The Lawfare Podcast

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.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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=1000614119459Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/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. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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?”Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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 EconomistSupport this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. 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.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The indictment filed last week against former President Donald Trump involves hundreds of classified documents, and the first 31 charges involve mishandling individual classified documents. This raises the specter of the Classified Information Procedures Act, or CIPA, which is the major instrument through which we handle classified material in criminal cases. How do you prove that the former president mishandled classified information without presenting a lot of classified information in open court? Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Brian Greer, former CIA lawyer and the man behind the @secretsandlaws Twitter account, to talk about the Justice Department's options for presenting these 31 documents in court, about whether they can be declassified, and about whether the department can use something called the “silent witness rule.”Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott braved the haze to talk through the week’s (very) big national security news stories, including:“Downstream Effects.” The destruction of the Kakhovka Dam in Ukraine promises a new wave of suffering and environmental devastation for Ukrainians living along the Dnipro River. Who is responsible? And what could the ramifications be?“He’s Off to Meet the Wizard, The Wonderful Wizard of Laws.” Over the past few weeks, there has been a steady drip of information about Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into former President Trump, leading many to conclude that an indictment is on the horizon. What do we know about the state of the investigation? And where does it seem headed?“Party Animals.” The number of contenders in the 2024 Republican presidential primary has officially doubled, with new candidates like Chris Christie and Mike Pence presenting—or being unable to avoid—the legacy of Jan. 6, among other issues with the direction of the party under former President Trump. What does this mean for the shape of the race? And will it mean for the debate over democratic values?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From February 26, 2020: Ben Buchanan is a professor at the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service and a scholar on cybersecurity and statecraft. He has a new book out this week: “The Hacker and the State: Cyber Attacks and the New Normal of Geopolitics." Jack Goldsmith sat down with Buchanan to talk about Ben’s new book, about the so-called name-and-shame of Justice Department indictments, and about the various reasons why states engage in offensive cyber operations.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On June 8, former President Donald Trump announced on Truth Social that he has been indicted in Special Counsel Jack Smith's investigation into the improper removal of classified documents from the White House to Mar-a-Lago. The indictment is currently under seal, but according to news reports, Trump has been indicted on seven counts relating to the improper retention of classified material and conspiracy to obstruct the special counsel investigation. On Friday, June 9, at 5 p.m. ET, Lawfare Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes, alongside Anna Bower and Lawfare Senior Editors Scott R. Anderson, Stephanie Pell, and Roger Parloff, will discuss what to make of the reported charges, the cases's reported venue, the Classified Information Procedures Act, and more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The data broker industry and its role in the digital economy is under scrutiny from Congress. Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Justin Sherman, the Founder and CEO of Global Cyber Strategies and a Senior Fellow at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy, to discuss the data broker ecosystem and the recent article he published in Lawfare about two bills from a previous congress that seek to give consumers more control over the information that data brokers collect and sell about them. They talked about some of the scams and other harms caused by data brokers, the regulatory approaches taken by each bill, and whether federal legislation regulating data brokers will get passed.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Shane and David have hosted many former intelligence officers, mostly of the American variety, during more than 80 episodes so far on Chatter. But, until this week, you haven't heard us speak with one who has turned her intelligence experience into a career as a professional genealogist. Lisa Maddox of Family History Investigations has carved out that unique path, and her story reveals much about the nature and wider applicability of analytic skills.David Priess talked to Lisa about her entry into the national security world; the role of intelligence within the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS); differences and similarities among NCIS, DIA, and CIA; her work at CIA as an analyst and manager of analysts; the research, analytic, and presentational aspects of intelligence analysis; structured analytic techniques; the coordination process within the Intelligence Community; the discipline of targeting analysis; her decision to start a genealogy business; how the elements of analysis apply to genealogical work; and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The TV show NCISThe TV show Finding Your RootsThe book Vanished Kingdoms by Norman DaviesThe book Demon Copperhead by Barbara KingsolverChatter 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.

