host: to what degree are you concerned about mr. mosk -- elon musk's approach or congress's ability and control over his actions? guest: any time you're messing with government expenditures, it is going to create a backlash because people like to get money from the government. our society has become very good at devoting themselves money. at some point, you look at 36 point $2 trillion of national debt and a deficit spend rate of $1.8 trillion a year. that has to change and that is not going to be a fun process. host: our guest is with us. if you want to ask him questions quit you can do it on the lines. kenny is from north carolina. caller: i want to ask him this. the first thing he said was china. it was a republican that gave china the most favored nation status and brought them in. when it comes to free-trade and nafta, it was a republican that was pushing that. it was republicans that goddess in the war in afghanistan and all of this. they are the ones now saying they can fix it, but they do not want to take no blame for anything. i

the possible interference with the payment systems i don't think there is enough details on why mr. mosk has asked for this permission to scrutinize what's called the bureau of fiscal service in the department of the treasury. i think we are at early days as far as whether that represents even something that president trump is interested in. but, in terms of the doj fbi angle, i think there's just a desire for more direct control and this is often been thought to be sort of a limiting case that no one would really be in favor of presidents directly controlling who gets prosecuted and who doesn't. but that may be challenged. another way for me to engage with the question is is it really true that the supreme court would back up president trump on all of these removal questions. i am not saying it's guaranteed at all. i think the judiciary is going to be a check on president trump just like it was in the first term. people forget about that. but president trump lost a lot of the cases brought in court that the court was not a rubber stamp and i think that's important to say. host: i was go

the possible interference with the payment systems i don't think there is enough details on why mr. mosk has asked for this permission to scrutinize what's called the bureau of fiscal service in the department of the treasury. i think we are at early days as far as whether that represents even something that president trump is interested in. but, in terms of the doj fbi angle, i think there's just a desire for more direct control and this is often been thought to be sort of a limiting case that no one would really be in favor of presidents directly controlling who gets prosecuted and who doesn't. but that may be challenged. another way for me to engage with the question is is it really true that the supreme court would back up president trump on all of these removal questions. i am not saying it's guaranteed at all. i think the judiciary is going to be a check on president trump just like it was in the first term. people forget about that. but president trump lost a lot of the cases brought in court that the court was not a rubber stamp and i think that's important to say. host: i was go

the possible interference with the payment systems i don't think there is enough details on why mr. mosk asked for this permission to scrutinize what's called the bureau of fiscal service in the department of the treasury. i think we are at early days as far as whether that represents even something that president trump is interested in. but, in terms of the doj fbi angle, i think there's just a desire for more direct control and this is often been thought to be sort of a limiting case that no one would really be in favor of presidents directly controlling who gets prosecuted and who doesn't. but that may be challenged. another way for me to engage with the question is is it really true that the supreme court would back up president trump on all of these removal questions. i am not saying it's guaranteed at all. i think the judiciary is going to be a check on president trump just like it was in the first term. people forget about that. but president trump lost a lot of the cases brought in court that the court was not a rubber stamp and i think that's important to say. host: i was going

the possible interference with the payment systems i don't think there is enough details on why mr. mosk asked for this permission to scrutinize what's called the bureau of fiscal service in the department of the treasury. i think we are at early days as far as whether that represents even something that president trump is interested in. but, in terms of the doj fbi angle, i think there's just a desire for more direct control and this is often been thought to be sort of a limiting case that no one would really be in favor of presidents directly controlling who gets prosecuted and who doesn't. but that may be challenged. another way for me to engage with the question is is it really true that the supreme court would back up president trump on all of these removal questions. i am not saying it's guaranteed at all. i think the judiciary is going to be a check on president trump just like it was in the first term. people forget about that. but president trump lost a lot of the cases brought in court that the court was not a rubber stamp and i think that's important to say. host: i was going

host: to what degree are you concerned about mr. moskelon musk's approach or congress's ability and control over his actions? guest: any time you're messing with government expenditures, it is going to create a backlash because people like to get money from the government. our society has become very good at devoting themselves money. at some point, you look at 36 point $2 trillion of national debt and a deficit spend rate of $1.8 trillion a year. that has to change and that is not going to be a fun process. host: our guest is with us. if you want to ask him questions quit you can do it on the lines. kenny is from north carolina. caller: i want to ask him this. the first thing he said was china. it was a republican that gave china the most favored nation status and brought them in. when it comes to free-trade and nafta, it was a republican that was pushing that. it was republicans that goddess in the war in afghanistan and all of this. they are the ones now saying they can fix it, but they do not want to take no blame for anything. it is

being innovative is good, but mr. mosk, this is in a tech startup these are public institutions that deal with things like social security and medicare national defense and provide for the well-being of the american people. and the american people have a right to be part of that debate, part of that debate. the elections occurred and one viewpoint got a few more votes than the other but that doesn't mean we throughout democracy. that doesn't mean what's been done for centuries in this country should just go out the window and the substituted by a small group of people who think they know a lot more than the wisdom of the american people. so that is why this week leader jeffries and i will join together to push legislation to prevent unlawful meddling in the treasury department payment system, to prevent everyone's records from being made available to a small group of people who can look at them at will when this has always been kept secret and always been protected, your tax returns and your payment systems and things like