The right-wing policy operation that became a rallying cry for Democrats and a nuisance for Republican nominee Donald Trump is trying to escape the public spotlight and repair relations with Trump’s campaign.

Project 2025, a collaboration led by the Heritage Foundation among more than 110 conservative groups to develop a movement consensus blueprint for the next Republican administration, is winding down its policy operations, and its director, former Trump administration personnel official Paul Dans, is departing. The Heritage Foundation also recently distributed new talking points encouraging participants to emphasize that the project does not speak for Trump.

The former president has repeatedly distanced himself from Project 2025 after relentless attacks from Democrats using some of the 900-page playbook’s more aggressive proposals to impute them to Trump’s agenda since many of the proposals were written by alumni of Trump’s White House. While some participants in the project started avoiding interviews and public appearances, Trump advisers grew furious that Heritage leaders continued promoting the project and feeding critical news coverage.

Trump senior adviser Susie Wiles repeatedly called Heritage leaders instructing them to stop promoting Project 2025. She and Trump strategist Chris LaCivita repeatedly wrote public statements disavowing the project, and then Trump started saying so in his own social media posts. More recently, LaCivita has started saying that people involved in the project would be barred from a second Trump administration.

“President Trump’s campaign has been very clear for over a year that Project 2025 had nothing to do with the campaign, did not speak for the campaign, and should not be associated with the campaign or the President in any way,” Wiles and LaCivita said in a joint statement Tuesday. “Reports of Project 2025’s demise would be greatly welcomed and should serve as notice to anyone or any group trying to misrepresent their influence with President Trump and his campaign — it will not end well for you.”

Some Project 2025 participants have responded by doubting a ban could be enforced when contributors include close Trump advisers such as former White House speechwriter Stephen Miller, former acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement Tom Homan, and former White House economic adviser Peter Navarro. Miller has denied his involvement in Project 2025, but his America First Legal group is a participating organization, and his deputy, Gene Hamilton, wrote the playbook’s chapter on the Department of Justice.

Many of the plan’s proposals overlap with official pronouncements from Trump’s campaign.

Both Trump and Project 2025 have proposed eliminating the Department of Education and reversing President Biden’s student loan relief program. Both have said they want to reintroduce a policy change to weaken tenure protections for career civil servants and tighten White House supervision of the Justice Department and other agencies. Both have proposed large-scale immigration raids and repealing temporary protections for migrants from unsafe countries. Both proposed ending affirmative action and rolling back Biden administration environmental regulations.

At least some Heritage employees are considering leaving the organization because they do not want to alienate a future Trump administration and hurt their future job prospects, according to a current employee, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to detail internal dynamics. While Heritage President Kevin Roberts has told people privately that the storm will blow over, employees have texted and messaged one another with dismay about the Trump campaign’s continued attacks on the organization.

“We are extremely grateful for [Dans’s] and everyone’s work on Project 2025 and dedication to saving America,” Roberts said in a statement. “Our collective efforts to build a personnel apparatus for policymakers of all levels — federal, state, and local — will continue.”

Roberts will take over direct supervision of the project. Earlier in the presidential primary, Roberts was perceived as closer to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. His relationship with Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) fueled new attempts by Democrats to tie Trump to the project since he chose Vance as his running mate.

Heritage Foundation employees had raised money on Project 2025 and touted its work to donors and activists, even after Trump administration officials complained. Members of Project 2025 continued to meet as recently as this month, preparing for the next administration. Many of the participants were hoping for jobs in the Trump administration. One current employee at the Heritage Foundation said there had been requests from people to get their names taken off the work.

Some donors have also expressed concerns about how angry the campaign seems about the project, the current employee said. Others agree that the controversy will pass.

Vice President Harris’s campaign manager, Julie Chavez Rodriguez, said Democrats will not stop talking about Project 2025.

“Hiding the 920-page blueprint from the American people doesn’t make it less real — in fact, it should make voters more concerned about what else Trump and his allies are hiding,” she said in a statement. “Project 2025 is on the ballot because Donald Trump is on the ballot. This is his agenda, written by his allies, for Donald Trump to inflict on our country.”

Project 2025 published its playbook in 2023, and it always planned to wind down the policy program and hand off recommendations to the official presidential transition when it starts this summer. Another arm of the project, a personnel database of more than 20,000 applicants for potential political appointments should Trump be reelected, will remain in operation, people familiar with the matter said. Trump has not established a transition, even though it is almost August. Should he win the presidency, his administration would have to immediately fill thousands of political jobs. Trump has told advisers in the past he did not want a transition because he was superstitious and had not won yet.

In a departing message to staff Monday, Dans lamented attacks on the project’s work as a “disinformation campaign” that aims to “falsely associate Former President Trump with the Project.” Dans ended by quoting Trump’s words after he survived an assassination attempt on July 13, which quickly became a MAGA movement mantra: “Fight! Fight! Fight!”

Dans did not respond to requests for comment.

Democrats routinely use Project 2025 and Trump’s plans for a second term interchangeably. Left-wing discussion of the project surged in June as the Biden campaign and surrogates started focusing on proposals in Project 2025 to portray Trump as extreme. While some project contributors took pride in being vilified by Democrats and in news coverage, they grew concerned when they started feeling the pressure coming from Trump.

Other areas of divergence have caused headaches for the Trump campaign. In particular, Project 2025 proposes restricting access to abortion medication and blocking shipments through the mail. Trump has said he opposes a federal abortion ban.

In another recent message to participants, communications adviser Mary Vought advised them to respond to questions about the project saying it is not partisan and not affiliated with any candidate. “If asked during a media interview, you can use these points to pivot,” she wrote.

The talking points included: “While President Trump and Project 2025 see eye-to-eye on many issues, President Trump alone sets his agenda. Project 2025 does not speak for President Trump or his campaign in any capacity.”

Welcome to The Campaign Moment, your guide to the biggest developments in a 2024 election that’s increasingly all about vibes — and vetting the VP picks.

(Make sure you are subscribed to this newsletter here. You can also hear my analysis weekly on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.)

The big moment

It’s getting to be crunchtime for Vice President Harris’s choice of a running mate.

The pick is due by Aug. 7, when the Democratic Party aims to formally nominate its ticket, solidifying Harris’s elevation to the top slot after President Biden’s exit from the contest. But we just got word that Harris is planning to tour the battlegrounds with the pick next week, which suggests it could come before the deadline.

