“I’m into effectiveness,” Senator Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) told an audience last week at the University of Chicago’s Institute of Politics.
Maybe effectiveness isn’t what we want from government,
Recognizing that, in the next Congress, Democrats are unlikely to have the votes to remove President Trump from office by impeaching him in the House and convicting him in the Senate, Slotkin called for an alternative strategy: pursuing aggressive criminal prosecutions in what she called “signature cases” of the people who have “enabled” President Trump.
Calling for the prosecution of someone who has committed a crime — I mean a real crime, not simply working for one’s political enemy — is not very controversial, of course. But Slotkin’s stated reasoning is.
“I want young people coming out of school to say, ‘Should I go work for the Trump administration?’”
She imagines them thinking, “‘Like, that sounds fun, I might get an opportunity.’”
But opportunities for young conservatives need to be effectively squelched, dontcha know . . .
“I want them to be like, ‘Lord, that might be buying myself a ton of problems I don’t want and so let me avoid participating in that,’” explained the senator.
“I want that deterrence message sent,” she concluded.
Yes, more lawfare is coming . . . in the name of “effectiveness” . . . to chill political participation.
Slotkin presents herself as a moderate Democrat. Really?
Even moderates are now in favor of using the judicial system to prosecute political opponents . . . the better to frighten and intimidate young people . . . who might be looking for a job with those political opponents?
That’s not change. That’s more of the same.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Illustration created with Grok Imagine
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts
