Almost four months into the new administration, the Trump White House is spinning stories like an old washing machine jitterbugging across the basement floor. Leaping from one crisis to another leaves little room for actual policy-making between golf outings. Is this truly what the great institution of the American Presidency has become…just another episode of a weekly reality show?

As President Trump and his advisors showboat replacements for fired F.B.I. director James Comey, the same short-listed sixth-grade vocabulary crawls beneath morning shows around the nation. From the beginning of Trump’s campaign, everyone invited to his inner circle or nominated to a government post has been described with less creativity and assurance than a typical 16-year-old can muster for their favorite teacher.

During a recent interview, Trump fumbled to reassure America that all of the possible Comey replacements are clear choices because each has “been vetted over their lifetime.” The renewed focus on “well-known” nominees and “really talented” appointees has highlighted a singular flaw in the “great” office of president: Who vetted Donald J. Trump?

Presidential nominees are required to file FEC Form 2 — Statement of Candidacy — with the Federal Election Commission. In addition, a clause in the constitution mandates that a candidate for president must “…have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.” Filing Form 2 allows those like Donald J. Trump (Rep.-N.Y.), Dan Vacek (Legal Marijuana Now Party-Minn.), and “Joe Exotic” Maldonado (Ind.-Okla.) to officially become candidates for president.

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5

There are other financial forms required by the FEC, but none of them inquires if Mr. Trump is mentally capable of occupying the office of president; if Mr. Vacek will be the executive under the influence; or whether “Joe Exotic” graduated high school. In other words, there simply is no vetting besides public opinion for the highest office in the land.

When it boils down to it, the American presidency is a reality show. It is a once every four years popularity contest that has obvious flaws vis-à-vis popularity, but even more serious weakness concerning vetting. However, in tribute to the wisdom of the founding fathers, the flaws are also the reason for the system of checks and balances. Without the educated and responsible oversight of the legislative and judicial branches, a poorly vetted candidate — regardless of greatness and talent — could turn the country to chaos.

This is the lesson in politics that eludes the new administration on a daily basis. When “Morning Joe” and other news outlets begin running North Korea nukes back-to-back with mentions of Trump meltdowns, it highlights the mounting frustration in the White House. Threats to withdraw press briefings, attacks on the media, and civil and human rights policy rollbacks are serious dangers to the American way of life.

Even the former director of national intelligence, James Clapper, accused Trump this week of assaulting America’s democratic institutions. The more Trump realizes his ego cannot rule a nation, the more he dismissively threatens the rules of democracy. As tensions mount, the country and its responsible leaders must ask where the eventual threat will come from— a rogue nation’s missile or a nuclear scale meltdown closer to home.

First, it was Hillary and the Democrats. Then it was the leakers, the hackers, the Ninth Circuit (and other courts), the media, and the “fake news” that earned the esteemed titles of scapegoats for President Trump’s political shortcomings. Now, the president has turned his sights on the most inconceivable scapegoat of all — the very document that provided a vehicle for his election.

That Trump has attacked the United States Constitution is beyond any irony and about as bizarre as his first 100 days in office.

During an interview with Fox News, yesterday, Trump blamed the checks and balances that are an inherent and fundamental proviso of the constitution. He implied that the most important document in America’s history is a “…really bad thing for the country.”

What exactly is really bad?

Is it that Americans can choose to practice the religion of their choice without fear of persecution? Or, that they can express themselves — politically, socially, artistically, and personally. Maybe it’s bad that it gives the accused a right to legal counsel and a trial by jury; or that it abolishes slavery and cherishes equality.

I doubt that Trump told members of the NRA this weekend that the constitution was “really bad” because it included the right to bear arms.

More than 225 years ago, the founding fathers drafted the documents that became the United States Constitution. Their concerns for a fair and just government of the people are clearly expressed in the constitution. They also framed the national system of a federal republic that relied on checks and balances in order to protect the people from the oppression they had fought to repel.

A little over 100 days ago, Donald J. Trump stood before a nation born from the constitution and swore an oath of office on a worldwide stage. Like the presidents before him, Trump recited the 35 words required by Article 2, Section 1 of the constitution:

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.

Unlike those before him, he has not quite embraced them.

If he does not appreciate the United States Constitution, Mr. Trump should not have sworn an oath that unequivocally mandates that he preserve, protect, and defend it. He should not have assumed the great responsibility that is being president of an “archaic” system in a diverse nation.

Time and history occasionally have exposed flaws in the constitution. In response, the government has made legitimate amendments over the past two centuries. However, changes that have been enacted benefit the entire nation and its population. They have never advanced the glorification and ego of the chief executive. As they did in the 1700s, the founding fathers would likely lobby vigorously against the one great leader concept today.

If anything, Trump has validated that our “archaic” system is in fact, imperfect. That the constitution allows anyone to run for the highest political office in the land — without regard to experience, education, or intelligence — demonstrates a tremendous flaw. As detrimental as that single defect may be, it emphasizes the fundamental driving philosophy that the founding fathers sought to attain: the equality of all.

If Trump was referring to the constitution as a “really bad thing” because it allowed him to be elected president, he may be correct. Otherwise, Mr. Trump, for the rest of America, the constitution is what made America great and what protects its people from tyranny.