A large dam on the Dnipro River has been destroyed, causing massive flooding and a dangerous environmental catastrophe in southern Ukraine. The Ukrainians are blaming the Russians; the Russians are blaming the Ukrainians. Meanwhile, the Washington Post is reporting that the CIA was actually tipped off about the coming destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines last year—and that it was tipped off that a Ukrainian military team was planning to do it. The blockbuster story is the latest bit of evidence that the Nord Stream operation was, after all, not the Russians, but the Ukrainians. Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down in three conversations to discuss the goings on. First, he spoke with Eric Ciaramella, Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and a former CIA analyst and NSC official on Russia and Ukraine, about the scope and scale of the damage the dam break has done. Then Ben spoke with Dmitri Alperovitch, Chairman of the Silverado Policy Accelerator, about the military implications of the dam break. And he spoke with Shane Harris, one of the reporters whose name is on that Washington Post story byline, about his story and what it all means for the future of the Ukraine war. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On January 1, 2023, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva was sworn in as president of Brazil. A week later, insurrectionists in Brazil stormed government buildings, including the president’s palace, the Supreme Federal Court, and the National Congress building to violently disrupt the democratic transition of power and challenge the results of the election. Lula, however, remained undeterred and forged ahead. It’s been roughly 150 days since those events, and Lawfare Legal Fellow Saraphin Dhanani sat down with Brian Winter, Editor-in-Chief of Americas Quarterly and a journalist with over a decade of experience living and reporting across Latin America, to discuss how Lula has fared in his first 100 days in office, his vision for reviving Brazil’s place in the world, and the political forces he’s up against.  Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On May 31, CNN reported that federal prosecutors investigating the unlawful removal of classified documents from the White House to Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence have obtained an audio recording in which the former president acknowledges that he knowingly kept a classified Department of Defense document that contained details about a potential attack on Iran. According to CNN, the tape indicates that Trump “understood he retained classified material after leaving the White House.”Trump’s alleged comments made on the recording have sparked a debate about whether he will be charged with violating 18 U.S.C. 793(e) of the Espionage Act.What exactly did Trump say on the tape? Did he violate the Espionage Act? How does this change Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigations? And what does all of this mean for Trump’s reelection campaign? To go over everything that happened, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down for a live recording of the podcast alongside Lawfare Senior Editors Scott R. Anderson, Quinta Jurecic, and Roger Parloff, who unpack all of these questions and more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's been about six months since the Attorney General issued new guidelines on compulsory process to members of the press in criminal and national security investigations, and two officials of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press—Bruce Brown and Gabe Rottman—wrote a detailed analysis of the document in two parts for Lawfare. Rottman joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to go through the document carefully: the long history that led to it, the shifting policies that have gotten more restrictive over the years since the Supreme Court ruled in Branzburg v. Hayes, the ramp-up of leak investigations and reporter subpoenas in the Obama and Trump administrations, and the new policy that creates a red line policy against them under most (but not all) circumstances. They talked about the document, about why the Justice Department has forsworn a historic and upheld authority, and about what it means for reporters and criminal investigations going forward. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by their Brookings and Lawfare colleague Molly Reynolds to talk all things Congress in the week’s national security news, including:Shattering the Must-Pass Ceiling.” Earlier this week, President Joe Biden and Speaker Kevin McCarthy announced a deal on raising the debt ceiling, and thereby avoiding a potential financial catastrophe. The question now is whether they can sell it to enough members of Congress, where right-wing members of McCarthy’s caucus are promising to sink it. Will the deal make it through? And if not, what might come next?“Recep Tayyip Erdo-won.” After a close fought contest, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has emerged victorious from run-offs in Türkiye’s national elections, positioning him for a third term in office and a third decade in power. Does the reelection of the increasingly autocratic figure mean the further decline of Turkish democracy? And Türkiye’s flagging relationship with the West?“I’m Sorry, Dave. I’m Afraid That’s Not Regulation.” The head of several leading AI developers are actively urging Congress to regulate the industry—even as they continue to roll out new products to the public with untested capabilities. How seriously should we take this plea? And is it aimed at the right risk?