Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.

Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.

I wanted to ask you, first of all about what we've been learning about. The editor of The Atlantic found himself in a chat with some of the most senior members of President Trump's administration national security staff, and by virtue of that was privy to plans for an attack in great detail.

I wanted to ask you, first of all about what we've been learning about. The editor of The Atlantic found himself in a chat with some of the most senior members of President Trump's administration national security staff, and by virtue of that was privy to plans for an attack in great detail.

Your reaction to it. You sitt on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Your reaction to it. You sitt on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

So let me just start with if Pete Hegseth had a shred of self respect and decency, he would resign. That's what leadership is about. And instead Pete Hegseth thinks it's all about I'll point at somebody else and minimize the problem and sweep it under the rug and deflect. You know, I want to be a leader of the finest armed forces in the world and step up and take some responsibility.

So let me just start with if Pete Hegseth had a shred of self respect and decency, he would resign. That's what leadership is about. And instead Pete Hegseth thinks it's all about I'll point at somebody else and minimize the problem and sweep it under the rug and deflect. You know, I want to be a leader of the finest armed forces in the world and step up and take some responsibility.

Should he be fired, you talk about it. If you won't quit, then he.

Should he be fired, you talk about it. If you won't quit, then he.

Should be fired because he has put our national security at risk. That's part one. Part two is you realize a bunch of this is potentially certainly breaking the law. So, for example, because of the Freedom of Information Act, there are laws that require that people in the administration all of them have to preserve the records of their texting back and forth. I know this from the days when I served in the administration and we were carefully cautioned about the importance of preserving records. Signal, as you know, disappears those records. And I will say on this when I read how casually they just formed this chat. Notice that's how you refer to it to discuss the national security issues and the bombing of another country. How many other times so are they using signal and what are they using it for? So this is a moment. We need some of those congressional investigations. We need a hearing in the Senate, we need a hearing in the House. I remember all of the hearings before when there was a question about Hillary Clinton's emails. I want to run the tape on how many Republicans talked about the importance of accountability and getting to the bottom of this. Where are they right now? I'm ready for those hearings, and the FBI needs to step up.

Should be fired because he has put our national security at risk. That's part one. Part two is you realize a bunch of this is potentially certainly breaking the law. So, for example, because of the Freedom of Information Act, there are laws that require that people in the administration all of them have to preserve the records of their texting back and forth. I know this from the days when I served in the administration and we were carefully cautioned about the importance of preserving records. Signal, as you know, disappears those records. And I will say on this when I read how casually they just formed this chat. Notice that's how you refer to it to discuss the national security issues and the bombing of another country. How many other times so are they using signal and what are they using it for? So this is a moment. We need some of those congressional investigations. We need a hearing in the Senate, we need a hearing in the House. I remember all of the hearings before when there was a question about Hillary Clinton's emails. I want to run the tape on how many Republicans talked about the importance of accountability and getting to the bottom of this. Where are they right now? I'm ready for those hearings, and the FBI needs to step up.

This was a chat that was organized by Mike Waltz, the president national security advisor, and he addressed this in an interview on Fox News.

This was a chat that was organized by Mike Waltz, the president national security advisor, and he addressed this in an interview on Fox News.

Here's what he said. We made a mistake. We're moving forward.

Here's what he said. We made a mistake. We're moving forward.

I noted that Biden large the response for the administration has been there wasn't classified information here, And as a result of that, the Atlantic release screenshots of a lot of these conversations. We learned that there was information about planes timing of this attack. You talk about the need for hearings. Are you optimistic that that's going to happen and that you're going to.

I noted that Biden large the response for the administration has been there wasn't classified information here, And as a result of that, the Atlantic release screenshots of a lot of these conversations. We learned that there was information about planes timing of this attack. You talk about the need for hearings. Are you optimistic that that's going to happen and that you're going to.

Get to the bottom of what was in fact discussed on that chat.

Get to the bottom of what was in fact discussed on that chat.

So I think this is a question fundamentally about where is power in this country. I get it elections, we pick a president. President picks a team, and that's where power resigns in terms of the execution day to day of various policies. But ultimately it's people across this country. And when people across this country said, wait a minute, the Secretary of Defense, I mean this is this is not some random guy off the streets who stumbled across some secret information and kind of didn't know how to handle it. This is the Secretary of Defense. And the Secretary of Defense went right along with exchanging this information in a place that is not secure. Again, I just got to stress over here, we want to look at any secret information, any confidential and information, any classified information, you got to go do onto a secure location to do it. You physically have to go, and you have to hand over your phone. By the way, somebody stands at the door and says, do you have any electronic devices on? And you've got to say no, I don't before you're allowed to go. Pencil and paper. Is how high tech they get because of the importance of protecting candid conversations that need to occur, and those candid conversations need to be shielded from the rest of the world. When the White House wants to say nothing to see here, just flip it the other direction and ask yourself if the Atlantic had called the White House and said, let me show you what we've got in advance of the bombing, you guys, okay, if we put it up on our website, how many heart attacks would there have been over at the White House saying no, no, no, no, no, you can't do that. Well, if it wouldn't have been okay for the Atlantic to publish all of that in advance, you gotta worry it's not published on a website. But I don't know who's listening on signal, the Chinese, the North Koreans, the Russians, some other bad actors out there. It is important that we follow through as a nation and say, look, you put our whole country at risk, our allies. I'm getting asked in the hallways by foreign reporters, can we actually trust the United States of America if we tell secrets and they're going to end up on some signal chat with the Secretary of Defense. So there needs to be an investigation, but there needs to be some accountability, and the accountability should start right now. Hegsas should resign, and if you won't do that, then Trump should fire them. He knows how to say you're fired.

