Charlie, I want to turn to the broader picture here, Trump and the rule of law.

Youúve been covering a lot of these issues and Iúm wondering, simply put, what is this, what is the thing that - - apart from the January 6th part, whatús the thing thatús most surprised you about some of these executive orders so far?

CHARLIE SAVAGE: So, as I was processing that blizzard of executive orders that Trump signed on the night of Inauguration Day, suddenly dozens are showing up, he was sitting in the Oval Office stack after stack after stack, you know, itús very different than eight years ago.

I think he issued four executive orders in his first five days.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Most of that first day was Sean Spicer trying to defend outrageous claims about crowd size.

CHARLIE SAVAGE: They knew what they were doing this time.

This was well prepared, this was scripted, these things were written.

And he was really pushing at the limits of legitimate executive authority with some of them.

The pardons weúve just been talking about, as I just said, may not be a good idea, but thereús no doubt he could do that.

The Constitution clearly lets the president do that.

Some of the stuff thatús in these executive orders is quite different.

Heús, for example, you know, it all seems like a million years ago we were talking about TikTok, but heús directing the government to essentially suspend this law that was passed by bipartisan majorities in both houses of Congress signed by President Biden, upheld unanimously by the Supreme Court just a couple days ago, and he said, weúre just going to suspend it.

It doesnút exist.

How does he have the power to do that?

You know, the Constitution says the president shall take care of the laws, be faithfully executed.

Heús just doing it.

Heús invoking commander-in-chief powers to -- in some of his immigration actions.

Heús saying weúre just not going to -- weúre going to treat migrants as invaders.

Heús activating North Com to develop a military campaign on domestic soil.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: The word invasion is used very deliberately in some of these documents.

I want to ask you about the immigration.

He ordered an end to birthright citizenship.

Well, he ordered it and then, very predictably, because it is in the Constitution, a judge, a Ronald Reagan-appointed judge, said, what are you doing?

You canút do that.

Any lawyer, any first year law student knows that, any judge is going to put a stop to that, or at least a temporary block on that.

So, whatús going on there?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Why do it?

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Why do it?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Well, because supporters and allies of Donald Trump who once were considered more on the fringe, whether itús Stephen Miller or John Eastman, a lawyer from California who wanted -- you know, this is their project.

They had long wanted to challenge birthright citizenship.

And Trump said, okay, letús do it.

I was told by a source close to the White House that some inside want this to be successful.

Some inside the White House want this to be successful.

Some inside the White House want this to go to the courts and get killed, so then that way they never have to touch it again.

Because they donút believe that they accurately say that in the Constitution, it says that he doesnút have the ability to -- JEFFREY GOLDBERG: A pragmatically futile attempt to overturn the Constitution.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: But I think with others, the Trump White House is looking forward to the court challenges, whether itús in immigration, not necessarily connected to birthright citizenship, or whether itús in -- whether or not they can take back some of the power of the purse from Congress.

They want to be able to use whatús known as impoundment authority to disperse federal funds however they see fit.

And they want that challenge to go to the Supreme Court, and they hope that with some of these that theyúre able to get favorable ruling.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Ashley, where are the Democrats in all of these controversies?

I mean, this is not 2017 with mass rallies and protests, but it just doesnút seem as if the Democratic Party is coming out in force to say, oh, you know what, maybe donút let the leader of the Proud Boys out of jail.

ASHLEY PARKER: I mean, am I allowed to say it, that the Democrats are in disarray?

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Yes, you are allowed to say that Democrats -- LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: They said that they are.

ASHLEY PARKER: Yes, they said that they are.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Democrats continue to be in disarray.

ASHLEY PARKER: I mean, youúre right.

What is so striking is this sort of very forceful and energizing resistance that Democrats put up for so long has dissipated, at least in this moment.

And when you look at what theyúre saying and when you talk to them, some of them are kind of candid about their -- theyúre trying to regroup and retrench, right?

They just lost an election.

As weúre talking about, thereús, which is what Trump always does, this shock and awe fire hose of things, which is even just from a political messaging standpoint, which one do you go after.