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From October 1, 2016: At this week's Hoover Book Soiree, Rosa Brooks joined Benjamin Wittes to talk about her new book, “How Everything Became War and the Military Became Everything: Tales from the Pentagon.” The book covers an extraordinary range of territory, from Brooks' personal experiences working as a civilian advisor at the Pentagon, to the history of the laws of war, to an analysis of the U.S. military's expanded role in a world in which the lines between war and peace are increasingly uncertain.How should we think about the military’s responsibilities outside the realm of traditional warfare? And is it desirable, or even possible, to rethink the way we approach the distinctions between wartime and peacetime?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It is often said that “Russia is a country with an unpredictable past.” Such distortions of history can lead to trouble, as the world witnessed last year when Vladimir Putin justified his invasion of Ukraine as an attempt to “denazify” the neighboring country—one with a Jewish president who lost relatives in the Holocaust. As Megan Buskey writes in her new memoir, “Ukraine Is Not Dead Yet: A Family Story of Exile and Return”: “How could a country know itself unless it knew all the things it had been?”Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Megan, a nonfiction writer and former Fulbright Fellow to Ukraine, who has studied and written about the country for two decades. They discussed her book, the use and abuse of history in Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and the role of family histories in countering those false narratives. They also talked about the best way to get a Polish archive to give you the documents you need. Please note that this episode contains content that some people may find disturbing, including descriptions of sexual and other forms of violence. Listener discretion is advised.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Alicia Wanless is one of the pioneers of the idea of information ecology, the notion that we should think about information and disinformation as part of a complex ecosystem, the management of which she analogizes to environmental policy. Wanless has been complaining for several years that the war on “disinformation” skates over important question: What are the collateral effects of anti-disinformation policies? How do interventions against information pollution operate in the real world? In her conversation with Benjamin Wittes, Lawfare’s editor in chief and this week’s Chatter guest host, Wanless talks about how she became interested in information management, what’s wrong with the discussion of disinformation, what a more environmentalist approach to information spaces might look like, and what a useful research agenda for the nascent field would focus on. Among the works mentioned in this episode:Wanless’s latest essay on Lawfare: “There’s No Getting Ahead of Disinformation Without Moving Past It.”The book Network PropagandaChatter 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.

The war in Ukraine is approaching a pivotal moment. Russia remains in control of the hotly contested city of Bakhmut. But the ruthlessly effective mercenary forces of the Wagner Group—the same group whose leader, Yevgeny Prighozin, has openly bickered with the regular Russian military and reportedly offered to trade Russian troop positions to Ukrainian intelligence—are withdrawing. Ukrainian forces, meanwhile, are preparing for a reported counteroffensive, even as unclaimed attacks are taking place across the border in Russia—including, most recently, on a civilian target in Moscow. To discuss these developments, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with two reporters covering the conflict for the Washington Post: Intelligence and National Security Reporter Shane Harris and Ukraine Bureau Chief Isabelle Khurshudyan. They discussed the peculiar role played by the Wagner Group, recent revelations stemming from the Discord leaks, and what to expect from the conflict in the months to come. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Sunday, May 28, Turkey held a bitterly contested run-off election, with incumbent presidential candidate Recep Tayyip Erdoğan winning reelection against opposition candidate Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu. Lawfare Legal Fellow Saraphin Dhanani sat down with Soli Özel, Senior Lecturer at Kadir Has University in Istanbul and a columnist at Habertürk daily newspaper, to discuss what was at stake in this election and the future of Turkey as Erdoğan’s next five-year term marks his 25th year in higher office.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Tim Mak was an NPR reporter in Kyiv since the beginning of the full-scale invasion last year. He recently stepped down and started his own Substack from the Ukrainian capital, called The Counteroffensive, and Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Tim to talk about the publication. What makes a reporter leave an established news organization like NPR to start a startup in a war zone? What is The Counteroffensive going to cover? How will it be different from other stuff you might be reading on the Ukraine war? And what are things like in Kyiv these days as the Ukrainians get ready for the counteroffensive for which the publication is named?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From January 20, 2018: This week on the Lawfare Podcast, the Guardian's Moscow correspondent Shaun Walker joined special guest host Alina Polyakova to discuss his new book "The Long Hangover: Putin's New Russia and the Ghosts of the Past." They discussed Putin's use of Russian history as political strategy, the pulse of Russian politics as its elections approach in March, the changing landscape of Russia's lesser-known cities since the 1990s, and much more.