So I think this is a question fundamentally about where is power in this country. I get it elections, we pick a president. President picks a team, and that's where power resigns in terms of the execution day to day of various policies. But ultimately it's people across this country. And when people across this country said, wait a minute, the Secretary of Defense, I mean this is this is not some random guy off the streets who stumbled across some secret information and kind of didn't know how to handle it. This is the Secretary of Defense. And the Secretary of Defense went right along with exchanging this information in a place that is not secure. Again, I just got to stress over here, we want to look at any secret information, any confidential and information, any classified information, you got to go do onto a secure location to do it. You physically have to go, and you have to hand over your phone. By the way, somebody stands at the door and says, do you have any electronic devices on? And you've got to say no, I don't before you're allowed to go. Pencil and paper. Is how high tech they get because of the importance of protecting candid conversations that need to occur, and those candid conversations need to be shielded from the rest of the world. When the White House wants to say nothing to see here, just flip it the other direction and ask yourself if the Atlantic had called the White House and said, let me show you what we've got in advance of the bombing, you guys, okay, if we put it up on our website, how many heart attacks would there have been over at the White House saying no, no, no, no, no, you can't do that. Well, if it wouldn't have been okay for the Atlantic to publish all of that in advance, you gotta worry it's not published on a website. But I don't know who's listening on signal, the Chinese, the North Koreans, the Russians, some other bad actors out there. It is important that we follow through as a nation and say, look, you put our whole country at risk, our allies. I'm getting asked in the hallways by foreign reporters, can we actually trust the United States of America if we tell secrets and they're going to end up on some signal chat with the Secretary of Defense. So there needs to be an investigation, but there needs to be some accountability, and the accountability should start right now. Hegsas should resign, and if you won't do that, then Trump should fire them. He knows how to say you're fired.

I want to ask you at the moment that we're in, this is your part of that moment. We're two months into this administration's tenure. How are you thinking about the role of the Democratic Party in this moment?

I want to ask you at the moment that we're in, this is your part of that moment. We're two months into this administration's tenure. How are you thinking about the role of the Democratic Party in this moment?

And just it's gravity overall for the country itself.

And just it's gravity overall for the country itself.

So let's set the table for this moment. Donald Trump ran for office saying over and over and over and over and over, I will lower costs on day one. Those are his words, not mine. I have a lower costs on day one. He said that to millions and millions of people, and right after he got elected, he was interviewed his very first interview, he said that's how I got elected, was saying I'm going to lower costs Onnday one. So here we are two months in. He has done nothing to lower costs. I mean no, all that's happening is we're watching places where costs are going up, up, up. But he and his co president Elon Musk, have been out there with a chainsaw moving through government, trying to fire the financial cops, for example, by trying to shut down the Consumer Financial protect Bureau, laying off tens of thousands of federal workers who kind of do the job of Social Security making sure people get their Social Security checks each month, ending contracts for medical research. So there's this, and playing red light green light with tariffs, right, yes there's a tariff, No, there's not a tariff, right, playing that game. So it's important to remember we're in a system right now that is deeply chaotic. I think of that like a sand storm. You know, the sand is blowing everywhere. I have. The job at the Democratic Party right now is to say there's a lot going on. We are in the fight. We are in the fight to save social security. We are in these fights, but to pull back and to look at the bigger picture. The media will do the day by day fights, but our job is to pull back and the bigger picture is that other promise that Donald Trump made when he was running for president. Remember to millions of people, he said, I will cut your costs. On day one. To a handful of what he called his richest held donors, he said, I'm going to give you tax breaks like you've never seen before. So right now, Trump, the Republicans, and the billionaires are working together to move forward on a tax giveaway of about four point seven billion dollars, mostly sucked up by billionaires billionaire corporations and then paid for on the backs of elderly people in nursing homes who will lose federal support. Your neighbor down the street who has a disability and needs a home health aid paid for by the federal government. Kids in public school who need help, and those public schools need help cutting scientific research and medical research. And that sets up what this fight is all about. Are we going to be a nation that hands over four point seven trillion dollars in giveaways to a handful of billionaires and makes everybody else pay for it. Are we going to be a nation that says no to tax cuts for those guys and says we're going to invest in America where everybody gets an opportunity.

So let's set the table for this moment. Donald Trump ran for office saying over and over and over and over and over, I will lower costs on day one. Those are his words, not mine. I have a lower costs on day one. He said that to millions and millions of people, and right after he got elected, he was interviewed his very first interview, he said that's how I got elected, was saying I'm going to lower costs Onnday one. So here we are two months in. He has done nothing to lower costs. I mean no, all that's happening is we're watching places where costs are going up, up, up. But he and his co president Elon Musk, have been out there with a chainsaw moving through government, trying to fire the financial cops, for example, by trying to shut down the Consumer Financial protect Bureau, laying off tens of thousands of federal workers who kind of do the job of Social Security making sure people get their Social Security checks each month, ending contracts for medical research. So there's this, and playing red light green light with tariffs, right, yes there's a tariff, No, there's not a tariff, right, playing that game. So it's important to remember we're in a system right now that is deeply chaotic. I think of that like a sand storm. You know, the sand is blowing everywhere. I have. The job at the Democratic Party right now is to say there's a lot going on. We are in the fight. We are in the fight to save social security. We are in these fights, but to pull back and to look at the bigger picture. The media will do the day by day fights, but our job is to pull back and the bigger picture is that other promise that Donald Trump made when he was running for president. Remember to millions of people, he said, I will cut your costs. On day one. To a handful of what he called his richest held donors, he said, I'm going to give you tax breaks like you've never seen before. So right now, Trump, the Republicans, and the billionaires are working together to move forward on a tax giveaway of about four point seven billion dollars, mostly sucked up by billionaires billionaire corporations and then paid for on the backs of elderly people in nursing homes who will lose federal support. Your neighbor down the street who has a disability and needs a home health aid paid for by the federal government. Kids in public school who need help, and those public schools need help cutting scientific research and medical research. And that sets up what this fight is all about. Are we going to be a nation that hands over four point seven trillion dollars in giveaways to a handful of billionaires and makes everybody else pay for it. Are we going to be a nation that says no to tax cuts for those guys and says we're going to invest in America where everybody gets an opportunity.

The leader of Democrats and the Senate, Chuck Schumer, has a book out, so he's been talking a lot in Something he's brought up over and over again is he doesn't think that we're at a constitutional crisis yet. I wonder if you agree with him in that regard, and if so, what is the threshold when we would be phasing one?

The leader of Democrats and the Senate, Chuck Schumer, has a book out, so he's been talking a lot in Something he's brought up over and over again is he doesn't think that we're at a constitutional crisis yet. I wonder if you agree with him in that regard, and if so, what is the threshold when we would be phasing one?

So I have to say, before we got here in the last two months, I would have described a constitutional crisis is like a light switch. You're not in one, you're not in one, You're not in one of them, all of a sudden you are in one. I've come to think of that that differently. When you've got a president just right out of the chalks says, yeah, I know the Constitution says earthright citizenship, but constitutions constitution, I don't have to pay attention to that. When you've got a president that has a co president who poses with a chainsaw and has a job in government, doesn't have a job in government, fires people illegally, tries to shut down agencies, illegally, cuts off contracts illegally. In other words, shows a hostility to the law. That's deeply worrisome. So I worry that we move increasingly toward an administration that's not just saying I'm going to be a more robust president. And I get it. Presidents look at this differently, some a little stronger, some a little weaker. But a president that says there are no constraints on me, and that takes me back to constitutional law one oh one. Legislature writes those laws. That's our part. Congress, the administration, President and those who work in the administration administer those laws. And the courts have the responsibility if the administration steps out of line to say you violated the law. We keep all three parts in balance. And I'm watching Donald Trump and Elon Musk say no, there are not three equal branches of government. It's just one that smells a lot like a constitutional crisis.

So I have to say, before we got here in the last two months, I would have described a constitutional crisis is like a light switch. You're not in one, you're not in one, You're not in one of them, all of a sudden you are in one. I've come to think of that that differently. When you've got a president just right out of the chalks says, yeah, I know the Constitution says earthright citizenship, but constitutions constitution, I don't have to pay attention to that. When you've got a president that has a co president who poses with a chainsaw and has a job in government, doesn't have a job in government, fires people illegally, tries to shut down agencies, illegally, cuts off contracts illegally. In other words, shows a hostility to the law. That's deeply worrisome. So I worry that we move increasingly toward an administration that's not just saying I'm going to be a more robust president. And I get it. Presidents look at this differently, some a little stronger, some a little weaker. But a president that says there are no constraints on me, and that takes me back to constitutional law one oh one. Legislature writes those laws. That's our part. Congress, the administration, President and those who work in the administration administer those laws. And the courts have the responsibility if the administration steps out of line to say you violated the law. We keep all three parts in balance. And I'm watching Donald Trump and Elon Musk say no, there are not three equal branches of government. It's just one that smells a lot like a constitutional crisis.

