In theory, yes. In practice, he already has a long track record of leveraging his position, and the institutions it allows him to command, to enact personal vengeance upon his enemies. The examples are numerous, but one need look no further than Stephen Colbert.

Paramount paid $16 million to the Trump library fund to settle a meritless case, because of his ability to wield the FCC to squash their merger.

Colbert called this out on his show as rampant extortion by the Trump Administration, and they promptly cancelled his show.

Sure, you can argue that this wasn't a police/military act, and the government itself did not punish Colbert for his views and speech.

But in cronyism, especially under a regime actively trying to gut the federal government and allow private parties to assume it's functions, this becomes at best a nominal distinction. If you, in an official government capacity, can wield your power to enact vengeance on your opponents and dissidents, maybe even going as far as to diacriminate against entire states that vote against you (https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/trump-discriminati...), you have a mechanism with which you can quasi-legally (good luck fighting this one in court) punish Speech You Do Not Like.

For the average, or even exceptional person, this functionally amounts to a restriction on your speech. I am highly critical of Trump, but not under any avenue tied to my identity.

I am far from the only person who operates this way. The assertion that you can freely citizen the administration without fear of reprisal does not hold water.