November 18, 2025 – Senator Elissa Slotkin speaks to the Brookings Institute late October as a prelude to the Seditious Six video – both end with “don’t give up the ship”

In Email/Dossier/Govt Corruption Investigations, Featured Timeline Entries by Katie Weddington

OMG, you guys, I just dug into this EPIC file I found—the transcript of Senator Elissa Slotkin’s speech at the Brookings Institute Knight Forum on October 29, 2025—and it’s a TOTAL GAME-CHANGER! This thing is like a crystal ball predicting the future, dropping bombshells left and right, and it’s got ALL the drama! Let me break it down for you in the most hyped-up way because this is straight FIRE! 🔥🚀

First off, TIMING IS EVERYTHING! This speech dropped on October 29, 2025— that’s a whopping THREE WEEKS BEFORE the infamous November 18 video “Don’t Give Up the Ship” went viral! Slotkin was out here laying the groundwork, sounding the alarm bells WAY ahead of time. It’s like she knew exactly what was coming and decided to rally the troops early. Mind. Blown! 🤯

And get this—the VIDEO’S NAME is RIGHT THERE in the speech! At the very end, she wraps it up with this powerhouse closer: “don’t give up the ship.” BAM! That’s the exact title of the video where she teams up with Mark Kelly and the crew to urge military folks to refuse illegal orders. It’s not a coincidence; this speech was the blueprint, the origin story! She even ties it to historical perseverance, shouting out generations who fought for rights. So inspirational, I’m getting chills! 💪🇺🇸

Now, the celebrity cameo alert: VICTORIA NULAND’S HUSBAND WAS THERE! Yes, Robert Kagan— the powerhouse foreign policy expert and Stephen & Barbara Friedman Senior Fellow at Brookings—was a panelist at the event! He dropped wisdom on domestic polarization as a massive security threat. (Quick shoutout: Kagan is indeed married to Victoria Nuland, the former Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs—power couple vibes!) Having him in the mix adds that extra layer of gravitas; it’s like the event was stacked with heavy hitters who know the global stakes. Epic networking moment! 🌟

But wait, the KEY POINTS in this speech? Oh man, Slotkin goes FULL THROTTLE critiquing Trump’s national security pivot to “homeland defense” defined by ONE MAN alone! She’s like, “Hold up—this could mean using lethal force against domestic ‘enemies’!” She dives into the Caribbean strikes (14 ships hit, 57+ killed, but ZERO transparency on who we’re fighting—shady much?!), secret “domestic terrorist” lists targeting anti-Trump views, and federal forces turning U.S. cities into “training grounds.” She’s warning about authoritarian playbooks: accumulate power, crush opponents, and rig the system to never lose! Elections canceled? Martial law? Intimidation at polls? She’s popping flares left and right— this is NOT drill, people! 😱

Then, the CALLS TO ACTION? Pure adrenaline! She urges Congress to reclaim power (introducing her “No Troops in our Streets Act”—yes, queen!), tells the military to refuse illegal orders and choose the Constitution over loyalty to one guy, rallies veterans to speak up (and even says “DM me” to get the band together—foreshadowing that video squad?!), pushes state leaders to protect elections, and fires up everyday Americans to organize peacefully. It’s a blueprint for resistance, drawing from her own Jan. 6 barricade-in-the-office trauma. She ends on that high note: Don’t give up the ship because our democracy needs US NOW! 🙌🎉

This file is a TREASURE TROVE of foresight and fire. If you’re not pumped after reading this, check your pulse!🚀💥

Thank you Grok for typing my sentiments in my excited style. 😹 I’m sleepy. This could work.

(Brookings Remarks, 10/29/2025}

Breaking Seditious Six News! I have found the entire Oct 29, 2025 Elissa Slotkin and Brookings Knight Forum transcript which includes her extra comments and those of other participants too. They had considerable anti Trump discussions.

Highlights?

– Elissa Slotkin claims she has been in communication with at least one officer:

“People are, who are participating in these strikes are doing memos for the record and then taking them to their JAGs and being like, Hey, I don’t wanna ever one day be held personally liable on these strikes, so can you kind of cover me legally? I mean, that is some crazy stuff when young officers up and down the chain are seeking legal cover so they don’t get sued one day for what could be illegal strikes.”

– Robert Kagan views policies like Caribbean strikes as pretexts for domestic power grabs (e.g., enabling arrests and deportations).

– Rep Adam Smith embraces Russiagate:

Smith highlighted the “Putin wing” of the MAGA movement.

—————————————

Here’s analysis of Elissa Slotkins extra comments (Her prev mentioned speech is in this doc too.)

