Monday, on Morning Joe, Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski discussed White House senior adviser Stephen Miller’s comments concerning the extent of the President’s power. Scarborough immediately got the ball rolling with a line of questioning for the administration, asking why they’d picked Miller to speak, saying: “Why did they have him say undemocratic things? Why did they have him say things that would do violence to the United States Constitution when they didn't have to? Why do they keep doing things like this?”
Scarborough, speculating also asked: “Are they seeing how far they can push?” As his outrage continued, he called Republicans out to speak up: “Every Republican in Washington, D.C., if you do not speak out about that, then you are doing yourself a disservice. Never call yourself a constitutionalist again. Never call yourself a constitutionalist again. Just call yourself– Just call yourself an obsequious pathetic little lemming. You just had somebody say the President will do whatever the hell he wants to do. We’re not going to listen to the courts and we are not going to listen to Congress.”
Former Democratic Congressman, Harold Ford Jr. followed with: “To put Stephen Miller out it begins to show, it reinforces, there’s some strange tensions still there, in that White House, that need to be – that need to be worked out.” Scarborough interrupted, yelling that, “There is anti-democratic tendencies in that White House . . . There is anti-democratic, anti-constitutional, forces in that White House. This is very clear.”
Scarborough continued on his tirade, telling his co-host Brzezinski and the rest of the panel, “I am getting texted by– some of the most powerful Republicans who were absolutely shocked. I can't even repeat what they are calling Stephen Miller.” Political analyst John Heilemann pleaded with Scarborough to share the texts, to which he replied, “I'll show you when we go to break.”
Scarborough continued to be outraged by Miller’s comments, later saying: “You come out and say the President will not be questioned? You're unworthy to be in the White House. You're unworthy to be in government if that is what you believe, unless it's Vladimir Putin's government. I'm just saying, the White House has to walk this line back.” Brzezinski then brought up the President’s tweet congratulating Miller on a job well done. This prepped Scarborough to say he was hopeful the President was too busy to have seen what happened.
Scarborough turned the conversation to David Ignatius, associate editor for The Washington Post. Scarborough to Ignatius: “David Ignatius, I want, again, this is just a moment we need to stop. You had a spokesman for the White House yesterday go out on all of the shows and say the power of the President will not be questioned. And then making matters far more concerning. The President of the United States tweeted his congratulations for that performance and staff members called all of us working us and telling us what a great job Stephen Miller did yesterday, when he basically sounded like a little autocrat on TV.” The hosts of Morning Joe love using the word autocrat, but I am not sure they fully grasp what it means.
As Scarborough and Ignatius’ banter went on, Heilemann presented his thoughts: “One generally gets a sense over the last few weeks that there is a kind of pervasive view in the White House which is, we will not be questioned. . . They direct that toward the press, they direct that toward their political opponents, they direct that towards someone within the party and towards the judiciary. The reality is that, yes, you will be questioned. You'll be questioned by everybody. That is what the gig is here, right?”
Brzezinski added: “But they’re undermining the truth, they’re undermining the media.” Heilemann responded: “It's the job of various institutional restraints on the President. The congress, the courts, the press, the citizens, to question, challenge the President and try to hem the President's authority in various ways. The President will push back. But the notion that there’s – that they have a sort of an impulse towards you will not question us and we will do as we wish and you will sit in the corner and be quiet is not going to work.”
Rick Stengel, former undersecretary of State, joined the conversation adding “What they are setting themselves up for is a Presidency where you have a conflict between the article 2 branch, the executive, and the article 3 branch, the judiciary. Like the Nixon administration. They’re setting the template for that right now.” Scarborough asked, “And what happened to Nixon?”
Stengel answered: “Well, I think they – that kind of autocratic authoritarian language doesn’t play well for the American people. No president is above the law. They actually have some install prerogatives based on what congress has given them in terms of immigration that the courts actually could ratify. But then to put their finger on the scale like this is just– not a good policy.”
