Could Your Substack Post Land You on an FBI Watchlist?

How the U.S. Government is quietly redefining who counts as a terrorist and what to do about it.

September 11th, 2001, jarred a slumbering America awake to the dangers posed by violent multinational terrorist groups.

I experienced that day firsthand as a D.C. resident. Our powerful military did not protect us. Our oceans did not protect us. I witnessed the Pentagon on fire. I saw troops deployed on our streets, combat aircraft in our skies, and terrified citizens running for their lives.

That was terrorism.

To Donald Trump and his allies, terrorists aren’t those who plotted the murder of 3,000 Americans. To them, terrorists are the American Civil Liberties Union. Antifa. Black Lives Matter. It’s “the Deep State.” It’s Rachel Maddow, the Associated Press, President Biden, Robert Hur, Jim Comey, Merrick Garland, Bob Mueller, Secretary Clinton, and Vice President Harris.

The list goes on.

All of them are Americans.
All of them have no criminal charges against them.
All of them are citizens protected—at least for now—by the Constitution.

But will it stay that way?

I spent years fighting actual terrorists—foreign nationals (for the most part) who have sworn allegiance to a terrorist organization and are actively trying to kill Americans. People who knew how to do it and were committed to it. I know people disagreed with putting them in Guantanamo, but make no mistake, they were the enemy.

Undocumented immigrants are not combatants. They have no business being in Guantanamo. And yet, here we are—they’re being detained without access to courts, treated like enemy combatants.

We built a powerful intelligence apparatus to stop terrorist attacks. We monitor our enemies because they actively hide their intentions from us. And yes, people objected to our surveillance tools—wiretaps, interrogations, and satellite intelligence—but those tools are why Bin Laden is dead.

But our laws prohibit those tools from being used against American citizens.

And yet, in 2016 and 2017, the Justice Department’s Inspector General confirmed that’s exactly what happened.

For years, I followed a simple maxim in national defense:

"If our cause be just, let no one stand in our path."

Because war is awful. And if we must wage it, we must do so relentlessly—to end it as quickly as possible.

But we must never turn that vengeful force against our people.

And yet—will it stay that way?

Will we resist the temptation to turn our vast intelligence and military power against our citizens?

I fear—no, I believe—that is precisely what will happen.

If Kash Patel’s confirmation hearings didn’t scare the hell out of you—they should have.

If Trump’s executive orders on Homeland Security task forces haven’t set off alarms, you’re not paying attention.

If Kristi Noem’s cosplay of sending migrants to ‘GTMO’ didn’t make you stop and ask, "What the hell are we doing?" then you’re missing the point.

We are redefining dissent as terrorism. And if that doesn’t make the hair on the back of your neck stand up, then I don’t know what will.

In Hemingway’s The Sun Also Rises, Jake Barnes asks Mike Campbell how he went bankrupt.

Campbell replies wryly:

"Slowly at first, then all at once."

That’s how we will lose our liberty—if we’re not careful.

Let me explain.

The Moment We’re In: Why This Matters Now

Kash Patel’s confirmation hearing should have been routine—an assessment of qualifications, a policy discussion, and reaffirming the FBI’s independence. Instead, it was something else entirely.

And if you missed it, in fairness, so did I. Only after having it “percolate” a bit in my head did all of this finally “pop out” two days ago, and I went, “Oh crap!” and I finally saw it. So I watched it again, read the EO, and looked at what DHS, Treasury, DOGE, and Justice are doing. Now, all of it is starting to make more sense. I’m not trying to be conspiratorial, but it’s like seeing the puzzle pieces come together. It’s like watching a TV series all the way through, and then when you rewatch it, you see hints and clues you missed the first time. That’s how I feel rewatching Patel’s confirmation hearing.

The hearing was a window into a government preparing to redefine domestic threats—not based on criminal activity but political opposition. Dissent, not criminal malfeasance, becomes the basis for the U.S. Government to investigate you.

Throughout the hearing, Patel dodged, deflected, and refused to answer simple questions that should have been layups for an incoming FBI Director. In doing so, he revealed exactly what his tenure would look like.

It wasn’t pretty.

Given that Kristi Noem, RFK, Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, and other nominees that many believed were completely “unqualified” have been confirmed, I have to presume that Kash Patel will also be confirmed, if only by a single vote (perhaps the Vice President’s).

Oddly enough, as you will see in later sections, Bessent, Noem, and Bondi are instrumental in the overall plan to build a machine that will simultaneously serve multiple interests of vengeance. For now, let’s focus on how Patel’s nomination and his answers reveal a stunning shift from how counter-terrorism has been conducted in the past to how it could be conducted going forward.

1. The Redefinition of Terrorism

At its core, Patel’s FBI is not about law enforcement—it’s about reframing political opponents as national security threats.

Senator Coons asked Patel directly who the FBI Director works for. The answer should have been obvious: the Constitution, the American people. Instead, Patel hesitated, then said:

"The immediate report for the Director of the FBI is into the Office of the Deputy Attorney General. Then that report is taken into the office of the Attorney General and ultimately the White House and the chain of command there."

When Coons pressed him, Patel refused to say the words “The FBI Director works for the Constitution.” Instead, he defaulted to chain-of-command rhetoric—signaling that his loyalty would lie with Trump, not the rule of law.

