Thread by @peterwsinger

Something to watch:
Deployment of federal forces to cities like Portland is justified as protecting federal property.
That same agency FPS has a contract vehicle with some familiar names from Iraq era:
dhs.gov/sites/default/…
medium.com/@wkc6428/the-l…
news.bloomberglaw.com/federal-contra…
1/x

To be 100% clear upfront, the "little green men" unmarked forces in Portland, as in DC, seem to be mix of various "special units" from BCP, BOP, ICE, Marshals, etc.
NOT the Blackwater or PMC narrative.
But lack of insignia makes this always a problem.
2/x

My concern is when Trump's desire for national "surge," (either as this pre-election political gambit continues or in a disputed election/mass protest scenario) hits the reality of numbers.
3/x

Once they try to do multiple cities, there's simply not enough of these, flexible-to-deploy, federal agency units to go around.
They either have to:
A) strip from main agency forces, which would be equivalent to self government shutdown (no border guard at border etc) or

4/x

B) call up National Guard
But as we saw in DC, this is viewed as massively escalatory, a major redline to cross (every security analyst gets the Russia parallel here to grayzone conflict rules), some governors will reject, not as flexible for political needs of Barr/Trump

5/x

That leaves C) Outsource
Outsourcing keeps it in the grayzone and thus will be appealing to some.

There are 2 ways to outsource that need to be watched for by media, analysts, Congress, and activists:
1) private militia forces and 2) government contracting.

6/x

There's already moves going on in the private militia land, with Trump narrative of his own "tough guys," scenes in various cities of armed counter protesters intimidating protesters, trying to create no-go areas for peaceful protest etc.

7/x

Despite the fact that far right extremist groups have killed more Americans than even ISIS, all the way to murdering a police officer in CA just a few weeks back, it is clear that federal govt. is going to continue to turn a blind eye to this. So risk of acceleration here.

8/x

Contracting is the other method Congress, media, activists need to be watchful for. It has appeal, as adds a patina of legitimacy. The forces will be in same uniform, badges that only differ when you examine them up close (think the security clearance inspector badge), and

9/x

and Barr etc can use deliberately official sounding language ("forces" "Protective Security
Officers") to describe them.

The key, though, is contracting leaves a trail. This is what to watch for, what comes before: coordination and contract announcements/modifications.

10/x

Those will be the alarm bells that we have crossed this next red line we thought we would never cross.

Indeed, when I started writing on private military outsourcing exactly 25 years ago, I never thought I would be using that expertise to diagnose risks to my own country.
11/x

But here we are.

BLUF:
We are not yet at outsourced forces being deployed against US citizens. But the scenario is a real risk that must be understood and monitored for by Congress, media, public, and analysts.