>>> NOW EARLIER IN THE PROGRAM, WE DISCUSSED THE ACTS THAT ELON MUSK HAS BEEN TAKING TWO CRITICAL AGENCIES IN A WAY THAT COULD BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND EVEN ILLEGAL.

IN A NEW PIECE FOR THE ATLANTIC, THEY WARNED THAT IT IS URGENT FOR THE LEGISLATURE TO RECLAIM ITS POWER BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE.

AND HE TELLS MICHELLE MARTIN WHY TOO LATE COULD COME A LOT SOONER THAN EVERYONE THINKS.

>> JONATHAN, THANK YOU FOR SPEAKING WITH US.

>> THANK YOU.

>> I WANT TO TALK ABOUT A COUPLE OF RECENT ARTICLES THAT YOU HAVE WRITTEN FOR THE ATLANTIC, BUT I WANT TO START WITH ONE WHERE YOU SAY THAT THE CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS IS HERE.

IN PLAIN LANGUAGE, WHAT ARE THE THINGS THAT WE -- LED YOU TO THAT CONCLUSION?

>> ARTICLE 1 GIVES CONGRESS POWER OVER SPENDING.

AND THAT IS THE SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE HAD IN THIS COUNTRY FOR THE ENTIRE EXISTENCE OF THIS REPUBLIC.

IF CONGRESS ESTABLISHES AN AGENCY OR SPENDING PROGRAM, THAT IS THE LAW, AND THE PRESIDENT HAS TO FOLLOW THE LAW.

NOW THERE HAVE BEEN DISAGREEMENTS ABOUT HOW THE PRESIDENT HANDLES THAT, AND THE PRIORITIES, BUT THAT BASIC FACT HAS NOT BEEN CHALLENGED, AND THAT FACT IS SOMETHING THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IS NOW CHALLENGING.

THEY'RE CLAIMING FOR THEMSELVES THE RIGHT TO ELIMINATE ANY PROGRAM OR AGENCY THAT THEY DO NOT LIKE FOR ANY REASON WHATSOEVER.

SO THAT, THAT IS TOTALLY NEW, AND THAT WOULD COMPLETELY UP AND THE BALANCE OF POWER BETWEEN THE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT.

>> DO YOU THINK THAT THE PUBLIC SEES IT AS SERIOUSLY AS YOU DO?

>> NO, I DON'T ALTHOUGH YOU ARE SEEN SOME EVIDENCE THAT TRUMPS APPROVAL RATINGS ARE FALLING BACK A BIT.

EVEN JUST OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF WEEKS.

AND YOU HAVE SEEN THAT ELON MUSK HAS GROWN UNPOPULAR.

THE GENERAL IDEA THAT THE DEMONSTRATION IS DOING SOMETHING RADICAL AND MOVING REALLY FAST IS GETTING THROUGH TO THE PUBLIC.

AND IT IS COMMON FOR PRESIDENTS TO COME IN AND THINK THAT THE PUBLIC WANTS THEM TO UNDERTAKE RADICAL CHANGE.

THIS IS A MISTAKE THAT PRESIDENTS OF BOTH PARTIES HAVE MADE AND ASSUMING THAT THE PUBLIC WILL REWARD THEM FOR MOVING THINGS REALLY FAST, AND THAT IS USUALLY NOT THE CASE, AND THIS SEEMS TO BE ANOTHER INSTANCE IN WHICH THAT SAME MISTAKE IS BEEN MADE.

>> SO, WHAT ARE SOME OF THE MOVES THAT THE PRESIDENT OFÃ YOU KNOW, WITH ELON MUSK IN THE LEAD, THE RICHEST MAN IN THE WORLD, WHAT ARE SOME OF THE DECISIONS THAT THEY HAVE TAKEN THAT HAVE CAUSED THIS KIND OF ALARM?

DESCRIBE WHAT IS GOING ON HERE.

>> YEAH.

WELL, THEY PUT UP THIS VERY BROAD AND CONFUSING MEMO THAT SEEMED TO SUSPEND THE ENTIRE GOVERNMENT'S OPERATIONS, WHICH THERE WERE LOTS OF PEOPLE JUSTIFIABLY IN A PANIC BEFORE A COURT SORT OF SLAPPED THEM DOWN.

BUT NOW THEY ARE TRYING TO DO A VERSION OF THAT SEEMINGLY PIECEMEAL.