We've just been through a moment when Republicans wrote a continuing resolution and Chuck Schumer said the Democrats had supported he did. You did not, I should say, you did a town hall in Lowell, Massachusetts. WBR was there and recorded it, and I got tape of what you said. I think Chuck Schumer is wrong. You didn't linger on that, and I wonder if you might hear, just for a moment, was he wrong about the political calculation? Spell out for me what you disagreed about that he did.

We've just been through a moment when Republicans wrote a continuing resolution and Chuck Schumer said the Democrats had supported he did. You did not, I should say, you did a town hall in Lowell, Massachusetts. WBR was there and recorded it, and I got tape of what you said. I think Chuck Schumer is wrong. You didn't linger on that, and I wonder if you might hear, just for a moment, was he wrong about the political calculation? Spell out for me what you disagreed about that he did.

In particular, I.

In particular, I.

Think there's a moment when his stand and fight, and for me, that moment came with a continuing resolution.

Think there's a moment when his stand and fight, and for me, that moment came with a continuing resolution.

It was a squaded opportunity to do so.

It was a squaded opportunity to do so.

It's more than that. Understand, Let's go back to what we're talking. What is the big fight right now? The big fight is going to be whether or not the billionaires and Donald Trump and Elon Musk are just going to take over our country and run it to suit themselves, make everybody else pay for it. That's what the budget is all about. We do a lot of other things in Washington, but you want to know our values. Take a look at the budget, and so the question becomes, in this fight, we got to stop and draw the line and say it's time. It's time for us to fight back. It's time to call on people of the United States, because that whole constitutional structure that I was talking about, the three parts of government, all rest ultimately on the people, and it is time to have that fight.

It's more than that. Understand, Let's go back to what we're talking. What is the big fight right now? The big fight is going to be whether or not the billionaires and Donald Trump and Elon Musk are just going to take over our country and run it to suit themselves, make everybody else pay for it. That's what the budget is all about. We do a lot of other things in Washington, but you want to know our values. Take a look at the budget, and so the question becomes, in this fight, we got to stop and draw the line and say it's time. It's time for us to fight back. It's time to call on people of the United States, because that whole constitutional structure that I was talking about, the three parts of government, all rest ultimately on the people, and it is time to have that fight.

Did it cause you to reevaluate your faith and confidence in Senator Schumer is a leader of Democrats in the Senate.

Did it cause you to reevaluate your faith and confidence in Senator Schumer is a leader of Democrats in the Senate.

I want to be clear, we are heading into a fight where we need every single Democrat pointed the same way. We may still be bumping around on exactly what the timing is going to be on that fight, exactly where the trigger point is going to be, but there is no doubt in the United States Senate, the forty seven of us are locked arms and moving in the same direction. And the same is true over in the House. This fight is on top of us. We cannot avoid this fight because Donald Trump and Elon Musk, truly they want to take this country over for just a handful of people, and they want even more wealth and more power to go to them. Well, everybody else has to pay for it. That is the fight.

I want to be clear, we are heading into a fight where we need every single Democrat pointed the same way. We may still be bumping around on exactly what the timing is going to be on that fight, exactly where the trigger point is going to be, but there is no doubt in the United States Senate, the forty seven of us are locked arms and moving in the same direction. And the same is true over in the House. This fight is on top of us. We cannot avoid this fight because Donald Trump and Elon Musk, truly they want to take this country over for just a handful of people, and they want even more wealth and more power to go to them. Well, everybody else has to pay for it. That is the fight.

Last question on this subject, sure, what is your role as you see it in that fight? You write a lot of letters to administration officials, you speak out quite a bit, You are somebod I think identifiable with this oversight fight and struggle with the administration. How do you see your role in the Democratic Party broadly today?

Last question on this subject, sure, what is your role as you see it in that fight? You write a lot of letters to administration officials, you speak out quite a bit, You are somebod I think identifiable with this oversight fight and struggle with the administration. How do you see your role in the Democratic Party broadly today?

But I look at what are the tools in my toolbox. I'll use every one of them that I possibly can. Oversight is a big part. This is part of your job when you're a senator, and that is to look at the agencies, to ask questions of these nominees, to get them on the record, to press them, to ask for investigations. This is why we need inspectors General. This is why we need an active GAO. This is why we need an FBI that is still functional. It's partly just to say we already have laws, and for the damn laws, make sure that people are doing that. That's part of my job. Part of my job is to be in the fight to give it everything I've got because, as I said, ultimately it's going to be about people across this country saying, look, I don't want in America where it's all about a handful of billionaires. I want in America where we actually do invest in medical research. I want in America where actually every kid has an opportunity to go to public school, even kids who have special need to hear me talking as a special needs teacher. I want in America where we're making investments in our best resource, and that is our people.

