Project 2025 September 18th Update

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 Project 2025 supporter Charlie Kirk’s misogyny, a war on Texas librarians, Project 2025 employee John McEntee’s latest TikTok blunder, and how groups behind Project 2025 are preparing for election disruption. We’ll also hear from James Lindsay, Tony Perkins, and Kevin Roberts in their own words.

Christian Nationalist Firebrand Charlie Kirk’s Troubling Gender Views

Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA and a key figure in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 has built a following among young conservatives with his provocative rhetoric. But a speech entitled “Why Does This Country Need Strong Men?” reveals deeply concerning views about gender roles that hearken back to a less enlightened era, raising questions about the ideology that could shape future conservative policy.

In an address to supporters at a Promise Keepers’ event in Oklahoma, rebroadcast on The Charlie Kirk Show on September 15, 2024, Kirk repeatedly denigrated what he called the “feminization” of American culture, painting a stark and reductive picture of masculinity and femininity. While Kirk is careful to ask leading questions of his Christian Nationalists podcast guests, he is often unhinged when speaking to the choir, in this case consisting of fellow misogynists.

“We are seeing the destruction of American masculinity,” Kirk declared, going on to define manhood in aggressive, domineering terms. He praised subway rider Daniel Penny, who put an aggressive passenger in a fatal chokehold as embodying “what is now largely dead in this country” — namely, a willingness to respond to perceived threats with physical force.

Kirk’s vision of masculinity centers on aggression, dominance, and a rejection of compassion or compromise as feminine weakness. He mocked the idea of being considerate of others’ feelings: “Oh, I’m so afraid you’re gonna say something I’m gonna be bothered by,” he said sarcastically, adding, “I don’t really care.”

This blustering machismo was contrasted with Kirk’s disparaging view of femininity. He used “feminine” as a pejorative throughout, associating it with weakness, over-sensitivity, and blind rule-following. At one point he declared: “Toxic femininity is constantly walking around on eggshells saying, well, I don’t know if I can say this because that’s politically incorrect.”

Kirk’s retrograde gender ideology extended to relationship dynamics as well. He expressed shock at the notion of couples splitting the bill on dates, stating: “I would go into debt and knock doors and beg on the streets before I allowed my wife to pay for any date, let alone the first date.”

This insistence on rigid gender roles extended to Kirk’s view of religion, as he called for a “hot masculine gospel” to replace what he derided as a “watered down feelings, emotional based feminine gospel.”

Perhaps most troublingly, Kirk framed acceptance of transgender identities as an assault on divinely ordained gender distinctions, stating: “Everything that the modern secular project is aiming to do in this nation is to blur, confuse, and destroy the distinctions that God established in creation.”

Kirk’s speech painted a dark picture of American culture as feminized, weakened and in desperate need of restoration through reassertion of traditional masculine dominance. This worldview, beyond being reductive and scientifically baseless, is also potentially dangerous in its implications.

By valorizing aggression and physical force as quintessentially masculine traits, Kirk’s rhetoric risks encouraging violence. His denigration of empathy and compromise as feminine weakness is likewise concerning, as these traits are vital for a functioning society.

Ultimately, Kirk’s gender ideology represents a rejection of decades of social progress toward greater equality and more fluid conceptions of gender. His call for reassertion of traditional masculinity risks reinforcing harmful stereotypes and power imbalances.

In an era of evolving understanding around gender and identity, Kirk’s rigid binary conception feels not only outdated, but actively harmful. His influence among young conservatives and involvement in shaping potential future policy through Project 2025 makes his regressive views on gender particularly concerning for the future of American society at large.

The Future is Now: Project 2025 and the War on Librarians

In the quiet town of Granbury, Texas, a storm has been brewing. For two years, a local law enforcement officer methodically built a case against three school librarians, seeking to charge them with felonies for allowing children access to books he deemed obscene. This wasn’t a rogue action, but part of a broader, coordinated effort that has been gaining momentum across the country. It’s a glimpse into a future that some political actors are actively working to create – a future outlined in the controversial Project 2025.

