The Lawfare Podcast

Lloyd Austin's hospitalization and delayed communication about it have spurred much commentary and questions about the role of the secretary of defense in the US nuclear-strike chain of command.David Priess spoke with Hans Kristensen, Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, about his path to expertise on nuclear issues, the chain of command for nuclear strike authorization (and recent comments from elected representatives that misunderstand it), alternatives to the current system, fictional scenarios of nuclear launches, what is known about different nuclear states' authorization processes, the "letters of last resort" for UK nuclear submarines, deterrence and human psychology, and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The TV movie The Day AfterThe movie WarGamesThe movie The Bedford IncidentThe music video for "Land of Confusion" by GenesisThe movie Dr. StrangeloveThe movie Fail SafeThe movie The Man Who Saved the WorldThe movie A Few Good Men"Finger on the Button," paper by Jeffrey G. Lewis and Bruno Tertais, Middlebury Institute of International Studies at MontereyThe book The Dead Hand by David HoffmanThe movie Crimson TideChatter 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.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last month, the Department of Defense released its first-ever policy on civilian harm reduction. But as Marc Garlasco recently wrote in Lawfare, “[T]he policy comes at an awkward time … The U.S. military has issued guidance on how to protect civilians during operations just as its close ally Israel has reportedly killed thousands of Palestinians with American bombs.” And yet, many aspects of the new policy are nothing short of groundbreaking.  Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Marc, a former targeting professional and war crimes investigator and current military advisor at PAX, as well as Emily Tripp, the Director of Airwars, a transparency watchdog NGO which tracks, assesses, archives, and investigates civilian harm claims in conflict-affected nations. They discussed the state of civilian harm worldwide; the good, the bad, and the ugly of the Pentagon’s new policy; and recent efforts to get U.S. allies and partners to buy in. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Chimène Keitner is the Martin Luther King Jr. Professor of Law at the University of California at Davis. She is a leading international law authority and served for a number of years at the State Department’s Office of the Legal Adviser. She is the author of a lengthy piece in Lawfare about South Africa's petition under the Genocide Convention against Israel in the International Court of Justice.Chimène joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to talk about the litigation. What is South Africa's claim under the Genocide Convention? What is Israel's defense? Where are both sides vulnerable? And how will the court likely consider the matter at this preliminary stage?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Over the last two months, Houthi militants have waged more than 27 attacks against merchant shipping and U.S. and partner forces in the Red Sea, the Gulf of Aden, and the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, purportedly in response to the war in Gaza. These attacks have significantly disrupted global shipping and surged the Middle East into an even more precarious security situation. Following a large-scale Houthi attack on U.S. and British ships, the U.S. and U.K. on Jan. 11 launched over 150 munitions targeting almost 30 Houthi sites in Yemen. The U.S. on Jan. 12 carried out another strike on a Houthi radar facility. The Houthis have since retaliated with multiple strikes targeting U.S. forces. Yesterday, the Houthis for the first time successfully struck a cargo ship owned and operated by the United States.Lawfare Research Fellow Matt Gluck sat down with Gregory Johnsen, the Associate Director of the Institute for Future Conflict at the U.S. Air Force Academy and Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson to discuss the spate of Houthi attacks, the U.S. response and the associated domestic and international law questions, and where the fighting is likely to go from here. What can history tell us about the possible paths forward? Why did the U.S. act when it did? What’s in it for the Houthis? They chewed over these questions and more. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From March 4, 2017: Yesterday, Just Security and the Center on Law and Security at New York University School of Law hosted Benjamin Wittes for a conversation on a question about the path of the Trump presidency so far: what happens when we can’t take the president’s oath of office seriously?Ben’s talk focused on an essay he and Quinta Jurecic posted to Lawfare simultaneously with the speech, in which they argued that the presidential oath—little discussed though it may be in constitutional jurisprudence and academic literature—is actually the glue that holds together many of our assumptions about how government functions. And when large enough numbers of people come to doubt the sincerity of the president’s oath, those assumptions begin to crumble.Big thanks to Ryan Goodman of Just Security and Zachary Goldman of the Center on Law and Security for putting together this event. Make sure to also read Ryan’s Just Security followup post on his discussion with Ben and the questions raised by our essay.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Quinta and Scott were joined by Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett to discuss the week’s big national security and courtroom news, including:“Ergo Omnes.” South Africa has brought Israel to the International Court of Justice for actions relating to its military campaign in Gaza, based on a novel legal theory that alleges Israeli violations of the Genocide Convention and asserts standing by virtue of the universal obligation to prevent genocide. What practical impact is this litigation likely to have? And what does it mean as a precedent for the international community?“Cert(ain Doom) Petition.” The Supreme Court has officially taken up former President Trump’s appeal of a Colorado Supreme Court decision disqualifying him from the 2024 ballot there on the grounds that he is ineligible to hold office. While some have welcomed the chance to nationalize Colorado’s holding, others have warned that doing so would be a grave blow to popular democracy. How might the matter play out? And what will it mean for the 2024 election and after?“Void Austin.” Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin spent several days in the hospital earlier this month—without notifying the White House, leaving what some believe was a gaping hole at the highest level of the U.S. military chain of command. How big a problem was this? What steps should be taken in response?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of “Trump's Trials and Tribulations,” recorded on January 11 in front of a live audience on YouTube and Zoom. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes spoke with Lawfare Senior Editors Quinta Jurecic and Roger Parloff, and Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower, about the closing arguments in the New York civil case, about the Supreme Court's decision to grant Trump's petition for it to review the Colorado Supreme Court's decision barring him from the ballot under the 14th Amendment, and about the flurry of motions filed in Fulton County by the January 8 deadline. They also checked in on the Southern District of Florida to see what was, or wasn't, going on, and took audience questions from Lawfare’s Material Supporters on Zoom. To be able to submit questions to the panelists, become a Material Supporter at lawfaremedia.org/support.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From September 26, 2015: On this week’s Lawfare Podcast, Gregory Johnsen outlines the current state-of-play in Yemen. Johnsen, who is a writer-at-large for Buzzfeed News, a doctoral candidate at Princeton University, and an all-things-Yemen-expert, walks Ben through the byzantine power politics in Sanaa that led to the conflict now engulfing Yemen and he explains why the war shouldn’t be viewed as just another Sunni-Shia fight. Yet while he clarifies that the issues that sparked the war are much more local, he warns that the longer the conflict goes on, the more likely it is to expand. Johnsen also outlines the events that led to the Saudi intervention and whether or not Yemen—which he says is really twelve separate factions now—can ever be put back together again.Johnsen is the author of The Last Refuge: Yemen, al Qaeda, and America’s War in Arabia. Follow him on Twitter for the latest updates on Yemen.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On January 11, 2024, Donald J. Trump arrived in a New York courtroom for closing arguments in the civil fraud case against the former president, his company, and his adult sons. The suit, brought by the state’s attorney general Letitia James, alleges that Trump and his company misled lenders about the former president’s net worth in order to secure better business deals. The case is not Trump’s only legal trouble, but it’s one that could have a consequential impact for his family business and the image he has crafted for himself as a richer-than-rich, deal-making business man.What are the legal issues at stake? What might Trump argue on appeal? And how could the outcome affect Trump’s finances?To talk it all through, Lawfare Legal Fellow and Courts Correspondent Anna Bower spoke with Tristan Snell, former New York Assistant Attorney General and lead prosecutor in the Trump University fraud case. Tristan is also the author of a forthcoming book called, “Taking Down Trump.”Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Brandon Stoddard was one of the most accomplished executives in broadcast television history. In his career at ABC, he helped bring to the small screen such legendary mini-series as “Roots” and “The Winds of War,” as well as the acclaimed television series “Moonlighting” and “Roseanne.” But arguably his most consequential and controversial decision was to air the made-for-TV movie “The Day After,” which graphically depicted the effects of a nuclear war between the United States and the Soviet Union. Stoddard faced opposition from his colleagues, pundits, and even the Reagan White House, which pressured ABC to pull the film. But having conceived of the project as an impetus for people around the world to grapple with the potential of a devastating war, Stoddard forged ahead and broadcast the film in November 1983. It was an epochal event in U.S. history. One hundred million people tuned in to watch, and the movie became the most-watched in television history. It was a national moment of the kind Americans rarely share today. Journalist A. B. Stoddard, Brandon’s daughter, spoke with Shane Harris about her dad’s determination to air the film and what he hoped to achieve. Stoddard is well known for her political commentary and work at The Bulwark. But today, she shares personal memories of her father, his illustrious career, and the legacy of his work. In November of last year, to commemorate the 40th anniversary of “The Day After,” she wrote a column, “The Day My Father Scared America.” Among the works mentioned in this episode:A.B. Stoddard’s column on her dadhttps://plus.thebulwark.com/p/brandon-stoddard-the-day-after Shane’s previous conversation with Nicholas Meyer, who directed “The Day After” https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-day-after-with-nicholas-meyer/id1593674288?i=1000558946928 A.B. Stoddard’s columns for The Bulwarkhttps://substack.com/@abstoddard The catalog of Brandon Stoddard’s work https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0830992/ Brandon Stoddard’s induction in the Television Academy Hall of Fame https://www.emmys.com/bios/brandon-stoddard “The Day After” (on YouTube) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utGRP9Zy1lg Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Jay Venables of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Israeli Supreme Court—in the middle of the war in Gaza—handed down a decision that amounts to a kind of death blow to Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu's judicial reform project. Before October 7, judicial overhaul was all that anybody was talking about in Israeli politics—you know, a five-part legislative plan to assert parliamentary control over the judiciary and reduce Israel's checks and balances into a more majoritarian system. Only one part of it passed, and the Supreme Court has now struck it down in a decision that sharply divided the court on some questions and reflected significant unity on others.To discuss the 700-page ruling, we brought back our Israeli judicial overhaul team: Yuval Shany of Hebrew University and Amichai Cohen of Ono Academic College. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes spoke with them about what the court did and what the court didn't do, about their doing it in the middle of a war and whether that was truly necessary, and about where the judicial politics of Israel go from here. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Yesterday, a panel of judges at the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in former President Trump's appeal of Judge Chutkan's denial of his claims of presidential immunity in the Jan. 6 case.On a livestream yesterday afternoon to talk over what happened in every phase of the oral arguments, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes spoke with Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower who was in the room for the arguments, and Lawfare Senior Editors Scott R. Anderson, Quinta Jurecic, and Roger Parloff. Anna Bower discussed what is was like in the courtroom where both former President Trump and special counsel Jack Smith were seated. They talked about the merits and jurisdictional questions the judges considered, their impressions about what the judges may be thinking about the case, and how the lawyers performed. They even talked about whether Lawfare was once again first in line, and they looked forward to what happens next.You can watch a video version of their conversation here.