Elissa Slotkin's Warning to Future Trump Staffers: You Could Face Prosecution
By Ben SmithSen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) apparently has a message for young Americans considering a job in President Donald Trump's administration: Think about what prosecutors might do to you later.
Slotkin, who has repeatedly accused Trump of weaponizing the federal government against political opponents, now wants young conservatives thinking about the consequences of working for him. She even has a name for it. A "deterrence message."
The senator was at the University of Chicago on October 13 for a live recording of Vox's "America, Actually" podcast. Her conversation with editorial director Astead Herndon included Democratic plans for dealing with Trump and officials serving under him.
A 26-second excerpt circulated Saturday. Slotkin was discussing future criminal cases when she brought up college graduates considering government work.
ON UCHICAGO CAMPUS: U.S. Senator from Michigan Elissa Slotkin hopes planned political prosecutions of republican leaders will scare young conservatives from getting involved in politics. @ElissaSlotkin https://t.co/p7NBJpDcQW
— The Chicago Thinker (@ThinkerChicago) October 17, 2026
"I want to look at these signature cases and not just focus on the president, but on the people who enabled him. I want young people coming out of school to say, 'Should I go work for the Trump administration? Like that sounds fun. I might get an opportunity.'"
She continued:
"I want them to be like, 'Lord, that might be buying myself a ton of problems that I don't want, and so let me avoid participating in that.' I want that deterrence message sent."
Odd words from someone who spent the last year calling similar pressure an authoritarian tactic.
The Chicago remarks didn't come out of nowhere. Two weeks earlier, at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Slotkin had laid out her plan for Democrats returning to power. She wanted a list of "signature cases," borrowing the idea from Poland's "Iron Broom" campaign.
Her examples included allegations concerning $200 million in advertising contracts involving Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and a $13 million no-bid contract involving Interior Secretary Doug Burgum. She also suggested U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro should face professional consequences if she misused her office. Slotkin's accusations were conditional, with the alleged wrongdoing still requiring proof.
Those officials are already serving. The students Slotkin was talking about in Chicago aren't. Some might never work in politics at all.
Yet she wants the possibility of a future legal headache factoring into their decision before they ever set foot in a federal office.
Investigating a crime is one thing. Making potential employees fear future prosecution because they want to work for a Republican president is quite another.
And Slotkin knows how that fear works.
In February, a federal grand jury declined to indict her and five other Democrat lawmakers over their November 2025 video urging members of the military to refuse illegal orders. Trump had accused the lawmakers of seditious behavior and called for an investigation.
After the grand jury declined to indict, Slotkin accused Trump of weaponizing the justice system. She had been talking about the pressure of a possible prosecution since January, when the investigation was still underway.
As RedState previously covered, she told the New York Times:
"Facts matter little, but the threat matters quite a bit. The threat of legal action; the threat to your family; the threat to your staff; the threat to you."
She understood perfectly well the chilling effect of threatened prosecution, when she was the one being investigated.
Slotkin now wants that concern weighing on people who haven't even accepted a government job. She never accused those prospective employees of committing crimes. She wants them to hear about investigations of Trump's aides and reconsider whether the opportunity is worth pursuing.
Slotkin called her own experience political intimidation. In Chicago, she explained how she hoped the possibility of future prosecutions would affect a new generation of government employees.
Apparently, the threat is only troubling when she's on the receiving end.
![]() |
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