YOU HAVE ELON MUSK HELD UP IN THE EISENHOWER BUILDING NEXT TO THE WHITE HOUSE JUST KIND OF GOING THROUGH THE FEDERAL BUDGET AND WITHOUT HAVING MUCH EXPERTISE TO DO THE JOB, DETERMINING WHICH PROGRAMS HE CONSIDERS WASTEFUL OR FRAUDULENT OR HEART OF SOME KIND OF LEFT-WING CONSPIRACY THAT HE IMAGINES HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR YEARS.

AND TRYING TO JUST ZERO OUT THOSE PROGRAMS OR DECLARE THEM DEAD.

AND THEN MEANWHILE, THEY ARE SENDING OUT LETTERS TO THE WHOLE FEDERAL WORK FORCE URGING THEM TO RETIRE IMMEDIATELY, AND SOME PEOPLE ARE FIGURING OUT WHETHER THEY SHOULD TAKE THAT OFFER OR WHETHER IT IS AN OFFER AT ALL OR IF IT IS LEGAL AND ALL THESE THINGS ARE HARD TO DETERMINE.

SO THEY ARE JUST THROWING SAND INTO THE GEARS OF THE MACHINERY.

THERE JAMMING UP THE MACHINE AS HARD AND FAST AS THEY CAN WITHOUT HAVING A VERY CLOSE IDEA OF HOW IT OPERATES AND WHAT THE EFFECTS OF ALL OF THIS MIGHT BE ON THE PEOPLE WHO ARE RELYING ON THESE GOVERNMENT SERVICES.

>> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS REALLY SET OFF RED FLAG'S FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE IS THAT ELON MUSK IN THIS GROUP OF YOUNG SOFTWARE ENGINEERS, WE ARE TOLD THAT ONE OF THEM IS AS YOUNG AS 19 YEARS OLD AND MOST OF THEM ARE IN THEIR EARLY 20s, HAVE HAD ACCESS TO THE TREASURIES SYSTEM FOR DISBURSING GOVERNMENT FUNDS.

AND THIS IS HERE TO FOR BEEN SUPERVISED BY CAREER EMPLOYEES, THE CAREER EMPLOYEE THAT WAS ULTIMATELY IN CHARGE OF THIS WAS RETIRED UNDER DURESS IT SEEMS AFTER HE OBJECTED TO THEM HAVING ACCESS TO THIS.

AND AS WE ARE SPEAKING NOW, A FEDERAL JUDGE HAS SAID THEY CAN ONLY HAVE LIMITED ACCESS AND ONLY TWO MEMBERS OF THE TEAM COULD HAVE LIMITED ACCESS AND IT IS SO CALLED READ ONLY ACCESS.

CAN YOU TALK ABOUT WHY THIS IS SO CONCERNING?

>> I DON'T KNOW THAT ANYBODY KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND THAT IS PART OF THE REASON FOR THE CONCERN.

WE DO KNOW THAT THEY HAVE MISLED THE PUBLIC ABOUT THIS.

THEY SAID THAT ELON MUSK HAD .- ONLY ACCESS TO THIS INFORMATION, BUT THE REPORTERS FOUND THAT THEY DID NOT, THEY ACTUALLY HAD ACCESS TO GO IN AND CHANGE THE OUTCOMES OF THESE PAYMENTS.

SO WHAT PEOPLE THINK, ALTHOUGH YOU KNOW, I DO NOT WANT TO JUST PASS ON SPECULATION AS FACT, BUT IT SEEMS AS IF ELON MUSK IS INCLINED TO USE THIS TOOL TO ADVANCE THIS ANTIGOVERNMENT AGENDA THAT HE SET OUT FOR HIMSELF THAT BASICALLY, INSTEAD OF GOING TO CONGRESS AND SAYING WE THINK THIS PROGRAM IS TOO BIG OR THIS AGENCY SHOULD BE SHATTERED, WE ARE GOING TO UNILATERALLY CUT UP THE PAYMENTS TO WHATEVER PROGRAMS THAT THEY THINK SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT EXIST.

AND JUST GOING STRAIGHT TO THE END POINT.

AND SO THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD ACCOMPLISH THE WORK IMMEDIATELY.