Scarborough continued to ramble on: “You pick a fight with the judiciary and say we will not be questioned on something so temporary? It leads me to believe that they are actually looking for a fight. They are testing.” Of course his co-host agreed, saying, “I think they are. . .They want chaos” Scarborough went on: “They are pushing the boundaries. They are seeing what Americans will put up with... And what they won't put up with. And they want to see if they can, at least Stephen Miller wants to see, if they can trample judicial Independence.” This time not just throwing Miller under the bus, Brzezinski added: “I think it’s more than Miller.”
<<< Please support MRC's NewsBusters team with a tax-deductible contribution today. >>>
Later in the morning, Democratic Senator Chris Coons joined the panel. Scarborough started off the segment by asking him: “ Really quickly though, just your gut reaction to the President's authority will not be questioned?” Coons answered saying:
“That is a simply stunning statement. The idea that a senior adviser to the President would go on camera and say the President's authority will not be questioned, shows both a striking lack of understanding of the structure of our government . . . a complete lack of respect for judicial Independence. It’s going to make confirmation of Judge Gorsuch harder and it will make the question of judicial independence more pressing. And if the President doesn't walk that back, I think he will have more and more problems on a bipartisan basis”
Scarborough asked: “Can you assure us that my Republican friends in the United States Senate are concerned about this type of talk?” Coons replied, “Privately, I know many of them are very concerned. Publicly, I'm waiting to see some action. . .” Scarborough interrupting: “But they are expressing private concern about this sort of autocratic talk?” Coons answer, “Absolutely.” Dramatically Scarborough exclaimed, “Okay. Thank God.”
Before the show ended, Jeff Greenfield, author and political analyst, also joined the discussion. Brzezinski asked him what he thought of this situation as well. Brzezinski: “What do you make of a White House adviser who says something like this, Jeff? Our opponents, the media and the world will soon see as we begin to take further actions that the powers of the President to protect our country are very substantial and will not be questioned.” Following suit, Greenfield answered: “It sounded better in the original German.” He continued: “No, it's the kind of statement that is so unnecessary. Obviously the President has huge powers in foreign policy. But of course they are questioned. The congress can question him . . . The courts draw lines. That kind of attitude, you know, is what helps fuel the anger. . . ”
Heilemann added, “It is possible to be an economic nationalist without being authoritarian. Or without any kind of wave of the hand at the fundamental constitutional structure that has kept our country free and prosperous for two hundred and x number of years.” Greenfield and Scarborough went on to explain that this administration is threatening the Constitution:
GREENFIELD: But, I still come back to this, so far, rather remarkable situation where people, law school scholars and even some Republican senators will be pushing back institutionally on this point. No, you don't have unlimited power. But part I think of what got Trump into the presidency was many people thought this was impossible was the feeling that all this old stuff, it's– rusted, it's broken, it doesn't work anymore. All these –
SCARBOROUGH: The Constitution?
GREENFIELD: The machinery of how we govern.
SCARBOROUGH: This goes directly to the Constitution of the United States of America. This goes directly to the foundations that were laid down by Madison and by Hamilton.
GREENFIELD: That's why it's so dangerous. Because if it's appealing to people to say break the China, we need somebody to come in and upend the table.
BRZEZINSKI: They are pushing as far as they can go.
Here is the full transcript of the February 13 exchange: 
6:30AM Eastern
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: A good thing happening today with – Justin Trudeau--
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Justin Trudeau
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: And Ivanka and– women's economic platform being pushed. That's good, finally.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Pushing a woman’s economic platform, that's great. But all they had to do this morning was quietly issue a new executive order.
HAROLD FORD JR: Right.