Senator Welch pressed Patel on Trump’s recent pardons of January 6th rioters—including violent offenders who assaulted police officers. Patel’s response?

“America will be safe when we don't have 200,000 drug overdoses in two years.”

A non-answer—but a revealing one. Rather than condemn the pardons, he pivoted—downplaying the significance of domestic extremists while elevating the FBI’s role in street crime. This is a hint towards the shift.

Terrorism, under Patel, will not mean what it has traditionally meant. Instead of focusing on organizations like Al-Qaeda or ISIS, his FBI will focus inward. On dissenters. Protesters. Journalists. Opponents.

2. The Enemies List is Real

At one point, Senator Durbin held up Patel’s own book, Government Gangsters, which includes a list of 60 names he calls the “Deep State 60.” These are not criminals. They are political enemies.

That list includes:

• President Joe Biden

• Vice President Kamala Harris

• Attorney General Merrick Garland

• Former FBI Director Jim Comey

• Special Counsel Robert Hur

• Former Defense Secretary Mark Esper

• Former Attorney General Bill Barr

• Former National Security Advisor John Bolton

• Hillary Clinton

• Rachel Maddow

Democrats. Republicans. Journalists. Lawyers.

“This is someone who has left behind a trail of grievances throughout his life, lashing out at anyone who disrespects him or doesn't agree with him,” Durbin said.

In response, Patel dodged and dismissed. He refused to say he would not use the FBI to go after those people. He refused to rule out politically motivated investigations. He refused to say it would be a violation of the law to do so (which it would be).

When asked directly if he planned to investigate people like Bill Barr, Jim Comey, or Christopher Wray, he refused to answer. Instead, he hid behind procedural rhetoric:

"Every investigation will be subject to the same legal standards."

That answer means nothing.

The FBI’s director is not supposed to be a political hatchet man. He is supposed to uphold the rule of law. And yet, Patel could not even give a clear answer on whether he would leave Trump’s former enemies alone.

That silence? It speaks volumes.

3. The Selective Use of Power

While Patel refused to commit to keeping the FBI independent, he made one thing clear: He would go after the press.

During the hearing, Senator Whitehouse read Patel’s own words back to him:

“We will go out and find the conspirators, not just in government but in the media. We're going to come after you, whether it's criminally or civilly.”

Whitehouse asked if that was accurate. Patel didn’t deny it.

Instead, he tried to spin:

“That’s a partial quote.”

But the meaning was clear: he said and meant it.¹

Patel’s FBI will not be an apolitical institution. It will be an enforcement arm of a political movement that sees the press, civil rights groups, and even former government officials as threats.

4. The Slow March Toward Criminalizing Dissent

Patel refused to say Biden won the election. Patel refused to rule out going after Trump’s enemies. Patel refused to say the press should be free from government retaliation. Patel refused to clarify how he would define “domestic extremists.”

Some who support the President want “their enemies” punished, but they forget one thing: Once this machine is built, it won’t turn off. Power like this never stays in one set of hands forever. Eventually, it comes for everyone.

Because if you blur the line between political opposition and national security threats, the next step is obvious.

You start using the vast intelligence and law enforcement tools built to fight terrorism against your own people.

Slowly at first. Then all at once.

The Legal Authority to Criminalize Dissent

Kash Patel’s confirmation hearing made one thing excruciatingly clear: his FBI won’t need new laws to go after political opponents—they intend to reinterpret the ones already on the books.

(This is when I had simultaneously both an “Oh, shit!” and an “Ah. Ha!” moment—if that’s possible, intellectually.)

The legal infrastructure for suppressing dissent already exists. Laws initially designed to fight terrorism and organized crime can be turned inward—against activists, journalists, political figures, or anyone else deemed to be a threat to the national security of the United States.

Patel won’t need new legislation to turn the FBI into an enforcement arm for Trump. All that’s required is to change priorities.

1. The Patriot Act and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act: Counter Terrorism Intelligence Turned Inward

After 9/11, the Patriot Act and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) dramatically expanded the government’s ability to monitor, detain, and investigate anyone suspected of terrorism.

These laws were intended to stop white supremacist groups, mass shooters, and homegrown terror cells. But under Patel’s FBI, they won’t just be used against violent extremists—they’ll be used against whoever the government decides is ‘dangerous.’

FISA 702 Already Allows Mass Surveillance

• FISA 702 was initially designed for foreign intelligence. But as Patel himself noted during the hearing, the FBI has repeatedly used it against Americans.

• Patel admitted that the FBI illegally searched the private communications of American citizens 274,000 times.

• And yet, despite calling this an abuse of power, Patel supports reauthorizing FISA. That’s not reform—that’s a blank check to use these powers however he sees fit.

How This Can Be Turned Against Political Opposition?

• FISA can be used to justify surveillance of journalists, activists, and dissidents by claiming they have “foreign ties.” (Suppose you have a Justice Department ready to make unbelievable arguments not based on fact or file misleading affidavits supporting warrants.²)

• Anyone in contact with a foreign journalist, diplomat, or activist could become a target.

• The FBI doesn’t need a criminal case to start an investigation—just the suspicion of “national security concerns.”

Under Patel, these tools won’t be used to stop Al-Qaeda. They’ll be used to monitor and investigate people like those on his ‘Deep State 60’ list.

