Senator Elissa Slotkin Announces She Is Being Investigated
Slotkin says prosecutors are investigating her over a video urging service members to resist illegal orders.

SOURCE CHECK
TAP FOR WHYVictory Girls Blog is an opinion-oriented blog, and this post uses highly partisan and inflammatory language while offering little original verification. The author is named, but the text relies substantially on excerpts and claims about a New York Times report.
- Source type — A blog with strongly partisan commentary rather than an established reporting organization.
- Editorial standards — The post uses insults and broad claims, with limited separation between commentary and verified reporting.
- Author attribution — A named author is identified.
- Transparency — The post identifies the New York Times as the source of quoted reporting, but provides little independent sourcing.
The post includes some attributed details about the prosecutor’s office requesting an interview and declining to confirm an investigation, but it provides little independent reporting or corroboration. Its inflammatory commentary and unsupported assertions substantially weaken precision and fairness.
HOW WE SCORE ↗The post includes attributed reporting that the prosecutor’s office would not confirm an investigation, but its own commentary is overwhelmingly critical of Slotkin and other Democrats. It gives little meaningful consideration to their explanation or to uncertainty beyond quoting the report.
- Loaded language — Repeated personal insults and partisan labels dominate the post.
- Counterarguments presented — Slotkin’s account and remarks are quoted, but the author largely dismisses them rather than engaging their rationale.
- Opinion vs reporting — The author’s judgments and commentary are explicit and extensive.
- Source diversity — The post relies chiefly on excerpts from one newspaper report and the author’s own assertions.
The post strongly favors Trump-aligned positions and attacks Democratic lawmakers using partisan labels, insults and dismissive framing. Its treatment of Slotkin and the video is overtly hostile rather than neutral reporting.
- Language tone — Uses insults such as “single cell organisms” and “Seditious Six” for Democratic lawmakers.
- Framing — Frames Slotkin’s account as attention-seeking and dismisses her concerns about government intimidation.
- Source selection — Quotes Slotkin’s statements mainly to rebut or ridicule them, while offering no comparable defense of her position.
The post criticizes Sen. Elissa Slotkin over her claim that federal prosecutors are investigating her after a video urging service members to resist illegal orders. It quotes reporting that prosecutors requested an interview, while noting that their office did not confirm an investigation and the possible crime was unclear.
The author attacks Slotkin’s account that federal prosecutors are investigating her because of a video she helped organize. The post quotes a New York Times report saying the U.S. attorney’s office requested an interview with Slotkin or her lawyer, but declined to confirm or deny an investigation and had not identified a possible crime. The author disputes Slotkin’s characterization of the matter as an effort to intimidate her and questions the significance of the inquiry.
The post also revisits the video, which it describes as advising military personnel to resist illegal orders. It presents the video as improper and criticizes Slotkin’s past remarks about President Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. The post is opinionated commentary and uses personal insults about Slotkin and other lawmakers.
Community verdict
11 VOTESCounts every outlet’s report of this story. See all 13
- Readers of left-leaning coverage: 56% good look
- Readers of right-leaning coverage: not enough votes yet
Votes cast on this page
Votes cast on this page: ▲ 0 · ◆ 0 · ▼ 0
People in this story
SWIPE →Michigan senator who says federal prosecutors are investigating her after she participated in a video about illegal orders.
President discussed in connection with Slotkin’s criticism and the video.
Secretary of Defense whom Slotkin questioned at a Senate hearing.
Pennsylvania representative and one of the lawmakers associated with the video.
New Hampshire representative and one of the lawmakers associated with the video.
Pennsylvania representative and one of the lawmakers associated with the video.
Arizona senator and one of the lawmakers associated with the video.
Colorado representative and one of the lawmakers associated with the video.
Part of a bigger story
10 OUTLETSSlotkin says federal prosecutors are investigating her over a video urging service members to refuse illegal orders; the U.S. attorney’s office has not confirmed an investigation. Left-leaning outlets frame the inquiry as political intimidation of lawmakers defending constitutional limits. Center outlets mostly use descriptive language, stressing prosecutors’ nonconfirmation and the unclear legal basis while placing the dispute in a wider political context. Right-leaning outlets cast the video as an effort to disrupt military command and dismiss Slotkin’s concerns, rather than treating the inquiry chiefly as retaliation.
- ARTICLES
- 13
- OUTLETS
- 10
- AVG CRED
- 67
- Wonkette · US Attorney Boxwine Harassing Lawmakers Who Reminded Troops Of Duty To Defy Illegal Orders
- Al Jazeera · Five US lawmakers investigated over warning troops about illegal orders
- Grenada Chronicle – Daily Grenada, Caribbean News · Five US lawmakers investigated over warning troops about illegal orders - Grenada Chronicle – Daily Grenada And Caribbean News
Discussion · 0
Loading comments…