Project 2025, a comprehensive policy blueprint backed by the Heritage Foundation, is widely expected to shape the policies of a potential conservative administration. But for those paying attention, the future envisioned by Project 2025 isn’t just a distant possibility – it’s already unfolding in communities across America, often spearheaded by grassroots conservative groups like Moms for Liberty.

The Granbury case, as reported by NBC,  Lonestar Live and the Daily Beast, is a prime example. Scott London, a Hood County chief deputy constable, led an extensive investigation into three school district librarians. According to the report, London “visited schools, spoke to district staff, issued subpoenas, obtained student records and drafted criminal complaints” — all with the intent to secure felony charges for distributing harmful material to a minor. These charges could have carried a sentence of up to 10 years in prison and fines of up to $10,000.

The books at the center of this controversy included The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison, Gone by Kathleen Jeffrie Johnson, Fade by Lisa McMann, and three books from Sarah J. Maas’ A Court of Thorns and Roses fantasy series. London labeled these works as “pornography,” despite none of them containing actual pornographic content. Many of these books deal with sexual topics, including the abuse of children in schools — subjects that, while challenging, are often considered important for young adult literature.

This aggressive stance toward education mirrors the rhetoric outlined in Project 2025. Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts explicitly targets librarians in his foreword to Project 2025’s Mandate for Leadership, arguing that “children suffer the toxic normalization of transgenderism with drag queens and pornography invading their school libraries.” He goes further, suggesting that educators and public librarians who provide certain materials “should be classed as registered sex offenders.”

While the charges in Granbury were ultimately not filed due to lack of evidence, the investigation itself had a chilling effect, with one of the targeted librarians leaving the district. This exodus of talent is precisely what critics of Project 2025 fear: a brain drain in education as qualified professionals flee an increasingly hostile environment.

The Granbury case is not an isolated incident. At least 18 states have considered bills to make it easier to prosecute librarians over contested books, with three — Missouri, Indiana and Arkansas — passing such laws. Police and sheriff’s deputies have been called to investigate library books in multiple states, including Florida and South Carolina.

Much of this push has been led by Moms for Liberty, a Project 2025 supporter that has rapidly gained influence since its founding in 2021. With reported ties to the Proud Boys, Moms for Liberty has been at the forefront of book challenges and curriculum disputes across the country. The group’s actions align closely with Project 2025’s vision for education,  which calls for a wholesale reimagining of the federal government’s role in education, advocating for the elimination of the Department of Education and a shift towards local control and “traditional” values. However, this “local control” often translates to increased scrutiny and potential criminalization of educators who don’t adhere to far right ideological standards.

It’s worth noting that London, the officer behind the Granbury investigation, has ties to extremist groups. He’s linked to the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Organization, which believes county sheriffs can nullify and ignore federal laws, and attempted to launch a local chapter of the Oath Keepers, a far-right paramilitary organization whose leaders were sentenced for seditious conspiracy for their role in the January 6 Capitol attack. While these connections don’t directly implicate Project 2025, they highlight the ideological underpinnings of some of the most aggressive implementations of these policies.

The impact of these policies extends beyond just the education sector. Project 2025 envisions sweeping changes across the federal government, from dismantling environmental protections to reshaping immigration policy. And just as with education, many of these changes are already being implemented at state and local levels.

These state-level actions serve a dual purpose. They not only advance conservative policy goals in the short term but also create a blueprint for how these policies could be implemented at the federal level. They provide real-world examples that proponents of Project 2025 can point to as evidence of the feasibility and effectiveness of their proposed changes.

These policies represent a fundamental threat to civil liberties and the principles of inclusive democracy. They promote the targeting of librarians and educators as a form of ideological policing, warning that it could lead to a narrowing of perspectives available to students and a chilling effect on free speech. The idea of imprisoning librarians for refusing to ban books, once considered extreme, has become increasingly normalized in certain political circles. 

The Trickshot Artist: Project 2025’s John McEntee’s Latest Fumble

In the ever-evolving landscape of American politics, few figures embody the fusion of social media savvy and hard-right ideology quite like John McEntee. Once known for his viral football trick shot videos, McEntee has transformed into a key player in the conservative movement, most recently making waves with a controversial video posted to TikTok and Instagram that backfired spectacularly.