Patel has the potential to make J. Edgar Hoover look like an amateur if we’re comparing the potential for abuses of power.

2. Domestic Terrorism Laws: The Perfect Tool for Political Prosecutions

The USA PATRIOT Act and domestic terrorism statutes allow the FBI to target Americans under the broadest possible definitions of ‘extremism.’

These laws were intended to stop white supremacist groups, mass shooters, and homegrown terror cells. But they contain enough vague language to be weaponized against virtually anyone.

The Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act (DTPA) Creates a Loophole

• The DTPA was passed with bipartisan support to counter domestic extremism.

• But the law doesn’t specify who qualifies as a “domestic extremist.”

• The Trump administration has already laid the groundwork to label groups like Antifa and BLM as national security threats.

• If Patel directs the FBI to classify protest groups as “domestic extremists,” he can justify surveillance, infiltration, and prosecution without new laws.

How This Can Be Turned Against Political Opposition

• Nonviolent protesters could be investigated as suspected/potential terrorists.

• Journalists who publish leaked classified documents could be charged under espionage statutes.

• Dissenters could be investigated and later charged with “material support for terrorism” if they assist a group labeled extremist.

Once the label is applied, US Constitutional rights become limited.

3. Homeland Security Task Forces: The Secret Police Framework

The executive orders already issued by Trump are laying the foundation for a federal security force (Homeland Security Task Force) outside traditional law enforcement.

EO 14159, signed on January 20, 2025, expands DHS and FBI task forces to combat “domestic threats.”

What This EO Does:

• Creates DHS-led “Homeland Security Task Forces” (HSTF) to work outside traditional law enforcement oversight.

• Empowers DHS to coordinate with local police on national security matters.

• Provides legal cover for broad domestic surveillance.

• Allows for “preventative detention” of individuals deemed national security threats.

This isn’t just about border security. It’s about creating a parallel police force—one that is less accountable, more ideological, and designed to bypass traditional legal constraints.

I didn’t see the connection they saw at first—mostly because their articulation was garbled. But let’s be clear: this isn’t the Gestapo. Himmler wishes he had something this sophisticated. What Patel is about to get his hands on makes historical secret police forces look like amateurs.

Looking at the EO again, especially after seeing Noem, Bessent (and how financing is being seized), Vought at OMB, and Bondi at Justice, I see it now. I’ve started thinking of this EO as “The Big Lebowski.” This EO is the “rug.” This is what “really ties the room together.”

How This Can Be Turned Against Political Opposition

• Patel’s FBI can designate groups as domestic extremists.

• DHS task forces can use that designation to justify surveillance, infiltration, and preemptive arrests.

• States that comply (Republican-led) will receive federal security funding. Those that don’t (Democratic-led) will be cut off. Democratic-led states are going to be punished by Justice, investigated by the FBI, and have their funding interfered with by Treasury and OMB.

This is how you build an authoritarian police state—through bureaucracy, not through tanks in the streets.

4. Financial Warfare: How DOGE and Treasury Will Starve Dissent

One of the most underappreciated tools of authoritarian control is financial suppression.

Patel’s FBI won’t need to round up every dissenter if they can cut off their ability to function by starving them of capital.

DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) Already Controls Federal Payments

• Under Scott Bessent, Treasury and DOGE have been given expanded authority to monitor financial transactions.

• The government can label political opponents as “financial security threats” and freeze their assets.

• FARA (Foreign Agents Registration Act) violations can be used to justify seizing bank accounts of journalists and NGOs.

How This Can Be Turned Against Political Opposition

• News organizations that publish classified leaks could have their funding cut, their businesses audited, or face investigations.

• Activists receiving donations from foreign sources could be charged with foreign influence violations.

• Political dissidents could have their financial accounts frozen under counterterrorism finance rules.

This is a dictatorship’s dream—who needs gulags when you can starve your enemies into submission? No money = no power in America. And under Patel’s FBI, the ability to function financially will be a privilege, not a right. As the famed Vaudeville legend Eddie Cantor used to sing, “When you haven’t got the coin, you’re always in the way.”

What This Means: The Blueprint for Criminalizing Dissent Is Already in Place

Kash Patel doesn’t need Congress.
He doesn’t need new laws.
He doesn’t even need the courts.

The legal infrastructure for turning the FBI against political opposition already exists.

Patel needs to reinterpret the laws that are already there and use executive authority to expand federal policing power. The orchestra is sitting there waiting for the conductor to play.

The Endgame: A System Designed for Permanent Control

So far, we’ve outlined how Patel’s FBI will have the legal tools, executive orders, and financial enforcement mechanisms to criminalize dissent. But this isn’t just about Patel.

This is about building a system that will persist beyond him, beyond Trump—one that cements power for an entire movement.

Patel’s role isn’t just to enforce Trump’s will in the short term. It’s to institutionalize a security state that makes resistance structurally impossible.

This isn’t speculation. It’s already happening.

1. The Slow Death of Checks and Balances

In the past, there were three major roadblocks to using national security tools against political opposition:

• The Courts – Judges required evidence to sign off on surveillance and prosecution.

• The Bureaucracy – Career officials in the DOJ, FBI, and intelligence agencies could resist political interference.

