Discover
The Lawfare Podcast
The Lawfare Podcast
Author: The Lawfare Institute
Subscribed: 12,525Played: 1,480,820Subscribe
Share
© The Lawfare Institute
Description
The Lawfare Podcast features discussions with experts, policymakers, and opinion leaders at the nexus of national security, law, and policy. On issues from foreign policy, homeland security, intelligence, and cybersecurity to governance and law, we have doubled down on seriousness at a time when others are running away from it. Visit us at www.lawfareblog.com.
Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
2741 Episodes
Reverse
Senior Editor Anna Bower speaks with Lawfare Public Service Fellow Michael Feinberg and Senior Editor Eric Columbus about the extraordinary actions taken by the Justice Department and Congress in response to calls for the release of investigative files related to Jeffrey Epstein. The discussion covers the DOJ’s unusual “review” of the Epstein files, Congress’s oversight role, proposed legislation aimed at compelling the release of these materials, and the department’s newly announced probe into prominent Democrats with alleged ties to Epstein.Listeners can read Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes’s column on the Epstein files here. Wittes’s writing on “ghost investigations” is available here.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
In a live conversation on YouTube, Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Lawfare Senior Editors Anna Bower, Roger Parloff and Eric Columbus and Lawfare Public Service Fellow Loren Voss to discuss an update in the Georgia prosecution of President Trump, a hearing on whether Lindsey Halligan was lawfully appointed as U.S. attorney, a district court barring the deployment of National Guard to Portland, and more.You can find information on legal challenges to Trump administration actions here. And check out Lawfare’s new homepage on the litigation, new Bluesky account, and new WITOAD merch.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
From August 9, 2024: On today's episode, Lawfare's Fellow in Technology Policy and Law Eugenia Lostri speaks with Senior Privacy Engineer at Netflix and former Army Reserve intelligence officer, Lukas Bundonis. They talked about the relationship between law enforcement and tech companies, what that relationship looks like in the U.S. and other countries, and the different ways in which that communication can be politicized.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
From November 29, 2023: Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you’ve probably heard a great deal over the last year about generative AI and how it’s going to reshape various aspects of our society. That includes elections. With one year until the 2024 U.S. presidential election, we thought it would be a good time to step back and take a look at how generative AI might and might not make a difference when it comes to the political landscape. Luckily, Matt Perault and Scott Babwah Brennen of the UNC Center on Technology Policy have a new report out on just that subject, examining generative AI and political ads.On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the information ecosystem, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic and Lawfare’s Fellow in Technology Policy and Law Eugenia Lostri sat down with Matt and Scott to talk through the potential risks and benefits of generative AI when it comes to political advertising. Which concerns are overstated, and which are worth closer attention as we move toward 2024? How should policymakers respond to new uses of this technology in the context of elections?To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Anton Korinek, a professor of economics at the University of Virginia and newly appointed economist to Anthropic's Economic Advisory Council; Nathan Goldschlag, Director of Research at the Economic Innovation Group; and Bharat Chander, Economist at Stanford Digital Economy Lab, join Kevin Frazier, the AI Innovation and Law Fellow at the University of Texas School of Law and a Senior Editor at Lawfare, to sort through the myths, truths, and ambiguities that shape the important debate around the effects of AI on jobs. They discuss what happens when machines begin to outperform humans in virtually every computer-based task, how that transition might unfold, and what policy interventions could ensure broadly shared prosperity.These three are prolific researchers. Give them a follow to find their latest works:Anton: @akorinek on XNathan: @ngoldschlag and @InnovateEconomy on XBharat: X: @BharatKChandar, LinkedIn: @bharatchandar, Substack: @bharatchandarFind Scaling Laws on the Lawfare website, and subscribe to never miss an episode.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Natalie Orpett, Eric Columbus, and Molly Roberts, to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including:“I Don’t Think You’re Ready for the Shutdown.” The record-setting shutdown of the U.S. government is set to come to an end after eight Democratic senators agreed to a continuing resolution that will fund all of the government through January 30, certain chunks of the government all the way through the end of the fiscal year, and made a number of concessions along the way. What should we make of this deal, and what are the political ramifications—particularly for Democrats, many of whom are quite angry at those who ultimately voted for this plan?“Overt Acts.” Last week, in a move quite publicly celebrated by his controversial clemency czar Ed Martin, President Trump issued pardons for dozens of individuals accused of participating in efforts to manipulate the results of the 2020 election in his favor, including his former attorney Rudy Giuliani and other alleged “unindicted co-conspirators” in his own, since-abandoned federal criminal prosecution. Indeed, Trump himself was the only one who was federally indicted for 2020 election manipulations, making the most immediate legal effect of these pardons unclear. What is Trump trying to accomplish in issuing them? And what could the ramifications be for future elections?