A Letter to Donald J. Trump, President of the United States of America

Hon. Donald J. Trump,
47th President of the United States of America
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, District of Columbia

Strengthening U.S. Cybercrime Defense and Victim Support: A Policy Brief

Executive summary

Cybercrime has outpaced the nation’s current defenses, creating a persistent national-security, economic, and public-health threat. This brief proposes five coordinated actions:

1. Re-establish a presidential council focused on cybercrime, with permanent victim-services representation.
2. Stand up a dedicated bureau within the Department of Homeland Security to address mass-scale cybercrime against residents, complementing federal investigations and improving victim response at scale.
3. Build an active “cyber border” using AI-assisted, privacy-protective network defenses to interdict hostile traffic in real time in partnership with U.S. carriers and cloud providers.
4. Create a unified cyber service within the U.S. military to consolidate cyber warfighting capacity and clarify lines of authority.
5. Direct the Department of State to maintain a list of state sponsors of cybercrime and align diplomatic, economic, and connectivity responses accordingly.

The SCARS Institute (Society of Citizens Against Relationship Scams Inc.), a Florida nonprofit that has never accepted government funding, has supported and educated more than 12 million scam victims worldwide and stands ready to contribute victim-centric expertise to any federal initiative.

The problem in plain terms

• Scale: Tens of millions of Americans experience cybercrime victimization each year, from fraud and identity theft to romance, investment, business email compromise, sextortion, ransomware, and more. The economic cost runs to the hundreds of billions, with some estimates in the trillions; the human cost includes trauma, suicidality risk, and long-term distrust in institutions.
• Fragmentation: Responsibility is spread across multiple agencies, leading to gaps in prevention, uneven victim care, and slow disruption of repeat offenders.
• Reactive posture: The U.S. largely responds after harm. By the time a case is reported, infrastructure and proceeds have moved, and victims are left to navigate recovery alone.
• Adversaries: Criminal syndicates operate at industrial scale, often with safe-harbor or tacit support from foreign states. The barrier to entry for attackers keeps falling to near zero; the barrier to recovery for victims remains high.

Recommendation 1: Re-establish a Presidential Council on Cybercrime

Purpose: Set strategy, align agencies, and embed the victim perspective at the highest level.

Composition: Senior leaders from DHS, DOJ/FBI, DoD, State, Treasury, FTC, CISA, FCC, and reputable victim-assistance organizations (e.g., SCARS Institute) plus private-sector carriers/clouds.

Functions:

• Publish a national cybercrime reduction plan with measurable targets.
• Coordinate takedowns, sanctions, and seizures across agencies.
• Standardize victim-care protocols and data-sharing for rapid referrals.
• Oversee public education campaigns that are evidence-based and trauma-informed.
  Why it matters: Strategy without victim input misses what actually fails on the ground; victim care without strategy never scales.

Recommendation 2: Create a DHS bureau dedicated to mass-scale cybercrime against residents

Working title: National Cybercrime Victim Protection Bureau (NCVPB) within DHS.

Mandate:

• Operate a unified 24/7 intake and triage for cybercrime reports (API-linked with existing portals) to route cases rapidly to the right investigative, regulatory, or civil-remedy channels.
• Provide standardized, trauma-informed support, including documentation for banks, reporting guidance, and mental-health referrals.
• Coordinate prevention with carriers, financial institutions, and platforms to block known threat infrastructure.
  Relationship to DOJ/FBI: Complements criminal investigations by handling population-scale harm reduction, disruption, and victim services; DOJ retains investigative and prosecutorial lead.
  Outcome: Faster relief for victims, fewer repeat victimizations, and better intelligence flow to investigators.

Recommendation 3: Build an active, AI-assisted “cyber border”

Concept: Nationally coordinated, privacy-protective network defenses that detect and interdict malicious traffic patterns in near real time in partnership with ISPs, cloud providers, and financial networks.