• Congressional Oversight – Lawmakers had the power to investigate abuses and cut funding. Even the “secret” committees (like the HPSCI and the SSCI) would exercise strong oversight. As someone who has testified before all of them, yes, they were very much “up in your face” about programs and activities in the “GWOT.” I have made “Gang of Eight” briefings (notifications really, they’re not briefings; the members don’t really get to ask a lot of questions; they’re just informed more than anything). I have made en camera briefings at the SCI level. You better believe that those Committees were engaged. I’ve been “out of the game" for twenty years now, but back in the GWOT's early years, Congress was energized to look over George Bush’s shoulder.

Each of these is now being eroded.

• The Courts: Willing to Defer

  • Patel refused to say he would resist political pressure from the White House.

  • Federal judges and the Supreme Court have historically deferred to national security claims, even when later revealed to be false.

  • The chances of meaningful pushback are low with the Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority, and the current jurisprudence favors deferral to the Executive on most issues.

• The Bureaucracy: Being Purged

  • Inspector Generals fired.

  • DOJ career prosecutors removed or resigned (or resigning.) This is truly unbelievable. Not since Bork tried to fire Archibald Cox and the “Saturday Night Massacre” have we seen anything like this.

  • Whistleblower protections weakened. So much so that Democrats in the Senate set up their own “Whistleblower hotline” (the legality of which I doubt.)

  • DOGE controls internal audits, fires people at will, and acts in contravention of court orders and apparently without restraint (and apparently without an Administrator, according to court filings.)

• Congress: Obstructed and Punished

  • Republican-controlled House blocks investigations.

  • Select committees do not exercise oversight (heck, it’s a struggle to get the Intelligence Authorization Act through Congress, let alone any real oversight through Committee.)

  • Democratic-led states that resist are financially punished.

  • Executive orders bypass legislation altogether.

The fail-safes are eroded or gone.

2. The Expansion of Preemptive Policing

The true power of this system is that it doesn’t need actual crimes to justify action.

Preemptive policing means targeting people before they act. The infrastructure is already in place.

• AI-driven threat assessments – DHS already uses AI models to flag “potential security threats” based on online activity.

• Predictive surveillance – Talking to the “wrong people,” donating to the “wrong cause,” or even searching the “wrong topics” could trigger monitoring.

• Expedited detention measures – EO 14159 allows preventative detention for “domestic security threats.”

You don’t need to commit a crime. You just need to be categorized as a “threat.”

This is the ultimate shift from reactive law enforcement to preemptive authoritarianism.

3. The Private Sector’s Role: Silicon Valley and Finance as Enforcers

The government won’t need to do all the work. Big Tech and financial institutions will enforce compliance for them. It’s not a surprise that it’s Elon Musk and the “crypto-bros” cozying up in this quest to gut the government and lean on the President’s “enemies.”

• Financial Deplatforming

  • DOGE controls federal payment infrastructure.

  • Private banks will freeze accounts on government orders.

  • Crowdfunding, Venmo, Stripe, and PayPal can be forced to cut off activists.

• Silicon Valley’s Role in Censorship

  • FBI already has direct channels to social media platforms.

  • Content moderation policies can be influenced by “national security concerns.”

  • Demonetization can bankrupt dissenting media voices.

They don’t need to arrest you if they can make you invisible, unbankable, and unemployable.

4. The Legal Precedents That Make Reversal Impossible

Once these tools are normalized, they won’t be reversed—even if Trump leaves office.

• The Next President Will Inherit This Machine

  • A Democratic administration might tweak it, but they won’t dismantle it.

  • The next Republican administration will expand it even further.

• Legal Precedent Solidifies Power

  • Once a national security threat category is created, it is rarely removed.

  • Courts rarely overturn established surveillance powers.

  • Expanding definitions of extremism create a permanent state of emergency.

This is not about one election cycle.

It’s about changing the relationship between the government and its citizens forever.

Why Everyone Wants This to Happen (Even If They Won’t Admit It)

One of the most uncomfortable truths about all of this?

It’s not just Trump and Patel.

It’s not just Republicans.

It’s not just the far right.

The security state, the corporate world, and even a big chunk of the American public want this to happen. Some are actively pushing for it, while others will quietly go along with it.

This seems like some grand Trumpian nightmare. Trump might be the match, but he’s hardly the only one blowing on the fuse.

The Security State Wants More Power

The FBI, DHS, NSA, CIA, and other agencies are not victims here. Even with all the chaos Trump, Gabbard, and Ratcliffe are causing, they’re not being “hijacked” by Trump’s movement. They want expanded authority.³

• The post-9/11 security apparatus was never designed to shrink.

• Surveillance agencies always push for broader definitions of ‘threats.’

• Counterterrorism officials love new tools—and if Patel gives them domestic surveillance on a silver platter, they’ll take it.

They’ll grumble about Patel. They’ll leak some memos about how “troubling” this all is. They’ll kick and scream. But the lady doth protest too much.

They won’t stop it because this means more money, power, and control.

Corporations Want Stability (And Control)

Big Tech, finance, and major corporations don’t care about democracy. Capitalism is a coward. They care about a stable environment for making money.

• Facebook, Google, and Twitter have already collaborated with the government on censorship.

• Banks already deplatform people over vague “security concerns.”