“Law & Order: Special Victims Unit.” Even as his prosecutions against James Comey and Letitia James have faced headwinds, the Trump administration appears to be moving full speed ahead with criminal investigations against other of his perceived enemies—including a large-scale investigation into government reports alleging Russian support for Trump in 2016 that was recently transferred from Justice Department officials in Eastern Pennsylvania to the more Trump-friendly terrain of Southern Florida. What is the current state of the revenge campaign the Trump administration has been pursuing, and where does it seem set to lead?In object lessons, Natalie is appreciating both “The History of the New Yorkers Vaunted Fact Checking Department” and the small army of neurotic geniuses who march forward in pursuit of journalistic integrity. Eric is appreciating The Week Junior, his daughter’s favorite magazine that proves real journalism isn’t just for grown-ups. Scott is appreciating The Far Side’s online presence, updated daily—a reminder that the line between journalism and cartooning is always thinner than we’d like to admit. And Molly is appreciating an “illuminating” visit to Glenstone, where Jenny Holzer’s art reads like journalism etched in light, documenting the lingering shadows of some dark subjects.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
In this episode, Michael Feinberg interviews Fareed Zakaria, whose book “Age of Revolutions” has just been issued with a new afterword in light of the return of the Trump Administration. The two discuss intellectual, cultural, and populist revolutions from history and what those events have to teach us about our current political moment.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Lawfare Senior Editors Kate Klonick and Alan Rozenshtein talk to Columbia law professor Tim Wu about this new book, “The Age of Extraction: How Tech Platforms Conquered the Economy and Threaten Our Future Prosperity.” The book is the final part of what Wu calls his trilogy—building on his prior best selling books “The Master Switch” and “Attention Merchants.” Klonick and Rozenshtein speak with Wu about how he sees the platforms as evolving in the 15 years since he started this series and what he sees as the future solution set for the problems that have developed out of the early promise of the digital era. To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
From September 23, 2024: Lindsay Chervinsky is the Executive Director of the George Washington Library at Mount Vernon. She is also the author of a much celebrated new book on the John Adams presidency that is focused primarily on the national security decision-making of the second president and how it set norms for the conduct of the presidency and its powers with which we still live today. She sat down with Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to talk about how Adams defended presidential power while it was under assault by both his Jeffersonian foes and the radicals of his own Federalist party.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
In a live conversation on YouTube, Lawfare Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editors Anna Bower, Molly Roberts, Roger Parloff and Eric Columbus to discuss the criminal trial of the man who threw a sandwich at a federal immigration officer in D.C., a hearing in the prosecution of James Comey, litigation over the conditions of an immigration detention center in Illinois, and more.You can find information on legal challenges to Trump administration actions here. And check out Lawfare’s new homepage on the litigation, new Bluesky account, and new WITOAD merch.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
From January 22, 2024: There is much debate among academics and policy experts over the power the Constitution affords to the president and Congress to initiate military conflicts. But as Michael Ramsey and Matthew Waxman, law professors at the University of San Diego and Columbia, respectively, point out in a recent law review article, this focus misses the mark. In fact, the most salient constitutional war powers question—in our current era dominated by authorizations for the use of military force—is not whether the president has the unilateral authority to start large-scale conflicts. Rather, it is the scope of Congress’s authority to delegate its war-initiation power to the president. This question is particularly timely as the Supreme Court appears growingly skeptical of significant delegations of congressional power to the executive branch.Matt Gluck, Research Fellow at Lawfare, spoke with Waxman and Ramsey about their article. They discussed the authors' findings about the history of war power delegations from the Founding era to the present, what these findings might mean if Congress takes a more assertive role in the war powers context, and why these constitutional questions matter if courts are likely to be hesitant to rule on war powers delegation questions.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
From November 6, 2024: For today’s special episode, Lawfare General Counsel and Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson held a series of conversations with contributors to a special series of articles on “The Dangers of Deploying the Military on U.S. Soil” that Lawfare recently published on its website, in coordination with our friends at Protect Democracy.Participants include: Alex Tausanovitch, Policy Advocate at Protect Democracy; Laura Dickinson, a Professor at George Washington University Law School; Joseph Nunn, Counsel in the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center; Chris Mirasola, an Assistant Professor at the University of Houston Law Center; Mark Nevitt, a Professor at Emory University School of Law; Elaine McCusker, a Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute; and Lindsay P. Cohn, a Professor of National Security Affairs at the U.S. Naval War College. Together, they discussed how and why domestic deployments are being used, the complex set of legal authorities allowing presidents and governors to do so, and what the consequences might be, both for U.S. national security and for U.S. civil-military relations more generally.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