Meanwhile, we’re seeing the candidates wage what’s basically a sprint of a campaign for the job — a remarkable scene in itself. They’ve done events for her both virtually and on the campaign trail, they’ve blanketed the airwaves with media appearances, and many of them seem to be making the case as much for themselves as for Harris.

That sprint of a campaign — along with two candidates indicating Monday that they’re not the pick — has crystallized the choice for Harris. So I thought it a good time to update my previous handicapping based on the latest.

The momentum candidate: Walz

Nobody’s stock has risen over the past week as much as Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D), who was previously thought to be something of a dark horse for the job. Walz has pushed himself into the conversation with a barrage of media appearances in which he’s played up his rural roots and everyman appeal. Perhaps nobody has “campaigned” for the job quite as much as he has.

But subtly, perhaps the best argument for Walz is how he’s seeded the biggest emerging Democratic talking point: that the GOP ticket is “weird.” Walz almost seemed to stumble upon it a week ago, but it quickly took hold.

The other messenger candidate: Buttigieg

To the extent this VP pick is about taking the fight to Republicans, Walz has some real competition for that mantle: from Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who has also been all over the airwaves.

And while Walz is the hot new thing, Buttigieg has been doing this kind of thing for years — even going on Fox News to joust with its hosts. An appearance this past Sunday in which Buttigieg declined to accept the Fox host’s premises has been shared far and wide on the left.

The swing-state picks: Shapiro and Kelly

While those two candidates might be the insurgents, two potential swing-state-focused picks thought to be leading contenders from the start still loom large — particularly, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) and Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.).

Shapiro has been touring his home state in a potential preview of what he could provide the Harris campaign in a crucial state. And a Fox News poll this weekend reinforced the asset he could be. Shapiro’s favorable rating in Pennsylvania was 61 percent — compared to just 32 percent unfavorable — and more than 3 in 10 Donald Trump supporters liked him. He even led Trump by 10 points in a hypothetical matchup as the party’s nominee.

Kelly has been quieter than these other candidates, and he maintains a lower profile. But an ABC News/Ipsos poll this week showed him with the best net image rating of any of the potential picks.

The anti-Vance: Beshear

While other candidates have gone after JD Vance — Walz’s “weird” comments have keyed on Vance — Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear (D) has focused his pitch extensively on the GOP vice-presidential pick. He’s called Vance a “phony” who has “exploited” and exaggerated his ties to eastern Kentucky and Appalachia. He’s even said he would be eager to debate Vance. That’s a pretty eager (and arguably presumptuous) statement.

To the extent the name of the game is to create a contrast in running mates, Beshear has positioned himself as that.

The others

Two major candidates thought to be in the mix signaled Monday that we should look elsewhere. North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper (D) said that he’s pulling out of consideration, while Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) said she’s “not a part of the vetting” — after previously suggesting that she wouldn’t take the job.

Others who have been mentioned but haven’t been as out front include Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker and Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo.

Another key moment

The presidential race is suddenly blocking out the political sun. But federal and state primaries are kicking back into gear after a sleepy month of July. And we start with a big one Tuesday in Arizona.

The Washington Post’s Amy B Wang has your primer for that state’s primaries. A couple big storylines to watch:

• It’s long been assumed that former gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake would win the GOP nomination for Senate, and that still appears likely — especially after Lake got some late help from Trump. But the most recent polling suggests that Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb has narrowed the gap somewhat, as some fret that Lake can’t win a general election. (Democratic Rep. Ruben Gallego has regularly led in head-to-head matchups with Lake). If Lake doesn’t win big, expect some more fretting.
• One of the ugliest and most contentious Republican primaries in recent history culminates tonight in the 8th Congressional District. It features a pair of statewide candidates who lost alongside Lake in 2022 — former Senate nominee Blake Masters and former attorney general nominee Abe Hamadeh — along with state House Speaker Ben Toma and former congressman Trent Franks. Masters has not-subtly pointed to Hamadeh’s heritage and lack of a family, while Hamadeh has played up his “testosterone” and accused Masters of “having a mental breakdown.” Trump previously endorsed Hamadeh but hedged his bets over the weekend by also endorsing Masters (something he’s done before, by endorsing “Eric” in a 2022 Senate primary featuring more than one Eric.)

A momentous number

8 percent

That’s the percentage of voters in a recent New York Times/Siena College poll who were so-called “double-haters” — or who disliked both of the two major-party presidential candidates.

That number is way down from where it’s been for much of the 2024 election cycle; it’s generally hovered around 20 percent. The number has declined given how much better voters like Harris than President Biden, but it’s also declined in part because of improved views of Trump. (Multiple recent high-quality polls show around 47 or 48 percent of voters like Trump.)

That renders this group less pivotal for the race ahead, at least for now. But we shouldn’t rule out the possibility that both Harris and Trump are enjoying a bit of a temporary honeymoon — Harris after replacing Biden, and Trump after the assassination attempt and the recent Republican National Convention.

The good news for Harris: Recent polling suggests she does better with these double-haters than Biden was doing. A Fox News poll in Wisconsin showed her winning them by 25 points, after such voters were split in the poll back in April.

Take a moment to read:

• “Rising from Biden’s shadow, Harris faces crucial test on foreign policy” (Washington Post)
• “‘White Dudes for Harris’ — including The Dude himself — raise over $4M” (Washington Post)
• “Vance tells donors Harris change was a ‘sucker punch,’ at odds with campaign” (Washington Post)
• “Trump, with a history of sexist attacks, again faces a female opponent” (Washington Post)
• “Kamala Harris’s image bump, by the numbers” (Washington Post)
• “With Dueling Ads, Harris and Trump Both Try to Define Her as a Candidate” (New York Times)

An update: Project 2025 just announced that it was going to stop creating policies, and that its director, a former Trump administration official, was leaving, The Washington Post’s Isaac Arnsdorf and Josh Dawsey report. Trump campaign, they report, is “furious” at the way Project 2025 has linked itself to Trump and how it has been received in the media. It’s not clear what that means for the initial 900-page plan, nor what it would mean for a second Trump presidency, since many of the ideas in Project 2025 are ideas Trump has endorsed and were put forward by close advisers or people who worked in his administration.

If Donald Trump struggled somewhat in his first administration to move the country dramatically to the right, he’ll be ready to go in a second term.