• Private companies enforce compliance better than the government ever could.

When Patel’s FBI leans on financial institutions, social media platforms, and telecom companies to “help fight extremism”, they will happily comply.

Not because they support Trump but because it’s easier. If nothing else, it’s just the cost of doing business.

They will enforce the crackdown voluntarily—not out of ideology, but because it protects their bottom line.

Democrats Won’t Stop It

If Democrats wanted to rein in executive overreach, they would have done it by now. It’s not like they were always in the minority.

• They kept the Patriot Act.

• They expanded domestic surveillance after January 6th.

• They use “fighting disinformation” as an excuse for controlling speech.

Sure, they’ll fight Trump on TV. They’ll grandstand about democracy. But once Trump is gone, they’ll keep the tools.

Just like Obama kept Bush’s national security powers.

Just like Biden kept Trump’s border enforcement powers.

No politician ever gives up power once they have it.

The Public Craves Safety over Freedom

Most people won’t resist because they won’t see themselves as the target. Most Americans do not understand that the protections of the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution do not exist to protect the guilty from prison but the innocent from being unjustly convicted and incarcerated. People think that innocence alone protects them from harm. Sadly, they are grossly mistaken. Innocent people talk themselves into arrest and prison all the time. Unfortunately, the American People crave safety over freedom. Since they believe innocence will protect them, they foolishly believe these erosions of liberty won’t affect them. They’re wrong.

• They don’t care about surveillance if they think it’s only used on “bad people.”

• They don’t care about censorship if they think it only affects extremists.

• They don’t care about law enforcement overreach until the door blows off their doorframe, and the flashbang comes flying into their living room. (Then they suddenly care a lot as they eat carpet with a bloody nose, broken ear drums, and possibly broken teeth and a dislocated jaw, assuming they didn’t wind up shot.)

The average person will comply voluntarily. Not out of fear, but out of comfort. They believe it is all going to happen to someone else.

Because it’s easier to believe:

• “If you don’t break the law, you have nothing to worry about.”

• “Only extremists are being investigated.”

• “This is just about stopping terrorism.”

It will be too late to escape when they realize they are trapped.

The Bottom Line

This crackdown isn’t just happening because of Trump, Patel, MAGA, or the Republicans. Trump may be the fuse, Patel the hammer, and MAGA the anvil, but they are not the only ones who will bring this about.

It’s happening because the people in power—on all sides—benefit from it.

It’s happening because corporations will enforce it.

It’s happening because the public will go along with it.

And that’s why no one is stopping it.

What Happens Next?

Kash Patel’s confirmation as FBI Director is not just likely—it’s almost inevitable. Previous nominees, including Kristi Noem, Pam Bondi, and Scott Bessent, have all been confirmed despite their lack of experience or extreme political positions, so there’s little reason to believe Patel won’t be confirmed.

And once he is, the shift will happen immediately.

This is not the kind of transformation that takes years. It is not dependent on Congress passing new laws. The system is already built—Patel will simply turn it on.

Patel’s FBI will not start with sweeping crackdowns or mass arrests. That’s not how modern authoritarianism works. The first wave will be targeted, methodical, and designed to create chilling effects across society.

Phase One: The Soft Targets

The first people targeted will be those without institutional power or large platforms.

• Small-time activists who organize protests.

• Independent journalists who publish critical investigations.

• Academics who publish research exposing government corruption.

• Government employees who leak wrongdoing to the press.

They will not all be arrested—many will not even be charged with crimes. Instead:

• They will be put under surveillance.

• They will find their financial accounts frozen for unexplained “security concerns.”

• They will face selective audits and regulatory investigations.

• They will be placed on no-fly lists, banned from financial services, or locked out of social media platforms.

The goal is not to make martyrs—but to make examples.

A handful of well-publicized cases will serve as a warning to everyone else.

• If you criticize the government too loudly, you may lose your bank account.

• If you organize protests, your family may be put under surveillance.

• If you expose government wrongdoing, you could be labeled a security threat.

This will have a chilling effect far beyond the initial targets.

Most people will comply voluntarily. Not because they are arrested but because they see what happens to others and don’t want it to happen to them.

Phase Two: Turning Up the Heat

Once the chilling effect has taken hold, the administration will begin testing the limits of their power.

• More aggressive financial crackdowns.

• More expansive use of surveillance and intelligence gathering.

• First legal test cases of the new system—likely against unpopular activists or fringe figures.

At this stage, laws will still matter, but they will be selectively enforced.

• Trump’s political enemies will face criminal investigations.

• Trump’s political allies will be shielded from consequences.

• Judges will face political pressure to rule favorably—or risk being investigated themselves.

This is where EO 14159 and the Homeland Security Task Forces become critical.

• Democratic-led states will face direct federal interference.

• The FBI will investigate governors and attorneys general who refuse to comply with federal mandates. There is no lawful basis to charge these officials (there’s such a thing as the anti-commandeering doctrine), but that won’t stop the FBI from harassing and intimidating public officials.

• Mayors of sanctuary cities could be charged with ‘harboring illegal immigrants.’

We will begin to see the federal government using its power to suppress opposition at the state level.

Phase Three: The Normalization of Political Policing

Once the new enforcement mechanisms have been tested and refined, they will become standard operating procedures.