But I look at what are the tools in my toolbox. I'll use every one of them that I possibly can. Oversight is a big part. This is part of your job when you're a senator, and that is to look at the agencies, to ask questions of these nominees, to get them on the record, to press them, to ask for investigations. This is why we need inspectors General. This is why we need an active GAO. This is why we need an FBI that is still functional. It's partly just to say we already have laws, and for the damn laws, make sure that people are doing that. That's part of my job. Part of my job is to be in the fight to give it everything I've got because, as I said, ultimately it's going to be about people across this country saying, look, I don't want in America where it's all about a handful of billionaires. I want in America where we actually do invest in medical research. I want in America where actually every kid has an opportunity to go to public school, even kids who have special need to hear me talking as a special needs teacher. I want in America where we're making investments in our best resource, and that is our people.

Talking to a former law professor. So Article two, Section two, Power of advice and consent. By virtue of the committees that you sit on Armed Services, Finance, Banking, you have had the ability to question a lot of these higher profile nominees. Coming up is the presence picked ahead the securious Exchange Commissions. And you've written a memo thirty four pages in length. It starts with the congressions.

Talking to a former law professor. So Article two, Section two, Power of advice and consent. By virtue of the committees that you sit on Armed Services, Finance, Banking, you have had the ability to question a lot of these higher profile nominees. Coming up is the presence picked ahead the securious Exchange Commissions. And you've written a memo thirty four pages in length. It starts with the congressions.

That average for me.

That average for me.

You say, he has extensive experience in financial services and capital markets.

You say, he has extensive experience in financial services and capital markets.

But I have concerns.

But I have concerns.

About your record if you tick through what he's done as an SEC staffer and commissioner, and the work that he's done since in the private sector as a consultant. He did work on behalf of FTX, the fraudulent and failed crypto conglomerate that Sam Bankman freed started. You point out things he said about crypto and climate regulations. Given all of that, is there anything that he could say to earn your vote and committee?

About your record if you tick through what he's done as an SEC staffer and commissioner, and the work that he's done since in the private sector as a consultant. He did work on behalf of FTX, the fraudulent and failed crypto conglomerate that Sam Bankman freed started. You point out things he said about crypto and climate regulations. Given all of that, is there anything that he could say to earn your vote and committee?

So let me back up just a little bit. Think about the job that he's being interned top cop on Wall Street, top cop on Wall Street, and cop in two meanings of that word. One is you've got to catch the fraudsters. You've got to make sure everybody's dotting their eyes and crossing their teas, because there's a lot of value in having that stock market be an honest and level playing field. The other way in which top cop, it's to watch for risk building up in the system. It's to make sure that the regulations that are in place are appropriately calibrated to deal with those risks and beat those risks out of the system. Paul Atkins actually has a track record on exactly that issue because he served as a commissioner in the SEC from two thousand and one to two thousand and eight.

So let me back up just a little bit. Think about the job that he's being interned top cop on Wall Street, top cop on Wall Street, and cop in two meanings of that word. One is you've got to catch the fraudsters. You've got to make sure everybody's dotting their eyes and crossing their teas, because there's a lot of value in having that stock market be an honest and level playing field. The other way in which top cop, it's to watch for risk building up in the system. It's to make sure that the regulations that are in place are appropriately calibrated to deal with those risks and beat those risks out of the system. Paul Atkins actually has a track record on exactly that issue because he served as a commissioner in the SEC from two thousand and one to two thousand and eight.

You remember what you actual crisis.

You remember what you actual crisis.

Yes, so here we are in lead up to the financial crisis, and over and over again, what does Paul Atkins vote for loosen the regulations?

Yes, so here we are in lead up to the financial crisis, and over and over again, what does Paul Atkins vote for loosen the regulations?

What does his nomination say to you about the regulatory framework this administration?

What does his nomination say to you about the regulatory framework this administration?

Once, oh, I think this is entirely in keeping with what Donald Trump and Elon Musk want to see us do, and that is loosen regulations. Loosen regulations. Loosen regulations, that is what Paul Atkins did. They also said repeatedly that no regulations just get in the way. Everybody needs to do whatever they want. Those big Wall Street giants. We saw the crash in two thousand and eight, and here's what happens next. After the crash, he has the chance to have a little twenty twenty hindsight. He has twenty zero hindsight. He looks back and says, no problem with having let those giant Wall Street banks run wild, and the fact that the American taxpayer had to bail them out not a problem. That's my concern. If someone has demonstrated such poor judgment, you've got to be really worried about putting them in a job where the failure to have good judgment could be like it was back then. Remember, ten million families lost their homes, millions more people lost their jobs. We watched Wall Street do a real tank then. And here's the thing about Paul Atkins. We have both his demonstrated experience, but also look at his experience overall. So his time in government is a real problem. But now he's someone who has built a very lucrative business with Potomac Partners. He charges evidently upwards of twelve hundred dollars an hour to give advice, and he says, well, I'm going to divest this interest, but he doesn't want to tell us who he's divesting too, who's buying, and for what purposes? And what are the long term plans? Because here's the deal. SEC chairmanship doesn't last forever, right, two years, four years, maybe longer? My concern is, And so what happens on the other end. Does he just come right back out and instead of charging twelve hundred dollars now it's now twenty four hundred dollars an hour? But it's who do you work for? And why that matters is it has an effect on the time you sit as chairman of the SEC. So there he is making decisions, and I look at someone like Paul Atkins. How much time has he spent with families that are working three jobs to try to make it to the end of the month. How much time has he spent with any of those ten million people who lost their homes in the last crash? And how much time has he spent with this handful of billionaires who really, at least in the short run love these deregulated markets and taxpayer bailouts, and how much when he makes a decision is he thinking about the guy working three jobs? And how much is he thinking about his future clients whom he could please? Wileys of the SEC. So those are the problems for me.