That’s the aim behind Project 2025, a comprehensive plan by former and likely future leaders of a Trump administration to remake America in a conservative mold while dramatically expanding presidential power and allowing Trump to use it to go after his critics.

The plan is gaining attention just as Trump is trying to moderate his stated positions to win the election, so he’s criticized some of what’s in it as “absolutely ridiculous and abysmal” and insisted that neither he nor his campaign had anything to do with Project 2025.

Still, what’s in this document is a pretty good indicator of what a second Trump presidency could look like. Here’s what Project 2025 is and how it could reshape America.

It’s a blueprint for a second Trump administration

The centerpiece is a 900-page plan that calls for extreme policies on nearly every aspect of Americans’ lives, from mass deportations, to politicizing the federal government in a way that would give Trump control over the Justice Department, to cutting entire federal agencies, to infusing Christian nationalism into every facet of government policy by calling for a ban on pornography and promoting policies that encourage “marriage, work, motherhood, fatherhood, and nuclear families.”

This isn’t coming directly from the Trump campaign. But it should be taken seriously because of the people who wrote it, analysts say. The main organization behind the plan, the Heritage Foundation, is a revolving door for Trump officials (and Heritage is a sponsor of the Republican National Convention, which will hand him the nomination next week).

“This is meant as an organized statement of the Trumpist, conservative movement, both on policy and personnel, and politics,” said William Galston, head of governance studies at the Brookings Institution.

Project 2025 calls for abortion limits, slashing climate change and LGBTQ health care funding, and much more

A few of the highlights:

Remake the federal workforce to be political: Instead of nonpartisan civil servants implementing policies on everything from health to education and climate, the executive branch would be filled with Trump loyalists. “It is necessary to ensure that departments and agencies have robust cadres of political staff,” the plan says. That means nearly every decision federal agencies make could advance a political agenda — as in whether to spend money on constituencies that lean Democratic. The project calls for cutting LGBTQ health programs, for example.

Cut the Education Department: Project 2025 would make extensive changes to public schooling, cutting longtime low-income and early education federal programs like Head Start, for example, and even the entire Education Department. “Federal education policy should be limited and, ultimately, the federal Department of Education should be eliminated,” the plan reads.

Give Trump power to investigate his opponents: Project 2025 would move the Justice Department, and all of its law enforcement arms like the FBI, directly under presidential control. It calls for a “top-to-bottom overhaul” of the FBI and for the administration to go over its investigations with a fine-toothed comb to nix any the president doesn’t like. This would dramatically weaken the independence of federal law enforcement agencies. “There’s going to be an all-out assault on the Department of Justice and the FBI,” said Galston, of Brookings. “It will mean tight White House control of the DOJ and FBI.”

Make reproductive care, particularly abortion pills, harder to get: It doesn’t specifically call for a national abortion ban, but abortion is one of the most-discussed topics in the plan, with proposals throughout encouraging the next president “to lead the nation in restoring a culture of life in America again.” It would do this by prosecuting anyone mailing abortion pills (“Abortion pills pose the single greatest threat to unborn children in a post-Roe world,” the plan says). It would raise the threat of criminalizing those who provide abortion care by using the government to track miscarriage, stillbirths and abortions, and make it harder to get emergency contraceptive care covered by insurance. It would also end federal government protections for members of the military and their families to get abortion care.

Crack down on even legal immigration: It would create a new “border patrol and immigration agency” to resurrect Trump’s border wall, build camps to detain children and families at the border, and send out the military to deport millions of people who are already in the country illegally (including dreamers) — a deportation effort so big that it could put a major dent in the U.S. economy. “Illegal immigration should be ended, not mitigated; the border sealed, not reprioritized,” the plan says.

Slash climate change protections: Project 2025 calls for getting rid of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which forecasts weather and tracks climate change, describing it as “one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry.” It would increase Arctic drilling and shutter the Environmental Protection Agency’s climate change departments, all while making it easier to up fossil fuel production.

Ban transgender people from the military and consider reinstating the draft: “Gender dysphoria is incompatible with the demands of military service,” it reads. The author of this part of the plan led the Defense Department at the end of Trump’s presidency, and he told The Washington Post that the government should seriously consider mandatory military service.

How all of this would be implemented

A huge part of this project is to recruit and train people on how to pull the levers of government or read the law in novel ways to carry out these dramatic changes to federal policy. There’s even a place on the plan’s website where you can submit your résumé.

But there are some major hurdles to getting the big stuff done, even if Trump and Republicans win control of Washington next year. For one, Trump doesn’t appear to agree with everything in it. His campaign platform barely mentions abortion, while Project 2025 zeroes in on it repeatedly.

Also, some of these ideas are impractical or possibly illegal. Analysts are divided about whether Trump can politicize the civil workforce to fire them at will, for example. And the plan calls for using the military to carry out mass deportations on a historic scale, which could be constitutionally iffy.

Ominously, one of the project’s leaders opened the door to political violence to will all of this into being: “We are in the process of the second American revolution,” Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts warned recently, “which will remain bloodless, if the left allows it to be.”

Why Project 2025 is getting so much attention right now

It’s not unusual for wannabe administration officials to plan for how they’d govern once they get back in power. But what is unusual is how dramatic and unapologetically extreme many of these proposals are.

And the Biden campaign — which is obviously struggling right now with existential questions about its nominee — sees this as an easy target to campaign on.

Democrats are circulating a survey from a liberal organization that suggests talking about Project 2025 as a “takeover” of American government by Trumpists resonates with voters.

“It’s like reading a horror novel,” said Democratic strategist Jesse Ferguson. “Each page makes you want to read the next one, but when you finish reading it, you’re scared and disgusted.”

That’s much to the frustration of the Trump campaign, which doesn’t want such specific (and politically unpopular) ideas out there pegged to his campaign, as he’s trying to moderate some of his positions to win the election.

“It makes no sense to put all the crazy things you’ll be attacked for down on paper while you’re running,” a Trump adviser told The Washington Post recently.

But it’s fair to think of Project 2025 as a pretty good indicator of what a second Trump presidency would look like, analysts say.

“It’s not like Trump is going to hand out this booklet to his Cabinet on Day One and say, ‘Here you go,’” said Michael Strain, the director of economic policy studies at the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute. “But it reflects real goals of important people in Trump’s community.”

Anita Dunn, a top adviser to President Biden and architect of his 2020 campaign, will leave the White House next week to advise the largest super PAC supporting Vice President Harris.