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From the birth of the republic, American presidents have communicated with the public in one form or another. The frequency and exact nature of such efforts have varied quite a bit over time due to variables ranging from the extent of partisanship in the media to each commander in chief's personal preference to travel technology. Political scientist Anne Pluta has explored this history deeply, including extensive analysis of contemporary newspaper accounts back to the late 18th century. And her insights, contained in writings like the book “Persuading the Public: The Evolution of Popular Presidential Communication from Washington to Trump,” provide plenty of surprises and even challenge some conventional wisdom about the presidency.David Priess chatted with her about her favorite presidents and her assessment of the best communicators among them; the precedents set by George Washington; Thomas Jefferson's State of the Union delivery method; changes in the communication environment during the Andrew Jackson era; Abraham Lincoln's exceptional presidency; the importance of train travel for presidential contact with the public; Rutherford Hayes's underappreciated importance in presidential communication; Theodore Roosevelt as a speaker; Woodrow Wilson's decision to deliver the State of the Union address in person; the importance for presidential communication of radio, television, and the availability of Air Force One; the relatively brief period of national, "objective" media; the late 20th century shift to splintered media; Donald Trump's social media use; Joe Biden's communication practices; and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The play HamiltonThe TV show John AdamsThe movie LincolnThe book Persuading the Public by Anne PlutaThe TV show The West WingThe TV show VeepThe movie The American PresidentThe movie Air Force OneThe movie Independence DayThe TV show ScandalThe book The Devil's TeethThe book Twelve Days of TerrorThe book The WaveChatter 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.

From April 16, 2019: Since November, Lawfare Contributor Michelle Melton has run a series on our website about Climate Change and National Security, examining the implication of the threat as well as U.S. and international responses to climate change. Melton is a student a Harvard Law school. Prior to that she was an associate fellow in the Energy and National Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, where she focused on climate policy.She and Benjamin Wittes sat down last week to discuss the series. They talked about why we should think about climate change as a national security threat, the challenges of viewing climate change through this paradigm, the long-standing relationship between climate change and the U.S. national security apparatus, and how climate change may affect global migration.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Thursday was sentencing day for some senior Oath Keepers, and Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff spent the day in court listening to and watching the sentencing of Elmer Stewart Rhodes III and Kelly Meggs, two Oath Keepers chieftains who were convicted of seditious conspiracy in connection with the Jan. 6 insurrection. They got a lot of time: Rhodes got 18 years; Meggs got 12. They also got a terrorism enhancement. It was a bad day if you're an Oath Keeper and a really bad day if you're a Proud Boy. After the sentencing, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Roger to talk through it all. What does it mean for future Oath Keeper sentencing? What does it mean for Proud Boy sentencing? When are we finally going to see the white collar defendants as well as the blue collar defendants in Jan. 6 cases? And can we finally begin to predict what Jack Smith may be up to regarding Jan. 6?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

At 9:02 a.m. on April 19, 1995, a bomb built by Timothy McVeigh exploded in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City. One hundred sixty-eight people died and hundreds more were injured in what remains the deadliest act of domestic terrorism in U.S. history.Jeffrey Toobin has a new book about the bombing and trial called, “Homegrown: Timothy McVeigh and the Rise of Right-Wing Extremism.” Toobin joined Jack Goldsmith to discuss the new and revealing information his book draws on concerning McVeigh’s motivations and trial strategy, Attorney General Merrick Garland's consequential role in the McVeigh trial, and the long-tail impact of the trial on right-wing domestic terrorism in the United States, including the Jan. 6 attacks on Congress.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Supreme Court last week issued the biggest opinion in the history of the internet—except that it didn’t. Rather, it issued an opinion in a case involving the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) and the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), finding there was no cause of action and thus dismissed for further consideration the biggest case in the history of the internet.Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editors Scott R. Anderson,  Alan Rozenshtein, and Quinta Jurecic to talk about Section 230, Taamneh v. Twitter, and Gonzalez v. Google.