Is it immigration?

Is it the pardons?

Is it withdrawing from the World Health Organization or the Paris Climate, you know?

So, theyúre regrouping.

And Democrats also are in a bit of a, an effort to reconstitute the party where Donald Trump and Republicans were able to claim a lot of the policies of Democrats as their own.

I mean, if you look back at when Biden was the nominee, it is so striking that Scranton Joe ceded being the advocate of the middle class in the American worker to Donald Trump, that Donald Trump was able to take that mantle from him.

And thatús something Democrats are trying to grapple with too.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: So, quickly, who is going to lead the Democrats into array?

And who are the -- it doesnút seem like anybody is sort of remotely ready to seize the mantle of direction and leadership.

Obviously, there are people -- there are the so called normie Democrats, you hear Elissa Slotkin and people like that talking about, letús not talk about identity thing, race, gender, letús not obsess about -- letús just talk about the things that people want to talk about.

But where is -- is there anybody yet youúve seen who says, oh Iúm going to take this by the horns and deal with it?

ASHLEY PARKER: I think the thing Iúve heard the most, and again, this is more from the normie Democrats, is this effort to wrest the party back from the activists and from the groups and -- JEFFREY GOLDBERG: The so-called groups.

ASHLEY PARKER: The so-called groups.

And Iúve heard people say, the next time a group says, you know, if you donút take this sort of very out of the mainstream leftist position, weúre going to blast you in a primary, the answer should be, okay, so blast us because we donút all want to be, if youúre a Democrat, standing up on stage and raising your hand for something that will get you killed in a general election.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right.

I want to - - one more topic I want to raise, and obviously there are a million topics brought up by these actions this week, but President Trumpús decision to pull security off of three figures, his former secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, his former national security adviser, John Bolton, and his former advisor on Iran, Brian Hook, all of whom are under death threats from the government of Iran.

These are people that all worked for Donald Trump, they got on Donald Trumpús bad side for one reason or another.

Leigh Ann, this is way, way, way outside the norm of Washington behavior.

How much danger are these men in?

And are there people in the Republican caucus, people on -- Republicans on the Hill who are saying, you canút do that?

LEIGH ANN CALDWELL: Yes.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Theyúre under -- go on.

LEIGH ANN CALDWELL: I mean, so, I donút know how much danger they are in.

Iúm not talking to intelligence officials.

But what I will say is this is Trump promised retribution and this is it.

Itús not just retribution for Liz Cheney and Democrats, but itús retribution for people who have wronged him.

And this is one way that heús able to use his strings to do that.

This is not something that has come up on Capitol Hill.

I will say, like we all are, Republicans and Democrats are drinking through a fire hose right now.

Every single aide that I talk to is literally exhausted and overwhelmed and cannot even jump from one topic to another.

So, I think that this is not even resonating yet on Capitol Hill.

And, Charlie, you might have a lot more on the intel side.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Yes.

Charlie, let me give you the -- Iúll give you the last word if you can answer the question, is this so far out of the bounds of what a Washington norm traditionally has been that people donút even have the language to deal with the fact that the president is cutting these guys adrift when they carried out his order to assassinate Qassem Soleimani, the Iranian terrorist leader?

CHARLIE SAVAGE: I mean, well put.

I canút build on that much.

But.

you know, itús not just about, I think, bullying people that heús decided were once his, you know, minions, but, you know, criticized him in some way and now are out of the tent, but itús also about striking fear in his current minions that they better not do anything but toe the line because look what happens when youúre out of the tent.

Youúre really out of the tent.

And, you know, the physical danger aspect of that resonates for me with what Mitt Romney and others talked about during the second impeachment, where Republicans supposedly were saying to each other they wanted to vote to convict Trump but they were afraid for their own physical safety and that of their family after January 6th.

LEIGH ANN CALDWELL: And the reason Mitt Romney did not endorse Kamala Harris.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right, exactly.

Unfortunately, we need to leave it there for now.

Itús been a great conversation.

And I want to thank our panelists and our viewers for joining us.