Rich Lowry

Presidents have done this from time immemorial to have informal advisers or people close to him review how the government's working and advise them. Now, Elon Musk is a little bit more than that. He's an actual government employee, right? He's a special government employee. And it's more than just a think tank the way we thought maybe Doge would be.

I mean, it's really an action squad that's going in and doing things. So the executive has a lot of discretion. He can fire people that he wants. He can redirect resources if Congress isn't very specific about how they're going to be spent, which applies to most of these U.S. AID funds. So... And as you point out, he's mostly being delayed, right?

I mean, it's really an action squad that's going in and doing things. So the executive has a lot of discretion. He can fire people that he wants. He can redirect resources if Congress isn't very specific about how they're going to be spent, which applies to most of these U.S. AID funds. So... And as you point out, he's mostly being delayed, right?

I mean, it's really an action squad that's going in and doing things. So the executive has a lot of discretion. He can fire people that he wants. He can redirect resources if Congress isn't very specific about how they're going to be spent, which applies to most of these U.S. AID funds. So... And as you point out, he's mostly being delayed, right?

Congress is just – sorry, the courts are just looking at this. And we've all sort of now accepted like the Elon Musk pace of things. Like if it's delayed a week, it's a terrible defeat because everything needs to move fast. But in the scheme of things – Things are still moving incredibly quickly, even with these little delays from the court. So you're right.

Congress is just – sorry, the courts are just looking at this. And we've all sort of now accepted like the Elon Musk pace of things. Like if it's delayed a week, it's a terrible defeat because everything needs to move fast. But in the scheme of things – Things are still moving incredibly quickly, even with these little delays from the court. So you're right.

Congress is just – sorry, the courts are just looking at this. And we've all sort of now accepted like the Elon Musk pace of things. Like if it's delayed a week, it's a terrible defeat because everything needs to move fast. But in the scheme of things – Things are still moving incredibly quickly, even with these little delays from the court. So you're right.

If he defies a court order, we'll have a constitutional crisis. I don't see why he would feel impelled, compelled to do that. I think he'd just fight this stuff out in the courts, and we will eventually have a big dispute over it. Because when Congress is not very specific, there's a lot to give in terms of how you spend the money. But whether you spend the money, that's a different question.

If he defies a court order, we'll have a constitutional crisis. I don't see why he would feel impelled, compelled to do that. I think he'd just fight this stuff out in the courts, and we will eventually have a big dispute over it. Because when Congress is not very specific, there's a lot to give in terms of how you spend the money. But whether you spend the money, that's a different question.

If he defies a court order, we'll have a constitutional crisis. I don't see why he would feel impelled, compelled to do that. I think he'd just fight this stuff out in the courts, and we will eventually have a big dispute over it. Because when Congress is not very specific, there's a lot to give in terms of how you spend the money. But whether you spend the money, that's a different question.

And you've got to spend a lot of it. You just can't zero it out when Congress has said, no, you're going to spend $40 billion. But Russ Voigt and others have a theory that the – The impoundment act that Congress passed in the Watergate era is unconstitutional, and they want a test case to go challenge that.

And you've got to spend a lot of it. You just can't zero it out when Congress has said, no, you're going to spend $40 billion. But Russ Voigt and others have a theory that the – The impoundment act that Congress passed in the Watergate era is unconstitutional, and they want a test case to go challenge that.

And you've got to spend a lot of it. You just can't zero it out when Congress has said, no, you're going to spend $40 billion. But Russ Voigt and others have a theory that the – The impoundment act that Congress passed in the Watergate era is unconstitutional, and they want a test case to go challenge that.

But that's – again, it's the tectonic plates of the two branches rubbing up against each other, and there's tension and there's give there, and you're going to need a determination by the courts on that eventually. But the idea that just we're in a constitutional crisis –

But that's – again, it's the tectonic plates of the two branches rubbing up against each other, and there's tension and there's give there, and you're going to need a determination by the courts on that eventually. But the idea that just we're in a constitutional crisis –

But that's – again, it's the tectonic plates of the two branches rubbing up against each other, and there's tension and there's give there, and you're going to need a determination by the courts on that eventually. But the idea that just we're in a constitutional crisis –

because some federal employees have been placed on leave and courts are examining whether the executive has that authority or not. He does, but that's not a constitutional crisis.

because some federal employees have been placed on leave and courts are examining whether the executive has that authority or not. He does, but that's not a constitutional crisis.

because some federal employees have been placed on leave and courts are examining whether the executive has that authority or not. He does, but that's not a constitutional crisis.

I love Scott, but I hate that show.