CNN —

Elon Musk’s recent address in the Oval Office highlighted why he poses a significant challenge to the federal government, and underscored the risk President Donald Trump faces by granting Musk considerable influence.

A portrait of George Washington watched from the wall as his modern successor engaged in a curious display alongside Musk on a snowy Tuesday afternoon. Clad in a black MAGA hat and a long dark coat, Musk, with his son X occasionally on his shoulders, was highlighted by an intricate window as snowflakes drifted down.

Together, the duo strongly defended Musk’s initiative to reform the federal government, emphasizing the potential dangers this poses to essential services, medical research, and the largest foreign aid program that has benefitted millions globally.

Musk’s allegations about government waste and ineffective programs resonated well with many Americans who harbor skepticism toward the political establishment and embrace Trump’s critique of the government he oversees.

However, the event communicated more than just an attempt to quell rising concerns regarding Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency.

It was a clear illustration that significant authority in Washington may increasingly rest not with elected officials, but rather amid the interplay of ambitions between Musk and Trump, two of the most powerful figures in the world.

The spectacle also underscored the unity between Trump and Musk amid ongoing discussions about the president’s willingness to embrace someone who shares his affinity for the limelight.

It’s noteworthy that Trump was firmly positioned behind the Resolute Desk while Musk stood by his side—a visual contrast to a recent Time Magazine cover that depicted Musk in the role of ultimate authority.

Occasionally, it seemed that Trump was distracted by X’s movements, while Musk’s apparent confidence and sense of impunity—despite lacking formal election or Congressional backing—was striking, especially in a room that symbolizes American democracy.

This moment vividly illustrated how immense wealth can wield significant power. Musk showed clear respect for Trump, and they appeared to enjoy each other’s company, but the president will need to approach this relationship with caution due to Musk’s vast fortune and influential platform on his social media network.

Their joint appearance comes at a time when backlash against Trump and his administration’s aggressive restructuring of the bureaucracy is gaining momentum. The freshly appointed young leaders he has sent into federal agencies have already shut down several entities, including USAID and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and are now eyeing broader targets.

The initiative faces numerous legal challenges, and remarks from high-ranking officials, including Vice President JD Vance, have raised alarms about a possible constitutional crisis if the administration disregards court orders.

Musk passionately defended his initiative by citing extensive waste in government spending. He ostensibly justified his access to Treasury payment systems by criticizing outdated accounting practices, asserting that he is not undermining democracy but rather striving to save it—this comes from a billionaire allegedly accused by some allies of interfering in foreign political affairs.

Trump also had a rehearsed response when questioned about whether he would respect rulings from judges whom he claimed were obstructing his ambitious plans for his second term. He stated, “I always abide by the courts,” a statement that may temporarily ease concerns regarding a constitutional crisis, although this is a man known for flouting court mandates during his legal challenges.

Musk is a captivating speaker, clearly relishing the opportunity to influence and communicate his vision.

The leader of the newly established Department of Government Efficiency demonstrated deference to Trump, indicating he communicates to ensure alignment with the president’s objectives. Nonetheless, the afternoon media showcase indicated the White House’s urgency to reframe the narrative surrounding DOGE, particularly as some GOP lawmakers exhibit concern over the ramifications of government spending reductions and workforce layoffs that would affect their constituents nationwide.

Musk’s explanations may have also sought to counter suggestions that he is executing drastic cuts to federal operations in secrecy, without appropriate oversight, and to dispel concerns regarding potential conflicts of interest. His willingness to face questions from the media marked a significant move towards transparency.

“I don’t think there’s ever been an organization as transparent as the DOGE organization,” Musk asserted.

Trump and Musk Align with Public Sentiment

Musk’s remarks illustrate why, despite the controversy surrounding it, Trump’s comprehensive offensive against the federal government is resonating with voters—at least for now.

Americans expressed a desire for change in the last election, frustrated by a bureaucracy they felt did not meet their needs, especially as Biden’s presidency seemed to stall in its final months. The base Trump cultivated demands the sort of overhaul he has begun. Conservative ideologies have long criticized the government, and the notion of significant budget cuts is appealing to many. Federal bureaucrats make convenient scapegoats, viewed as elite employees enjoying lifetime guarantees and generous retirement plans, thus skewing the political landscape. In this narrative, Democrats and media figures who highlight Trump and Musk’s power consolidations are seen as part of the same establishment they detest.

“The public has voted for substantial government reform, and that’s exactly what they will receive,” Musk declared. “That’s the essence of democracy.”

Musk’s early achievements stem from targeting relatively easy objectives, such as USAID and the CFPB. Aid to foreign countries isn’t typically favored by voters—particularly under an “America First” administration—while the consumer protection bureau has long been in the crosshairs of Republican critics.

Yet, future targets may provoke more intense backlash from Trump’s supporters. He has hinted that the Education Department is next on the list, potentially realizing a vision that has been long dreamed of by various Republican leaders. However, any disruption to federal student loans or essential education initiatives could alienate voters, extending beyond those aggrieved by the closure of USAID.

On Tuesday, Trump announced plans to dismantle the Federal Emergency Management Agency, a move he has been preparing by exaggerating its failures in the aftermath of last year’s hurricane in North Carolina. Proposing a new model for direct disaster aid to states appears to be a cost-effective approach, yet the absence of FEMA’s established knowledge and resources could have serious repercussions if future natural disaster responses falter.

Musk’s inquiries into the federal government reveal opportunities for identifying waste in such a large entity—even if many of his assertions lack the evidence needed for voters to evaluate them.

However, proposed cuts to funding for medical research institutions supported by the National Institutes of Health, while seemingly beneficial from a budgetary perspective, could jeopardize a critical collaboration between the federal government and American universities that has propelled the country to the forefront of clinical advancements. States, whether politically red or blue, could face economic repercussions due to the vital roles played by state universities as employers and economic drivers. Senator Katie Britt from Alabama hinted at this complex issue, advocating for a “targeted” strategy to enhance taxpayer savings used by the NIH.

The possibility of Musk evolving from a reformer into a source of scandal loomed large during the media event.

Musk stated that because the substantial contracts his companies secure from federal sources are public knowledge, anyone can verify that he is not profiting. This is less reassuring when coming from a tech leader overseeing agencies that regulate his businesses.

Trump’s assertion that “we wouldn’t let him” exploit his role lost credibility amid his reluctance to confront his own significant conflicts of interest, further compounded by the announcement that Musk would only be required to file a confidential disclosure as an unpaid special government employee.

“Transparency is fundamental to building trust,” Musk commented regarding DOGE’s campaign, seemingly oblivious to the irony of his own situation.

As such, the Oval Office spectacle—aimed at alleviating concerns regarding an unaccountable and unpredictable tech visionary radically restructuring the U.S. government—only served to reinforce the perception of their joint agenda.