politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
This is not speculation. Project 2025, through its 900-page Mandate for Leadership, lays out a framework for using the U.S. military and other federal forces inside the country against its own people. It starts by calling the federal government “a behemoth, weaponized against American citizens and conservative values” (Foreword, p. xv). From that claim, it argues the next president must “re-forge” the Department of Defense and other agencies to “serve the president” directly (p. 171). That wording removes the wall that separates civilian governance from military command.
Project 2025 proposes that all senior military promotions be reviewed by the White House to ensure loyalty to presidential priorities. That recommendation appears in the section on the Department of Defense (Mandate for Leadership, cited in People’s Guide p. 46-47) where it directs the president to “review all general and flag officer promotions.” Once that happens, the military becomes an arm of political enforcement rather than national defense.
It also outlines the use of federal and possibly military resources to “arrest, detain, and remove immigration violators anywhere in the United States.” That line appears in multiple summaries of the Mandate (People’s Guide p. 3, 41-47). It does not limit that power to the border. It explicitly authorizes “arrest operations anywhere in the United States.” That is domestic deployment by definition.
The Mandate treats the Department of Defense as a political tool, demanding a purge of leadership that resists “social engineering” and replacing them with those who share the president’s “values” (People’s Guide p. 46, citing Mandate pp. 80-81, 213, 524). It also revives Executive Order 13957, also known as Schedule F, to remove non-partisan officials and replace them with “policy-advocating” loyalists (p. 43-44). That structure would put every major department, including Defense, under direct presidential command with no institutional buffer.
Once power is concentrated in this way, the same troops and officers sworn to defend the nation can be ordered to suppress dissent, occupy cities, or enforce political will under executive authority.
In short, Project 2025 is the first open plan in modern American history to outline the conditions under which the military could be used against citizens. It replaces the principle of civilian control with the principle of presidential control. Anyone who reads The People’s Guide to Project 2025, pages 3, 43-47, 80-81, 171, 213, 524, and the Foreword p. xv, will see that it does not prepare for national defense. It prepares for internal enforcement.