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Michael J. Gottlieb is a litigation partner at the Willkie law firm. He is a long-time national security lawyer, served in Barack Obama's White House Counsel's office, and used to be the civilian lead on a task force that built rule of law institutions in Afghanistan.Late last year, he won a $148 million dollar judgment against Rudy Giuliani on behalf of election workers Shaye Moss and Ruby Freeman. He joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to talk about the case, how he and the advocacy group Protect Democracy teamed up to use defamation law to fight disinformation and the big lie, what the use of defamation in this way can and cannot be expected to do, and how he went from building rule of law institutions in Afghanistan to representing people who have had their lives turned upside down by a toxic media ecosystem. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Tuesday, Jan. 9, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals is set to hear oral argument in United States v. Trump. Trump, indicted in D.C. for alleged crimes related to election interference, is appealing the trial court’s denial of his motion to dismiss based on presidential immunity and constitutional grounds.Ahead of the hearing, we gathered an all-star team to discuss the merits of Trump’s appeal and how the D.C. Circuit might rule. Lawfare Legal Fellow and Courts Correspondent Anna Bower sat down with Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic; Stanton Jones, counsel for American Oversight, which has filed a fascinating amicus brief that questions whether the appeals court has jurisdiction to decide the case in the first place; and Matthew Seligman, counsel for a group of former Republican officials who have filed an amicus brief in opposition to Trump’s claim of immunity. Matthew is also the co-author of a forthcoming book on presidential elections called, “How to Steal a Presidential Election.”Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Quinta and Scott were joined by Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower to talk through the week’s big national security news, including:“Hamas, No Más.” A senior Hamas official was recently killed in an attack in Beirut, in what many believe was an operation by Israel—a country whose leaders have pledged to target Hamas’s leaders wherever they might be, though it has not formally acknowledged involvement in this particular attack. But pursuing such action across a border that is already on the edge of becoming a second front in the Gaza conflict has observers nervous. How significant is this operation? Does it risk regional escalation?“Bad for the Immune System.” Just before the holiday, the Supreme Court rejected special counsel Jack Smith’s petition for it to expedite consideration of former President Trump’s claim of immunity to criminal charges. And in the week that’s passed, briefing is already underway—including an argument by an amicus asserting that appeal shouldn’t be allowed at all. What hangs on this case? And how do the courts seem poised to address it?“The Unprincipled Agent Problem.” The Justice Department has leveled additional charges against Sen. Robert Menendez and his wife alleging additional illegal actions in support of Qatar, including some in violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Meanwhile, several associates of former President Trump have faced similar charges for alleged work for the same government. What should we make of these powerful public officials and their associates doing work for foreign governments? And is FARA the right tool to address it?For object lessons, Quinta continued to suck up to the estate of Roberto Bolano by endorsing his book “The Savage Detectives.” Scott spilled the beans on one of Denver’s lovely speakeasies, B&GC. And Anna urged folks to try out a Tarot Card reading for the New Year—advice Fox News appears to have taken on former President Trump’s behalf.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of “Trump's Trials and Tribulations,” recorded on January 4 in front of a live audience on YouTube and Zoom. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower and Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff to discuss all of the Section 3 litigation happening across the country from Colorado to Maine. They talked about where the D.C. case stands and whether the Jan. 6 trial will start on March 4. And they took questions from a live audience.This is a live conversation that happens online every Thursday at 4:00pm Eastern Time. If you would like to come join and ask a question, be sure to visit Lawfare’s Patreon account and become a Material Supporter.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From December 11, 2018: Last week, Benjamin Wittes sat down with Gregory Johnsen, a former member of the U.N. Security Council Panel of Experts on Yemen and the author of the book "The Last Refuge: Yemen, Al-Qaeda, and America’s War in Arabia," to do a deep dive on the conflict in Yemen: its origins; its current state; and the role Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United States have played and are likely to play moving forward. Joining Ben and Greg was Daniel Byman, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Center for Middle East Policy and Lawfare’s own Foreign Policy Editor.After Ben and Dan’s conversation with Greg, Brookings Fellow Molly Reynolds and Lawfare's Scott R. Anderson sat down for a conversation about Yemen-related legislation that is currently churning on Capitol Hill, and what it may mean for the future of U.S. involvement in the conflict there.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last month, at COP28 in Dubai, the Republic of the Marshall Islands unveiled its sweeping national climate adaptation plan, the multi-year product of government officials interviewing thousands of Marshallese residents across the country’s dozens of coral atolls. The plan is ambitious and groundbreaking because it has to be. As John Silk, foreign minister of the Marshall Islands, said in September, “We call it our national adaptation plan, but it is really our survival plan.”Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Jake Bittle, a staff writer at Grist who covers climate impacts and adaptation and the author of a recent book about climate migration called “The Great Displacement,” about this very plan, which Jake obtained ahead of the annual climate conference. They discussed what makes this particular climate adaptation plan revolutionary, the thorny geopolitics of climate financing, and the unimaginable, unquantifiable loss that might occur should the worst case scenarios come to fruition for the Marshallese. But they also talked about why, despite its dire warnings and existential subject matter, the plan’s creators ultimately see it as an optimistic document. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From the protests in Brazil initially focused on bus fares to the protests in Hong Kong seeking to stop an extradition bill to the protests across the Middle East now collectively referred to as the "Arab Spring," the political and economic mass demonstrations from 2010 to 2020 made it a decade of public protest like no other. Yet the vast majority of these efforts failed to bring about their desired changes--and many of them actually led to the opposite of what they wanted. Vincent Bevins, author of the new book If We Burn: The Mass Protest Decade and the Missing Revolution, has chronicled this decade with stories from his on-the-ground reporting and extensive interviews with activists in ten countries around the globe.David Priess spoke with Vincent about why mass protests during this decade so often fell short of their objectives, the principle of horizontalism, the role of social media in mobilization and action, and other themes as they relate to the mass protests in Brazil, Turkey, Hong Kong, Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, Syria, South Korea, and other countries.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book If We Burn: The Mass Protest Decade and the Missing Revolution by Vincent BevinsThe movie The CandidateThe book From Mobilization to Revolution by Charles TillyThe book Minor Detail by Adania ShibliThe book Bourdieu's Secret Admirer in the Caucasus by Georgi DerluguianChatter 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.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The conflict between Israel and Hamas is provoking heated debates about which side is in the right. Each accuses the other of things like war crimes. Oftentimes, they’re expressing a political or moral judgment—but the fact is, these are also legal terms.So for this discussion, we’re going to step back from the debates and try to take a dispassionate look at the law that applies here—international humanitarian law, or IHL.To do that, Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Gabor Rona, who previously served as the legal adviser for the International Committee for the Red Cross. They talked about what IHL has to say about the most heated debates of this conflict, including the high number of civilian casualties in Gaza and Hamas’s use of human shields. They talked about the gaps in the law. And they talked about whether the law even matters here. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In May 2023, Montana passed a new law that would ban the use of TikTok within the state starting on January 1, 2024. But as of today, TikTok is still legal in the state of Montana—thanks to a preliminary injunction issued by a federal district judge, who found that the Montana law likely violated the First Amendment. In Texas, meanwhile, another federal judge recently upheld a more limited ban against the use of TikTok on state-owned devices. What should we make of these rulings, and how should we understand the legal status of efforts to ban TikTok?We’ve discussed the question of TikTok bans and the First Amendment before on the Lawfare Podcast, when Lawfare Senior Editor Alan Rozenshtein and Matt Perault, Director of the Center on Technology Policy at UNC-Chapel Hill, sat down with Ramya Krishnan, a staff attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, and Mary-Rose Papandrea, the Samuel Ashe Distinguished Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of North Carolina School of Law. In light of the Montana and Texas rulings, Matt and Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic decided to bring the gang back together and talk about where the TikTok bans stand with Ramya and Mary-Rose, on this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the information ecosystem.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welcome to our annual “Ask Us Anything” episode, a hallowed Lawfare tradition. Every news alert in 2023 seemed to bring new questions. But fear not, because Lawfare has answers. Lawfare senior editors answered listener-submitted questions on the Israel-Gaza War, military aid to Ukraine, the Trump trials, gag orders against the former president, the presidential pardon ability, violence against elected officials, efforts to combat corruption, and more. What a year! Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From September 27, 2014: A few weeks ago, Benjamin Wittes began listening to a podcast called Hardcore History, which is the brainchild of a fellow named Dan Carlin. Carlin was doing a series of episodes on World War I, and Hardcore History is—let's just say—a different sort of podcast. The episodes are very long, very involved, and to Ben at least, completely riveting. Ben can't recommend it highly enough. Carlin, a former radio talk show host, also runs a podcast called Common Sense, which focuses on contemporary political issues and features Carlin's eclectic political views—many of which Ben disagrees with intensely. Literally millions of people are downloading Carlin's lectures on World War I and other major events in mostly military history. Ben caught up with Carlin this week to discuss the World War I series, Hardcore History more generally, and his views on matters surveillance, ISIS, and overseas intervention.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Quinta and Scott rang in the New Year with co-host emeritus Benjamin Wittes by discussing some listener-submitted topics, including:What does the AUKUS deal mean for the Five Eyes intelligence relationship?How can courts enforce a gag order against former President Trump?What would a President Nikki Haley mean for the Republican Party’s foreign policy?Which is better, wizards or fighters?Could anything stop former President Trump from appointing a cabinet of loyalists if elected back into the White House?How is misinformation impacting public understandings of the Gaza conflict?What advice would you give to folks beginning law school—and those married to them?Could we just do away with hard printouts of classified information altogether?How will China’s economic and demographic challenges impact its decision-making on Taiwan?What does Prighozin’s death mean for Wagner in Africa?What was your most (or least) favorite media of the year?As for object lessons, they shared several sent in by listeners, including:The video game Pentiment, a murder mystery set in Renaissance Bavaria;The book “Palestine 1936: The Great Revolt and the Roots of Middle East Conflict” by Oren Kessler;The “anti-reactionary conservative news site” The Dispatch, including its podcasts Advisory Opinions, The Remnant, and The Dispatch Podcast;The book “Three Dangerous Men” by Seth Jones, examining military leaders in China, Iran, and Russia;The book “Killers of the Flower Moon” by David Grann (but not the movie);The podcast “The Prince” about the rise of Xi Jinping (along with The Economist’s other phenomenal podcast work);The book “Listen Liberal: Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People” by Thomas Frank;The new book “For the People, For the Country” by John Ragosta, a political biography of Patrick Henry;And LinkedIn as the hot new social networking site!Thank you to everyone for listening to Rational Security and supporting Lawfare throughout the year. We hope you enjoy a Happy New Year, and we will be back in your feeds in 2024!Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From February 9, 2019: From the increasing development of autonomous weapons systems to the expansion of the traditional battlefield to cyber and outer space, the evolution of warfare invites ethical and legal questions about what the future holds. In November 2018, Arnold & Porter's Veterans and Affiliates Leadership Organization hosted a panel discussion to explain what warfare will be like for the military veterans of the future.Former Air Force and Army general counsel and current Arnold & Porter partner Chuck Blanchard moderated a conversation with American University law professor Ken Anderson, Emory law professor Laurie Blank, and Jamie Morin, vice president of Defense System Operations at The Aerospace Corporation and a director of the Center for Space Policy and Strategy.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Former President Trump’s prosecution for mishandling classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate has brought an old law back to the front pages—the Espionage Act.Enacted more than a century ago, parts of that law allowing for the prosecution of those who mishandle or unduly disclose sensitive national security information, have helped provide the legal infrastructure for the modern classification system used to protect our country's most important secrets. And by some accounts, to limit debate over some of its most controversial policies.In his new book, “State of Silence,” George Mason University History Professor Sam Lebovic provides a fast-paced and eminently readable account of the Espionage Act, from its early-20th-century origins, through the various twists and turns that have led it to be applied to government leakers and former presidents alike. Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Lebovic to discuss the unlikely evolution of the Espionage Act, the role that it has come to play in our national security system, and how it might be changed to better reflect our democratic values.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, we're taking time off for the holidays, so we reached into the Chatter archives for one of our favorites.In this episode from January 13, 2022, Shane Harris and David Priess teamed up to talk with John Sipher, a former senior intelligence officer who has gone Hollywood. With his partners at Spycraft Entertainment, John is bringing compelling and, yes, accurate stories about espionage to the screen. Before working in the entertainment industry, he spent 28 years in the CIA, where he served multiple overseas tours as a chief of station. Shane, David, and John talked about their favorite spy movies, the fine line between the espionage and action-adventure genres, and the kinds of stories they’d like to see more of.  Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo, with engineering assistance from Ian Enright. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Between 1865 and 1872, the first iteration of the Ku Klux Klan conducted a reign of terror across the former Confederate States, harassing, intimidating, and murdering freedpeople and their white allies. As violence spread with impunity across the South, Congress, at President Ulysses S. Grant’s urging, passed three Enforcement Acts, which radically expanded the federal government's ability to protect individuals from violence when their state governments could or would not. Lawfare Associate Editor for Communications Anna Hickey sat down with Fergus Bordewich, author of “Klan War: Ulysses S. Grant and the Battle to Save Reconstruction,” to discuss how the Grant administration fought the first domestic terrorist organization the federal government had ever faced. They also talked about the political terrorism conducted by the Klan in that era and what we can learn from that violent period of American history.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Supreme Court last month heard oral arguments in United States v. Rahimi, in which the Court will decide the constitutionality of a federal law that criminalizes the possession of firearms by individuals on whom state courts have imposed domestic violence protective orders. This case came to the Court following its June 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. In that case, the Court determined that whether a law violates the Second Amendment depends on whether there is a “representative historical analogue” for the contemporary law. Amanda Tyler, the Shannon Cecil Turner Professor of Law at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, argued in a recent article in Lawfare that the many laws disarming loyalists that existed at the time of the Founding serve as a set of “historical analogues” required by Bruen to demonstrate the constitutionality of the statute at issue in Rahimi—a claim which has been disputed by Rahimi’s lawyers. Lawfare Research Fellow Matt Gluck sat down with Tyler to discuss the Rahimi case, the nature of the Founding-era laws that stripped loyalists of their firearms, whether loyalists were members of the American political community, why that question matters for the Court’s ruling in Rahimi, and more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Supreme Court during World War II issued some of the most notorious opinions in its history, including the Japanese exclusion case, Korematsu v. United States, and the Nazi saboteur military commission case, Ex parte Quirin. For a fresh take on these and related cases and a broader perspective on the Supreme Court during World War II, Jack Goldsmith sat down with Cliff Sloan, a professor at Georgetown Law Center and a former Special Envoy for Guantanamo Closure, to discuss his new book, which is called “The Court at War: FDR, His Justices, and the World They Made.”  They discussed how the Court's decisions during World War II were informed by the very close personal bonds of affection that most of the justices had with President Roosevelt and by the justices’ intimate attachment to and involvement with the war effort. They also discussed the fascinating internal deliberations in Korematsu, Quirin, and other momentous cases, and the puzzle of why the same court that issued these decisions also, during the same period, issued famous rights-expanding decisions in the areas of reproductive freedom, voting rights, and freedom of speech.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Quinta and Scott were joined by Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett and Cyber Fellow Eugenia Lostri to talk through the big national security news waking us up from our long winter’s nap this week, including:“Rocky Mountain, Bye.” Colorado’s Supreme Court has bid goodbye to former President Donald Trump’s 2024 candidacy (for now, at least), holding in a 4-3 ruling that he is disqualified as a candidate by virtue of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. Will this ruling hold? And where will it go from here?“Houthis to Sea, so Rudely, a Wop Bop a Loo Bop a Wop Bam Boom.” Attacks by Yemen-based (and Iran-backed) Houthi rebels have led major shippers to avoid the Red Sea, dealing a serious blow to global commerce. But the United States and a coalition of allies has announced a new maritime effort—the (perhaps too) aptly named Operation Prosperity Guardian—to keep trade flowing. What will this military operation look like? And what will it mean for the global economy?