Core elements:

• Federated threat-intelligence sharing with strong civil-liberties guardrails.
• AI models to flag botnets, phishing campaigns, and fraud infrastructure at carrier scale.
• Rapid takedown and sinkholing playbooks with due process.
• Opt-in protections for critical sectors and at-risk populations.
  Safeguards: Transparency reports, independent oversight, strict minimization, and auditability to protect constitutional rights and legitimate traffic.
  Goal: Shift from purely reactive posture to proactive disruption without mass surveillance.

Recommendation 4: Create a unified military cyber service

Rationale: Cyber operations are dispersed across multiple commands and services. A dedicated uniformed cyber service would clarify doctrine, readiness, talent pipelines, and joint operations.

Mission set: Defend national security networks, support civil authorities upon request, deter and respond to state-aligned cyber aggression, and coordinate with allies.

Benefits: Clearer career paths, unified training, faster joint responses, and less duplication.

Recommendation 5: Establish a State Department-managed list of state sponsors of cybercrime

Action: Direct the Department of State to maintain and publish designations for governments that harbor or enable cybercriminal groups.

Tools: Calibrated diplomatic measures, targeted sanctions, law-enforcement cooperation agreements, MLAT modernization, and, in extreme cases, graduated connectivity restrictions to U.S. networks consistent with international law and human-rights considerations.

Objective: Raise costs for safe-harbor states and reduce attacker freedom of movement.

Integrating victim care at every step

• Standards: Adopt national, trauma-informed protocols for first contact, documentation, and referral so victims are believed, stabilized, and guided.
• Partnerships: Contract with experienced nonprofits to deliver scalable peer support, education, and recovery navigation.
• Data hygiene: Privacy-preserving analytics to track repeat victimization, infrastructure reuse, and intervention outcomes.
• Public messaging: Consistent, stigma-reducing campaigns that emphasize grooming, manipulation tactics, and safe reporting.

Implementation roadmap (illustrative)

• 0–90 days: Re-constitute the council; appoint leadership; publish an initial action directive; stand up a joint victim-care working group.
• 90–180 days: Launch unified reporting intake pilot with trauma-informed scripts; select carrier and cloud partners for cyber-border prototypes; draft legislation as needed.
• 6–12 months: Stand up the DHS bureau; expand AI-assisted interdiction pilots; release the first state-sponsor designations with aligned measures.
• 12–24 months: Evaluate and scale; propose the unified military cyber service; publish annual progress and transparency reports.

Risks and safeguards

• Civil liberties: Build governance into the design with independent oversight, minimization, and redress.
• Attribution challenges: Pair technical signals with multi-source intelligence and legal due process.
• International blowback: Coordinate with allies and apply calibrated, lawful measures.
• Private-sector burden: Offer clear SLAs, liability protections where appropriate, and cost-sharing for defensive infrastructure.

Measuring success

• Reduction in successful large-scale fraud campaigns reaching U.S. consumers.
• Decrease in repeat victimization rates.
• Time-to-takedown for identified criminal infrastructure.
• Victim satisfaction with first-contact and referral experience.
• Volume and impact of coordinated disruptions, seizures, and sanctions.

The SCARS Institute’s role

SCARS Institute brings long, practical experience at population scale: trauma-informed education, peer-support models, recovery roadmaps, and outreach that has touched more than 12 million victims. We can help design standards for first-contact scripts, referral pathways, victim-care metrics, and public messaging that reduce shame and increase safe reporting.

Closing perspective

Cybercrime is no longer a niche problem. It is a daily national threat that steals money, corrodes trust, and leaves lasting psychological harm. The solutions exist. They require alignment, scale, and a victim-first lens. These recommendations offer a pragmatic path to move from scattered reaction to coordinated prevention, disruption, and care.

Respectfully,

Debby Montgomery Johnson, USAF Veteran
Tim McGuinness, Ph.D., USN Veteran