SCARBOROUGH: And would have put this behind. Why do they put him out? Why did they push him? Why did they have him say undemocratic things? Why did they have him say things that would do violence to the United States Constitution when they didn't have to? Why do they keep doing things like this? At first, you want to say, oh this is – and then you starting going, wait a second. Are they saying how far they can push? Every Republican in Washington, D.C., if you do not speak out about that, then you are doing yourself a disservice. Never call yourself a constitutionalist again. Never call yourself a constitutionalist again. Just call yourself– Just call yourself an obsequious pathetic little lemming. You just had somebody say the President will do whatever the hell he wants to do. We’re not going to listen to the courts and we are not going to listen to congress.
HAROLD FORD JR: Can you imagine if they’d put Rex Tillerson in, or John Kelly out, or both of them to begin to preview what may happen this week around the order and for tillerson to be able to comment with regard to North Korea and the kinds of things we are going to do to respond. It would have, to your point earlier, no tweeting by this president, I thought has had a pretty good weekend. Optically a great weekend
SCARBOROUGH: Great weekend, honestly, yeah.
HAROLD FORD JR: We will see what happens. Somebody will have to I think lead in that direction but to put Stephen Miller out it begins to show, it reinforces, there’s some strange tensions still there in that White House that need to be– that need to be worked out.
SCARBOROUGH: There is anti-democratic tendencies in that White House.
HAROLD FORD JR: I'm trying to be kind about it and diplomatic. I think they’ve got to figure out how to–
BRZEZINSKI: Well–
SCARBOROUGH: There is anti-democratic anti-constitutional forces in that White House. This is very clear.
BRZEZINSKI: And for your message to Republicans, it's a threat. It's going to get worse. You deal with it now or you're in big trouble. We are all.
SCARBOROUGH: And by the way, I am getting texted by– texted by some of the most powerful Republicans who were absolutely shocked. I can't even repeat what they are calling Stephen Miller.
JOHN HEILEMANN: Oh, go ahead!
BRZEZINSKI: No–
SCARBOROUGH: I'll show you when we go to break.
-----------
JOE SCARBOROUGH: This is Andrew Jackson. Your president's hero. All of the rights secured to the citizens under the Constitution are worth nothing and a mere bubble, except guaranteed to them by an independent judiciary. Andrew Jackson, July 5th, 1822. You come out and say the President will not be questioned? You're unworthy to be in the White House. You're unworthy to be in government if that is what you believe, unless it's Vladimir Putin's government. I'm just saying, the White House has to walk this line back.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Well, they tweeted the President, himself, tweeted, Joe–
JOE SCARBOROUGH: David Igantius–
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: That he did a great job, so maybe you ought to -- address that as well.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: I— I can only hope that the President of the United States–
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Was too busy playing golf.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Did not know.Too busy working with --
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Please God, Please God make that the case.
SCARBOROUGH: with the Japanese prime minister. David ignatius, I want again, this is just a moment we need to stop. You had spokesman for the White House yesterday go out on all of the shows and say the power of the President will not be questioned. And then making matter far more concerning. The President of the United States tweeted his congratulations for that performance and staff members called all of us working us and telling us what a great job Stephen Miller did yesterday, when he basically sounded like a little autocrat on TV.
DAVID IGNATIUS: Fortunately, federal judges do not take orders from Stephen Miller. And the judges who are reviewing this case, the district court judge who began it in Washington and this ninth circuit panel, are trying to construct quite narrow rulings. What they said to the White House was you have enormous powers commander in chief over issues of national security, over issues of who gets across our borders but you have to present evidence of a threat that justifies what you're trying to do. That was essentially the core of the appellate court ruling. And when Stephen Miller says this is ideological, this is about those who wants borders and those who don't, that’s the really outrageous part. All that courts are saying, under our system, you have to show why you want this.
SCARBOROUGH: The most outrageous part of it, John Heilemann, is the fact this will ultimately be resolved in their favor. They are going to have a majority on the supreme court with Judge Gorsuch. They are going to fill 125, 150 federal judgeships. They could have quietly done an executive order this morning without him saying that yesterday and gotten everything that they wanted to get.