“Not So Bueno(s) Aires?” Argentina has a new president in the form of eccentric populist economist and literal dogfather Javier Milei. What does his election mean for the future of the country? We have a live dispatch from Buenos Aires to talk it over.For object lessons, Quinta recommended Jennifer Egan’s 2022 classic “A Visit From the Goon Squad” and her latest “The Candy House.” Scott shared his preferred recipe for mulled wine and the secret ingredient: star anise. Natalie shared a wealth of new materials celebrating civil rights leader Bayard Rustin, including a new film Rustin, as well as a recent profile in The New Yorker. And Eugenia gave the people what they want with her endorsement of the Dragon Age series of games.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's part two of our Lawfare year-end event. Yesterday, we brought you the headliner conversation with Adam Kinzinger. Today, it's three panels of Lawfare insiders talking about the year to come and the year that's passed. We did a panel on democracy, the Trump trials, and related matters. We did a panel on cybersecurity, cyber defense, and AI. And of course, we did a panel on foreign policy and the various crises that are overtaking American foreign policy.You can watch a video version of their conversation here.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another episode of “Trump's Trials and Tribulations,” this one recorded on December 21 in front of a live audience on YouTube and Zoom. This week, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower and special guest Anthony Michael Kreis from the Georgia State University College of Law.They talked about the 11th Circuit's denial of Mark Meadows’s removal request in Fulton County, about why the order may have worrisome secondary effects, and of course, about that decision from the Colorado Supreme Court blocking Trump from the 2024 Republican primary ballot. This is a live conversation that happens online every Thursday at 4:00pm Eastern Time. If you would like to come join and ask a question, be sure to visit Lawfare’s Patreon account and become a Material Supporter.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The other day before a live audience, we had our Lawfare year-end extravaganza. It was two hours long, so we've broken it up for purposes of the podcast. In this episode, you'll hear Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes interview Adam Kinzinger, former representative and member of the Jan. 6 committee, who headlined the event. They talked about the big national security stories of 2023, both domestically and abroad. They talked about what to expect in 2024, and how the international stories are linked to American domestic politics and dysfunction. You can watch a video version of their conversation here.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Secure by Design means different things to different people. As part of Lawfare’s ongoing project to understand what Secure by Design might mean in practice, we are trying to identify the open questions—areas where research or inquiry might help our collective understanding of the concept and how it might work. Lawfare Contributing Editor Paul Rosenzweig sat down with three Senior Advisers to CISA—Lauren Zabierek, Jack Cable, and Bob Lord—who work on the cutting edge of SbD design and implementation, to get their thoughts on research that would be of ongoing value to their efforts to define an SbD standard.You can watch a video version of their conversation here.For more information, including the resources mentioned in this episode:CISA, U.S. and International Partners Announce Updated Secure by Design Principles Joint Guide | CISACISA, NSA, FBI and International Cybersecurity Authorities Publish Guide on The Case for Memory Safe Roadmaps | CISABlog: The Next Chapter of Secure by Design | CISAExpanded Secure by Design Publication: Secure-by-Design | CISAWhite Paper: https://www.cisa.gov/resources-tools/resources/secure-by-design (English and Spanish versions available)Blog on Memory Safety: The Urgent Need for Memory Safety in Software Products | CISAApplying Secure By Design to events : Applying “Secure By Design” Thinking to Events in the News | CISARFI on secure software attestation form: CISA Requests Comment on Draft Secure Software Development Attestation Form | CISADirector Jen Easterly on updated Secure by Design in Singapore (start 2:12): SICW Opening Ceremony & SICW High-Panels - Opening Plenary - YouTubeRosenzweig on Auto/Cyber Liability: https://tcg-website-prod.azurewebsites.net/the-evolving-landscape-of-cybersecurity-liability/Unsafe At Any Speed: CISA's Plan to Foster Tech Ecosystem Security (youtube.com)Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Modern representative democracy was born in darkness. Transparency in representative bodies can spur unintended consequences for freedom, while secrecy in those bodies can lead to optimal outcomes for the public.These are uncomfortable truths that emerge from the history of the US and French revolutionary experiences. Many of our governance challenges today, from malign misinformation to persistent leaks to skepticism toward authority, derive in part from the fact that fundamental issues about how to manage openness in a representative deomcracy remain unresolved.David Priess chatted with Katlyn Carter, assistant professor of history at Notre Dame and author of the new book Democracy in Darkness: Secrecy and Transparency in the Age of Revolutions, about the concepts of reflective representation and insulated representation, how to understand and research the will of the people, the Continental Congress's secrecy, the closed-door policy of the Constitutional Convention, the consequences of its secrecy for the doctrine of originalism, the crucial cases of the Jay Treaty and the Alien and Sedition Acts, James Madison's evolving views about representation and openness, the difficult realization that open dialogue and debate do not always lead to truth, and Thomas Jefferson's complicated legacy.Chatter 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.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In an end-of-the-day ruling on Tuesday, the Colorado Supreme Court struck Donald Trump from the Republican primary ballot on grounds that he was disqualified for the presidency as a result of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. The decision now appears to be fast-tracked to Supreme Court consideration that could obliterate it or make it apply nationally. To go over all the twists and turns, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff and Gerard Magliocca, a professor at the University of Indiana, who wrote a key law review article on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. They talked about the Colorado decision—where it's strong, and where it's less strong. They talked about how this is going to land at the Supreme Court—which parts the justices are likely to accept, and which parts they're going to pick apart. They talked about the politics of it all, and they talked about what it means to engage in insurrection.