• Domestic intelligence will be indistinguishable from political intelligence.

• Law enforcement will prioritize ideological enemies over criminal ones.

• Political affiliation will determine legal treatment.

At this point, it won’t feel like a radical shift anymore—it will feel normal.

Most Americans will not resist because they believe they are not the target.

• Moderate liberals will assume the crackdown is only against “radicals.”

• Moderate conservatives will assume they are safe because they support the government.

• Business leaders will go along with it to avoid financial retaliation.

It will not be tanks in the streets.

It will not be martial law.

It will not be mass arrests.

It will be a quiet, bureaucratic transformation of law enforcement into a political tool.

And by the time people realize what has happened, it will be too late to reverse.

How Fast Will This Happen?

We tend to think of authoritarian takeovers as sudden, dramatic events.

But real power grabs happen slowly—then all at once.

The first few months will seem like nothing is changing.

The first few years will seem like overreach, but nothing irreversible.

Then, suddenly, we will wake up in a country where:

• Dissent is dangerous.

• Opposition is criminalized.

• The security state serves political power, not the law.

And when we look back, we will realize:

• It didn’t happen overnight.

• It happened through a series of small, incremental changes.

• It happened because each step seemed justifiable in isolation.

That is what comes next.

And if Patel is confirmed, the countdown starts immediately.

How to Position Yourself for What’s Coming

Let’s be clear: Patel’s confirmation will mark the official turning point.

At that moment, the machine is ready to become operational. The legal structures are already in place, and the control systems could (and likely will) start tightening immediately.

If you’re reading this expecting Congress, the courts, or some internal rebellion to stop it, you’re deluding yourself.

But that doesn’t mean panic. It means positioning.

I am not writing this to cause you to flip out, panic, or vomit in the waste basket. I have, unfortunately, delivered this type of briefing before. I’ve seen the blood drain out of the faces of Senators and Congressmen when I’ve told them of dire threats to National Security. I’ve seen the look on policymakers faces when the “Jesus, we’re fucked,” realization finally hits.

I have no doubt that’s what is going through your mind right now. Take a breath. Then take another. Then, please listen to me carefully as someone who has briefed people in times of national crises.

Every crisis follows a predictable pattern and a predictable set of stages. There are four of them: event & confusion, setting of the rules, apex, and then “the new normal” (or final resolution.) Briefly, let me explain to you each stage:

• Event & Confusion: When a crisis happens, there is a time, a window of hours, days, weeks, or possibly months, when the “rules of the new game” aren’t set. The crisis event disrupts the status quo. There is confusion. There is inaction and paralysis by most people. They don’t know what to do so they do nothing. Doing nothing will kill you in most circumstances. It is in this moment of time when you will have the absolute greatest agency in a time of crisis. You need to think quickly and act before the “rules of the new game” get set.

• The setting of the Rules: As the crisis unfolds, the new rules of the new status quo unfold. What used to be the way things were done, aren’t the way things are done anymore. Norms change. Rules change. Power structures change. As this stage matures, your opportunity for agency eventually dwindles to zero.

• Apex: Eventually, the crisis hits its apex. There’s a turning point of some kind. Once the apex is reached, the rules for the “end game” are established, and the momentum towards that end state has become such that it is inevitable.

• New Status Quo/New Normal: Once the Apex moment (period) resolves, you’re left with the after-effect. The “new normal,” the new status quo, is ready for the next exogenous shock event.

When Patel is confirmed - POW! Stage one happens. Put your big boy pants on; it’s time to knuckle up, buttercup.

This is no longer about stopping the crackdown—it’s about navigating it.

1. Have an Exit Plan—Even If You Never Use It

You don’t need to flee the country today—but you should be able to move if you need to. Freedom means options and choices. As I say in “Breakway Brief” (which oddly enough was the whole reason why I came to Substack, not to write TLM, it just worked out that way): “The Future belongs to the Free.”⁴

• If you have dual citizenship, make sure your paperwork is in order.

• If you don’t, look into residency options now—before things escalate.

• Don’t wait until your finances or passport access are restricted to make a decision.

The worst-case scenario is having no options if things get bad. The best-case scenario? You never need to leave. But the only way to ensure that is to plan ahead.

So slip out the back, Jack. Make a new plan, Stan. You don’t need to be coy, Roy. Just listen to me.

2. Use State-Level Resistance as a Buffer

If you’re staying, your best defense will be living in a state that fights federal overreach.

• Democratic-led states must (and are likely to) act as internal sanctuaries.

• State law enforcement can (and thus far has demonstrated their desire to) refuse to comply with federal task forces.

• State courts can (and most likely will) block federal investigations targeting political dissidents.

The best place in the U.S. will be in states willing to fight back against federal repression. I believe those states are California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, New York, and Washington (state).⁵

That means:

• Push your state legislature to pass protections for journalists and activists (heck, for everyone.)

• Advocate for refusal to cooperate with federal Homeland Security Task Forces and discriminatory federal enforcement practices.

• Pressure your governor to take a stand before they’re forced into compliance.

If your state isn’t already making moves to protect against federal overreach, assume they will fold when the pressure comes.

3. Build Parallel Systems Outside Federal Control

The most significant risk in an authoritarian security state is total dependence on federal institutions.

• If the government controls your bank, your access to money is at risk.

