I was recently watching and listening to some of the old 9/11 footage and I know a lot of people still believe that our own government couldn't possibly be behind something so horrific… but look at how many people were sent to die in WWl, WW2, Vietnam, the two nukes dropped on citizens, the genocides… they're desperate to gain even more control right now. I don't believe Ivana just feel down those stairs. Epstein was his best friend for how long? You saw how he reacted when asked how he was doing after Charlie Kirk was killed. You really think he wouldn't sacrifice all of our military generals and Hegseth for a false flag?
I know this sounds insane, "it's just a pep talk" or however they worded it, but read just the basic outline for the military streamlining and tell me you support giving POTUS even more power. He cuts and fires and replaces them with more loyal people.
I'll post the rest in the comments.
Posted by Financial_Result8040
3 Comments
“Provisions to increase presidential control
Project 2025 and its associated “Mandate for Leadership” propose several key changes related to executive authority over the military:
Political alignment of military command: It suggests that a new administration should review and approve promotions for senior general and flag officers to ensure their political alignment.
Purging non-partisan officials: The plan advocates replacing non-partisan career national security and intelligence officials with appointees loyal to the president.
Domestic deployment of armed forces: The agenda calls for granting the president the authority to deploy the U.S. armed forces for domestic law enforcement, potentially through invoking the Insurrection Act. This has been compared to former President Donald Trump’s past deployment of the National Guard for domestic events.
Changes to military policy, not cuts
Instead of cutting the military, Project 2025 proposes significant changes to military policy, such as:
A “unilateral militarism” approach: Critics from the Center for American Progress argue the plan favors “unilateral militarism” over a comprehensive and holistic national security strategy.
Decreased focus on alliances: The plan advocates pulling back U.S. military forces from Europe and changing the U.S. commitment to NATO, a move that critics say would weaken alliances and embolden adversaries like Russia.
Focus on China and domestic issues: The plan recommends a reallocation of military priorities, including using special operations forces to counter China’s Belt and Road Initiative and shifting some resources toward border protection operations.
Changes to military personnel policies: Recommendations include reinstating service members discharged for not receiving the COVID-19 vaccine, abolishing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) offices, and reversing the policy that covers travel costs for troops seeking abortion care.
Criticism and context
Critics have voiced strong concerns about the military and national security proposals in Project 2025:
Undermining national security: The Center for American Progress warns that the proposals would undermine national and economic security by politicizing military leadership and intelligence agencies.
Damaging alliances: By weakening ties with NATO, critics argue the plan would harm global stability and benefit U.S. adversaries.
Risk of nuclear war: The document’s recommendation to expand the U.S. nuclear arsenal, while downplaying arms control, is criticized for increasing the risk of nuclear conflict.
Distance from Trump: While former President Trump has distanced himself from Project 2025, his administration has recently nominated several architects and supporters of the project to key positions. ”
I do have it downloaded so I’ll try to find the exact page and wording.
Do we know the names of the few generals who were exempted from this meeting? That might give some clues.
It’s a tarp!