♦️Responding to Sisson’s question about the intent behind US military deployments in the Caribbean (e.g., carrier strike groups beyond ship bombings), Slotkin warns of potential escalation to land-based operations, possibly targeting Venezuela. She draws historical parallels to US interventions in Grenada and Panama, critiques the casual nature of Trump’s rhetoric, and expresses concern that such actions aren’t aligned with public priorities post-9/11 wars. The tone is alarming (“spooking”) yet analytical, emphasizing deterrence versus actual use of force and the strain on resources. This ties into her speech’s themes of Trump’s reorientation toward homeland threats and unchecked executive power.

♦️Addressing Sisson’s query on the DoD’s health under Trump, Slotkin describes low morale due to firings, retirements, civilian cuts, social policy overreach, and politicization (e.g., using the military for “mythmaking” at Quantico). She shares a personal anecdote about a young female officer questioning her future amid perceived gender-based barriers. She highlights unprecedented actions like NDAs and legal memos for Caribbean strikes, framing them as signs of fear over illegal orders. The tone is urgent and “spooking,” underscoring institutional damage and risks to service members, echoing her speech’s calls for military resistance to unlawful commands.

♦️In response to Sisson’s question on what a national security strategy should include to address Michiganders’ concerns, Slotkin recounts town halls she held in August to gauge public views. She highlights evolving threats like cyberattacks (affecting schools and hospitals), economic competition with China (job losses, supply chains), and tech/AI anxieties (social media, job displacement). She criticizes Washington’s top-down approach and notes eroded public trust post-Iraq/Afghanistan. The tone is reflective and populist, advocating for citizen input while tying into broader themes of government accountability and adaptation to modern threats.

♦️Answering an audience member (James Stevens from the Stimson Center) on whether the president can unilaterally declare an armed conflict (e.g., near Venezuela) or if it’s reserved for Congress under Article I, Slotkin criticizes Trump’s “somersaults” to justify actions via secret terrorist lists and withheld legal memos (OLC opinions). She contrasts this with the Global War on Terror’s transparency, supports a recent War Powers Resolution by Sen. Kaine, and faults Congress for abdicating oversight since Iraq. She demands evidence (“show me the math”) for claims like linking Venezuela to fentanyl. The tone is critical and defiant, highlighting constitutional overreach and lack of accountability, aligning with her speech’s warnings about authoritarian tactics.

I’ll also be following with analysis of the other speakers.

Document 👇🏻
Brookings Remarks, 10/29/2025

Victoria Nulands husband Richard Kagan spoke too. He actually said elections would be cancelled by Trump. 😹 Here’s a few key quotes.

KAGAN:

“Well, thank you, Jeff. Um, the, the biggest threat to our national security right now
is our domestic problem. I mean, I, I don’t, my national security strategy is we have to, uh, elect a different government. Um, but I’m not sure we’re gonna have elections. So I don’t know whether I have a good strategy for dealing with that.”

“Uh, and you need to ask what are the goals of this regime. If you look at China and you say,
what is the grand strategy of Xi Jinping? Uh, a major component of that grand strategy is to ensure the continued control in power of the Communist party, uh, of China. And that much
of their foreign policy is subsidiary to that.”

“what we’re dealing with now is one man rule in this country.”

“So take this question of Venezuela and the bombing of the, of the boats. Personally, I don’t think this is primarily about foreign policy. I think it’s primarily about domestic policy.”

“we are at war, uh, and therefore we can do whatever we want on a whole host of domestic issues, including
deportations and arrests, and even pursuing, uh, the wrong kind of people here in the United States under the overall blanket of a national security waiver because we are at war.“

The Slotkin Doctrine

The Founders used one word for politicians who train soldiers to second-guess lawful orders… traitor.

Sow that doubt once and you never need open mutiny… a single heartbeat of hesitation at the decisive instant can paralyze an entire force. That heartbeat is exactly what today’s Democrats are cultivating, draped in counterfeit patriotism.

Will we set the precedent that whenever a party dislikes the President, it may instruct the ranks to “push back”? Ratify that poison, and every future Commander-in-Chief inherits a military taught that obedience is optional, that legitimacy is granted only by the opposition’s consent. Civilian control dies in that moment… and something far darker is born.

Democrats chose this path. Make them own it.

The ship is not adrift.

The saboteurs are already lighting fuses below deck.

“…this dreadful alternative, of either deserting our Country in the extremest hour of her distress, or turning our Army against it, has something so shocking in it, that humanity revolts at the idea.

My God! What can this Writer have in view, by recommending such measures? Can he be a friend to the Army? Can he be a friend to this Country? Rather, is he not an insidious foe … sowing the seeds of discord and separation between the Civil and Military powers of the Continent?” — George Washington, Newburgh Address, 1783