The interpretation and case law surrounding executive powers is not nearly as logical and black and white as the article implies. Elon Musk is obviously workin

The interpretation and case law surrounding executive powers is not nearly as logical and black and white as the article implies. Elon Musk is obviously working under the direction of the president, and is appointed by him. The fact that he’s a billionaire or you personally hate him and hate everything he does is mostly irrelevant. And Musk is not the one who issued the illegal stop work orders or shut down USAID, that’s the president. There needs to be some perspective here. All presidents have engaged in illegal activity to some extent. Recent presidents literally ordered assassinations of citizens. Eisenhower rounded up Japanese citizens and put them in concentration camps. So okay maybe shutting down USAID is illegal and there will be an injunction. In the scheme of illegal presidential actions it seems tame to me. Like past presidents, Trump is mostly operating within the consent of Congress. Even if the actions are technically illegal, Congress tacitly approves. The conversation around Trump being a dictator remind me of US reactions to elections in foreign countries, where if the people elect someone the US doesn’t like they are branded a “populist” or “authoritarian”. Trump didn’t illegally seize power. He won the election. Him being a moron and an a-hole is kind of orthogonal to whether it’s a coup.