JOHN HEILEMANN: See, I think the thing that is troubling about it, I don't think it's just limited, although in this case if you read the plain language that he used he is talking about the judiciary. One generally gets a sense over the last few weeks that there is a kind of pervasive view in the White House which is, we will not be questioned. And there is a – They direct that toward the press, they direct that toward their political opponents, they direct that towards someone within the party and towards the judiciary. The reality is that, yes, you will be questioned. You'll be questioned by everybody. That is what the gig is here, right?
BRZEZINSKI: But they’re undermining the truth, they’re undermining the media.
JOHN HEILEMANN: It's the job of various institutional restraints on the President. The congress, the courts, the press, the citizens, to question, challenge the President and try to hem the President's authority in various ways. The President will push back. But the notion that there’s – that they have a sort of an impulse towards you will not question us and we will do as we wish and you will sit in the corner and be quiet is not going to work.
BRZEZINSKI: Well, it's more than that.
SCARBOROUGH: Rick, and we have warned on this show, time and time again, don't trash the Intel community. They will cut you into a thousand pieces. Well Donald Trump is learning that now. And Michael Flynn is learning that now. They are not listening to common sense. And this leads nowhere. This sort of thinking leads to defeat for the Republican party in 2018. Fdr tried a court packing scheme.
RICK STENGEL Right.
SCARBOROUGH: And it was the only time his Presidency was in trouble. Donald Trump's low point in the campaign was when he questioned Judge Curiel. You can't do that. If you want to criticize movie stars and criticize the public and you want to criticize the press, fine, go at it, but you do this, then you start talking about our constitution and you start questioning the checks and balances that have protected this country from tyrants for 240 years.
RICK STENGEL: And I think, Joe, what they are setting themselves up for is a Presidency where you have a conflict between the article 2 branch, the executive, and the article 3 branch, the judiciary. like the Nixon administration. They’re setting the template for that right now.
SCARBOROUGH: And what happened to Nixon?
RICK STENGEL: Well, I think they d– in that kind of autocratic authoritarian language doesn’t play well for the American people. No president is above the law. They actually have some instal prerogatives based on what congress has given them in terms of immigration that the courts actually could ratify. But then to put their finger on the scale like this is just– not a good policy–
JOHN HEILEMANN: Early retirement I think is the word you're looking for.
SCARBOROUGH: Nixon had an early retirement but again this is yet another fight that was so unnecessary. Again, redraft the executive order this morning, put it out, and you'd get most of everything that you wanted. And again, you're going to control the supreme court. You're going to control the federal courts. Ideologically, he wants to talk about ideology, they are going to control it ideologically. Why— You pick a fight with the judiciary and say we will not be questioned on something so temporary? It leads me to believe that they are actually looking for a fight. They are testing.
BRZEZINSKI: I– think they are.
SCARBOROUGH: They are pushing the boundaries. They are seeing what Americans will put up with–
BRZEZINSKI: They want chaos
SCARBOROUGH: And what they won't put up with. And they want to see if they can, at least Stephen Miller wants to see, if they can trample judicial Independence.
BRZEZINSKI: I think it’s more than Miller.
HAROLD FORD JR: Look, you get the sense, there’s no doubt, broad groups within the media were wrong about the outcome of this election. There seems to be an enduring and residual anger on the part of those in this administration, still with the media. To say the media and the entire world are our opponents--
SCARBOROUGH: By the way, by the way– -- they’re sore winners.
HAROLD FORD JR: Right. Yeah.
SCARBOROUGH: Somebody told me last night, said, you know, you hear about the sore losers all of the time. I've never seen a group of people who are sore winners.
BRZEZINSKI: And this is unbelievable.
-----
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Really quickly though, just your gut reaction to the President's authority will not be questioned?
DEMOCRATIC SENATOR CHRIS COONS: That is a simply stunning statement. The idea that a senior adviser to the President would go on camera and say the President's authority will not be questioned, shows both a striking lack of understanding of the structure of our government--
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Nice way of putting it.
