On April 16, Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) Tulsi Gabbard declassified the Biden-era “Strategic Implementation Plan for Countering Domestic Terrorism.” The release followed an April 2 declassification request from Stephen Miller’ legal organization America First Legal (AFL). While much of the document’s content had been publicly discussed in general terms, the newly declassified version reveals troubling new specifics.
The declassified version features language that outlines how the Biden administration planned to operationalize counterterrorism efforts. It details strategy, actions, and performance measures, and assigns responsibility across agencies including the NSC, FBI, DHS, and DoJ. Notably, this was the first counterterrorism plan in U.S. history in which the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) prioritized Domestic Violent Extremism (DVE) over foreign threats.
This declassified plan is one of several documents forming the backbone of the Biden administration’s counterterrorism strategy. While the documents claim an unbiased approach to identifying DVEs, much of the language and policy framework suggest otherwise -- raising significant constitutional and civil liberty concerns.
The Biden administration’s approach included social media surveillance, data collection, community-level monitoring, and even efforts to influence public narratives -- all under the broad umbrella of national security. It consistently targeted U.S. citizens labeled as domestic extremists, often based on subjective or politically biased criteria, and sometimes on the flimsiest of pretexts.
The operation began shortly after the 2021 inauguration. By March of that year, ODNI released an unclassified executive summary detailing the administration’s domestic terrorism focus:
The summary cites the capitol protest on January 6 as a pretext for some of its targeting, foreshadowing 
what would soon become a broader weaponization of the U.S. government against its citizens -- complete with pretrial imprisonment for many with non-violent offenses, arrests and imprisonment of pro-life protesters, and in some cases surveillance of parents at school board meetings throughout the country.
On June 14, 2021, a "senior administration official" held a teleconference reaffirming the administration’s domestic terrorism posture. The FBI (with its May 2021 Domestic DVE Assessment), DHS, and DoJ, he explained, were fully resourced and aligned in their mission to prevent future events like January 6. The official also referenced the repurposing of post-9/11 watchlisting protocols, such as the "Quiet Skies" program -- one that caught Tulsi Gabbard when she was flagged under it.
The March 2021 strategy was organized around four pillars:
Even into 2023, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas continued expanding this apparatus, convening the Homeland Intelligence Expert Group. Among its members were former intelligence officials such as John Brennan and James Clapper, tasked with helping identify “disinformation” as part of the DVE threat matrix.
One of the more alarming aspects of the Biden-era counterterrorism approach was its effort to influence public opinion under the guise of “digital literacy programming.” These programs, often carried out in partnership with NGOs, aimed to “educate” local agencies and communities on identifying misinformation -- especially from social media sources. Branded as “public health-focused prevention programming,” ostensibly implemented to help Americans sort truth from “disinformation” and under a pretense of neutrality.
In 2023, AFL’s Reed Rubinstein called the DHS “out of control,” and the facts support his claim. DHS programs like the Center for Prevention Programs and Partnerships (CP3) and the Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention (TVTP) initiative received $10 million in FY20 alone to develop training materials for identifying early signs of radicalization. Law enforcement, doctors, school counselors, and therapists were instructed to monitor for political anger, anti-authority attitudes, or emotional distress -- criteria that risk criminalizing ordinary dissent or emotional expression.
Political profiling was normalized. SWAT raids were conducted on pro-life advocates and January 6 defendants. In other cases, internal documents obtained by AFL singled out white males as a national threat archetype. One DHS excerpt read: “Among DVEs, White Supremacist Extremists (WSEs) are the most persistent and lethal threat.” There is no evidence that white supremacism is a widespread threat across the U.S., yet it remained central to the administration’s focus.
Biden’s DHS also funded programs that trained Americans to report one another -- not for committing crimes, but for expressing dissent. With $80 million funneled into various DHS divisions in FY21 -- including CRCL, CISA, I&A, and others -- this infrastructure was well-funded, and deeply entrenched.
Specifically, FOIA documents obtained by America First Legal (AFL) revealed fully produced “Choose Your Own Adventure”-style training videos. Viewers were prompted to determine whether their suburban neighbor “Ann” or a high school student named “Courtney” was being radicalized -- a dystopian scenario bordering on thought-policing.
The scope of these programs went far beyond digital literacy. By January 2021, Twitter had already begun suspending accounts. Later, the release of the Twitter Files by Elon Musk confirmed what many had long suspected: a coordinated effort between government agencies and tech platforms to suppress disfavored narratives and target dissenters. Discredited “conspiracy theories” such as RussiaGate and the Biden laptop story were later confirmed, vindicating those who had exposed the scope of the administration’s efforts to control discourse.
The ideological targeting wasn’t speculative. In a 2021 White House press call, DHS Senior Official John Cohen explained the administration’s shift: “It’s not the ideology and the psyche -- it’s the psychology.” He described Domestic Violent Extremists (DVEs) as angry, isolated individuals who spend time online consuming “extremist content” -- a definition vague and behavioral that it renders the First Amendment meaningless. While officials like Cohen were saying it wasn’t their job to police speech, their actions proved otherwise.
Perhaps most concerning of all was the repeated reference to “cognitive infrastructure” -- a concept drawn from information warfare doctrine. It refers to the narrative architecture that shapes how people think. Under the banner of national security, the Biden administration fused behavioral surveillance with ideological profiling to create a system that was intrusive, biased, and unconstitutional.
Image: Pixabay
Source link