Project 2025 Contributors Are Abandoning Ship as Trump Turns Against Them
Former President Donald Trump has been actively distancing himself from Project 2025, a controversial 900-page manifesto that has received criticism from various quarters. In response to the Trump campaign’s warning to the Heritage Foundation and other leaders of Project 2025, some former Trump administration officials who contributed to the manifesto have started removing their names and affiliations from the project.
The Intercept recently discovered that Project 2025 made changes to its list of individual contributors, removing two names entirely and modifying two others to eliminate their employment affiliations with prominent firms. This move comes after conservative organizations quietly exited the Project 2025 advisory board, including some that were heavily involved in drafting the playbook.
One of the individuals who disappeared from the Project 2025 list is David Moore, the dean of Brigham Young University Law School. Moore, who previously served in the Trump administration, was listed as a contributor as recently as July 16, but his name was no longer there on July 17. Moore, who did not respond to questions, became the dean in June 2023, two months after the release of the Project 2025 playbook.
Another former Trump official whose name vanished from the Project 2025 list is attorney Sohan Dasgupta. Dasgupta, who served as special counsel to the Department of Education and deputy general counsel for the Department of Homeland Security, was listed as a contributor along with his affiliation with the law firm Taft Stettinius & Hollister. However, his name and affiliation disappeared from the list by July 28. Dasgupta did not provide any answers regarding his involvement in Project 2025.
Two other individuals remain listed as Project 2025 contributors, but their entries were recently modified to remove their employers. Earl Comstock, an attorney who served as a senior adviser in the Trump Department of Commerce, is now senior policy counsel at the law firm White & Case in Washington, D.C. Initially, Comstock’s name appeared along with his employer, but the firm’s name was removed from the list. A spokesperson for White & Case clarified that the firm is not affiliated with Project 2025 and that Comstock contributed to the project as a private citizen.
The final modification on Project 2025’s contributor list was made for Joel Frushone, who served as a spokesperson for the Peace Corps and U.S. Economic Development Administration during the Trump years. Frushone was initially credited as a Project 2025 contributor along with his current employer, Ernst & Young. However, by July 3, only his name remained on the list. Frushone declined to speak with The Intercept, and Ernst & Young did not respond to inquiries.
The removal of names and affiliations from the Project 2025 contributor list raises questions about the level of support and endorsement the project has from former Trump administration officials. The changes made to the list suggest that individuals associated with the project may be concerned about potential repercussions from the Trump campaign. The campaign spokesperson’s reported threat to blacklist other Project 2025 affiliates from posts in the Trump administration further underscores the pressure faced by those involved.
It is worth noting that the Project 2025 contributors list currently includes over 250 names, and a disclaimer on the list acknowledges that there is no unanimity among the contributors or the organizations they are affiliated with regarding the recommendations put forth in the playbook. This implies that the views and proposals presented in Project 2025 do not represent a comprehensive catalog of conservative ideas for the next President.
As the controversy surrounding Project 2025 continues to unfold, it remains to be seen how the project will be impacted by the withdrawal of contributors and the Trump campaign’s disassociation. The removal of names and affiliations raises questions about the credibility and support behind the manifesto, and it remains to be seen whether Project 2025 will be able to maintain its influence and relevance in the face of these challenges.
