None of them are giving press conferences in the Oval Office and acting like they're above the law. Typically when someone has as much power as Musk, they must either be elected or confirmed by the Senate.
At the very least Musk needs to explain some thing under oath, especially the processes he's put in place to deal with his massive conflicts of interest. He was asked about those yesterday, and he explained there is no conflict because he's posting everything transparently on Twitter, which is itself a conflict of interest.
The president has broad authority to build his team and run his departments as he see's fit. Congress has the right to elect department heads but if a special initiative is created under the treasury department, that department does not need to be nominated. Elon has special overnment initiative to find massive waste... He has shown that the Social security database is de-duplicated and there are thousands of individuals above the age of 150. Hundreds of treasury employees have access to the same database he has, and most of the data analysis can be done open source via FPDS-NG.
> The president has broad authority to build his team and run his departments as he see's fit.
Outside of the Executive Office of the President, that's not really all that true (between statutory constraints and officers subject to Senate confirmation), and the Departments are not his, which is the critical distinction between a monarchy, in which the government is the personal domain of its head, and a republic.
> He has shown that the Social security database is de-duplicated
I think you mean “not de-duplicated” and that it is not (and why) is not a new revelation by Musk, it has been well-known and, ironically, a common example of various lessons in real world database design for at least a generation.
You hand-wave this away with "This has been known for decades"… Well, why does it take an unelected South African to step up and fix it?
The reality is that just because something has been “known for decades” doesn’t mean it has been addressed—especially in government bureaucracies, where inefficiency, inertia, and misaligned incentives often prevent meaningful reform. The persistence of outdated Social Security records, massive waste, and fraud is a perfect example of systemic dysfunction.
The president, as the chief executive, has broad authority to ensure that executive agencies function efficiently and effectively. While there are statutory and congressional constraints, the executive branch is ultimately responsible for implementing policies and running departments. If existing bureaucrats and Treasury officials have had access to this data for years but failed to act, then it is not only within the president’s prerogative but arguably his duty to bring in outside expertise—whether that be Musk or anyone else—to tackle waste and inefficiency.
While it is true the president has broad authority, it's not true he can run his departments as he sees fit. His job is to faithfully (operative word) execute the office of president which includes defending the Constitution itself, most of which is about establishing a separation of powers that allows for checks and balances across the branches of government.
The Constitution very purposefully gives most power to the people through Congress. Article I of the Constitution goes through the pains of enumerating all the powers Congress has and doesn't. Article II is 1/4 the length and is mostly about how the President is elected. But it describes a much more limited set of power granted to the President.
What you're doing is reading vast powers to dictate the workings of the executive branch from the "Executive Power Clause", but completely failing to account for the "Take Care Clause" --
"he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States."
and the presidential oath of office --
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
That's his job. Not to exercise broad authority over the executive branch as he sees fit. His job is to exercise broad authority over the executive branch as Congress sees fit.
And can't you see why this has to be the case? Because if we go down this path, there's nothing stopping the next executive from completely wiping out all programs he doesn't like, and what's to say you agree with the next guy as much as you agree with this one? What's to say he doesn't go after the programs keeping you alive, or housed, or fed because actually he doesn't like the color of your skin, or your religion, or the hand you use to write with? Or maybe he just doesn't like you personally, because you doing your job faithfully is in the way of his unfaithful objectives?
> He has shown that the Social security database is de-duplicated and there are thousands of individuals above the age of 150. Hundreds of treasury employees have access to the same database he has, and most of the data analysis can be done open source via FPDS-NG.
Then there should be no issue bringing all of that to Congress and going through the proper channels. In fact there is a bipartisan Congressional DOGE committee that was purportedly for exactly this, but Musk has been keeping them in the dark and cutting them out entirely. Why?
We can see why they don't want to work with Congress; their goal is to shutter lawful, Congressionally authorized agencies they don't agree with politically, yet don't have the legal power to end. They've said as much about the CFPB, but they have no legal authority under the Constitution to close it. The CFPB is a net economic benefit to consumers and saves the US money, there's no logical reason to go after it as one of the first targets if you're looking to balance the budget.
At the very least Musk needs to explain some thing under oath, especially the processes he's put in place to deal with his massive conflicts of interest. He was asked about those yesterday, and he explained there is no conflict because he's posting everything transparently on Twitter, which is itself a conflict of interest.