The Lawfare Podcast: Patreon Edition

On July 12, the Justice Department appealed the sentences of seven Oath Keepers convicted for Jan. 6-related crimes. Five have been convicted of seditious conspiracy, and two others were convicted of conspiring to obstruct Congress. Lawfare Intern Gia Kokotakis sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff, a former lawyer and expert on the Jan. 6 Oath Keepers prosecutions who directly observed the proceedings. They discussed who the defendants are, how their sentences were calculated, and the Justice Department's strategic motivations for filing the appeals. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott got together to NOT talk about that ONE big story that's not quite ripe yet. (You know the one. It involves sandwiches.) But they did chat through some of the week's other big national security news, including:“Against the Grain.” Russia backed out of the Turkey-facilitated Black Sea Grain Initiative this past week, which had allowed much needed Ukrainian grain to arrive in markets, largely in the developing world. Now not only is that avenue cut off, but Russian forces are attacking grain facilities in Odessa, threatening the global food supply. How does this brutal act fit into Russia’s global strategy? And how should the United States and its allies respond?“It’s a War on War.” The culture war is now taking on actual war, as House Republicans have passed a National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) laden with provisions that target Defense Department policies relating to abortion, DEI, and LGBTQ+ issues — measures that are certain not to make it through the Democrat-controlled Senate and may end up putting the annual bill at risk of not being passed at all. How big is the risk of such an impasse? What could it mean for U.S. national security?“Coups are Like Pancakes.” Earlier this week, the New York Times published a report about how former officials in the Trump administration are declaring the first Trump administration a mulligan and outlining plans to dramatically expand presidential power and purge the executive branch if and when Trump returns to the White House for a second time. How seriously should we take these proposals? And what would they mean for democracy if implemented? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From November 18, 2020: In the waning days of his administration, the president has attempted to install a political loyalist as General Counsel of the National Security Agency, a position that is traditionally a merits position, not a political position. He has also issued an executive order that gives the executive branch greater control over the civil service, making it easier to hire and fire people in agencies. It all raises the question: Is Donald Trump attempting to create the very deep state that he has spent the last four years denouncing? To talk over this question in its various permutations, Benjamin Wittes sat down with Susan Hennessey, who recently wrote an article about the NSA General Counsel appointment; Scott Anderson, Lawfare senior editor; and Rudy Mehrbani, senior advisor at Democracy Fund Voice, senior fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice, former assistant to the president and director of presidential personnel and former associate White House counsel in the Obama administration. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On June 16, the U.S. State Department discovered unauthorized access to its Exchange Online email services and reported it to Microsoft. Almost a month later, on July 11, Microsoft disclosed the attack, and attributed it to a China-based threat actor, which they call Storm-0558. The intrusion granted the hackers access to email accounts at the Commerce and State Departments, including Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo, among other targets. Although no classified information was compromised, the cyber espionage campaign comes at a time of tension between the U.S. and China.To discuss the significance of the latest cyber espionage campaign, Lawfare’s Fellow in Technology Policy and Law, Eugenia Lostri, sat down with Asaf Lubin, Associate Professor of Law at Indiana University Maurer School of Law and a Visiting Professor at Columbia Law School. They talked about what different types of espionage campaigns tell us about tightening U.S.-China competition, how international law can address cyber espionage, and the options available for governments to respond to these type of incidents. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Gaming might seem far removed from national security, but Volko Ruhnke's experience proves otherwise. During his career as an intelligence analyst and manager, he designed and published many commercially successful historical board games that, in turn, informed his work. Additionally, he applied his skills in gaming to training intelligence officers.David Priess hosted Volko for a deep dive about board games that included discussion of various game types, the value of in-person vs. virtual gaming, Volko's intelligence career, his many published games, the use of cards in gameplay, the importance of honoring historicity while avoiding forced recreation of exact historical timelines, similarities between game design and intelligence questions, the collaborative nature of historical boardgaming, why military wargaming matters, complexity in intelligence analysis, games ranging from political coalition management to Polynesian exploration and from the suffrage movement in the early 1900s to the manipulation of public perceptions about the functionality of Machu Picchu, and much more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:Volko Ruhnke's page at GMT GamesThe Kevin McPartland-designed game Conquest of ParadiseThe Alison Collins-designed game Wiñay KawsayChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Noam Osband and Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last month, the majority staff of the Senate Rules and Governmental Affairs Committee released a report entitled “Planned in Plain Sight: A Review of the Intelligence Failures in Advance of January 6th, 2021,” which explores one of the biggest remaining questions about that day: Why didn’t the government see this coming?Molly Reynolds, Senior Fellow at Brookings and Senior Editor of Lawfare, sat down with Quinta Jurecic, Senior Editor of Lawfare and Fellow at Brookings, and Ryan Reilly, Justice Reporter at NBC News, to discuss the report’s findings, how it fits in with other investigations about the insurrection, and where we go from here. You can also find Molly and Quinta’s article on the report on Lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It was a big day in the legal travails of Donald Trump. We awoke this morning to news from the former president himself that he had received another target letter from special counsel Jack Smith, this time from the Jan. 6 grand jury. An indictment seems to be imminent. Incoming Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower spent the day in federal court in Fort Pierce, where Judge Aileen Cannon was hearing the first major status conference of the Mar-a-Lago case. And just as Anna was coming out of court, the Attorney General of Michigan announced that she had brought cases against several fake electors from the 2020 election in that state.Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Anna and with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff for a live taping of The Lawfare Podcast to go over it all. What do we know about the apparently forthcoming new case against Donald Trump? What do we know about the fake electors case in Michigan? And what happened in the courtroom when Judge Cannon faced her first hearing as the presiding judge in the Mar-a-Lago case? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It was a busy weekend in the waters off of Ukraine and Russia. The Ukrainians hit—for the second time—the Kerch Bridge, which connects the Russian mainland with occupied Crimea. The Russians, meanwhile, announced that they are not renewing the Black Sea Grain Initiative, the complex agreement by which Ukraine has managed to export grain through the port of Odessa.What do we know about what happened on the Kerch Bridge? How big a deal is it? Is it connected to the Russian withdrawal from the grain initiative? And what does the scotching of the Black Sea Grain Initiative mean for the Ukrainian economy? To chew it all over, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Dmitri Alperovitch of Silverado Policy Accelerator and the Geopolitics Decanted podcast, and Mykhailo Soldatenko, a visiting researcher at the Harvard Law School and an international lawyer who has written for Lawfare about the Black Sea Grain Initiative.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On July Minipod episode, Lawfare Associate Editor for Communications Anna Hickey sat down with Kori Schake, Director of Foreign and Defense Policy at the American Enterprise Institute, to talk about Senator Tuberville's hold on military nominations and promotions in protest of the Defense Department's abortion policy. They discuss who this hold is impacting, the short and long-term impacts on national security of these holds, and more. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The only thing more impressive than the performance of generative AI systems like GPT-4 and Stable Diffusion is the sheer volume of training data that went into these systems. GPT was reportedly trained on, essentially, the entire Internet, while Stable Diffusion and other image-generation models rely on hundred of millions if not billions of existing pieces of artwork. Of course, much of this content is copyrighted, and the authors and artists whose work is being used to train these models and, potentially, threaten their own livelihoods are paying attention. A number of high-profile lawsuits are making their way through the courts, and the outcome of these cases could hugely shape, and potentially even stop, progress in machine learning.To explore these issues, Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with Pam Samuelson, the Richard M. Sherman Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of California at Berkeley and one of the pioneers in the study of digital copyright law. She's just published a new piece in the journal Science titled "Generative AI meets copyright,” in which she analyzes the current litigation around generative AI and where it might lead. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by Ravi Agrawal, Editor in Chief of Foreign Policy Magazine, to talk through the week’s big natsec news, including: “Pledge Week.” In a sign of strength, NATO held its annual summit in the capital of Vilnius this week, just kilometers from Lithuania’s border with Belarus. But those hoping to join the club have gotten mixed receptions, with NATO members securing a clear path for Sweden to join the alliance without presenting a clear way forward for embattled Ukraine. What did we learn about the state of the alliance from this week’s historic meeting?“Cluster Ruck(us).” Late last week, the Biden administration made the controversial decision to provide U.S. cluster munitions—a type of weapon that many U.S. allies have banned by treaty, due to concerns about civilian casualties—to its ally Ukraine. Is it the right move? And what might it mean on the battlefield—and after the war is over?“Needling and Threads.” Mark Zuckerberg appears to have finally gotten under the skin of tech billionaire Elon Musk, as his recently launched competitor to Musk’s beleaguered Twitter, Threads, launched last week and soon secured over 100 million users. Has Twitter finally met its match? And what will Threads and other competitors mean for the future of the information (and disinformation) economy?  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From December 8, 2020: On Monday, Lawfare released the first paper in its "The Digital Social Contract" paper series. For each paper, Alan Rozenshtein will be doing a podcast interview with the author, and the first guest is law professor Kyle Langvardt of the University of Nebraska College of Law. His paper, "Platform Speech Governance and the First Amendment: A User-Centered Approach," examines how the First Amendment should and should not apply to the content moderation decisions of major internet platforms. Plus, Alan and Benjamin Wittes have a brief discussion to introduce the paper series as a whole. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The NATO summit in Vilnius, Lithuania, just wrapped up, and the big news is that Sweden is in, and Ukraine is not. Eric Adamson of the Atlantic Council and the Swedish Defense Association is a Swedish defense policy analyst who observed the NATO summit. He joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to discuss the two big things that happened: the Swedish resolution of the dispute with Turkey that impeded Swedish NATO accession until now, and the frustrating failure of NATO to set a path for Ukrainian NATO membership. They talked about the dispute between Sweden and Turkey and the nuanced manner in which it was resolved, about whether the Ukrainians are being too demanding and should be more grateful for Western support, and the specific areas in which Sweden will contribute to NATO's capabilities. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Kori Schake is the Director of Foreign and Defense Policy at the American Enterprise Institute. She has also worked in policy positions at the State Department, the Defense Department and the White House, taught at West Point, and more recently, served on the commission tasked with renaming military bases named for confederate figures. She sat down with Lawfare's editor in chief Ben Wittes, to talk about her unusually diverse career in national security, her work at AEI in a period when principled conservatism isn’t popular, and about the recent NATO summit. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Earlier this year, Donald J. Trump became the first former president to be criminally indicted. A few months later, he became the first former president to be indicted a second time, this time in federal court. And it’s not clear that he is done, as Trump and his close associates remain at the center of at least two and possibly more ongoing criminal investigations that have not yet resulted in charges. Nor are Trump’s legal troubles limited to the criminal side of the ledger, as he and the Trump Organization he runs are also involved in a number of ongoing civil lawsuits. As a result, the leading candidate for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination is expected to spend much of that year in court. To get a sense of the complex litigation landscape facing the president and to catch up on the latest developments, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Lawfare’s two leading trial watchers: Senior Editor Roger Parloff and incoming Legal Fellow Anna Bower. They talked about the criminal cases Trump is facing, what charges may yet be coming down the pike, and how his overlapping trials—and the forthcoming election—fit into his apparent legal defense.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On July 4, a federal judge in Louisiana issued one of the most dramatic First Amendment rulings in recent memory. The case involves a variety of individuals, organizations, and conservative state governments who accuse the Biden administration of unconstitutional "jawboning”—that is, informally pressuring social media companies to censor speech, especially about controversial topics like COVID vaccines and election integrity.Describing the allegations as the "most massive attack against free speech in United States’ history," Judge Terry Doughty enjoined by name dozens of high-level Biden administration officials, and potentially thousands more unnamed government employees, from communicating with social media companies about taking down First Amendment-protected user content.If the opinion stands, it will have a dramatic effect on the ability of the government to communicate with social media platforms, a practice that administrations of both parties have engaged in for years. Earlier this week, Judge Doughty rejected a motion from the government to stay the injunction pending appeal; the government has since asked the Fifth Circuit to do so instead and, in a sign of how seriously it is taking the ruling, has signaled that it may ask the Supreme Court to step in if the Fifth Circuit does not.On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the information ecosystem, Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke to two of the leading experts on the government's relationship with social media platforms to work through the implications of this decision. Derek Bambauer is the Irving Cypen Professor of Law at the University of Florida Levin College of Law and is the author of an influential law review article on jawboning in the context of internet speech. Jeff Kosseff is an associate professor of cybersecurity law in the United States Naval Academy and a Lawfare contributing editor and the author of numerous books and articles about online speech issues. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

What are the latest trends in the ransomware-as-a-service ecosystem? Since at least May 27, the CL0P ransomware gang has been exploiting a previously unknown vulnerability to exfiltrate data from financial services organizations, energy corporations, government agencies, and even universities. The group appears to be changing tactics—while it was previously known for its use of the “double extortion” tactic of stealing and encrypting victim data, it seems to now be relying mostly on data exfiltration instead.To discuss the latest changes in the ransomware ecosystem, Eugenia Lostri, Lawfare’s Fellow in Technology Policy and Law, sat down with Charl van der Walt, Head of Security Research at Orange Cyberdefense. Charl is one of the authors of a report analyzing recent cyber extortion activity. They talked about the ransomware-as-a-service ecosystem, the impact the Russian invasion of Ukraine had on ransomware activity in the past year, and what law enforcement is doing to disrupt cybercriminal networks. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Eric Goldstein is the Executive Assistant Director for Cybersecurity of the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, having served previously as Global Head of Cybersecurity Policy Strategy and Regulation at Goldman Sachs, where he led development of the firm's cybersecurity risk management program, and in cybersecurity positions in DHS, as well as practicing cybersecurity law in the private sector. David Kris, Lawfare Contributor and former Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division, and Bryan Cunningham, Lawfare Contributor and Executive Director of the University of California, Irvine’s Cybersecurity Policy & Research Institute, sat down with Eric to talk about all things cybersecurity, including the U.S. National Cybersecurity Strategy and U.S. government cyber lanes in the road. Eric also discusses ransomware and what it's like for a lawyer to serve in an operational position.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott sat down to talk over the week's post-Independence Day national security news, including:“Oy Revolt.” Israel launched a major military operation aimed at uprooting terrorist bases in the refugee camp outside the city of Jenin in the West Bank this week. But as is so often the case, the operation not only proved deadly for Palestinian civilians but has become a point of controversy in the international community. What does this operation say about Israel’s security strategy? “Nationwide Disjunction.” On July 4, a federal judge in Louisiana issued a nationwide injunction ordering the Biden administration not to engage with social media platforms over First Amendment protected speech, arising out of complaints about its handling of COVID-19 information (or misinformation). What is the basis for this order, how realistic is it, how sustainable is it, and what does it tell us about the weird legal dynamics surrounding this set of issues at the moment?