• If the government controls your job, your ability to earn an income (and provide for yourself and your family) is at risk.

• If the government controls your communication, your ability to organize is at risk.

The key is diversification. Those three are just examples. You have to examine all aspects of your life (this is an unfortunate reality of the world we live in now.)

• Financial alternatives – Gold, bearer securities, foreign stocks, foreign bank accounts, and any assets not tied to U.S. institutions.⁶ Some people like “crypto,” but it’s a bad bet if you ask me. I may be unreasonably biased.

• Alternative media – Decentralized platforms (like Substack), encrypted communication (Signal), independent servers.

• Mutual aid & underground networks – Support structures that exist outside official channels.

You're already too late if you wait until you need these things. You need to plant the seeds before you are hungry.

4. International Pressure: Make This a Global Issue

The U.S. does not exist in a vacuum.

• The EU, Canada, and other democracies can apply pressure.

• Human rights organizations must start documenting abuses now.

• Foreign governments can be pressured to take action.

This won’t stop the crackdown, but it raises the cost of maintaining it.

That means:

• Exiled journalists and dissidents must organize globally.

• International courts must be petitioned to take action.

• Foreign leaders must be pressured to condemn U.S. human rights violations.

If the world sees this as just another internal U.S. political dispute, it will continue unchecked. The pressure increases if framed as a global human rights crisis. I ask my international readers; I IMPLORE my international readers, please put pressure on your governments in this manner. Just as Americans need to put pressure on Congress, I am asking you to put pressure on your political representatives to put pressure on the United States.

5. Delay, Disrupt, and Expose

The system is not invincible even when (or if) Patel is confirmed.

• Leaks and whistleblowers can expose abuses before they are fully implemented.

• Lawsuits can slow down and challenge executive orders and actions.

• Lawsuits can also shine a light on unlawful activities and conduct.

• Mass non-compliance makes enforcement more difficult.

The goal is to make every step of this as painful, slow, and costly as possible.

• Expose federal overreach whenever possible.

• Use every legal and bureaucratic tool to stall the process.

• Make every act of political suppression a public scandal.

This isn’t about winning outright—it’s about making the cost of repression so high that it collapses under its weight.

An aside for a moment: Most people think George Washington was the greatest general, right? People think, “Man, that Washington, he was awesome; he won the Revolutionary War!”

Actually, and not to be a jerk, Washington didn’t win doodly squat. Washington got his ass handed to him 99 times out of 100. Yes, he won a few skirmishes here and there. Yes, fantastic pictures of him crossing the Delaware and praying (neither of those events happened as depicted, I might add).

But here’s the thing: Washington didn’t win, but he also never lost so badly he couldn’t fight another round. He ground down Cornwallis with sheer determination not to have the Colonial Army outright defeated. In that regard, Washington was a brilliant commander. He always lived to fight another day. That strategy gave the American colonists time to allow the French to arrive ultimately, and when they did, Cornwallis was screwed. Trapped between the devil and the deep blue sea (literally), he had no choice but to surrender. That’s how a rag-tag army of farmers, carpenters, printers, and tradesmen defeated the world's finest military.

Thus, to arms, Gentlemen! (And Ladies!)

Position Yourself Now, Not Later

The crackdown has already begun if you read this after Patel has been confirmed. (Hopefully, that’s not the case when you read this posting.)

The question isn’t if repression will come—it’s how fast it is developing.

Slowly, at first. Then, all at once.

This isn’t about paranoia. It’s about being prepared. If I’m wrong, awesome. You have no idea how much I pray that I am wrong.

• If you can leave, have that option ready.

• If you can resist from within, do it now—before it’s illegal.

• If you can build parallel systems, start immediately.

This is not a drill.

This moment will define whether you control your future—or whether it’s controlled for you.

These are the Times That Try Men’s Souls

This could prove to be a moment that defines the future course of the United States.

Patel’s confirmation isn’t just about who runs the FBI. It’s about whether law enforcement becomes a political weapon. It’s about whether dissent is criminalized. It’s about whether America remains a democracy or slides into anocracy at best or authoritarianism at worst under the guise of protecting “national security.”

The pieces are already in place. The machinery is built and waiting to be turned on. The levers of power are being handed over to a man of dubious intentions. The only question that may remain is how fast it will all happen.

For most people, the realization will come too late.

They’ll believe it’s just isolated abuses at first. They’ll assume the courts will intervene. They’ll tell themselves this isn’t happening.

And then, one day, they’ll wake up in a country where:

• Speaking the truth gets you investigated.

• Protesting injustice gets you labeled an extremist.

• Your bank account disappears overnight without warning.

• Your phone listens. Your social media tracks. Your government watches.

• Law enforcement no longer serves the law. It serves power.

Some will still believe it can’t happen here. Again, I do hope I am wrong. I want nothing more than to be wrong.

But that’s exactly what people said in every democracy before it collapsed.

By the time they recognize what’s happening, the infrastructure of control will already be permanent.

And history will not be kind to those who saw it coming and did nothing.

The choices now are clear:

• Prepare while you still can.

• Fight back, however (and if) you are able.

• Position yourself as best as possible so that you are not trapped no matter what happens.

Once this system is locked in place, it will not be undone.

Not by elections.

Not by courts.

Not by protests.