Once, oh, I think this is entirely in keeping with what Donald Trump and Elon Musk want to see us do, and that is loosen regulations. Loosen regulations. Loosen regulations, that is what Paul Atkins did. They also said repeatedly that no regulations just get in the way. Everybody needs to do whatever they want. Those big Wall Street giants. We saw the crash in two thousand and eight, and here's what happens next. After the crash, he has the chance to have a little twenty twenty hindsight. He has twenty zero hindsight. He looks back and says, no problem with having let those giant Wall Street banks run wild, and the fact that the American taxpayer had to bail them out not a problem. That's my concern. If someone has demonstrated such poor judgment, you've got to be really worried about putting them in a job where the failure to have good judgment could be like it was back then. Remember, ten million families lost their homes, millions more people lost their jobs. We watched Wall Street do a real tank then. And here's the thing about Paul Atkins. We have both his demonstrated experience, but also look at his experience overall. So his time in government is a real problem. But now he's someone who has built a very lucrative business with Potomac Partners. He charges evidently upwards of twelve hundred dollars an hour to give advice, and he says, well, I'm going to divest this interest, but he doesn't want to tell us who he's divesting too, who's buying, and for what purposes? And what are the long term plans? Because here's the deal. SEC chairmanship doesn't last forever, right, two years, four years, maybe longer? My concern is, And so what happens on the other end. Does he just come right back out and instead of charging twelve hundred dollars now it's now twenty four hundred dollars an hour? But it's who do you work for? And why that matters is it has an effect on the time you sit as chairman of the SEC. So there he is making decisions, and I look at someone like Paul Atkins. How much time has he spent with families that are working three jobs to try to make it to the end of the month. How much time has he spent with any of those ten million people who lost their homes in the last crash? And how much time has he spent with this handful of billionaires who really, at least in the short run love these deregulated markets and taxpayer bailouts, and how much when he makes a decision is he thinking about the guy working three jobs? And how much is he thinking about his future clients whom he could please? Wileys of the SEC. So those are the problems for me.

Something about which I know you're passionate is the independence of these regulatory Oh yes, you look at the SEC today. There are two Republicans on that commission, one Democrat whose term will be up soon. There's been no indication the present's going to put forward another Democratic nominee. I look at the FTC, the Federal Trade Commission, and the two Democratic members were removed by this administration.

Something about which I know you're passionate is the independence of these regulatory Oh yes, you look at the SEC today. There are two Republicans on that commission, one Democrat whose term will be up soon. There's been no indication the present's going to put forward another Democratic nominee. I look at the FTC, the Federal Trade Commission, and the two Democratic members were removed by this administration.

They're fighting to get back in those positions.

They're fighting to get back in those positions.

What is the practical implication of that, not having five members in place, not having the kind of imagine ideological political diversity you would have under normal circumstances.

What is the practical implication of that, not having five members in place, not having the kind of imagine ideological political diversity you would have under normal circumstances.

Right. I'm glad you asked that, because it's a reminder that when those agencies were designed FTC, of course the oldest, the SEC, during the Great Depression, they were made bipartisan from the beginning, in an understanding that, yeah, it's going to move a little there's going to be a little shift, but we need buy in across the political spectrum, and we need the stability all the way through the entire system. I think of it this way, even for companies that are saying, let's de regulate, you know, turn us loose, let us do whatever we want. At the end of the day, yeah, let me feel good. In the short term, you may be able to figure out how to cut a corner here and make a little more money. But understand, the reason our stock market is so valuable is in part because it has level, transparent rules that are strictly enforced. And you start to weaken that and in the short run you may make a profit and that guy over there, but how many other people say, you know what, I don't think that's where I want to invest my money. I think I'm just going to slow down on how much of my wealth, my energy, my time, my talent I put in there. We have built a legal structure that in many ways is the envy of the world. There's a reason investment comes into the United States, and it's because you count on those structures independent of where they've got a Democrat or a Republican in the White House, the structures work when Donald Trump and Elon Musk come in and don't just say, you know, let's give a little different emphasis. But they want a chainsaw. They want to just get rid of everyone who doesn't follow their deregulatory agenda. They're boost the billionaire agenda. That's going to cost everybody in this country.