“A la Modi.” Indian President Narendra Modi is having a moment. This week he is sitting down with Chinese and Russian leaders, hosting a virtual face-to-face of the Shanghai Cooperative. This just a week after he was feted by President Biden and Congress here in Washington, D.C. What are we to make of India’s new global prominence? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From January 17, 2015: This week, Ben and Matt Waxman sat down with Daniel Reisner, former head of the International Law Branch of the Israeli Defense Forces and current partner with Herzog, Fox and Neeman. Reisner has also served as a senior member of Israel’s peace delegations over the years, participating in negotiation sessions and summits including those at Camp David. He continues to advise senior members of the Israeli government on a variety of issues relating to international law and operational security issues. Colonel Reisner was in New York on a visit sponsored by Academic Exchange for a series of events and discussions on contemporary national security challenges. His experiences set up a wide-ranging conversation touching on everything from the law of targeted killing to the role of morality in operational law advice. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

“But what about Hillary Clinton's emails,” a thousand voices have shouted since the Trump Mar-a-Lago indictment came down. It's not just politicians; it's commentators in serious magazines who seem to think that Trump's conduct is no different from that of the former secretary of state.Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff writing in Lawfare on June 26 found 703 different ways in which Trump's Mar-a-Lago conduct bears no resemblance to Clinton’s emails, and he joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to talk about them. With him was Pete Strzok, a former FBI special agent who ran the Hillary Clinton email investigation. He was there to talk about the investigation, how it differed from the Trump Mar-a-Lago investigation, and whether Roger is correct that the two could not be more different. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Political scientist Ethan Scheiner appeared on Chatter in early 2022, right before the Olympics in Beijing, to talk about the fascinating intersection of politics, security, and Olympic events. This week, he returns to talk about the compelling connections between hockey and international relations--with a special focus on Czechoslovakia before, during, and after the Cold War. His new book, Freedom To Win, uses the stories of a range of larger-than-life characters across several decades to describe the importance of international hockey play to the Czech and Slovak national experience and to increase awareness of a too-little-known quest for freedom from oppression.David Priess and Scheiner discussed the broad intersection of hockey and politics, the intensity of the Swedish-Finnish rivalry on the ice, the origins of the game in Europe, how Czechoslovakian hockey players used their sport to fight back against Soviet domination, the 1969 Ice Hockey World Championships in Stockholm, prominent sports figures' defections from the Warsaw Pact countries during the Cold War, the internationalization of the US National Hockey League, hockey in the former Czechoslovakia after the end of Communist rule in Eastern Europe, and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The Chatter episode The Olympics, Politics, and SecurityThe book Freedom to Win: A Cold War Story of the Courageous Hockey Team that Fought the Soviets for the Soul of its People--and Olympic Gold, by Ethan ScheinerChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, is one of the most important national security offices that you have probably never heard of. Responsible for reviewing foreign investment in the United States for possible national security threats, its jurisdiction and scope of work has expanded dramatically in recent years—and may be on the verge of expanding once again, as the Biden administration considers installing similar measures for outbound U.S. investment.To discuss, Lawfare Contributing Editor Brandon Van Grack and Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Assistant Treasury Secretary for Investment Security Paul Rosen, whose office oversees the CFIUS process, for the first of what we are calling “The Regulators”: a special series Lawfare is co-sponsoring with our friends at the law firm Morrison Foerster, where Brandon is a partner, featuring one-on-one discussions with the senior officials that are implementing our new era of economic statecraft. They discussed how the CFIUS process works in practice, how it’s changed, and what challenges sit on the horizon, both for U.S. policymakers and the businesses they interact with. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In April, former Vice President Mike Pence testified before a federal grand jury under subpoena as part of the special counsel’s investigation into January 6. The testimony came after the district court rejected Pence’s challenge to the validity of the subpoena under the Speech or Debate Clause of the Constitution. And now, months later, Chief Judge James Boasberg has unsealed his ruling on the matter, along with other documents related to Pence’s challenge.When news of the subpoena first broke, Lawfare Senior Editors Molly Reynolds and Quinta Jurecic sat down with Mike Stern and Eric Columbus on the Lawfare Podcast to talk through the issues raised. Now that we have more details about just what took place, Molly and Quinta invited Mike and Eric back to discuss what they made of Pence’s argument and the court’s decision, and what this episode adds to our understanding of the Jan. 6 investigation more broadly. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From June 11, 2019: More than two years after the 2016 presidential election, new information continues to seep into the public about the extent of Russia's sweeping and systematic efforts to interfere in the U.S. democratic process. With the 2020 presidential election on the horizon, last week, Stanford's Cyber Policy Center published a report on securing American elections, including recommendations on how the U.S. can protect elections and election infrastructure from foreign actors.On Monday, Susan Hennessey spoke with two of the report's authors: Alex Stamos, director of the Stanford Cyber Policy Center's Internet Observatory and former Chief Security Officer of Facebook, and Nate Persily, Stanford law professor and expert on election administration. They talked about what happened in 2016, and the enormously complex landscape of defending not just election infrastructure but also preserving the integrity of the information ecosystems in which Americans make their decisions about how to vote, including the possible consequences of regulating foreign media. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Until this year, Tim Wu was Special Assistant to President Biden for competition and tech policy. One of the leading thinkers in progressive approach to antitrust, Tim has since returned to Columbia Law School, where he is the Julius Silver Professor of Law, Science and Technology. Since leaving government, Tim has been offering his thoughts on how the government should regulate artificial intelligence.Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with Tim about his experience in government, whether he's concerned about AI's existential risks, and what his priorities would be for making sure that AI serves society's, and not just the private sector's, interests.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by their colleague and think-tank neighbor, Russia/Ukraine expert Eric Ciaramella, to talk over the week's big news, including:“Going All (Prigozh)in.” Yevgeny Prighozin, leader of the mercenary Wagner Group, went all in this past week, marching his troops into Russia and halfway to Moscow for the stated purpose of removing Russia’s military leadership, only to abruptly halt and accept exile in Belarus instead. What does this mean for the conflict in Ukraine—and future of the Putin regime?“Lost at Sea.” In a busy week of news, one story has gotten surprisingly little attention: the tragic sinking of an overcrowded smugglers’ boat off the coast of Greece that claimed the lives of hundreds of migrants. What does this incident tell us about the dynamics of the migrant crisis in the Mediterranean—and how the world views it?“Moore, Moore, Moore! (How do YOU like it?)” The Supreme Court issued decisions in three major cases this past week, including addressing the much-discussed Independent State Legislature Doctrine in Moore v. Harper. What did the Court decide, and what will these decisions mean? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From October 23, 2020: It's been a wild couple of days of disinformation in the electoral context. Intelligence community officials are warning about Russian and Iranian efforts to influence the U.S. presidential election—and claiming that Iran is responsible for sending threatening emails from fake Proud Boys to Democratic voters. What exactly is going on here? To talk through the developments and the questions that linger, Benjamin Wittes sat down with Scott R. Anderson, Susan Hennessey and Quinta Jurecic. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Thursday, South Africa’s Department of International Relations confirmed it would host the 15th BRICS Summit in August. Normally, this wouldn’t make the news. But because South Africa is a signatory to the International Criminal Court, the country is obligated under international law to arrest one of the summit’s invitees—Russian President Vladimir Putin—the moment he sets foot in Johannesburg.This presents South Africa with what Nosmot Gbadamosi has dubbed a “Putin problem.” Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Nosmot, a multimedia journalist and the writer of Foreign Policy’s weekly Africa Brief, to discuss this diplomatic dilemma, why U.S.-South Africa relations have withered in recent months, and the incoherent Russia-Ukraine “peace mission” led by President Cyril Ramaphosa just weeks ago. They also discussed what the late Eusebius McKaiser has called South Africa’s “nonsensical nonalignment” since the Russian invasion of Ukraine last year and what nonaligment even means in light of the war. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Shane sits down with law professor and hacker historian Scott Shapiro to rant, and rave, about hacker movies. From War Games to the Die Hard franchise to TV’s “Mr. Robot,” Hollywood has portrayed hackers as heroes and villains. Sometimes filmmakers get the art and culture of hacking right. Sometimes they get basic technology very wrong. But the results are almost always entertaining. Scott is a professor at Yale Law School and the author of the new book Fancy Bear Goes Phishing: The Dark History of the Information Age, in Five Extraordinary Hacks. Here’s a list of movies Shane and Scott discussed:War Games https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086567/fullcredits/?ref_=tt_cl_sm Sneakershttps://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105435/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1 Live Free or Die Hard, aka Die Hard 4   https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0337978/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1  Snowden https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3774114/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1 Mr. Robot https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4158110/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0_tt_7_nm_1_q_mr%2520robot Hackers https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113243/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1 The Net https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113957/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1 Die Hard 2 https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099423/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0_tt_8_nm_0_q_die%2520hard%25202 Scott’s book, Fancy Bear Goes Phishinghttps://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374601188/fancybeargoesphishing Scott on Twitter https://twitter.com/scottjshapiro?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor Scott’s interview on the Lawfare podcast about his book https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-dark-history-of-the-information-age/id498897343?i=1000614119459 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