AND EVEN IF THE COURTS WERE TO STEP IN AND SAY YOU CANNOT DO THIS, THE DAMAGE OF MOVES LIKE THIS WOULD BE SO DIFFICULT TO REVERSE, THAT THEY MIGHT FUNCTIONALLY SUCCEED IN THEIR GOAL EVEN IF ILLEGALLY.

>> PRESIDENT TRUMP AND HIS KIND OF DESIGNATED AGENT IN THIS, ELON MUSK, HAVE BEEN ARGUING THAT THESE PROGRAMS ARE EITHER INEFFICIENT OR, IN THEIR WORDS, CORRUPT.

WHAT DO YOU SAY TO THAT?

>> LOOK, THERE ARE INEFFICIENT PROGRAMS IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND THERE ARE CERTAINLY INEFFICIENT SYSTEMS THAT PREVENT THE GOVERNMENT FROM FUNCTIONING EFFICIENTLY AND I KNOW OF SOME POLICY HAWKS THAT HAVE BEEN TRYING TO MAKE THE GOVERNMENT WORK BETTER.

IT IS FRUSTRATING THAT THEY ARE NOT LISTENING TO PEOPLE LIKE THAT WITH REAL EXPERTISE AND THAT ACTUALLY WANT TO MAKE THE GOVERNMENT MORE EFFICIENT.

IN A SENSE, THEY SEEM TO BE JUST RUNNING RAMPANT THROUGH THE GOVERNMENT, PICKING UP PROGRAMS THAT HAVE NAMES THAT SOUND WEIRD TO THEM OR MAKING SEAT OF THEIR PANTS GUESSES.

AND 20 IN THE AMOUNT WITHOUT ANY REAL THOUGHT.

SO IT IS FRUSTRATING AS SOMEBODY WHO WANTS TO MAKE GOVERNMENT MORE EFFICIENT, THAT THEY ARE NOT, THEY ARE NOT DOING THE SAME KIND OF CAREFUL OR RESPECTABLE WAY.

>> BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS ASPECT, BECAUSE THAT IS YOUR LARGER.

, BECAUSE THIS IS NOT JUST ABOUT -- AND OVERREACH IN ONE AREA BY A PERSON WHO IS INEXPERIENCED, DOES NOT REALLY KNOW HOW THE GOVERNMENT WORKS OR WHAT IT DOES, IS THAT HE STAYS PARTICULARLY FIXATED ON USAID .

THE PRESIDENT AND ELON MUSK SEEM PARTICULARLY FIXATED ON THIS.

THE POINT OF USING VERY DISPARAGING LANGUAGE TO TALK ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAT DO THIS WORK AND THE WORK THAT THEY'RE DOING.

WHY ARE THEY SO FIXATED ON THESE AGENCIES?

DO YOU HAVE ANYÃTHIS PARTICULAR AGENCY, DO YOU HAVE ANY SENSE OF THAT?

>> THAT IS A GREAT QUESTION AND I HAVE TRIED TO FIGURE IT OUT .1 IRONY, AND I HAVE ACTUALLYÃ I'M WORKING ON A STORY ABOUT THIS, IS THAT THE MARXIST LEFT HATES USAID AND HAS ALWAYS HATED USAID, AND THE REASON THEY HATE IT, IT IS A TOOL OF AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY.

AND AS SUCH, IT WAS DESIGNED TO COUNTER THE EFFECTS OF COMMUNISM.

NOW IT COUNTERS THE EFFECTS OF THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY GLOBALLY BY PROVIDING HUMANITARIAN AID AND TRIES TO SHOW THE WORLD THAT THE UNITED STATES CARES ABOUT THEM, SO IT IS KIND OF A JOINT DRAMATIC HUMANITARIAN MISSION.

DESCRIBING IT AS MARXIST IS REALLY AN A VERSION OF THE TRUTH.

HOW THEY CAME TO THIS IS VERY HARD TO UNDERSTAND.

IF YOU WANTED TO GIVE THEM CREDIT FOR BEING CLEVER AND SAY THE AMERICAN PUBLIC DOES NOT LIKE FOREIGN AID, THE AMERICAN PUBLIC MASSIVELY OVERESTIMATES THE AMOUNT OF THE BUDGET THAT GOES TO FOREIGN AID, SO ONE REASON THAT THEY THINK WE'RE SPENDING FAR MORE ON IT THEN WE ARE.