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In 2021, the Wall Street Journal published a monster scoop: a series of articles about Facebook’s inner workings, which showed that employees within the famously secretive company had raised alarms about potential harms caused by Facebook’s products. Now, Jeff Horwitz, the reporter behind that scoop, has a new book out, titled “Broken Code”—which dives even deeper into the documents he uncovered from within the company. He’s one of the most rigorous reporters covering Facebook, now known as Meta.On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the information ecosystem Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic sat down with Jeff along with Matt Perault, the Director of the Center on Technology Policy at UNC-Chapel Hill—and also someone with close knowledge of Meta from his own time working at the company. They discussed Jeff’s reporting and debated what his findings tell us about how Meta functions as a company and how best to understand its responsibilities for harms traced back to its products.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Bryan Vorndran is Assistant Director of the FBI's Cyber Division, a position he's held since around March 2021. Prior to that, he was the special agent in charge in New Orleans, and he's worked in Afghanistan and on the Joint Terrorism Task Force at the Washington Field Office.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 Bryan to talk about his career trajectory, the FBI's top cyber challenges, the Bureau's relationships with other agencies and private sector entities, and the challenges posed by the People's Republic of China. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The conflict in Gaza may be approaching a turning point. An increasingly frustrated Biden administration has reportedly told Israeli officials that the military campaign needs to wind up within weeks, while even some Israeli officials have suggested that Hamas is on the verge of defeat. But as the physical and human devastation in Gaza continues to mount, the question of what comes after the conflict ends looms just over the horizon, without anyone offering a clear answer. To talk through the state of the conflict and what might come next, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Joel Braunold, the Managing Director of the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace—someone who has followed the Israeli-Palestinian conflict closely for decades, and who has often played a key supporting role in related negotiations. They talked about the state of Israel’s military campaign, how it is impacting Israeli and Palestinian politics, and the challenges of reaching a new status quo that stands any chance of meeting the demands of those parties who are most directly affected. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Quinta and Scott were joined by Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien to talk through the week’s big national security news, including:“You’ll Shoot Your Five Eyes Out with a Bibi Gun.” From Ukraine to Gaza, some of the biggest controversies surrounding U.S. foreign policy hinge on the assistance—including weapons and intelligence—that the United States provides to its allies. What makes these relationships so complicated? “The Sock-It Docket.” Late last week, Special Counsel Jack Smith executed a power move, bringing former President Trump’s appeal of the denial of his claim of absolute presidential immunity directly to the Supreme Court — through what is often called the “rocket docket”—and citing precedents from the Nixon era suggesting the Supreme Court should resolve the issue within weeks. What does this move tell us—and how likely is Smith to win his case?“Netanya-who?” President Biden’s bear hug of the Israeli prime minister may be loosening, as he has reportedly told donors that Netanyahu must go if Israel is to retain international support. How serious a move is this? And what might it mean for the conflict in Gaza?For object lessons, Quinta continued to show off her bookshelf by recommending Jeff Horwitz’s “Broken Code.” Scott flagged for listeners that “White Christmas” is, in fact, the best holiday movie and no one should try to argue otherwise. And Tyler endorsed Julie Byrne’s album from earlier this year, “The Greater Wings.”Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another edition of “Trump’s Trials and Tribulations,” recorded on Thursday before a live audience of Lawfare Material Supporters. This week, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff, Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower, and special guest Steve Vladeck from the University of Texas School of Law. They discussed Jack Smith's petition to the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari “before judgment” on the question of presidential immunity. They talked about the Court's decision to weigh in on Fischer v. United States and the potential impact on Trump's criminal cases and the other Jan. 6 cases that involved the same statute. They talked about whether Trump's trial in D.C. will be delayed by the Supreme Court's consideration of the immunity question. They talked about the status of the civil suit by Georgia election workers against Rudy Giuliani, and they checked in to see what is new in Fulton County. This is a live conversation that happens online every Thursday at 4:00pm Eastern Time. If you would like to come join and ask a question, be sure to visit Lawfare’s Patreon account and become a Material Supporter.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From July 29, 2017: On December 31, 2017, Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act will sunset. While U.S. officials insist that the provision authorizes critical intelligence gathering, it remains an open question whether Congress will reauthorize the law as it exists, pass it with amendments, or allow it to lapse altogether. In this week's podcast, Susan Hennessey sits down with FBI General Counsel Jim Baker and the Bureau's Executive Assistant Director of the National Security Branch Carl Ghattas to discuss the FBI's perspective on the legal and operational elements of Section 702.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

According to the resolution signed at the end of the 28th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), or COP28 for short, fossil fuels have finally been sentenced to a slow and painful death. This year’s global climate summit, held in the United Arab Emirates, ended with an overtime session that resulted with the nations agreeing to transition away from fossil fuels for the first time in COP history. But what does this really mean, and is the language as strong as it could have been? Lawfare Associate Editor Hyemin Han talked to Director of the Center for Climate and Security and Lawfare Contributing Editor Erin Sikorsky about the final deal language, what else happened at COP28, and the geopolitical implications of the clean energy transition. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the summer of 1944, a group of artists, visual designers and sound engineers--all of them GIs--began a series of secret operations in occupied France. Their mission: to deceive German forces about the location and size of U.S. military units, using a combination of inflatable vehicles, sound recordings, and “actors” posing as officers. The ranks of the “Ghost Army” included future stars of the worlds of art and design, including Ellsworth Kelly, Bill Blass, Arthur Singer, Victor Dowd, Art Kane, and Jack Masey. Journalist Rick Beyer has chronicled their ingenious exploits in a book and a documentary. December marks the 80th anniversary of the order that created the unit, which remained secret for decades. Shane Harris talked with Beyer about its creation, its success, and the ghost army’s role in the storied history of intelligence deceptions. Among the works mentioned in this episode:The Ghost Army bookhttps://www.chroniclebooks.com/products/ghost-army-of-world-war-ii The Ghost Army documentary https://shop.pbs.org/WC3752.html The Ghost Army Legacy Project https://ghostarmy.org/ Smithsonian magazine feature  https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/how-the-ghost-army-of-wwii-used-art-to-deceive-the-nazis-180980336/ The National WWII Museum https://www.nationalww2museum.org/visit/exhibits/traveling-exhibits/ghost-army-combat-con-artists-world-war-ii Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Ben Saul is the Challis Professor of International Law at the University of Sydney, Australia, whose internationally recognized work has focused specifically on the intersection of human rights, terrorism, and international law. The United Nations Human Rights Council voted to appoint Saul as the newest Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, which has become one of the most visible and urgent special rapporteur mandates at the Human Rights Council. He began his three-year tenure, which can be extended to six years, on November 1, 2023. Lawfare Associate Editor Hyemin Han sat down with Saul for an interview about his priorities for his tenure, the intellectual frameworks and perspectives he brings to his role, and to get his perspective as Special Rapporteur on the ongoing Israel-Hamas war. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

You may have heard of Javier Milei, Argentina’s new president, thanks to some of his eccentricities, like his five cloned dogs or his reliance on a chainsaw prop to illustrate the need to cut public expenditure. But Milei was able to harness the dissatisfaction with a system that has left the country with 150% inflation and over 40% of the population under the line of poverty. Now, the self described anarcho-capitalist libertarian will attempt to turn the economy around with shocking fiscal adjustment.To discuss this inflection point in Argentina, Lawfare’s Fellow in Technology Policy and Law Eugenia Lostri spoke with Ana Iparraguirre, a partner at consulting firm GBAO and a frequent commentator on leading Latin American media outlets. They talked about Milei’s rise to power, if and how he can deliver on his campaign promises, and what that would even mean for the Argentinian people.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

FISA Section 702 is set to expire on Dec. 31, 2023. Last week, two bills were marked up by two different House committees—one in the House Judiciary Committee and one in the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. To talk about these very different approaches to FISA Section 702 reauthorization and reform, Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Preston Marquis, a JD candidate at Harvard Law School and a former analyst at the Central Intelligence Agency; Molly Reynolds, Senior Editor at Lawfare; and Benjamin Wittes, Lawfare’s Editor-in-Chief. They discussed some of the key differences between these bills, the abnormal politics surrounding this reauthorization process, and an unusual floor procedure called Queen of the Hill that may be used for consideration of both of these bills.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Senate last week failed to move forward the national security supplemental, which includes a large package of aid for Ukraine. The holdup? Migration at the southern border and Republican insistence that the administration and Democrats will have to swallow major policy changes in order to get the Ukraine aid through. Meanwhile, the mood in Kyiv is a little down. The counteroffensive did not go as planned, the U.S. aid situation and the European commitment to Ukraine is alarming, and domestic politics are returning after a hiatus during the first couple years of the war.  To chew over the state of Ukraine and its support from the United States, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Eric Ciaramella of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a former CIA Ukraine analyst, and Molly Reynolds, Lawfare Senior Editor and Congressional Guru. They talked about the state of the Ukraine aid package in Congress, about whether a deal on the border is possible, about whether such a deal could pass the House, and about Ciaramella's recent trip to Kyiv and the mood there as Congress dithers.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, co-hosts Quinta and Scott were joined by co-host emeritus Benjamin Wittes to talk over the week’s big national security news, including:“Stalled and Appalled.” Ukraine’s counteroffensive to try and reclaim Russia-held parts of eastern Ukraine appears to have stalled, triggering a degree of finger-pointing on both sides of the Atlantic—just as U.S. and European support for their military campaign appears to be waning. What does this mean for the next stage of this conflict?“Parting the Red Sea.” Since the start of the war in Gaza, U.S. and allied diplomatic and military presences have come under attack by Iran-backed proxies throughout the Middle East. Now the Iran-backed Houthi faction in Yemen is targeting commercial shipping in the Red Sea with purported Israeli ties. What’s motivating these actions? And how do they change the regional security picture?“One Day Soon, I’m Gonna Tell My Goons, About the Blassingame.” Former President Donald Trump suffered two big legal losses in cases relating to Jan. 6 this past week, as both the D.C. Circuit in the civil suit against him and the trial court in his criminal prosecution held that he was not immune for prosecution by virtue of being the president. What will these decisions mean moving forward on the civil and criminal fronts?For object lessons, Quinta shared an amazing development in the Menendez case. Scott pulled a musical hat-trick and endorsed the newish venue The Atlantis, the phenomenal Lydia Loveless (who he just saw there), and (since it is December) Ingrid Michaelson’s holiday album Songs for the Season—and specifically the sob-inducingly melancholy song, “Happy, Happy Christmas.” And Ben plugged the Romanian Madrigal Choir show he attended at the National Cathedral while also logrolling for the new (non-Lawfare) podcast feature he rolled out on his substack Dog Shirt Daily and related podcast “Read with Me,” which features readings of major filings and opinions in the Trump trials. Also, we are beginning preparations for our end-of-year listener-submitted episode! If you have a topic you want us to cover, a question you want us to answer, or an object lesson you want to share, send it along to us at [email protected] no later than December 18!Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.