CNNs latest political panel once again showcased the networks ideological imbalance, as lone conservative commentator Scott Jennings calmly dismantled a series of alarmist claims that President Donald Trump is somehow shredding the Constitution.
.
According to Townhall, the exchange began when former MSNBC host Tour Neblett asserted that the goal of DOGE was not fiscal restraint but a deliberate effort to shrink the government so that itll be too small to stop Trump with whatever else is in this plan. Tour declared, Can I be real for a moment that DOGE is not about cutting money, right? Its not about spending. Its about shrinking government so that itll be too small to stop Trump with whatever else is in this plan, openly suggesting that unelected bureaucrats should serve as a political counterweight to the elected president.
Jennings immediately exposed the logical flaw in that argument, asking the obvious constitutional question that progressives on the panel seemed eager to ignore. Why would the government stop Trump? Isnt he the head of the government? Jennings asked. Youre saying the government would be too small to stop Trump. If Trumps the president, why would the government, the bureaucracy, be actively trying to stop him?
Tour responded with the standard left-wing talking point, insisting, Because he is shredding the Constitution, and adding, And creating an authoritarian dictatorship. Jennings pressed further, simply asking, Is he? forcing his colleagues to confront whether their rhetoric has any basis beyond partisan hysteria.
Another panelist, Alencia Johnson, a former Harris 2024 campaign advisor, tried to reframe the debate by claiming a broader civic mission. And no matter who is in office, I am going to hold them accountable, but more importantly, Im going to make sure the government is working for the American people, said Alencia Johnson, though she did not address whether that includes the American people who elected Donald Trump president in 2024.
Jennings closed the loop by highlighting the deeper issue at stake: whether the permanent bureaucracy should see itself as a political actor against elected leadership. Both of you made an interesting point, which is that your view is that Trump is shredding the Constitution Id like to hear more about that but that, it seems to me that you all both believe that the unelected part of our government, the bureaucracy, has a responsibility to resist the political leadership. Is that your view? Jennings asked, underscoring a core conservative concern that the real constitutional threat may come not from an elected president, but from an entrenched administrative state that believes it should overrule voters.
Login