DEMOCRATIC SENATOR CHRIS COONS: A complete lack of respect for judicial Independence. It’s going to make confirmation of Judge Gorsuch harder and it will make the question of judicial independence more pressing. And if the President doesn't walk that back, I think he will have more and more problems on a bipartisan basis.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: I was going to ask, can you assure us that my Republican friends in the United States senate are concerned about this type of talk?
DEMOCRATIC SENATOR CHRIS COONS: Privately, I know many of them are very concerned. Publicly, I'm waiting to see some action. That's --
SCARBOROUGH: But they are expressing private concern about this sort of autocratic talk?
COONS: Absolutely.
SCARBOROUGH: Okay. Thank God.
COONS: But the challenge isn't talk. It's actions.
SCARBOROUGH: I know. Time will come if they don't walk this back and if this continues, a time will come when everybody is going to have to stand and be counted.
BRZEZINSKI: Well isn’t that what we’ve learned? I know we need to get to North Korea but– But isn’t there a point where– Haven't we learned from this candidate and now this President that if you don't stake your ground earlier, this only gets worse?
COONS: Yes.
BRZEZINSKI: I mean haven't -- are Republicans going to really sit back and not say anything?
SCARBOROUGH: They just can't. They have to push back hard.
BRZEZINSKI: They can't be.
----
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Joining us now, author, columnist, Jeff Greenfield. What do you make of a White House adviser who says something like this, Jeff? Our opponents, the media and the world will soon see as we begin to take further actions that the powers of the President to protect our country are very substantial and will not be questioned.
JEFF GREENFIELD: It sounded better in the original German. No, it's the kind of statement that is so unnecessary. Obviously the President has huge powers in foreign policy. But of course they are questioned. The congress can question him–
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: That's the beauty of our country.
JEFF GREENFIELD: The courts draw lines. That kind of attitude, you know, is what helps fuel the anger. The real question may be among the people who like Trump and voted for him, how does that resinate? I'm not sure that they are particularly offended by it, they may agree with it.
JEREMY PETERS: You touch on a very interesting point. What Stephen Miller represents inside this administration is a school of thought that is taken very seriously, an economic populist nationalism. Miller was brought on from Jeff Sessions office, who before there was Trump was the voice of that nationalism.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Yeah something to keep in mind.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Yeah, right, but economic nationalism is one thing. It's quite another to try to try to toss out judicial independence and judicial review that has, as the senator said, gone back to 1803.
JOHN HEILEMANN: It is possible to be an economic nationalist without being authoritarian. Or without any kind of wave of the hand at the fundamental constitutional structure that has kept our country free and prosperous for two hundred and x number of years.
JEFF GREENFIELD: But, I still come back to this, so far, rather remarkable situation where people, law school scholars and even some Republican senators will be pushing back institutionally on this point. No, you don't have unlimited power. But part I think of what got Trump into the presidency was many people thought this was impossible was the feeling that all this old stuff, it's– rusted, it's broken, it doesn't work anymore. All these –
SCARBOROUGH: The Constitution?
GREENFIELD: The machinery of how we govern.
SCARBOROUGH: This goes directly to the Constitution of the United States of America. This goes directly to the foundations that were laid down by Madison and by Hamilton.
GREENFIELD: That's why it's so dangerous. Because if it's appealing to people to say break the China, we need somebody to come in and upend the table.
BRZEZINSKI: They are pushing as far as they can go.
GREENFIELD: Therefore the people that push back, you are the old guard --
BRZEZINSKI: Right. Or the media or the judiciary. Which they are undermining. Or you are the judiciary which they are undermining. Or you’re reality.
GREENFIELD: Yes and this is, I think sooner, rather than later, this is going to come down. I think you’ve been on this point a lot. The Republican senators, conservatives, but institutionally conservative as well.
SCARBOROUGH: And constitutionally conservative.
GREENFIELD: Do they say to their President of their party, we like taxes, we like the supreme court nominee, but this is a danger to the system and we are going to start pushing back? Or– I don't think we know the answer.