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hacking and cybersecurity are evergreen issues, in the news and on Lawfare. Scott Shapiro, the Charles F. Southmayd Professor of Law and Professor of Philosophy at Yale Law School, has a new book on how and why hacking works and what to do about it, called “Fancy Bear Goes Phishing: The Dark History of the Information Age, in Five Extraordinary Hacks.”Scott joined Jack Goldsmith to talk about how his pre-law-professor obsession with computers combined with his recent work in international law led him to write the book. They also discussed the lessons that the five hacks discussed in the book teach, including the limits of technology and solving cybersecurity problems, the importance of the human dimension to cybersecurity, and why we shouldn't be panicked about the state of cyber insecurity.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In November 1919, President Woodrow Wilson came out in opposition to a compromise that would have resulted in Senate ratification of the Versailles Treaty and thereby put the nail in the coffin of an international agreement that he had spent months negotiating and would have secured U.S. participation in one of his greatest legacies, the League of Nations.Wilson's self-defeating decision shocked many who had been involved in the treaty negotiation, including a young diplomat and journalist named William Bullitt. Deciphering what about Wilson's psychology led to such a monumental decision became an obsession for Bullitt, one he pursued with an unlikely partner, Sigmund Freud, the father of modern psychoanalysis. Yet the original text they authored on the subject remained unpublished for decades, as Bullitt pursued a career in diplomacy and politics, until it was finally unearthed in 2014 by scholar Patrick Weil. Weil's new book, “The Madman in the White House,” tells the unlikely story of the Bullitt-Freud analysis of President Wilson and the lies it intersected with.Weil joined Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson to discuss Bullitt’s exceptional life and career, what he and Freud truly thought of one of our most complex and controversial former presidents, and what it tells us about how we should think about the role psychology plays in the modern presidency. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan and Scott were joined by co-host emeritus (and Washington Post star reporter) Shane Harris to talk over the week's news! Including:“Flight of the Valkyries.” Recently leaked U.S. intelligence reports allege that Wagner Group owner Yevgeniy Prighozin—who has privately and publicly feuded with the Russian military leadership in recent weeks and even threatened to pull his mercenary troops from the conflict—has been in contact with Ukrainian intelligence and offered to share Russian troop positions in exchange for concessions around the disputed city of Bakhmut. Is Prighozin trying to find a path to retreat? What do his actions tell us about the conflict?“Jerkiye Boy.” Twitter owner Elon Musk has come under criticism for the company’s latest bad call: censoring certain content at the request of the Erdogan government in Türkiye, just prior to national elections there. How should Twitter have responded to the demands of Turkish officials? And how has Musk’s erratic leadership affected the company’s approach to such issues?“BootLichter.” CNN and its CEO Chris Licht are experiencing blowback from the decision to host a town hall with former President Donald Trump before an audience of his supporters, at which he repeated an array of lies about the 2020 election results, the recent judgment finding him liable for sexual battery, and his potential legal exposure for retaining classified documents, among other items. Was CNN in the wrong? How should it handle Trump (and other candidates)?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From September 9, 2020: It was a big week for manipulated video and audio content. In just 36 hours, senior republicans or people associated with the Trump campaign tweeted, posted or shared manipulated audio or video on social media three times, prompting backlash from media and tech companies. Last week, Lawfare's managing editor, Quinta Jurecic, and associate editor, Jacob Schulz, wrote a piece analyzing these incidents. To talk through issues of deep fakes and cheap fakes, Benjamin Wittes spoke with Quinta, Jacob and Danielle Citron, a professor of law at the Boston University School of law. They talked about who posted what on Twitter and other social media, how the companies responded, what more they could have done and whether posting manipulated video is still worth it, given how companies now respond.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Over the past two weeks, the Department of Justice has issued two press releases announcing disruption efforts it has taken against malicious cyber actors. One operation involved the disruption of Russia’s so-called Snake Malware Network, and the other involved the indictment of a Russian national for ransomware attacks on critical infrastructure. To talk about these disruption efforts, Lawfare Senior Editor Stephanie Pell sat down with Alex Iftimie, Partner at the law firm Morrison Foerster, and a former federal prosecutor in the National Security and Cyber Crimes Units in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia. They talked about the operational details and sophistication of some aspects of these disruption operations, the significance and relationship of these operations to other disruption efforts, and how these recent efforts fit into the broader picture of the DOJ’s and the U.S. government’s efforts to disrupt malicious cyber actors. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.