groups, mobilizing church-based voters, and galvanizing conservatives around issues like “parental rights.” These efforts dovetail with Project 2025’s focus on preparing for a potential conservative administration, creating a two-pronged approach to securing and wielding power.
One particularly controversial aspect of Ziklag’s plan involves investing in AI-powered tools to challenge voter eligibility in key swing states. While not directly part of Project 2025, this initiative aligns with broader conservative efforts to tighten voting rules and scrutinize voter rolls, which feature prominently in Project 2025’s recommendations for the Department of Justice and state-level reforms.
The influence of Christian Nationalist ideology is evident throughout both Ziklag and Project 2025’s materials. Both frame their efforts in terms of a spiritual battle against secular forces they view as hostile to Christian values. This apocalyptic worldview helps explain the urgency and scope of their plans, which extend far beyond typical policy proposals to envision a fundamental remaking of American society.
As the 2024 election approaches, the combined influence of groups like Ziklag and initiatives like Project 2025 is likely to play a significant role in shaping the conservative agenda. Their vision of reshaping American government and society along Christian Nationalist lines represents a dramatic departure from long-standing principles of pluralism and separation of church and state.
What’s clear is that a well-funded, highly organized network of Christian Nationalist groups and allied organizations is positioning itself to exert unprecedented influence over the direction of American politics and society. Whether through Ziklag’s donor network, Project 2025’s policy blueprints, or the myriad conservative think tanks and advocacy groups in their orbit, this movement is prepared to reshape government from the inside out should conservatives gain power.
Surviving Turning Point USA: Victims of TPUSA Harassment Speak Out in New Documentary
Warning: this report includes graphic and violent language
Filmmaker and professor Kevin Parkinson’s new documentary Surviving Turning Point USA exposes the dark underbelly of the conservative organization and ardent Project 2025 supporter’s controversial Professor Watchlist. Through intimate interviews and disturbing revelations, Parkinson brings to light the stories of educators who have faced threats, harassment, and professional ruin after being targeted by this initiative. Parkinson himself was placed on the watchlist in January 2024.
The documentary delves into the experiences of professors like Ken Storey, who lost his job at the University of Tampa after a tweet about Hurricane Harvey was amplified by Turning Point USA. Storey reveals the horrifying aftermath, including graphic death threats he received:
“Hey, Ken, you big pussy. Yeah. You think they deserve that in Texas? Well, I think you deserve to die, motherfucker. I hope somebody beats you to goddamn death.”
Parkinson’s film exposes how the watchlist has become a tool for harassment and intimidation. Dr. Wendy Moore describes it as a “dog whistle designed to silence us, to make us fearful and quiet,” highlighting how the initiative puts “the whole of education on trial.”
The documentary features several professors who share their harrowing experiences of being targeted. One educator received this chilling threat:
“I’ll beat you with a fucking ball peen hammer until you fucking die, and then I’ll beat your fucking wife and your goddamn family to death, you fucking bitch.”
Through these personal stories, Surviving Turning Point USA paints a disturbing picture of the watchlist’s impact on academic freedom and the lives of educators. Dr. Charles Strozier, a historian and psychotherapist, draws parallels to historical attempts to stifle intellectual freedom, noting that such lists create “an atmosphere of fear that is really outrageous.”
The film also explores the broader implications of the watchlist, including its chilling effect on academic discourse. Many professors report self-censoring or avoiding certain topics altogether, fearing they might become the next target. This climate of fear, the documentary argues, undermines the very purpose of higher education.
Parkinson’s work doesn’t shy away from the violent rhetoric often directed at listed professors. The film includes disturbing voicemails received by targeted educators, such as:
“But after I’ve killed your whole family, I’m gonna rape their dead bodies in front of you. Then you going to fucking watch motherfucker,” a voicemail message blares. “Because when I find you, I’m gonna kill you and your whole goddamn family, bitch, grandchildren included.”
Surviving Turning Point USA also examines the methodology behind the watchlist, revealing how professors’ words are often taken out of context or misrepresented. Dr. Robert Thurston, for instance, found himself labeled as a “Stalin defender” based on a nuanced academic analysis of Soviet history.