In a live conversation on November 5, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Lawfare Contributing Editor Peter Harrell and Georgetown Law Professors Marty Lederman and Kathleen Claussen to discuss what occurred during oral arguments in the legal challenge to President Trump’s tariffs at the Supreme Court and how the justices may rule.This episode is a part of Lawfare’s new livestream series, Lawfare Live: The Now. Subscribe to Lawfare on Substack or YouTube to receive an alert for future livestreams.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
On today’s episode, Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sits down with Joseph Kellner, an assistant professor of history at the University of Georgia to discuss his latest book, “The Spirit of Socialism: Culture and Belief at the Soviet Collapse,” which examines the millions of Soviet people who embarked on a “spirited and highly visible search for new meaning” during the dissolution of the U.S.S.R.They discuss the questions of epistemic authority, of cultural identity, and of history's ultimate meaning that drove people to seek new spiritual meaning during this period, as well as the era’s many colorful characters, including Hare Krishnas, astrologers, doomsayers, and neo-Pagans who pushed bio-healing, folk baths, and other answers to these questions. They also talk about why, when a superpower declines, shared reality dissolves.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
This week, Scott sat down with co-hosts emeritus Benjamin Wittes and Alan Rozenshtein, and Senior Editor Kate Klonick, to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including:“Cracks in the Foundation.” The conservative Heritage Foundation—and the broader conservative movement it plays a central role in—has been going through a very public crisis over the past week after its president, Kevin Roberts, came to the defense of right-wing commentator Tucker Carlson after Carlson chose to host white nationalist Nick Fuentes on his podcast. This has led to resignations at the Heritage Foundation, condemnation by certain figures on the right, and a pseudo apology by Roberts. It has also led to a little bit of a reckoning over how some on the right, and to some extent Americans more broadly, have dealt with accusations of anti-Semitism, its relationship to various policy questions, as well as hate speech and other political perspectives. What should we be making of this crisis and what does it tell us about the different policy aspects that intersect with this question of anti-Semitism?“Turning Back the Clock.” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent promised that President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping would “consummate” a TikTok deal at their face-to-face last week. But no details have emerged to date. What should we make of this apparent hold-up—and of the TikTok saga altogether? “A Foe By Any Other Name.” As the Trump administration has continued its military campaign against narcotics traffickers in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, U.S. officials have continued to draw parallels between current policies and the Global War on Terrorism, calling detainees “unlawful enemy combatants” and the groups being targeted “designated terrorist organizations.” “If you are a narco-terrorist…,” Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth recently tweeted in relation to one of the strikes, “we will treat you like we treat Al-Qaeda.” But how accurate are these parallels, and why is the Trump administration deploying them in this way?In object lessons, Ben brings you a little announcement that is shorter than this sentence—you’re just going to have to listen to find out. Alan, hungry for more genre fiction, is diving into The Divine Cities trilogy, starting with “City of Stairs,” by Robert Jackson Bennett. Scott is going out of this world with what he calls “the nerdiest object lesson” he’s ever brought to RatSec: Pioneer, a tabletop role-playing game that has “launched” on Kickstarter. And Kate, not to be outdone in nerdom, displays maybe the mathiest vegetable: the beautiful romanesco.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
In this episode, Lawfare’s Ukraine Fellow Anastasiia Lapatina sits down with Francis Farrell, a front line reporter at the Kyiv Independent, to discuss the looming fall of Pokrovsk, the recent transformations of the front line, and whether Ukraine can ever give up Donbas, per Russia’s demand.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
On today’s episode, Lawfare Senior Editor Kate Klonick sits down with NYU law professor Rick Pildes to discuss his article, “Political Fragmentation in Democracies in the West,” which was featured in a New York Times opinion column by Thomas Edsall on the link between smartphone and social media use and threats to democracy.The two discuss the admittedly sprawling topic from a historical perspective—comparing the impact of the internet to that of the printing press, the radio, and cable television on social orders. But they also discuss how this technology that once held such promise for democracy is now impacting the United States political system in a unique way—in particular, the ability social media has to further polarize a two-party system's information ecosystem while also revolutionizing small-donor-based campaigns. The result is some very anti-democratic outcomes from what was seen as such promising democracy-empowering technology.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
