I have to give Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort credit. Does anyone, other than his boss, pack as much crazy and danger into so few words. Is there an award for Most Outrageous Statements in A-One-Photo-Caption-Sized Quote?”

In an interview this week, Manafort managed, in 106 words, to dismiss women and minorities from the vice presidency, to show contempt for Trump’s “long list” of possible V.P.s, and, at the same time, to suggest that one of these people with “major problems” will be given unprecedented authority in a way that would likely produce multiple constitutional crises.

Here’s what Manafort said in an interview this week:

“He needs an experienced person to do the part of the job he doesn’t want to do. He seems himself more as the chairman of the board, than even the CEO, let alone the COO.

“There is a long list of who that person could be,” Manafort added, “and every one of them has major problems.

“The campaign probably won’t choose a woman or a member of a minority group, he said. “In fact, that would be viewed as pandering, I think.”

It might be futile to take anything that the Trump campaign says too seriously, except that Trump is only one unpopular seventy-year old woman away from the presidency, so, yeah, everything his campaign says should be taken seriously.

Manafort states that Trump will be the metaphorical Chairman of the Board of his administration while the Vice President handles the parts of the job he doesn’t want to do!” He doesn’t elaborate on what those parts of the job will be, but I’ll bet it’s a long list.

There is a dangerous logic to this.  It gives cover to Trump supporters who are too embarrassed to admit it. Or need some re-assurance that their decision is actually a sound and prudent one. And maybe it persuades some Republicans who don’t like Trump, but have a hard time voting for Hillary.

I think back to 1980 when people were concerned that Reagan was too old or not engaged enough to be president. The idea then was that he’d be like the CEO and hire great people around him and everything would be fine. Except that Reagan had been a two-term governor of California and, as it turns out, was much more engaged and hands-on than his critics wanted to believe.

And Reagan did bring in great people.  He’d been part of Republican and conservative politics for decades. I don’t get the sense that Trump’s got people like George Schultz, Casper Weinberger, David Stockman, and Jim Baker lining up to join his team.

And the CEO metaphor betrayed an ignorance of exactly how engaged and hands-on and essential a CEO is to a company.

But, Trump’s taken the metaphor to the next level.  He’s going to be the Chairman of the Board. Which means no real involvement in the day-to-day strategy or operations of the company.

The idea of Trump spending much of his presidency in Mar-a-Largo while his vice president runs the country has undeniable appeal. It might even get him elected if he can find a serious Republican to take the job.

The Trump as Chairman idea also explains why someone as serious as Bob Corker would take a meeting at Trump Tower to discuss the Vice Presidency.  You sorta have to take a meeting with someone who wants to give you unprecedented, extra-constitutional power.  But, I’m sure someone as canny as Corker—who also made his fortune in real estate—recognizes Trump as a guy who negotiates a contract for steel or cement or dry wall and then when the bills come due doesn’t pay them, and then 120 days later re-opens negotiations on the price.

I’m not qualified to assess whether such an arrangement would be constitutional.  Trump dipping in and out of his presidency when the spirt moves him, and Bob Corker running the government except when he doesn’t. And no one knows when he is or isn’t.

It almost doesn’t matter. Even if some kind of legal action could be brought, it would go to a Supreme Court that is less “supreme” than it used to be. A court either still split 4-4 or that has a Trump-appointed replacement for Scalia. John Roberts recognizes his responsibility to protecting the role of the Court.  He would likely step in and declare the arrangement unconstitutional.  But, then what? President Trump, “Well, John Roberts is a loser. He failed on Obamacare. He’s not liked by many people. I don’t trust him . . . “

I’m straying into future-history fiction, but my point was that if professional politicians and voters don’t take the institutions of government seriously, then they will break. Manafort’s off-hand comments make it clear how close we are to that breaking point.