The decision, which has long been discussed as a possibility inside Biden’s inner circle, marks the first major exit from Biden’s core team since he decided to step aside from the presidential campaign and endorse Harris.

“She’s tough and tested, and her experience and intellect have helped us deliver historic results for the American people,” Biden said in a statement Tuesday about Dunn. “I deeply value her counsel and friendship and I will continue to rely on her partnership and insights as we finish the job over the next six months.”

Dunn will be a senior adviser to the independent group Future Forward, which has committed at least $300 million to support Harris, and an adviser to its partner organization Future Forward USA Action. Dunn will work on super PAC efforts that can coordinate with the Harris campaign, meaning she will not be able to consult on independent ad placement or message strategy, say people familiar with the arrangement.

“I am grateful to President Biden and Vice President Harris for their leadership and giving me the opportunity to be part of what they have accomplished for the American people,” Dunn said in a statement.

She helped structure the ecosystem of outside groups for Biden during 2021 and 2022, and worked closely with the groups last year, when legal restrictions on coordination were less strict. She does not plan to join a consulting firm, and would work as an independent consultant. Future Forward President Chauncey McLean said in a statement that the group was “thrilled” to have her rejoining the effort.

Dunn worked in the White House for Biden on two temporary assignments starting in January 2021, before divesting from her consulting firm SKDK in 2022 to work full time as a senior adviser to the president. She worked with the Center for American Progress on a project that developed the “ultra MAGA” communications strategy that Democrats, including Biden, adopted before the 2022 midterms.

Since then, she has overseen the White House communications operation, managed the policy rollouts and advised Biden’s 2024 campaign as it set up operations and began planning for next month’s convention in Chicago.

She was previously a part of the inner circle that advised Biden when he considered and decided against a presidential campaign in 2015. She then took on a central role in the 2020 campaign, serving briefly as an interim campaign manager after Biden’s fourth-place finish in the Iowa caucuses. Campaign aides credit her with the Nevada and South Carolina strategy that allowed Biden to win the nomination, despite embarrassing defeats earlier in the process.

Previously she served as a top adviser to Barack Obama’s 2008 and 2012 campaigns, including a brief stint as White House communications director during Obama’s first term. She advised former senator Bill Bradley (D-N.J.) when he ran for president in 2000 against Vice President Al Gore. She first worked in the White House for President Jimmy Carter in 1978, where she got to answer phones in the chief of staff office after cuts to the full-time staff.

Her husband, former White House counsel Bob Bauer, is Biden’s personal attorney.

“The President and the entire team turn to Anita for her always insightful counsel, decisiveness, and unparalleled experience every single day,” White House chief of staff Jeff Zients said in a statement Tuesday. Harris’s chief of staff, Lorraine Voles, praised Dunn as “a valued colleague to me and so many others,” while White House Deputy Chief of Staff Bruce Reed called her “a clutch hitter.” Minyon Moore, chair of the Democratic convention, described Dunn as “the person who can get things done and get you answers.”

News of her departure led to an outpouring of other tributes from those who have worked with her or been mentored by her over the past decade, including White House spokesman Andrew Bates, who called her “unfailingly supportive.” Dozens of Democratic operatives credit Dunn with jump-starting and guiding their careers.

“She’s been a great mentor to me and scores of communicators across the administration,” White House communications director Ben LaBolt said in a statement.

At the White House, her chief of staff, Jordan Finkelstein, created an email distribution list, called WWBakedGoodAlert, to inform staff when Dunn brought in freshly baked goods to share. She baked blackberry lemon cake Tuesday morning, said one person familiar with her cooking schedule, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.

“She is so confident and fearless in what she does,” said T.J. Ducklo, a communications adviser to the Harris campaign, who worked for Dunn in the Biden White House and on his 2020 campaign. “When she gives you an assignment and says, ‘You are going to do this, and I know you can,’ it makes you feel like you can.”

U.S. forces carried out an airstrike in Iraq on Tuesday night, targeting unspecified “combatants” attempting to launch a one-way attack drone, officials said.

The incident followed attacks on American positions in Iraq and Syria in recent days, officials said, ending what had been months of relative calm between U.S. forces and militias there that are supported by Iran.

U.S. officials said the airstrike happened in Musayib, a town south of Baghdad, but disclosed few other details. A defense official said in a brief statement that “based on recent attacks in Iraq and Syria,” U.S. military officials assessed that the activity constituted a threat to American and coalition forces. Like some others, this official spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the operation.

“This action underscores the United States’ commitment to the safety and security of our personnel,” the statement said. “We maintain the inherent right to self-defense and will not hesitate to take appropriate action.”

A second defense official said the airstrike followed three attacks on U.S. forces in recent days. On Thursday, two rockets targeted al-Asad Air Base in Iraq and another struck on or near a U.S. outpost in Syria, the official said. The following day, two additional rockets targeted the facility in Syria, Mission Support Site Euphrates. No damage or injuries were reported in any of those incidents, the official said.

U.S. officials have long feared that Israel’s war in Gaza could spill over into other parts of the Middle East, where Iran enjoys considerable influence.

Tuesday’s airstrike, reported earlier by Reuters, follows a spike in violence between Israel and Hezbollah, a powerful Iranian-backed group in Lebanon.

Earlier in the day, Israel carried out an airstrike in a busy neighborhood on the outskirts of Beirut, saying it had killed a senior Hezbollah commander responsible for an attack Saturday that killed 12 children in the Israeli-controlled Golan Heights. The Lebanese Health Ministry said the attack killed a woman and two children. Hezbollah denied it was responsible for the weekend attack.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, speaking to reporters after meeting with officials in the Philippines on Tuesday, expressed hope for a diplomatic resolution to avoid a full-blown conflict but said the United States will defend Israel if it is attacked by Hezbollah. “We’ve been clear about that,” he said.

In the weeks after Hamas-led militants launched a deadly cross-border attack into Israel on Oct. 7, spawning the ongoing war in Gaza, other militant groups backed by Iran started attacking U.S. military positions in Iraq, Syria and Jordan, linking their violence to Washington’s support for Israel. The militias in Iraq and Syria, along with the Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Hamas in Gaza, are all part of the same network and are provided weapons and training by Iran, U.S. officials have said.