In a live conversation on YouTube, Lawfare Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Contributor Marty Lederman, Public Service Fellow Loren Voss, and Senior Editors Scott R. Anderson, Roger Parloff and Eric Columbus to discuss the Supreme Court’s handling of the legal challenge to the federalization of the National Guard in Chicago, James Comey’s motions to dismiss the indictment against him, ongoing politicization at the Department of Justice, litigation over the Trump administration’s attempt to suspend SNAP during the government shutdown, and so much more.You can find information on legal challenges to Trump administration actions here. And check out Lawfare’s new homepage on the litigation, new Bluesky account, and new WITOAD merch.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
From July 18, 2024: On today’s episode, Matt Gluck, Research Fellow at Lawfare, spoke with Michael Beckley, Associate Professor of Political Science at Tufts, and Arne Westad, the Elihu Professor of History at Yale.They discussed Beckley’s and Westad’s articles in Foreign Affairs on the best path forward for the U.S.-China strategic relationship—in the economic and military contexts. Beckley argues that in the short term, the U.S. should focus on winning its security competition with China, rather than significant engagement, to prevent conflict. Westad compares the current moment to the period preceding World War I. He cautions that the U.S. and China should maintain strategic communication and avoid an overly narrow focus on competition to stave off large-scale conflict.They broke down the authors’ arguments and where they agree and disagree. Does U.S. engagement lower the temperature in the relationship? Will entrenched economic interests move the countries closer to conflict? How can the U.S. credibly deter China from invading Taiwan without provoking Beijing?To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
From August 27, 2024: On today’s episode, Sherri Goodman, the Secretary General of the International Military Council on Climate & Security and the first Deputy Undersecretary of Defense (Environmental Security) joins Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien to talk about Sherri’s new book, “Threat Multiplier: Climate, Military Leadership, and the Fight for Global Security.”They discuss Sherri’s career in climate security, beginning at the Senate Armed Services Committee before “climate security” entered the lexicon. From there, they trace Sherri’s career educating a generation of military leaders about the nexus between climate change and national security and coining the phrase “threat multiplier,” helping to usher in a paradigm shift at the Pentagon. Sherri addresses skeptics wary of a perceived tradeoff between military readiness and greening the military, as well as others who warn against “securitizing” climate change. Finally, they look ahead, as Sherri lays out her four main pillars of climate action (mitigation and adaptation) and institutional reform (awareness and alliance building).To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.









Ugh, more Brookings babble. Next!
is Lederman a Harvard man? He sounds like a Harvard man.
sandwich guy clearly committed *misdemeanor* assault, but felony assault requires bodily harm.
Buddy! Don't talk about "the bad guys!" Until the USA deals with its Republican problem, that's your club, too.
what does he think 'pig in the python effect' means?
Jack G. exposed himself as a complete hack a doodle do. All of his arguments were busted and his defense was so weak & pathetic. Thanks for the laugh Jack.
iuiiiiiiiiiiiiuiii iiiiiiii
I'm my. I'm an be mm can
Can a group of voters sue Cannon for delaying the due process of getting a clear verdict before the Election Day?
It would be fantastic to see The Trump Trial documentary before the election. Just look at the popularity of the O J Simpson trial, and it was decades after it happened, this would definitely be a money maker. The script is already half-written since the transcript is available. Big name actors would probably be happy to join, if cast. Think of the impact of the 34 "guilty" at the end. Just before the Election Day? It would be bigger than Comey to Hillary. Any body?
has anyone been looking into Trump being an agent of Russia?
ads are so quiet?
An easy way to check if a podcast is legitimate is to find an obvious truth and see how they treat it. The obvious truth is that Jan 6th was NOT an insurrection. Insurrection is a legal term with which 0 people were charged. the irrationality of these 2 is profound but the name of the podcast is accurate. authoritarianis use lawfare and the left has perfected it to the Shame if all real Liberals. this podcast is pathetic
💚CLICK HERE Full HD>720p>1080p>4K💚WATCH>ᗪOᗯᑎᒪOᗩᗪ>LINK> 👉https://co.fastmovies.org
This is less work than following this from the news.
Why are you assuming Trump would need to be released to perform his duties? The pandemic taught us that many jobs can be done remotely.
Please help her ditch the "you knows".
adzcctcc
Please don't confuse yourself. There is no predicament. Trump is a defendant. His appearance in Court is statutorily required. The fact that he is a candidate for anything is irrelevant. Trump does not have a constitutional right to be a candidate. He is statutorily required to be in Court. Thus, the "national interest" theory that Trump's interest in presidential candidacy is weighed against his requirement to appear is a fallacious analysis. Want to ensure his presence? Offer remand as his only alternative. Please do not confuse yourself or your listeners.
Ll L L L L L L L https://www.heraldnews.com/story/entertainment/local/2023/07/22/french-canadian-families-get-together-aug-5-in-westport/70403102007/ https://www.heraldnews.com/story/entertainment/local/2023/07/22/french-canadian-families-get-together-aug-5-in-westport/70403102007/ Ll