BUT IT IS A SOFT TARGET AND IF THEY WANT TO ESTABLISH THE PRINCIPLE THAT THE WHITE HOUSE HAS THE RIGHT TO TERMINATE ANY FEDERAL PROGRAM THAT IT WANTS WITHOUT GOING THROUGH CONGRESS, YOU WANT TO START WITH THE SOFTEST TARGET TO BEGIN WITH AND THEN YOU ESTABLISH THE PRINCIPLE AND YOU CAN START GOING AFTER HARDER TARGETS.

AND THAT WOULD REALLY ENABLE CONSERVATIVES TO ADVANCE POLICY GOALS.

YOU HAVE LARGE CHUNKS OF THE CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT THAT IS OPPOSED TO THE EXPANSION OF GOVERNMENT THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE SINCE THE NEW DEAL IN THE GREAT SOCIETY, BUT CONSIDERED A LOT OF THESE LARGE SPENDING PROGRAMS LIKE MEDICARE, MEDICAID, SOCIAL SECURITY TO BE POPULAR DIFFICULT TO CUT OR TO PRIVATIZE.

BUT IF THEY COULD JUST DO IT AT THE WHITE HOUSE WITH THE SNAP OF THE FINGERS AND NOT HAVE TO HAVE A VOTE IN CONGRESS, NOT HAVE TO HAVE PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY, THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD BE A GENERATIONAL CHANGE WITH THE GOVERNMENT AND ADVANCE A LOT OF THE GOALS.

>> WHEN THE ARGUMENTS THAT YOU MAKE IN YOUR PIECES THAT LOOK, IF THIS IS A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS, THIS SPEAKS TO A NEUTERING OF THE THIRD BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT, WHICH IS THE CONGRESS, THAT PRESUMABLY EVERYBODY IN CONGRESS SHOULD BE CONCERNED.

>> THE FIRST BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT I THINK THE FOUNDERS DECIDED THE FIRST BRANCH, CONGRESS IS SUPPOSED TO PREEMPT -- >> THE FIRST BRANCH, BUT THE QUESTION I HAVE FOR YOU, WHY ARE THEY NOT MORE JEALOUS OF THEIR OWN INSTITUTIONAL IMPERATIVES?

>> WELL, RIGHT.

WHAT YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED IS REALLY A LONG-STANDING FLAW IN THE CONSTITUTION.

AND NEITHER OF US IS THE FIRST PERSON TO IDENTIFY THIS, BUT THE FOUNDERS WERE NOT THINKING ABOUT POLITICAL PARTIES WHEN THE POUNDED THE SYSTEM.

PARLIAMENT REFORMS ARE DESIGNED WITH PARTIES IN MIND.

YOU HAVE PARTY CONTROL AND IN THE CORE OF HOW THOSE SYSTEMS ARE SUPPOSED TO OPERATE.

BUT WHAT THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTION DESIGN -- THEY IMAGINE THAT THE SEPARATE BRANCHES WOULD OPERATE AS BRANCHES INDEPENDENTLY OF EACH OTHER, AND SO THERE WOULD BE JEALOUS OF THEIR POWERS AND MAKE SURE THAT THE OTHER BRANCHES DID NOT -- CONTROL.

SO YOU HAVE CONGRESS MAKING SURE THAT THE PRESIDENT DID NOT TAKE TOO MUCH POWER BECAUSE CONGRESS WOULD WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT CONGRESS -- AND THE PRESIDENT WOULD DO THE SAME THING VIS-@-VIS CONGRESS AND THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, AND THE LEGISLATURE AND THE JUDICIAL BRANCH WOULD ALL CHECK IN WITH EACH OTHER.

BUT, THE PARTIES UP AND THOSE INCENTIVE SYSTEMS.

WHEN YOU HAVE CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT CONTROLLED BY THE SAME PARTY, MEMBERS OF CONGRESS JUST WANT THE PRESIDENT TO SUCCEED.

NOW, THAT IS A LONG-STANDING FEATURE OF AMERICAN POLITICS.

BUT IT IS KIND OF REASON TO A NEW HEIGHT UNDER THE REPUBLICAN PARTY BECAUSE PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS SO MUCH POWER OVER OTHER REPUBLICANS.