Right. I'm glad you asked that, because it's a reminder that when those agencies were designed FTC, of course the oldest, the SEC, during the Great Depression, they were made bipartisan from the beginning, in an understanding that, yeah, it's going to move a little there's going to be a little shift, but we need buy in across the political spectrum, and we need the stability all the way through the entire system. I think of it this way, even for companies that are saying, let's de regulate, you know, turn us loose, let us do whatever we want. At the end of the day, yeah, let me feel good. In the short term, you may be able to figure out how to cut a corner here and make a little more money. But understand, the reason our stock market is so valuable is in part because it has level, transparent rules that are strictly enforced. And you start to weaken that and in the short run you may make a profit and that guy over there, but how many other people say, you know what, I don't think that's where I want to invest my money. I think I'm just going to slow down on how much of my wealth, my energy, my time, my talent I put in there. We have built a legal structure that in many ways is the envy of the world. There's a reason investment comes into the United States, and it's because you count on those structures independent of where they've got a Democrat or a Republican in the White House, the structures work when Donald Trump and Elon Musk come in and don't just say, you know, let's give a little different emphasis. But they want a chainsaw. They want to just get rid of everyone who doesn't follow their deregulatory agenda. They're boost the billionaire agenda. That's going to cost everybody in this country.

Want to stick with the FTC and what happened there, because we've heard from the FED chairman with whom you've had your sheriff disagreements, I should say over policy and I ticket hearings.

Want to stick with the FTC and what happened there, because we've heard from the FED chairman with whom you've had your sheriff disagreements, I should say over policy and I ticket hearings.

He's not over his independence, not over.

He's not over his independence, not over.

His independence, and that's where I want to go.

His independence, and that's where I want to go.

Should he be worried as he watches what happened at the FTC about his and his colleagues ability to keep their positions in the Federal Reserve?

Should he be worried as he watches what happened at the FTC about his and his colleagues ability to keep their positions in the Federal Reserve?

I want to say, no, he shouldn't be worried because I stand staunchly behind the independence of the FED, But damn I stand staunchly behind the independence of the FTC and behind the independence of the SEC within their statutory neighborhoods. But that's the question. If Donald Trump can just start getting rid of everyone who disagrees with him anywhere in government, for me, it started actually with the inspectors General. If he can just fire those inspectors General, even though the statutes say that they have job protection and can only be fired for cause, If he can just mow through every civil servant, if he can just mow through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, it's a form of lawlessness and all the power belongs to the king that it suggests nobody is safe, not even the chairman of the Federal Reserve.

I want to say, no, he shouldn't be worried because I stand staunchly behind the independence of the FED, But damn I stand staunchly behind the independence of the FTC and behind the independence of the SEC within their statutory neighborhoods. But that's the question. If Donald Trump can just start getting rid of everyone who disagrees with him anywhere in government, for me, it started actually with the inspectors General. If he can just fire those inspectors General, even though the statutes say that they have job protection and can only be fired for cause, If he can just mow through every civil servant, if he can just mow through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, it's a form of lawlessness and all the power belongs to the king that it suggests nobody is safe, not even the chairman of the Federal Reserve.

I want to guess that the person you'd most like to have in a seat in front of you in a hearing room is Elon Musk, of course, not a cabinet appointee.

I want to guess that the person you'd most like to have in a seat in front of you in a hearing room is Elon Musk, of course, not a cabinet appointee.

In fact, what is he? Can you just tell me? I recurt here it documents, and I hear that he's nothing. He's just the guy who stands her in the White House.

In fact, what is he? Can you just tell me? I recurt here it documents, and I hear that he's nothing. He's just the guy who stands her in the White House.

But it gets to this issue of who does hold him to account? And in your capacity as senior center from Massachusetts, ranking member of the banking how do you get answers from somebody who again has no official position, traditional official position, but is doing so much to reshape the bureaucratic landscape, the regulatory landscape, in fact, the whole government.

But it gets to this issue of who does hold him to account? And in your capacity as senior center from Massachusetts, ranking member of the banking how do you get answers from somebody who again has no official position, traditional official position, but is doing so much to reshape the bureaucratic landscape, the regulatory landscape, in fact, the whole government.