How much transparency do big technology companies owe to their users? The question has become pointed in recent years as users, researchers, and politicians voice discontent about the absence of public information available about how platforms moderate and amplify content. Today, Meta’s President of Global Affairs, Nick Clegg, announced a new initiative to provide more information about how the company’s ranking algorithms work on Facebook and Instagram. On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, Lawfare’s occasional series on the information ecosystem, Lawfare Senior Editors Quinta Jurecic and Alan Rozenshtein talked with Clegg about how Meta has approached transparency for both users and researchers. They also discussed Clegg’s controversial 2021 essay on how Meta’s algorithms interact with user preferences.Meta provides support for Lawfare’s Digital Social Contract paper series. This podcast episode is not part of that series, and Meta does not have any editorial role in Lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The United States in the early 21st century has been involved in a so-called “forever” war involving military threats, interventions, occupations, counterinsurgencies, and the like. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the United States engaged in an at least superficially analogous many-decades series of interventions in the Western Hemisphere with the aim of achieving regional hegemony.This earlier period is the topic of a new book by Sean Mirski, an attorney at Arnold & Porter and a visiting scholar at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. The book is called “We May Dominate the World: Ambition, Anxiety, and the Rise of the American Colossus.” Jack Goldsmith sat down with Sean to discuss what he describes as the United States’ “regional rampage of staggering scope and scale” in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the aims and consequences of these military adventures, and the lessons they hold for today, both for U.S. foreign policy and for understanding the aims of rising powers like China.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It was a heck of a weekend in Russia. There was an insurrection, kind of? A coup, sort of? A column of troops led by Wagner chieftain Yevgeny Prigozhin marched toward Moscow from Rostov-on-Don, threatened the destabilization of the Putin regime, and then in a sudden back flip, everybody stood down and the whole thing was resolved in a weird deal between the Russian president and the renegade mercenary.To talk it all through, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Alina Polyakova, President of the Center for European Policy Analysis; cybersecurity guru and Lawfare Contributing Editor Matt Tait; and Dmitri Alperovitch of the Silverado Policy Accelerator. They talked about what happened over the weekend, what they know and what they think, what it might mean for Vladimir Putin's regime, and what it might mean for the war in Ukraine.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Countries across Africa are procuring and employing surveillance tools from China. This trend is a product of China’s diplomatic strategy, its technological ambitions, and growing corporate power and reach, as well as African domestic demands. A white paper from the Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) at the Atlantic Council argues that research on this topic disproportionately focuses on the motivations and ambitions of the supplier, and seeks instead to focus on the local features that drive the adoption of Chinese surveillance tools.Lawfare’s Fellow in Technology Policy and Law, Eugenia Lostri, sat down with Bulelani Jili, the author of the white paper. Bulelani is a fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Cyber Statecraft Initiative, and a Meta Research Ph.D. Fellow at Harvard University. They discussed the supply and demand drivers for surveillance technology in Africa, the risks to civil liberties that come from the deployment of these technologies without proper checks and balances, and how all this fits in the context of U.S.-China competition. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by UVA Law Professor Paul Stephan to talk through the close-calls in this week’s national security news, including:“Xi’s All That.” Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited Beijing this past week, for a long delayed sit-down with President Xi Jinping to try and de-escalate the two superpowers’ tense relationship. Was this meeting a smart move or a giveaway? And what should we make of President Biden calling the Chinese leader a “dictator” shortly after Blinken’s return?“Adverse REPOssession.” The question of what to do with the $300 billion in Russia-related assets frozen by the United States and its allies has reemerged, with members of Congress recently introducing a new version of the REPO Act that would seize those assets and make them available as reparations for Ukraine, among other purposes. Is seizure the right way to handle these assets? What challenges and risks might such a dramatic step encounter?“Robo Joe.” President Biden joined a summit of leaders in the AI industry this week as part of his administration’s ongoing effort to seriously engage the policy challenges raised by AI technology. But what are the realistic prospects for regulation? And what form should it take? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From July 9, 2019: President Trump has declared that he will fight “all the subpoenas” coming from Congress and has claimed “absolute immunity” for White House advisors. In doing so, he has brought the issue of congressional oversight of the executive branch to the front pages. To talk about that very issue, Margaret Taylor sat down with Austin Evers, the executive director of American Oversight, a non-profit government accountability watchdog; and Michael Stern, who served for many years as the Senior Counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives. Stern is the founder of the Point of Order blog, which covers legal issues affecting Congress. They talked about pending oversight litigation, the House of Representatives’ strategy, how the Trump administration is responding, and if any of this is normal. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As large language models like ChatGPT play an increasingly important role in our society, there will no doubt be examples of them causing harm. Lawsuits have already been filed in cases where LLMs have made false statements about individuals, but what about run-of-the-mill negligence cases? What happens when an LLM provides faulty medical advice or causes extreme emotional distress?A forthcoming symposium in the Journal of Free Speech Law tackles these questions, and Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with three of the symposium's contributors at the University of Arizona and the University of Florida: law professors Jane Bambauer and Derek Bambauer, and computer scientist Mihai Surdeanu. Jane's paper focuses on what it means for a LLM to breach its duty of care, and Derek and Mihai explore under what conditions the output of LLMs may be shielded from liability by that all-important Internet statute, Section 230. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Since joining Lawfare in November 2021, Roger Parloff has been a constant presence at the January 6th trials. Now based in Washington, D.C, he had, earlier in his career, served as a staff writer for Fortune and American Lawyer Magazine, and has been published in The New York Times, Yahoo Finance, ProPublica, New York, NewYorker.com, and Air Mail News. As a senior editor at Lawfare, he's focused on January 6 related matters, including covering the more than 1,000 federal criminal cases that have been filed while also keeping up on the pending investigations of higher-ups.In his conversation with Benjamin Wittes, Lawfare’s editor in chief and this week’s Chatter guest host, Roger talks about giving live play-by-play of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers trials, the Venue Transfer Motions filed by many Jan. 6th defendants, the other journalists and "sedition hunters" who have been crucial in gathering information and reporting on the Jan. 6th cases, and more.Parloff’s latest essay on Lawfare on this subject is entitled: “Should Nine Oath Keepers Receive Terror-Enhanced Sentences?” Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

At the United Nations, Russia's obstruction of efforts to respond to its invasion of Ukraine is finally sparking serious interest in an issue that has long simmered in the background of global politics: reform of the UN Security Council to make it a larger and more inclusive body. In contrast to prior U.S. administrations, the Biden administration is at the tip of the spear of this effort and may be preparing to release a reform proposal of its own in the coming weeks.To better understand this forthcoming proposal and the context that has led to it, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Richard Gowan, an experienced UN watcher and current UN Director at the International Crisis Group. They discussed why the Ukraine conflict has sparked an interest in Security Council reform, what reform is likely to look like, and who stands to benefit the most. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Carolyn Cole, a Pulitzer-Prize winning staff photographer for the Los Angeles Times, has covered wars and other conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Kosovo, Liberia, Sudan, Nicaragua, Haiti, and the U.S.-Mexico border. Over the course of her 30 year career, she has been seriously injured on the job precisely once—when members of the Minnesota State Patrol pushed Cole over a retaining wall and pepper sprayed her so badly that her eyes were swollen shut. Cole was in Minneapolis in the summer of 2020 to cover the protests after the murder of George Floyd. She was wearing a flak jacket marked TV, a helmet, and carried press credentials at the time of her attack. Cole’s story is not unique among the press corps. According to a new report out this week from the Knight First Amendment Institute called “Covering Democracy: Protests, the Police, and the Press,” in 2020, at least 129 journalists were arrested while covering social justice protests and more than 400 suffered physical attacks, 80 percent of them at the hands of law enforcement. As Joel Simon, author of the report and former Executive Director of the Committee to Protect Journalists, writes, “The presence of the media is essential to dissent; it is the oxygen that gives protests life. Media coverage is one of the primary mechanisms by which protesters’ grievances and demands reach the broader public.”Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Joel, as well as Katy Glenn Bass, the Research Director of the Knight First Amendment Institute, to discuss the report, the long legacy of law enforcement attacks on journalists covering protests in America, who counts as “the press” in the eyes of the court, and what can be done to better ensure press freedom.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last November, President Trump became candidate Trump when he formally announced his campaign to retake the White House in 2024. And when, earlier this month, the Department of Justice indicted Trump over his unauthorized possession of classified documents, it gave him another title: defendant Trump.How will all of these roles interact with each other on a legal and logistical level? How will the obligations of defendant Trump interfere with candidate Trump's ability to conduct his presidential campaign? And if candidate Trump becomes convicted-felon Trump and also President Trump, what then?To think through these issues, Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with two members of the Lawfare extended universe: Stephanie Pell, Lawfare Senior Editor and a former federal prosecutor in the southern district of Florida, and Brian Kalt, a law professor at Michigan State and one of the foremost experts on presidential disqualification and removal. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

June Minipod episode! Lawfare’s Associate Editor for Communications Anna Hickey sat down with Daniel Byman, a professor at Georgetown University's Walsh School of Foreign Service and Lawfare’s Foreign Policy Editor, to talk about this month’s Patreon-submitted question: When the U.S. has had periods in which political violence was particularly high, what tools brought it back down? Are those tools still available? And are they being used effectively? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From April 19, 2019: A redacted version of the 448-page Mueller report dropped yesterday, and there’s a lot to say about it. In this Special Edition of the Lawfare Podcast, Bob Bauer, Susan Hennessey, Mary McCord, Paul Rosenzweig, Charlie Savage and Benjamin Wittes discuss what the report says about obstruction and collusion, Mueller’s legal theories and what this all means for the president and the presidency. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower fresh from the Miami court system to discuss the week's yuge national security news story—and one more for good measure:“Aileen, Aileen, Aileen, Aileen! Please don’t take this case just ‘cuz you can.” Former President Donald J. Trump was arraigned in federal court on Tuesday, the first step in a criminal trial expected to be overseen by none other than our old friend Judge Aileen Cannon. Will the charges for unlawful retention or obstruction of justice stick? And where is the trial likely to go from here?