THE REPUBLICAN PARTY HAS COME TO DEFINE ITS IDEOLOGY ALMOST ENTIRELY IN WHATEVER TERMS DONALD TRUMP SETS AND TRUMP HAS SHOWN THAT HE CAN JUST CHANGE WHAT THE PARTY STANDS FOR OVERNIGHT AND MOST REPUBLICANS WILL FOLLOW HIM INSTANTANEOUSLY.

HE HAS ALSO SHOWN THAT ANY REPUBLICANS WHO DEFY HIM, HE CAN SAY THAT THEY ARE A RHINO REPUBLICAN IN NAME ONLY AND SUPPORT OF A PRIMARY CHALLENGE AND AND THEIR POLITICAL CAREER.

>> SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THE DEMOCRATS NOW, BECAUSE YOU HAVE ALSO BEEN WRITING ABOUT THEM.

YOU'RE NOT IMPRESSED.

>> NO.

>> YOU'RE NOT IMPRESSED.

>> SAY MORE.

>> I WROTE A PIECE ABOUT THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE'S RECENT MEETING WITH AN ELEVATED LEADER AND IT SORT OF HAD A BIT OF A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE PAST AND REALLY WANT TO GO.

AND YOU HAVE GOT TO BE A LITTLE BIT CAREFUL TALKING ABOUT IT BEEN LIKE THIS, BECAUSE THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE SOUNDS LIKE IT WOULD BE IN CHARGE OF THE DEMOCRATS BUT IT IS REALLY AN ORGANIZATION THAT HAS RELATIVELY LIMITED POWER.

IF YOU ARE A DEMOCRAT RUNNING FOR OFFICE YOU DO NOT HAVE TO GO WITH THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE TO FIND OUT WHAT TO SAY OR WHO IS GOING TO BE THE CANDIDATE IN YOUR DISTRICT.

-- BY VOTERS.

BUT I THINK, YOU CANNOT JUST STOP THERE, BECAUSE THE REASON, OR AT LEAST ONE REASON THE DNC IS SO POWERLESS IS THAT A LOT OF THE POWER OVER THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY HAS BEEN CONCEDED TO THE PROGRESSIVE -- INFRASTRUCTURE OVER THE PAST 15 OR 20 YEARS.

PROGRESSIVE ACTIVIST GROUPS FINANCED PRIVATELY BY DONORS OFTEN VERY LIBERAL DONORS THAT HAVE ADVANCED A SERIES OF CAUSES AND NEW ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE, RACIAL JUSTICE, AND ALL THOSE ACTIVISTS HAVE SET OUT TO PUSH THE PARTY TO THE LEFT SINCE THE SECOND OBAMA TERM, AND THEY HAVE HAD TREMENDOUS AMOUNTS OF SUCCESS PUSHING THEM TO THE LEFT, BUT I THINK THAT IN A LOT OF WAYS THEY PUSHED THE PARTY TO THE LEFT OF WHERE THE PUBLIC IS AND WHERE THEY WERE WINNING DURING THE OBAMA ERA, AND IT HAD SOME RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEM, FOR THE DEFEATS OF THE LAST ELECTION.

AND WHAT I NOTICED IN THE DNC MEETING IS THERE DID NOT SEEM TO BE ANY ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THIS PROBLEM.

THEY JUST SEEMED TO BE DOUBLING DOWN ON THE SAME BUZZWORDS AND ANALYSIS THAT GOT THEM INTO THE PROBLEM IN THE FIRST PLACE.

>> MEMBERS OF CONGRESS?

SOME OF THEM HAVE BEEN IN OFFICE FOR A LONG TIME.

THEY HAVE THEIR OWN STANDING IN THEIR COMMUNITIES THEY HAVE THEIR OWN REPUTATIONS.

YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THE -- I MEAN, WHERE IS THE LEADERSHIP THERE?

I MEAN, IS THE SIMPLE PROBLEM HERE THAT THERE IS NO FIGURE WHO COMMANDS THE RESPECT OR AT LEAST THE FOLLOWERSHIP OF SUFFICIENT NUMBERS OF EVEN MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO KIND OF CREATE A -- I DON'T KNOW ANY OTHER WERE TO USE ALTHOUGH IT HAS BECOME -- >> A RESISTANCE.

>> A RESISTANT.

IS THAT, IS THAT THE ISSUE.

IS IT A FAILURE OF THE LEADERSHIP PERSONALITIES?

>> WELL, LOOK AT I THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE A LITTLE BIT PATIENT IN ASSESSING THE SITUATION.

