Slotkin won't cooperate with DOJ probe of 'illegal orders' video

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Elissa Slotkin won't voluntarily cooperate with federal prosecutors' investigation into a social media video that she organized with fellow Democrats telling members of the military and intelligence communities that they may refuse "illegal" orders.

Slotkin's lawyer called the inquiry "meritless" and an "unconstitutionally vindictive prosecution" intended to intimidate members of Congress and the public from questioning President Donald Trump. He also suggested that Slotkin is preparing to sue over potential violations of the Holly Democrat's First Amendment rights and malicious prosecution if the Department of Justice continues to come after her.

“I did this to go on offense,” Slotkin told The Associated Press. “And to put them in a position where they’re tap dancing. To put them in a position where they have to own their choices of using a U.S. attorney’s office to come after a senator.”

Slotkin's attorney, former federal prosecutor Preet Bharara, wrote Thursday to U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro, saying that the first-term senator is declining to voluntarily sit for an interview and requesting that Pirro "immediately" terminate an open investigation and inquiry regarding the video.

Bharara also separately wrote a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi, in which Slotkin similarly rejected the request for an FBI interview about the video and urged Bondi to close the investigation.

Slotkin, as a former CIA officer and defense official, has the "utmost" respect for law enforcement seeking to protect national security but "investigating a video that accurately restates the law has nothing to do with protecting national security and everything to do with weaponizing the Department of Justice against the president's political opponents," Bharara wrote.

"Senator Slotkin will not, therefore, lend legitimacy to this unconstitutional abuse of power," he added.

Pirro's office declined to comment Thursday. Last month, Pirro's team declined to confirm or deny any investigation and wouldn't answer questions about what potential crime Slotkin is being investigated for and whether it relates to the late November viral video. Bharara's letters were first reported by the Associated Press.

The video at issue was filmed last fall by six Democratic lawmakers who urged U.S. military personnel to follow established protocols and refuse orders that are illegal. The lawmakers in the video said Trump’s administration was “pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens,” and they called on troops to “stand up for our laws.”

The video infuriated Trump and other Republican leaders the week before Thanksgiving, with the president accusing them of sedition and calling for their arrest, prosecution and possible execution by hanging: "SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!" Trump wrote in one post on his Truth Social platform.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth dubbed the group of Democrats the “Seditious Six" and claimed they're spreading “despicable, reckless, and false” information. Pentagon initiated administrative actions against Arizona U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly, a retired Navy captain and Democrat who took part in the video.

Bharara emphasized what Slotkin and the other lawmakers have said ― that they were merely restating the law in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which says service members may push back on illegal orders. "Legal orders should always be followed. We're just talking about illegal orders," Slotkin said amid the furor.

Bharara pointed to remarks by Bondi, Hegseth and Solicitor General D. John Sauer, who have also spoken on record expressing the same view of the law, including in legal statements to the Supreme Court on behalf of Trump.

In Thursday's letters, Bharara explained that the video was prompted by Slotkin receiving outreach from members of the military and intelligence community last summer and fall with questions about whether they could refuse an illegal order. Slotkin, in response, then organized the video filming to help those individuals understand "that the law not only allows, but requires, them to refuse an illegal order."

Bharara noted to Pirro and Bondi that their prosecutors, when he spoke to them, could "not articulate any theory of possible criminal liability" or identify the statute that they were relying on or that was violated by Slotkin.

He further stated that Slotkin as a member of Congress under Article 1 of the Constitution (known as the speech and debate clause) has the right to speak on matters of public policy without the threat of arrest or persecution. Slotkin serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

In early December, Slotkin formed a legal defense fund as she braced for a possible federal probe.

Members of Congress may establish a legal defense fund to help defend themselves when they face potential trouble with the law or ethical violations related to their congressional service. The creation of such a fund requires the approval of the bipartisan Senate Ethics Committee, which oversees them and requires quarterly reports on their activities.

_____