Maybe Elissa Slotkin isn’t as smart as I thought. Either that, or her priorities are all out of whack.

I say this because the Michigan Democrat senator and former CIA operative clearly believes that while a Jew-hating radical socialist/Muslim Brotherhood sympathizer is on the cusp of becoming her senatorial colleague and thereby gaining access to our nation’s most sensitive military and intelligence secrets, Slotkin is targeting... young Republicans. (No, Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed will not become Michigan’s next senator, but work with me here.)

Yes, while Jew-hatred has overtaken the Democrat Party and its college-campus production facilities, Slotkin believes that if her party gains power after next week’s midterm elections, its priority ought not be treating the infection that courses through her party’s veins — the infection that causes scumbags like El-Sayed and his fellow-traveling Muslim leftist, Cenk Uygur, to rationalize the attempted mass murder of Jewish children and to blame the high cost of groceries on the Jews.

No, instead, the priority of Slotkin and her fellow Democrats should be rounding up and prosecuting Trump administration officials and thereby making an example of them to young conservative Americans.

Last week, I wrote about Slotkin’s vile statement to that effect at the University of Chicago — a statement meant to send a weaponizing chill through young people who might consider serving in the Trump administration. Again, here’s her exact quote: “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.’ 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.”

Credit goes, first and foremost, to Michael Bicksel, a young conservative University of Chicago student and senior editor of the school’s student newspaper, The Chicago Thinker, for refusing to be cowed by Slotkin’s despicable warning. Instead, Bicksel filed an ethics complaint with the Senate Select Committee on Ethics.

Concurrently, the Center to Advance Security in America filed its own complaint against Slotkin, asking Senate Ethics Committee Chairman James Lankford and Vice Chairman Chris Coons “to investigate whether Slotkin’s remarks violated Senate ethical standards.” Spoiler alert: Her comments most certainly did violate ethical standards, and if the Senate Ethics Committee can’t come to that simple determination, it ought to fold up its tent.

Slotkin’s Senate colleague, Utah Republican Mike Lee, called her remarks “absolutely disgraceful” and a “fascist move.” American Moment CEO Nick Solheim was equally indignant, vowing, “We are going to help them get jobs, we are going to put them to work, and if anyone comes after them — they’ll have a fight on their hands.”

As for Senate Majority Leader John Thune, he had this to say on the matter: “.”

At issue here, though, is more than just an attempt by Democrats to terrorize young Republicans; Slotkin is also laying the groundwork for a sustained lawfare campaign against those who dared to work for a duly elected American president. And if the Democrats win next week’s midterms and get the gavels on January 3, that’s exactly what they’ll do.

Slotkin’s plans, however, are likely unconstitutional. Not that that ever stopped a Democrat, but still. As Abhi Kambli, former deputy associate attorney general at the Department of Justice, writes at The Federalist, the investigative powers of Congress aren’t enumerated within the Constitution; instead, they’re implied, and the Supreme Court has ruled that there are limits to what a rabidly partisan bunch of Democrat committee chairs can do.

As the Supreme Court has ruled, Democrats can’t haul Trump officials before their committees as a matter of law enforcement; that’s a power reserved to the other two coequal branches.

Nor can the Democrats do so merely to expose behavior they disagree with. As SCOTUS has ruled, “There is no congressional power to expose for the sake of exposure.”

Nor can the Democrats overtly threaten such punishment of Trump officials; such actions are in violation of the separation of powers because they’d give Congress “enormous power over the executive, empowering it to hold the executive branch hostage.”

Finally, Slotkin’s comments might be used against her by Republicans. How? As Kambli notes, such threats provide “evidence for those who wish to block enforcement of future congressional subpoenas.” Imagine War Secretary Pete Hegseth arguing that he’s not going to abide by a congressional subpoena because it’s purely partisan in nature. In this way, Slotkin might’ve made an own goal.

Now Slotkin is playing the victim card, saying of Donald Trump, “His supporters use a coordinated play to threaten, intimidate, and silence anyone who speaks up. So if the president wants to investigate and arrest me, and even worse, as so many authoritarian leaders do with their political adversaries, then do it.”

I remember many years ago when a Jewish friend of mine introduced me to a fascinating term I’d never heard before: the self-hating Jew. These are the folks who, like hard-left professor and social critic Noam Chomsky, always seem to be tripping over themselves to apologize for the existence of the Jewish state.

Is Slotkin a self-hating Jew — more concerned with terrorizing young Republicans than rooting out the Jew-hatred in her midst — or just a hyper-partisan dimwit? It’s hard to say. But Republican voters can render the whole matter moot next Tuesday by showing up and voting against this thuggery.