In February, after at least 165 attacks on U.S. forces, the Biden administration approved airstrikes in response to, and to avenge, the deaths of three U.S. soldiers killed in a one-way drone strike on their base in Jordan.

Tuesday’s airstrike in Iraq occurred as U.S. and Iraqi officials negotiate a possible withdrawal of at least some of the approximately 2,500 U.S. troops in Iraq. An additional 900 troops are based in Syria, with a mission to counter the Islamic State, and are reliant on personnel in Iraq for logistical help.

In June, Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona was the only Senate Democrat to stand alongside President Biden as he announced a new executive order aimed at cracking down on asylum seekers.

“I’m happy to be here today, and what I hope is that we will have a safer situation and operational control over our southern border,” Kelly told reporters outside the White House that day.

Kelly’s eagerness to associate himself with a tough border measure just weeks ago is now suddenly seen as his greatest asset as he vies to become Kamala Harris’s running mate in a transformed presidential race against Donald Trump following President Biden’s sudden exit from the contest. The two-term senator and former NASA astronaut is fluent in and brings some credibility to what’s perceived as Harris’s weakest issue as a candidate: security of America’s southern border.

“When it comes down to it, [Kelly] has a record that can really protect against a withering, brutal assault on the border on her that’s going to be coming,” said political operative Mike Madrid, who worked on GOP campaigns in California and later co-founded the anti-Trump Lincoln Project. “You can’t lose by 35 points on the border to Trump and win Pennsylvania, Wisconsin or Michigan.”

Trump is already going on offense against Harris on immigration — his first ad targeting the likely Democratic nominee focused on her record on immigration and called her “dangerously liberal.” Harris has received an onslaught of criticism for her role, assigned by Biden, seeking to combat the root causes of migration to the United States from Central America, with Republicans calling her Biden’s “border czar.” Illegal border crossings have soared during Biden’s presidency, though they dropped sharply in recent weeks because of the shift in administration policy.

Some hope that Kelly, who declined an interview request through a spokesman, can help inoculate Harris on an issue that Trump is certain to make a linchpin of his reelection campaign.

Amanda Renteria, a top aide to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, said choosing Kelly would “broaden” the Democratic ticket by diversifying the experience on it. Kelly is a former U.S. Navy pilot who flew combat missions in the Gulf War, and he would represent a stylistic departure from Harris. “It shows her choice to bring on people that are different from her,” Renteria said. “It’s a huge contrast to Donald Trump and JD Vance.”

While many of Kelly’s Democratic colleagues railed against Trump’s desire to build a wall on the southern border and criticized him from the left on immigration during his presidency, Kelly has sounded an entirely different note. He pushed the Biden administration to help close gaps in the border wall in the Yuma, Ariz., sector in 2021, and in 2022 criticized Biden’s decision to lift a pandemic-era policy allowing officials to turn away asylum seekers as “dumb.”

Kelly has not spearheaded meaningful legislation on immigration during his short time in the Senate, but he was a vocal proponent of the bipartisan border deal that ultimately failed in February amid Republican opposition. He has built deep relationships with border officials, law enforcement and migrant rights activists in Arizona, giving him a rare fluency on the issue, according to observers. Even some officials who criticize Harris for what they see as a lack of concern about border communities praise Kelly for supporting increased border resources.

But Kelly has weaknesses of his own as a vice-presidential pick. Biden and Harris have underperformed in Arizona vs. Trump so far, casting doubt on whether Kelly could deliver a swing state. He also only has four years of political experience, none of it executive, and some union leaders have raised concerns that he is not sufficiently pro-labor.

So far, Kelly has been less present on the campaign trail and cable TV than some of the other vice-presidential contenders, including Gov. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania, who co-headlined a Harris event Monday in Ambler, Pa.

Since his name was floated, packs of reporters have trailed Kelly around the Capitol and given him the opportunity to audition for the traditional veep attack dog role — even as he declines to say whether he wants the job. Instead, Kelly has shifted the focus to Trump’s own running mate, Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio), whom he called “backward” for his opposition to supporting Ukraine in its fight against Russia.

“I think it’s one of the most important issues that we’re going to face here in a generation and what happens in Ukraine is going to affect us in our national security,” Kelly said last week.

Kelly is slated to appear on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on Wednesday morning ahead of Vance’s swing through Arizona, which will take him to Glendale and later the border.

Kelly and Harris have spoken since Biden announced he was stepping aside, according to a person with knowledge of the phone call who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly. Harris is slated to pick her running mate before Aug. 7, when the Democratic Party will nominate its presidential ticket using a virtual process.

“Vice President Harris has directed her team to begin the process of vetting potential running mates,” a Harris campaign spokesperson said. “That process has begun in earnest and we do not expect to have additional updates until the vice president announces who will be serving as her running mate.”

Kelly’s wife, former congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), appeared in Grand Rapids, Mich., for Harris on Monday. After suffering a near-fatal gunshot wound in 2011, Giffords became a leading activist against gun violence, with Kelly co-founding a national gun-control group that carries his wife’s name.

While not known as a particularly energizing public speaker, Kelly has been in high demand as a surrogate for other Democrats this campaign cycle, including Harris before she was elevated to the top of the ticket. Several of his Senate colleagues are eager to be seen with him.

“She is, without a doubt, one of the best, most bipartisan senators in the United States Senate,” Kelly said while appearing at a rally for Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) in June.

He’s a prolific fundraiser and is battle-tested after winning two fiercely contested Senate races by margins of roughly two to five percentage points, first during a special election in 2020 and then in 2022, when he secured a full six-year term. Republicans threw a mountain of opposition research at him both times, trying to cast suspicion on his transformation from Giffords’s husband to a wealthy politician with business ties to China. Kelly won both times and had — until recently — been enjoying the freedom of not running for reelection, he has told colleagues.

In the Senate, the Arizona Democrat has focused on national security issues; he serves on both the Intelligence and the Armed Services committees. He was also a part of the negotiations that resulted in the bipartisan Chips and Science Act, which boosted manufacturing of semiconductors in the United States to counter China’s influence.

Kelly also bluntly clashed with Sen. Tommy Tuberville (Ala.) when the Republican held up military promotions over objections to allowing service members to be reimbursed for travel related to abortions, saying it didn’t make “sense” that Tuberville, who is not a veteran, insisted he was the most “military” person on the Armed Services Committee.

But it is Kelly’s style on immigration that some Democrats think would make him a unique asset to the presidential ticket.