IT IS A COMMON SITUATION FOR A PARTY SHUT OUT OF POWER THROUGH LACK OF EFFECTIVE VOICE AND EFFECTIVE LEADERS BECAUSE THEY JUST DON'T HAVE A POWER BASE FOR WHICH TO OPERATE IN.

AND USUALLY WHEN THE PARTIES COME BACK IT IS NOT BECAUSE THE IDEAS THEY ARE DEVELOPING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH THE CHARISMA OF THE LEADERS THEY HAVE IN OPPOSITION.

IT IS BECAUSE THE RULING PARTY, THE GOVERNING PARTY OVERREACHES AND CREATES A BACKLASH AND THEN THE OPPOSITION PARTY FINDS WAYS TO EXPLOIT THAT BACKLASH.

I THINK THAT WHATEVER LEADERS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY DEVELOPS, THEY ARE GOING TO COME OUT OF THE PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY THAT IS GOING TO BEGIN IN THREE YEARS OR SO, AND THEY ARE GOING TO FIGURE OUT WHATEVER ISSUES RESONATE MOST WITH THE PUBLIC AND WHATEVER FAILURES OF THE MENSTRUATION THEY CAN RUN AGAINST AND CRAFT A MESSAGE.

MY CONCERN IS THAT WHILE THEY POSITION THEMSELVES TO DO THAT, THEY RECOGNIZE THAT THEY CAN ALSO TAKE ON A BUNCH OF POSITIONS THAT ARE TOO FAR TO THE LEFT OF WHERE THE PUBLIC IS THAT WILL MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR THEM TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE PUBLIC DISCONTENT WITH TRUMP.

>> THE COURTS, SO FAR THE COURTS HAVE BEEN -- HAVE CONFRONTED TRUMP AND HIS AGENDA AT MULTIPLE POINTS.

THEY ALREADY SAID, ONE FEDERAL JUDGE SAID THIS IDEA OF ELIMINATING, YOU KNOW, BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP WITH THE 14th AMENDMENT'S OVERREACH, BUT THERE IS ANOTHER ARGUMENT TO SUGGEST THAT IS HIS GOAL, TO GET SOME OF THESE ISSUES IN COURT, BECAUSE HE DOES BELIEVE -- HE APPOINTED THREE OF THE CURRENT COURT JUSTICES, THEY HAVE NOT DEMONSTRATED THAT THEY HAVE A MAXIMALIST VIEW OF EXECUTIVE POWER, IS THERE ANY EFFECTIVE CHECK ON THE ACTIONS OF THIS PRESIDENT?

>> WELL, YOU ARE CERTAINLY RIGHT THAT IS ONEÃBASICALLY TWO GROUPS BY WHICH THIS CAN WORK.

ONE OF THEM IS THAT THIS -- THEY GET THESE CASES TO COURT AND THEY WIN AND THEY CHANGE THE PRESIDENT AND THEY GET THE COURT TO SAY ACTUALLY THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH UNILATERALLY COULD ELIMINATE ANY SPENDING PROGRAM IT IS NOT LIKE.

NOW, THAT SEEMS TO VIOLATE THE PLAIN TEXT OF THE CONSTITUTION, AND -- UNDERSTOOD FOR OVER 200 YEARS.

BUT THE CONSTITUTION IS WHATEVER DEFINED MOST CONSERVATIVE JUSTICES SAY, SO IF THAT IS WHAT THEY SAY IT IS, THAT IS WHAT IT IS.

SECONDLY, IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO LOSE, BUT THEY WILL MOVE SO FAST THAT THEY WILL HAVE AN EFFECT ANYWAY.

THAT ONCE YOU DRIVE OUT THE STAFF, THE EXPERTISE, THE INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE, IN A LOT OF THESE AGENCIES, BECAUSE THEY CANNOT STAND AROUND WAITING FOREVER TO SEE IF THEY WIN IN COURT.

THEY HAVE GOT TO GO ON WITH THEIR LIVES AND THEY HAVE MORTGAGES TO PAY.

THEY HAVE GOT THINGS TO DO WITH THEIR LIVES.

HE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO REBUILD IT.

SO THE SECOND DANGER IS PROBABLY MORE SERIOUS THAN THE FIRST, BUT EITHER ONE IS A POSSIBILITY.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TALKING WITH US.