McEntee, a senior advisor to Project 2025, recently posted a video challenging Vice President Kamala Harris’s assertion that women were “bleeding out in parking lots” due to abortion bans. “Can someone track down the women Kamala Harris said are bleeding out in parking lots because Roe v. Wade was overturned?” McEntee quipped, smirking as he dipped his food in a sauce. “Don’t hold your breath.”

The response was swift and overwhelming, Mother Jones reported. Thousands of women flooded the comments with harrowing personal stories of medical complications and near-death experiences resulting from restricted access to reproductive care. Carmen Broesder, a mother from Idaho, responded directly: “I’m right here.” She recounted being turned away from the ER three times during a 19-day miscarriage, ultimately blacking out from blood loss in her hallway.

This incident is just the latest chapter in McEntee’s controversial career, which has seen him rise from a campaign volunteer to a powerful figure in conservative circles. At just 34 years old, McEntee has already served as the director of the White House Presidential Personnel Office under Trump and now holds a crucial role in shaping the potential staffing of a future conservative  administration.

McEntee’s journey to the heart of conservative power is as unconventional as it is telling of the current political climate. His first brush with fame came in 2011 when, as a University of Connecticut quarterback, he produced a trick football video that went viral. This knack for attention-grabbing content would serve him well in his later political career.

In 2015, inspired by Trump’s infamous escalator speech announcing his presidential run, McEntee quit his job and volunteered for the campaign. His unwavering loyalty, rather than any particular skill set, propelled him from carrying Trump’s bags to directing the Office of Personnel.

However, McEntee’s rise was not without setbacks. In March 2018, he was fired and escorted out of the White House after a background check revealed suspiciously large bank deposits, later attributed to gambling winnings. Yet, in a testament to the value placed on personal loyalty in Trump’s orbit, McEntee was brought back in 2020 and promoted to director of the Presidential Personnel Office.

In this role, McEntee transformed the office into what some described as a loyalty enforcement arm. His team scrutinized officials across agencies for any signs of dissent, even going so far as to consider liking a Taylor Swift post as potentially disqualifying. He stocked his office with young Trump loyalists,  often inexperienced, and including Instagram influencers with no professional background.

Post-White House, McEntee has leveraged his political connections and social media acumen to further the Project 2025 agenda. He launched a conservative dating app called “The Right Stuff” in September 2022, backed by right-wing billionaire Peter Thiel. McEntee disseminates daily videos that blend snarky content with hard-right messaging through the app’s TikTok account, which boasts 2.3 million followers.

These posts often touch on controversial topics, from questioning the focus on white slave owners in historical narratives to making provocative statements about LGBTQ+ rights. While McEntee often frames these as jokes or trolling, they align closely with Project 2025’s stated goals and reflect a broader strategy of using social media to normalize extreme positions among younger people.

McEntee’s influence in shaping a potential future administration cannot be overstated. His ability to appeal to young conservatives through social media while simultaneously working to staff the highest levels of government represents a new breed of political operative — one that blends digital prowess with hard-right ideology. As the political landscape continues to evolve, figures like McEntee serve as a stark reminder of the changing face of conservative politics in America.

Anticipating Chaos or Creating It? Project 2025’s Election Integrity Gambit

Last June in Austin, Texas, a group of 60 conservative strategists and Christian Nationalists gathered to war-game scenarios that could upend the 2024 presidential election. This initiative dubbed the 2024 Transition Integrity Project (TIP 2024), has deep ties to conservative think tanks and Project 2025 — a blueprint for radically reshaping the federal government under a conservative administration.

The resulting report, “Anticipating Election Disruptions to Ensure a Safe Transition of Presidential Power,” reads like a political thriller. It envisions a landscape rife with foreign interference, domestic terrorism, and a Department of Justice run amok. Critics argue it’s less about protecting democracy and more about laying the groundwork to contest an unfavorable result.

At the helm are figures directly tied to Project 2025: Adam Ellwanger, a professor and American Conservative author; Mike Howell from the Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project; and Chuck DeVore of the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF).