Much like Arizona’s other senator, Kyrsten Sinema, an independent, Kelly long has distanced himself from Democrats’ handling of border security. During his 2020 campaign, Kelly frequently told supporters that more border security and resources were necessary to aid towns dealing with a flood of asylum seekers. He noted that the debate over undocumented immigration and resources in Arizona had been going on for decades — through Democratic and Republican administrations alike.

“When Democrats are wrong, like on the border, I call them out on it, because I’m always going to stick up for Arizona,” Kelly said during a 2022 campaign debate.

Despite speaking differently than many Democrats on the border, Kelly’s legislative record is slim on the issue given Washington has been virtually deadlocked on it. Sinema, a former immigration lawyer and veteran dealmaker, has often taken the lead on Washington’s border efforts, including the failed bipartisan compromise to crack down on border crossings. Kelly supported the deal but was not deeply involved in crafting it.

Additionally, Kelly co-sponsored legislation aimed at helping border officials combat fentanyl trafficking that became law earlier this year, and helped pass a measure with Sinema aimed at boosting agents who patrol tribal lands for drug smugglers.

Kelly slammed his Republican colleagues for voting against the compromise after Trump opposed it, calling it a “shameful” day for the Senate. “This isn’t just a political talking point for me or my state. It’s a reality we live every single day,” he said.

It’s that sort of blunt assessment of Washington’s attitude toward the issue that could carry broad appeal in both Rust Belt and Sun Belt states, said Adam Kinsey, an Arizona Democratic consultant.

“He understands how [the border] operates, how it works, he understands the challenges, the pressure points based on who he represents,” Kinsey said. “It’s more real, more visceral for him than it is for a senator who isn’t on the border.”

Republicans are skeptical Kelly can boost Harris on the border. “Regardless of how much they try to say she was not the czar, she was clearly leading point on this issue,” said Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.). “I don’t think on that particular policy issue that she can get away from it.”

Back home in Arizona, Kelly has built a powerful political brand in the swing state, where he performed well with Latino voters in his 2022 race, a key constituency for Harris as she plots a path to victory in 2024. Sixty-eight percent of Latinos backed his candidacy, according to an analysis by the progressive-voter-file company Catalist. That was higher than the 63 percent of Arizona Latino voters who backed Biden-Harris in 2020.

“In 2022, he beat every statewide [candidate] on the ticket by several points,” said Catalist adviser Haris Aqeel, referring to his performance with all voters.

Kelly, who lives about an hour north of the border in Tucson, has cultivated a reputation for accessibility on border issues, and is well known among border officials. He often flies himself around border communities in the vast desert state to both get in pilot hours and visit his constituents and elected officials. He stresses the need for more resources and better enforcement while also speaking about the need for comprehensive immigration reform to provide a path to citizenship for some undocumented immigrants.

“He’s well educated, well versed on the topic,” said Yavapai County Sheriff David Rhodes, a Republican. “He’s been a good conduit of information and he is approachable — he does get back to us.”

Rhodes contrasted that with Harris.

“We haven’t heard a single word from Vice President Harris,” Rhodes said, referencing the diplomatic role Biden gave her to address the root causes of migration from Central America. “I don’t know exactly what she was told to do, but we have not seen or heard from her on the border in Arizona.”

Tyler Pager contributed to this report.

ATLANTA — Vice President Harris, the likely Democratic presidential nominee, held a raucous rally here Tuesday night and challenged Republican Donald Trump to debate her, as both the Harris and Trump campaigns are refocusing attention on this pivotal Southern state amid a political map that could be reshaped by newfound Democratic energy.

Trump and his running mate, Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio), will appear at a rally in the same venue Saturday, the Trump campaign said, marking two dueling rallies in a state increasingly at play. President Biden, who narrowly captured Georgia in 2020, had been considered by many Democrats a long shot to win it again, but that calculus could change if Harris can energize the state’s voters.

“I am very clear: The path to the White House runs right through this state,” Harris said. “You all helped us win in 2020, and we’re going to do it again in 2024.”

In a sign of the shifting landscape, the organizers of Project 2025, which was intended as a blueprint for an incoming Trump administration but has become a rallying cry for Democrats, announced it was ending its policy work. Democrats have seized on Project 2025 in an effort to tie Trump to policy proposals such as eliminating the Education Department and limiting access to abortion pills, while the Trump campaign has sought to distance itself from the document.

In a new interview, Trump also suggested that Harris cannot hold her own with world leaders.

“They’ll walk all over her. She’ll be so easy for them. She’ll be like a play toy,” Trump said in an interview with Laura Ingraham of Fox News. “They’re going to walk all over her. And I don’t want to say as to why, but a lot of people understand it.”

Harris is planning a tour of battleground states next week with her soon-to-be-named running mate, according to a campaign official, with plans to stop in Philadelphia; Detroit; Raleigh, N.C.; Savannah, Ga.; Phoenix; Las Vegas; and western Wisconsin. Her campaign has signaled that she would announce her vice-presidential pick by Aug. 7, though her choice could be unveiled sooner.

“Not yet,” she said, when asked as she boarded Air Force Two to fly to Atlanta if she had chosen her running mate.

Ahead of Harris’s rally, crowds snaked around the Georgia State Convocation Center for hours, with sweaty attendees moving at a snail’s pace in the 90-degree heat — a scene that until recently was more familiar at Trump’s rallies. The Harris campaign ultimately announced a crowd count of 10,000 people.

It was the campaign’s largest rally to date, boisterous and energetic in ways the Democratic Party has arguably not seen for years. If not for the “Harris for President” signs everywhere, the convention hall could have been mistaken for a concert venue. The crowd did the wave. Chalie Boy, Frankie Beverly and Maze, and Beyoncé thumped from the speakers. Attendees “dougied,” a hip-hop dance. The event featured Georgia’s most prominent politicians as well as rappers Quavo and Megan Thee Stallion.

Where Biden often quotes Irish poets in his speeches, Harris quoted Quavo in hers.

She mentioned Trump’s name often, a dozen times or more, but never mentioned Biden, even as she brought up many of the policy aims of the Biden-Harris administration. She chastised Trump for urging Republicans to vote against a bipartisan immigration package this year and vowed to pass it if she is elected.

“He tanked — tanked — the bipartisan deal because he thought it would help him win an election,” Harris said, “which goes to show, Donald Trump does not care about border security. He only cares about himself.”