Yeah, so let me do two parts here. The first one is, I want to remind you after Donald Trump was elected, one of the very first letters I wrote was to Elon Musk and I said, I've read the declaration. You want to cut two trillion dollars from the budget, which he then trimmed down to a trillion, which he then trimmed down to half trillion. I said, don't give up, don't give up. You can cut two trillion dollars in waste and fat out of the And here's a list of thirty things that I've been working on for a long time here in Congress that I've seen kind of an insider's view on some of this, places where we could make cuts that would make our government actually more efficient, that would make our government work better. You want to go to work, I'm ready. I'm ready. And you don't have to promise to do all thirty just pick any of them. This is a menu, Just take whatever you like on this no answer. And instead he goes out and just starts firing people. And now this moves into the second part of the answer. He does things that are illegal, and there's just not much doubt about this. He fires people who under law have certain job protections, can only be fired in certain ways. He goes out there and cancels contracts government contracts that can only be canceled by a federal contracting official. I mean, look at the laws, just boring old laws about this stuff. So what we have is a lawlessness that has been set through our entire government. And this is a threat to democracy. It is also a threat to our economy. You can't build a strong and stable economy in the middle of this. It is also a threat, damn it, to good government. I go back to my list. There are things I really wanted to cut toa something else I want to do. I think we ought to have simpler regulations. I'm not a no regulations gal, but I am definitely there are a lot of places we should simplify our regulations, make them clearer, easier to understand. There are things we could do to run this government better. And in that sense, I want to cheer when someone says I want to be a reformer, but you got to be a reformer within the law that is possible. Right now, Republicans are inc of the House, the Senate, of the White House.

Yeah, so let me do two parts here. The first one is, I want to remind you after Donald Trump was elected, one of the very first letters I wrote was to Elon Musk and I said, I've read the declaration. You want to cut two trillion dollars from the budget, which he then trimmed down to a trillion, which he then trimmed down to half trillion. I said, don't give up, don't give up. You can cut two trillion dollars in waste and fat out of the And here's a list of thirty things that I've been working on for a long time here in Congress that I've seen kind of an insider's view on some of this, places where we could make cuts that would make our government actually more efficient, that would make our government work better. You want to go to work, I'm ready. I'm ready. And you don't have to promise to do all thirty just pick any of them. This is a menu, Just take whatever you like on this no answer. And instead he goes out and just starts firing people. And now this moves into the second part of the answer. He does things that are illegal, and there's just not much doubt about this. He fires people who under law have certain job protections, can only be fired in certain ways. He goes out there and cancels contracts government contracts that can only be canceled by a federal contracting official. I mean, look at the laws, just boring old laws about this stuff. So what we have is a lawlessness that has been set through our entire government. And this is a threat to democracy. It is also a threat to our economy. You can't build a strong and stable economy in the middle of this. It is also a threat, damn it, to good government. I go back to my list. There are things I really wanted to cut toa something else I want to do. I think we ought to have simpler regulations. I'm not a no regulations gal, but I am definitely there are a lot of places we should simplify our regulations, make them clearer, easier to understand. There are things we could do to run this government better. And in that sense, I want to cheer when someone says I want to be a reformer, but you got to be a reformer within the law that is possible. Right now, Republicans are inc of the House, the Senate, of the White House.

You guys want to.

You guys want to.

Do reform pass some damn laws, but do not set Elon Musk to take a chainsaw of cancer research in America and put old people out of the nursing homes that they're in. That is not how America builds a future, and frankly, that is not the kind of people we want to be.

Do reform pass some damn laws, but do not set Elon Musk to take a chainsaw of cancer research in America and put old people out of the nursing homes that they're in. That is not how America builds a future, and frankly, that is not the kind of people we want to be.

Last question here, we've talked about the three branches of government. Let me ask you about the judicial one in particular, drawing from your experience again as a professor of law, are you confident that the courts will be able to keep up with all of the challenges that we've seen here? There has been this flurry, the sandstorm, as you described it. Can the courts keep up?

Last question here, we've talked about the three branches of government. Let me ask you about the judicial one in particular, drawing from your experience again as a professor of law, are you confident that the courts will be able to keep up with all of the challenges that we've seen here? There has been this flurry, the sandstorm, as you described it. Can the courts keep up?

It's tough. Look, we're at over one hundred lawsuits. I no longer can keep the number in my head because it keeps shifting up. But the judges by and large have stepped up. Courts are designed to go slowly right, and Elon Musk is fast. Right. You can break laws a lot faster than you can actually hold people accountable for that. But at the end of the day, the three parts of government. Congress writes those laws, the administration administers those laws. We count on the courts to hold the first two to their roles. I think the judges are stepping up, so I say this half out of hope but half out of conviction. I still believe in the Constitution of the United States. I think most judges do, and I think they're going to hold

It's tough. Look, we're at over one hundred lawsuits. I no longer can keep the number in my head because it keeps shifting up. But the judges by and large have stepped up. Courts are designed to go slowly right, and Elon Musk is fast. Right. You can break laws a lot faster than you can actually hold people accountable for that. But at the end of the day, the three parts of government. Congress writes those laws, the administration administers those laws. We count on the courts to hold the first two to their roles. I think the judges are stepping up, so I say this half out of hope but half out of conviction. I still believe in the Constitution of the United States. I think most judges do, and I think they're going to hold