“It’s Arraignin’ Men.” The indictment of Trump in the Mar-a-Lago investigation is the first of its kind. But will it be the last? What else is the special counsel investigating? And are there other charges he might pursue, against Trump or others?“Xi Guevara.” Washington is up in arms over a spy station China is setting up in Cuba—or might have been operating for years. How big a deal is this? Are the reactions high-minded or hyperbole? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From April 28, 2018: On Thursday, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates hosted a conference at Georgetown Law on the future of American democracy. Matt Axelrod, Bob Bauer, John Bellinger, Jack Goldsmith, and Don Verrilli participated in a panel on the norms that govern contacts between the White House and the Justice Department, how the Trump administration has broken them, and what can be done to protect the Justice Department’s independence in this administration and future ones. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Monday, 16 young plaintiffs—between the ages of 5 and 22—walked into a packed courtroom in Helena, Montana, to sue their government. At issue is a 1972 amendment to the state constitution guaranteeing that the “state and each person shall maintain and improve a clean and healthful environment in Montana for present and future generations.” 22-year-old Rikki Held and her co-plaintiffs allege that state officials violated that constitutional right. The case, Held v. Montana, now over a decade in the making, is truly historic—the first-ever constitutional climate lawsuit to reach trial in the United States.Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Michael Gerrard, founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at the Columbia Law School to talk through what’s at stake in this landmark case. They discussed the origins of the trial, its potential ripple effects, and where Held v. Montana sits in the landscape of climate change litigation around the world. Other reading of interest:This climate newsletter from Annie Crabill at The Economist Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Water, essential to the emergence and endurance of life on Earth, has both spurred technological advances and driven many types of conflict. For the first time in humanity's long history with water, we are starting to suffer the consequences of widespread unsustainable water use, and we soon will face a crucial collective choice about what future generations' interactions with water will look like.Hydroclimatologist Peter Gleick has studied the issues at the intersection of water, climate change, security, and conflict for decades; he recently wrote The Three Ages of Water to bring together much of his life's work on how water has shaped the course of human history and why acting now is so vital for fostering a sustainable hydrologic future. David Priess hosted him for a conversation covering his early interest in hydrology, the importance of interdisciplinary studies for water issues, early civilizations' relationship with water, ancient epic flood stories, early legal codes' attention to water conflict, the scientific revolution's water impacts, water poverty, the difference between so-called water wars and conflicts involving water, Hollywood's portrayals of water conflicts, NASA's GRACE satellites, the peak water debate, the path to a more sustainable future, and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book The Three Ages of Water by Peter GleickThe article "Water and Conflict: Fresh Water Resources and International Security," International Security (1993) by Peter GleickThe article "Environment and Security: The Clear Connections," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (2015) by Peter GleickThe book Bottled and Sold by Peter GleickThe Water Conflict Chronology project at the Pacific InstituteThe Water at the Movies compilation by Peter GleickThe movie The Treasure of the Sierra MadreThe movie Mad Max: Fury RoadThe movie WaterworldThe movie Quantum of SolaceThe movie V is for VendettaThe movie Dune (1984)The book Dune by Frank HerbertChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The first 31 counts of the Trump Mar-a-Lago indictment all are under the Espionage Act, which has led to a lot of confusion because Trump is not accused of spying. Heidi Kitrosser is a professor of law at Northwestern University and an expert on the Espionage Act. She wrote a recent piece in Lawfare about the Espionage Act and its history of prosecutions during the Trump Administration. She joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to talk about the law, its history, the problems with it, and how overbroad it is in some areas—and why none of those areas implicate the Trump indictment. It's an interesting conversation that covers media prosecutions, prosecutions of leakers, and prosecutions of spies, and it will give you all the background you need to understand the controversy about the charges against Trump.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Donald Trump was arraigned Tuesday in Miami, FL, in connection with the Mar-a-Lago indictment. Lawfare's Fulton County Correspondent Anna Bower was in the courtroom and immediately after the hearing, she joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes and Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic before a live YouTube audience to debrief on the whole thing. They talked about what happened in the courtroom, Trump's conditions of release, counsel, and what happened in “The Line” getting into the courtroom—27 hours of waiting before the hearing actually started. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This weekend, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes had a conversation on Read With Me, a by-subscription-only podcast associated with Ben’s Substack Dog Shirt Daily. In this episode, Ben went through the indictment of Donald Trump at great length and with particular care with Lawfare Fulton County Court Correspondent Anna Bower and Lawfare Contributing Editor Matt Tait. It's a line-by-line, page-by-page analysis that we thought might be a good resource for people who are trying to make sense of the indictment—where it's strong, where it raises issues, what issues it raises, and where things might go from here. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.