She mocked his policy positions — called him and his running mate “just plain weird” — and mocked him for not fully committing to a debate. “Donald, I do hope you’ll reconsider, to meet me on the debate stage,” she said. “Because as the saying goes, ‘If you’ve got something to say, say it to my face.’”

Recent days have seen a remarkable shift in the dynamics of the 2024 presidential campaign, since Biden announced July 21 he was ending his bid for reelection and endorsing Harris as his replacement. Few states reflect that change more than Georgia.

Biden narrowly won the state in 2020, becoming the first Democrat to do so since Bill Clinton in 1992, while Democrats Jon Ossoff and Raphael G. Warnock secured the state’s two U.S. Senate seats.

But as the 2024 campaign ramped up, many Democrats privately admitted they saw Georgia as a lost cause, especially after Biden’s dismal debate performance June 27. Harris has reoriented the campaign, and Democrats hope she can motivate young, non-White and college-educated voters, notably in the Atlanta area, and close the gap with Trump.

As both sides recalibrated to adjust to the new landscape, Anita Dunn, a top adviser in Biden’s White House and architect of his 2020 campaign, announced she would leave the White House next week to advise Future Forward, the largest super PAC supporting Harris.

Harris’s campaign unveiled its first television ad Tuesday in what it said would be a $50 million buy in battleground states ahead of the Democratic National Convention on Aug. 19-22. The new ad — which will run during coverage of the Olympics, as well as popular shows such as “The Bachelorette,” “Big Brother” and “The Simpsons” — begins by flashing images of Harris from childhood to adulthood before focusing on her track record in public office.

“As a prosecutor, she put murderers and abusers behind bars,” a narrator says. “As California’s attorney general, she went after the big banks and won $20 billion for homeowners.”

The ad also includes a clip from a campaign rally in Milwaukee in which Harris says, “This campaign is about who we fight for.”

The Trump campaign’s first television ad of the general election, also released Tuesday, attacks Harris as an evasive, weak and distracted leader who did not protect the U.S.-Mexico border from drug trafficking, increased migrant crossings and a possible terrorism threat during the Biden administration.

“Kamala Harris. Failed. Weak. Dangerously liberal,” the ad concludes.

The Trump campaign made a two-week, $12 million purchase Monday of broadcast, cable and digital airtime across Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, Arizona, Nevada and Wisconsin, according to the tracking firm AdImpact.

Equally notable were the continued efforts to distance Trump from Project 2025. The Heritage Foundation, which organized the project, said it was winding down its policy operations — a move that came after Trump senior adviser Susie Wiles repeatedly urged Heritage leaders to stop promoting Project 2025 and Trump strategist Chris LaCivita repeatedly disavowed it.

“President Trump’s campaign has been very clear for over a year that Project 2025 had nothing to do with the campaign, did not speak for the campaign, and should not be associated with the campaign or the President in any way,” Wiles and LaCivita said in a joint statement Tuesday. “Reports of Project 2025’s demise would be greatly welcomed and should serve as notice to anyone or any group trying to misrepresent their influence with President Trump and his campaign — it will not end well for you.”

But Democrats noted that many of the contributors to Project 2025 were former high-ranking Trump officials and that the effort was explicitly intended to pave the way for the next Republican administration. Harris campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez said Democrats will not stop talking about Project 2025.

“Hiding the 920-page blueprint from the American people doesn’t make it less real — in fact, it should make voters more concerned about what else Trump and his allies are hiding,” Chavez Rodriguez said in a statement. “Project 2025 is on the ballot because Donald Trump is on the ballot. This is his agenda, written by his allies, for Donald Trump to inflict on our country.”

While Harris’s running mate has yet to be named, Vance is on a Western swing this week, fundraising in California and hosting rallies in battleground states Nevada and Arizona.

During remarks at a high school gymnasium in Henderson, Nev., Vance on Tuesday made several references to Trump “taking a bullet” for his country, referring to an attempted assassination this month. During his rally speech, Vance drew parallels to his own time in the Marines. Several supporters wore hats that said “Bulletproof Trump 2024.”

“Do you want a president who is disloyal to this country? Or do you want one who is willing to take a bullet for it?” Vance asked.

He also called Harris “dangerously liberal” and referred to the quick coalescing of support from Democrats as a “coup.”

“The media … for years has said the Republicans are a threat to democracy,” Vance said, referring to attempts by Trump and his allies to overturn the results of the 2020 election. “They’re calling it a coronation [of Harris]. I’ve got a different word for it: I call it a coup.”

Supporters at the rally insisted that Vance’s comments about the societal value of women without children — whom he described as “childless cat ladies” — have been taken out of context by the media and Democrats.

Lisa Cassel, 55, said Harris likely becoming Democratic nominee has only increased her support for the Trump-Vance ticket. “So many of her positions are so radical. I’m just not ready for her yet. That’s not the America I live in,” Cassel said.

Sam Brown, the Republican Senate candidate in Nevada, who took the stage before Vance, gave his full endorsement of Trump’s new running mate before turning to attack Harris.

“We’ve all been impacted by her failed leadership on the border, we’ve all been failed by the policy on our economy,” Brown said. “We’ve all been impacted by their failed policy on energy.”

Ahead of Vance’s first campaign visit to Nevada, the local Harris campaign hosted reproductive rights advocates on Monday, attacking Trump’s position that abortion laws should be left up to individual states.

“Leaving it to the states means you support the worst and the most restrictive of all the laws that have been passed,” said Rep. Dina Titus (Nev.), who alongside fellow Democrat state Assemblywoman Sandra Jauregui introduced herself as “childless cat lady.”

“I’m here to tell JD Vance, we don’t want you in Nevada,” Titus told reporters.

Abbie Cheeseman, Tyler Pager, Michael Scherer, Josh Dawsey and Isaac Arnsdorf contributed to this report.

Vice President Harris is the only candidate who has qualified for the virtual roll call vote to officially select the Democratic presidential nominee.

Electronic voting for the nearly 4,000 Democratic delegates will begin Thursday at 9 a.m. and end Monday at 6 p.m. Harris needs 1,976 votes to secure the nomination and is expected to far surpass that number.

The Democratic National Committee said 3,923 delegates petitioned to put Harris on the ballot for the nomination. No other candidate met the threshold of securing 300 delegate signatures.