How did we lose the Republic? Slowly at first, then all at once.

If you’ve considered upgrading to The Long Memo (TLM), now’s the time. Through February 28, annual plans are 25% off—for just $5 a month (billed annually). That means a full year of exclusive deep dives, analysis, book club access, and all future paid-member benefits—at the lowest price it will ever be. This deal won’t happen again.
If you’re already a paid subscriber, thank you for supporting the publication.

1. For more, see https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/kash-patel-said-come-journalists-now-hangs-fbi-candidacy-rcna182661, and you can watch a video where Sen. Whitehouse got the quote from that he used during the hearing.

2. I’m not trying to be cutesy here. Given what we have witnessed in the leaked Justice Department memos, it seems clear that Main Justice is prepared to go into federal court and argue some of the most preposterous claims imaginable—bordering on, if not outright, perfidious.

The charitable interpretation of these leaked documents is that the Deputy Attorney General (or others in leadership) profoundly misunderstand the facts they’ve been briefed on. The uncharitable interpretation? Willful and intentional misconduct.

• The fact that U.S. Attorneys are resigning in protest, stating they refuse “to do it,” suggests they’re being asked to make bad-faith legal arguments that lack prima facie evidence and do not even meet the basic standard of a colorable legal claim.

• If this is how the Trump Justice Department is operating, it’s not some wild conspiracy theory to anticipate that misleading affidavits—technically truthful but deliberately misleading—will be used to obtain warrants and justify investigations.

• Or worse? Some affidavits may be outright fabricated out of thin air, with zero factual basis whatsoever.

In short: The legal system will not act as a safeguard. It will be a tool.

3. If you’re interested in diving deeper into how government agencies operate, Graham Allison’s Essence of Decision is essential reading. It’s required for advanced political science students studying international relations and diplomacy for a reason.

The core takeaway from Allison’s research?

“Where you stand is based on where you sit.”

In other words, bureaucracies don’t act as neutral arbiters—they have their own institutional interests and pursue them rationally. And the most fundamental interest of any government agency?

Expanding its own power and control.

This is why the security state will not resist Patel’s FBI—they benefit from it.

4. If this piece resonates with you, I hope you’ll consider subscribing to my other Substack, The Breakaway Brief—where I’m documenting my journey to obtain Italian citizenship by jus sanguinis and build an exit strategy if things go south.

This isn’t about panic. It’s about options.

I saw the gathering storm back in October of last year. It took time to find someone reputable to help me and my children obtain our EU passports. I have no intention of renouncing my U.S. citizenship, but I want the ability to live abroad if needed.

At the same time, I’m diversifying my finances—not to evade taxes, but to ensure compliance with U.S. banking laws while also mitigating risk. Because let’s be real:

• What happens if Elon Musk suddenly decides to fire everyone at the FDIC, claiming it’s a “woke” organization?

• What happens if the President decides that Jerome Powell “has to go” and the Federal Reserve is thrown into chaos?

• Sure, both would be blatantly illegal, but do I trust Congress or the courts to stop it in time? No.

So yes, having a chunk of cash in a bank outside of the U.S.—maybe in St. Cooks, maybe elsewhere—is a good idea just in case things go sideways.

This isn’t a theoretical exercise anymore. These are things we now have to think about.

And that’s what I’ll be writing about in The Breakaway Brief—how to create legal, realistic options to ensure financial and personal freedom.

I hope you’ll consider subscribing.

5. Some may argue, “What about Hawaii?”

My reply: Pearl Harbor.

Hawaii isn’t just another blue state—it’s home to one of the largest U.S. military presences in the world. It also happens to be headquarters for Pacific Command (now called INDOPACOM). If federal control is expanding, Hawaii is the last place you want to be.

As the story goes, after conquering the armies of Pompey, Julius Caesar supposedly told Canidius to inform Marc Antony that his word would be law in Rome.

Canidius replies:

“And as always, Caesar’s word shall be law.”

As Canidius departs, Caesar adds one final instruction:

“And remind Antony to keep his legions intact. They have a way of making the law legal.”

This moment is beautifully dramatized in the 1963 film Cleopatra with Rex Harrison.

The lesson? Power isn’t in the law. It’s in who enforces it.

This is why I don’t see states like Oregon, Vermont, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, and Virginia as reliable long-term defenders against an aggressive federal government.

They may resist for now, but their ability (or willingness) to hold the line is questionable at best when the pressure comes.

6. Let me be very clear: This is not about tax evasion or regulatory dodging.

Diversifying where your assets are held is not illegal.

Everything I’ve outlined—holding foreign bank accounts, owning gold and silver, investing in foreign stocks, or keeping foreign currency in large amounts—is completely legal for U.S. citizens.

That said, these actions do come with reporting and regulatory requirements.

• Foreign bank accounts must be reported under FBAR (Foreign Bank Account Report) and FATCA (Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act).

• Gold and silver holdings are legal but may have capital gains tax implications.

• Foreign securities and investments have specific tax treatments under IRS rules.

If you take these steps, consult with accounting and legal experts to ensure full compliance.

The last thing you want is to give the federal government a legitimate reason to investigate you because of avoidable securities or tax violations.

This isn’t about hiding. It’s about protecting your ability to move, function, and remain independent in an increasingly controlled financial system.