The documentary goes beyond just exposing threats, exploring the psychological toll on targeted professors. Many report ongoing mental health challenges, with some leaving academia altogether. Storey admits, “To this day, I go to counseling and am on antidepressants, and I am surviving day to day.”
Parkinson’s film also highlights the physical dangers faced by some professors. It recounts an incident at Arizona State University where a professor was confronted and assaulted by individuals associated with Turning Point USA, bringing online threats into the real world.
While the documentary presents a damning case against the Professor Watchlist, it also showcases the resilience of educators fighting back. Many are speaking out about their experiences and calling for greater protections for academic freedom. Others, like Dr. Tanya Hernandez, emphasize that their work aims to create “equality for everyone” rather than promote a partisan agenda.
As the documentary prepares for release on YouTube on Saturday, July 20 (a video from its soundtrack is out now), it promises to ignite important conversations about the role of organizations like Turning Point USA in shaping public discourse and the future of academic freedom in America. Through the powerful stories of its subjects, Parkinson’s film stands as a testament to the courage of educators who continue to pursue truth and knowledge in the face of intimidation and threats.
Project 2025: A Controversial Blueprint for Veterans’ Benefits Reform
The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 shows little regard for our nation’s veterans. The Christian Nationalist Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise outlines sweeping changes to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), aiming to slash federal spending and increase privatization, the Center for Media and Democracy reports.
Project 2025 has sent shockwaves through the veterans’ community with its drastic proposals to slash benefits and privatize services. This 920-page document includes a particularly alarming chapter on reforming the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) that critics argue would devastate support for those who have served our country.
Authored by Brooks D. Tucker, former chief of staff for Trump’s second VA secretary Robert Wilkie, with assistance from Darin Selnick, a known advocate for dismantling the VA, the chapter outlines a series of severe cuts that would significantly undermine the support system for veterans. These proposals have been met with widespread condemnation from veterans’ advocates and policy experts, the Center for Media and Democracy and Raw Story wrote in separate reports on July 3rd and 4th, respectively.
One of the most egregious suggestions is the elimination of concurrent eligibility for both service-related disability benefits and military retirement benefits. This change alone would strip veterans of at least $160 billion through 2032, effectively punishing those who have sacrificed the most for their country. The plan also calls for revising disability rating awards, a move that would likely result in reduced benefits for many veterans struggling with service-related health issues.
Further compounding the assault on veterans’ welfare, the blueprint proposes ending VA medical care enrollment for veterans in two low-priority groups, potentially leaving thousands without access to essential healthcare. Additionally, the plan seeks to narrow eligibility for veterans’ disability by excluding disabilities not directly related to military service, potentially denying crucial support to $37.6 billion worth of claims over the same period.
The Project 2025 blueprint also advocates for a dangerous shift in healthcare delivery, proposing an expansion of Community Based Outpatient Clinics (CBOC) at the expense of maintaining or upgrading existing VA healthcare campuses. This move threatens to fragment care, potentially compromising the quality and continuity of services for veterans with complex health needs.
Privatization, a recurring theme in the proposal, extends to the Department of Defense’s TRICARE system. While Tucker claims this would provide higher quality care and save $60 billion, critics argue it would likely result in reduced coverage and increased out-of-pocket costs for military families. The suggestion to require married service members to share housing allowances and document their housing expenditures is seen as an unnecessary intrusion into military families’ financial affairs.
These proposed changes would not only significantly reduce the quality and accessibility of care for veterans but also break the sacred promise made to those who have served our nation. The Project 2025 blueprint represents a fundamental betrayal of our obligations to veterans, prioritizing cost-cutting over the well-being of those who have sacrificed so much for our country.
Moreover, the broader agenda outlined in Project 2025 — including slashing federal spending, gutting regulatory oversight, and staffing the government with political loyalists — raises serious concerns about the potential politicization of veteran care and the erosion of essential support systems.
Project 2025 is a stark reminder of the ongoing need to protect and strengthen support for those who have served, rather than treating their hard-earned benefits as a cost to be cut.