Harris is also expected to announce a running mate soon, and when she does the party will declare them the official ticket that will appear on ballots.

Parties traditionally nominate their presidential ticket at a convention, but Democrats chose to hold an earlier vote, citing concerns over ballot access deadlines in some states and an overly litigious Republican Party that could challenge them if they were missed. The Democratic National Convention will be held in Chicago from Aug. 19 to 22.

Election experts have said there’s no evidence to suggest states wouldn’t have worked with the party to ensure their candidates appeared on the ballots.

Fred Trump III kept silent for years about his uncle, former president Donald Trump. And when his sister, Mary L. Trump, wrote a 2020 bestseller calling their uncle “the world’s most dangerous man,” he called the book “a breach of trust and a violation of our privacy,” adding that “We consider our family matters to be private.”

Yet Tuesday marked the release of Fred Trump III’s own book, in which he does an about-face to take on his uncle and recount a deeply dysfunctional extended family.

The turning point, Fred Trump III said, was an Oval Office conversation about his son William, who has physical and mental disabilities, in which the president said about people with disabilities, “The shape they’re in, all the expenses, maybe those kinds of people should just die.”

That was the last time he talked with his uncle, Fred Trump III said in an interview Tuesday with The Washington Post, setting him on the path to write “All in the Family: The Trumps and How We Got This Way.” He said he planned to vote for the likely Democratic nominee, Vice President Harris, and that, if asked, he would campaign against his uncle and speak at the Democratic National Convention.

“I have stayed quiet for a very long time,” said the 61-year-old Fred Trump III. “I’m one of the only people that knows Donald from his formative years to his business career to the White House.”

With that background, he said, he set out to write “a three-dimensional book. It’s the good, the bad and the jaw-dropping.”

Former president Trump, in a statement to The Post, said he had helped Fred Trump III, contributed to a fund to help William Trump, and also introduced Fred Trump III to government officials from the National Institutes of Health and elsewhere who might be helpful.

“I helped him so much, more than anyone else in his life, and this is the thanks I get. I even set up [a] meeting with NIH and top doctors in the country talking about his son, who is disabled,” Donald Trump said in the statement. He said that Mary Trump “convinced him to do this.”

But Fred Trump III said that he has not talked to Mary since her book published. She could not be reached for comment.

Donald Trump and his spokesman did not respond directly to a question about Fred Trump III’s assertion about his comments regarding disabled people.

Fred Trump III said the book is, by design, a nuanced and somewhat gentler view than his sister’s volume. He recounts the many disputes within the family but saved the toughest comments about Donald Trump and his views on people with disabilities until the final pages. That episode fits his conclusion that Donald Trump has an innate lack of empathy.

The backstory to both Mary and Fred Trump III’s books is Donald Trump’s relationship with their father — his older brother — Fred “Freddie” Trump Jr., who died in 1981 of an alcoholism-related illness at age 42.

Donald Trump, who rarely admits mistakes, told The Post in 2019 that he regrets having tried to press his brother to abandon his work as a TWA pilot and join the family company, telling Fred Jr. “you’re wasting your time.” Donald Trump said in The Post interview that “I do regret having put pressure on him.”

Fred Trump III, asked in the interview whether he blames Donald Trump’s pressure for contributing to his father’s struggles, responded, “Yes, I do,” saying that “my father became an airline pilot flying a 707. You know, in those days, pilots were sort of heroes along with the astronauts.” Instead of accepting his brother’s decision, “Donald continued to beat down my father. And that’s unfortunate,” Fred Trump III said.

When the family patriarch, Fred Trump Sr., died in 1999, years after being diagnosed with dementia, Fred Trump III and his sister, Mary Trump, expected they would receive a portion of the estate that would have gone to their father.

Instead, after Fred Trump III and Mary Trump were told that they would be getting far less than they expected if there had been an equal division of the estate, they sued Donald Trump and two of his siblings, alleging that they had taken advantage of Fred Trump Sr.’s dementia and gotten him to change the will.

Donald Trump and his siblings denied the allegation and responded by cutting off family medical insurance that was crucial for the care of Fred Trump III’s son. Donald Trump said at the time to the New York Daily News, “When [Fred Trump III] sued us, we said, ‘Why should give him medical care?’”

The feud escalated as Fred Trump III said in a court case that Donald Trump and his siblings “thought nothing about taking away my critically ill son’s coverage in an attempt to browbeat me in to abandoning my claim in the probate contest.”

Fred Trump III and his sister, Mary, eventually settled their suit under a confidentiality agreement.

With the publication of Mary’s book, “Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created The World’s Most Dangerous Man,” the first public crack appeared among the Trumps, but no one else in the family joined her criticism. She based her book in part on secret tape recordings of her aunt Maryanne Trump Barry, first reported in 2020 by The Post, in which Donald Trump’s sister said her brother has “no principles” and that “you can’t trust him.”

Fred Trump III, who often visited Barry, wrote in his book that she told him in 2016 that she was writing an op-ed urging people to vote against Donald Trump, but the opinion piece was never published for reasons that are not known. Fred Trump III recalled seeing Barry writing the op-ed on a yellow legal pad and that it said “he’s just not fit to be president.” Barry died in 2023.

Fred Trump III said in the interview that, to this day, he has not read his sister’s book.

While the relationship between Mary and Fred Trump III frayed, he stayed in regular touch with Donald Trump after his 2016 election, visiting him about a dozen times at the Oval Office, he said in the interview, despite differing politics. Fred Trump III said he voted for Democrats Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020 — but refrained from publicly speaking out against his uncle.

He said that Donald Trump voluntarily and regularly contributed an undisclosed amount to a fund to help pay for his son’s medical expenses.

Donald Trump, meanwhile, said in his 2019 interview with The Post that his dispute with Fred Trump III was in the past. “One child was having a difficult time,” Donald Trump said of William. “It was an unfortunate thing. It worked out well, and we all get along.”

But the rapprochement between the former president and his nephew collapsed with Tuesday’s publication of Fred Trump III’s book.

Fred Trump III said that he hopes the book will spark a national conversation about helping families of those with disabilities, including the difficulty of caring for adult children. William is now 25 years old, lives in a group home and is doing relatively well medically, Fred Trump III said, but “we’re still struggle every day” to care for him.

To this day, Donald Trump has never met William, according to Fred Trump III. He believes that is due to a view that anyone “below him” is not a worthy person “unless he needs their vote.”