The report asserts that “the incumbent is always the greatest threat to a peaceful, secure transition of power,” pointing to the Biden administration’s alleged “willingness to use executive power to create partisan advantage in elections.” It warns of DOJ interference, intelligence community bias, and foreign actors potentially ensuring a second Biden term.

To counter these perceived threats, the authors call for “unprecedented actions,” including “large, peaceful demonstrations” and involving local law enforcement in election monitoring. They stress using alternative media platforms, stating “corporate media’s immense power to simulate and influence public opinion must be aggressively confronted, contradicted, and circumvented.”

The scenarios are dramatic: Hamas-aligned terrorists taking a Jewish celebrity hostage, Iran conducting an underground nuclear test, and the DOJ arresting Trump at Mar-a-Lago. A fabricated Supreme Court decision in the appendix has the court ruling 6-3 for Trump’s release, stating, “Never in the history of the country has the incumbent administration used the power of the justice department to jail its opponent.”

It promotes involving local sheriffs in election monitoring, arguing that “more law enforcement in polling places will be a net deterrent to illegal voting practices across the country, while actual instances of violence against poll workers is almost nonexistent.”

The report’s ties to Project 2025 add complexity. This Heritage Foundation initiative aims to have a conservative government ready to take power immediately if a conservative wins the presidency, with plans for staffing and policy changes across federal agencies.

In case of a GOP Electoral College victory but popular vote loss, the report anticipates Democrats “delegitimizing the electoral procedures that have held since the beginning of our constitutional republic.” It presents states potentially refusing to submit elector slates as a threat to constitutional order, rather than a legal challenge within the existing system.

Recommendations include establishing state-level networks ready for coordinated action and urging state officials to “proactively enforce existing election laws and precedents, and to use whatever power is at their disposal to challenge, neutralize, or negate violations of procedure that might influence the outcome of the election by undemocratic or illegal means.”

Private citizens are called to “give freely of their time and talents,” with legal experts urged to draft briefs anticipating electoral abuses, and citizens encouraged to work at polls and observe ballot counting.

The report concludes: “Those committed to ensuring the American tradition of participatory government must aggressively seek out violations of law and precedent. They must also proactively fight overt and covert efforts to corrupt the process by which a new leader is chosen.”

As America approaches another high-stakes election, initiatives like TIP 2024 highlight the deep polarization in the political landscape, and the strategies outlined will likely shape the narrative around election integrity, leaving voters to question both the message and the motivations behind it.

In Their Own Words

“In Mao’s China, the process was so vicious that people would do almost anything to avoid being tagged ‘an enemy of the people.’ Thus, they were made to conform. Today, in America, you’re not called ‘an enemy of the people’ — you’re called racist, or transphobic, or homophobic, or something-phobic, and the fear of that is enough to make most people conform. This is pure Maoism.”

— Project 2025 partner PragerU’s James Lindsay in a video entitled “Is Maoism Coming  to America?” posted on September 16, 2024.

“We’re living in incredibly evil times where Satan’s schemes have been revealed with remarkable clarity for those able and willing to see. Public education, social media and entertainment have become prime tools for Satan to ensnare and destroy our children. Parents, take your God-given authority as a parent and protect your children.”

— Tony Perkins, president of the Project 2025-supporter the Family Research Council on his Washington Watch podcast on September 11, 2024.

“I’m Kevin Roberts with Project 2025, and I’m here to help, which is a way of saying, and I will answer your question, my friend, if the radical left, which has mischaracterized everything about what we’re trying to do, thinks that we’re gonna roll over, they’ve got another think coming.”

— Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts on “Tucker Carlson Live with Kevin Roberts: Saving America from the D.C. Elites,” podcast, September 10, 2024.

“We live on the cusp of this great republic being an intellectual totalitarian state. And the real weapon of power there is the administrative state.”

— Ibid.

“And the real, the real gist of the work we do at Heritage of Project 2025, which includes, I should say 111 organizations, is that we’re trying to break the power of the elites in DC and, and New York and the left coast.”

— Ibid.