Advertise on podcast: The Lawfare Podcast: Patreon Edition

From September 11, 2023: How much influence do social media platforms have on American politics and society? It’s a tough question for researchers to answer—not just because it’s so big, but also because platforms rarely if ever provide all the data that would be needed to address the problem. A new batch of papers released in the journals Science and Nature marks the latest attempt to tackle this question, with access to data provided by Facebook’s parent company Meta. The 2020 Facebook & Instagram Research Election Study, a partnership between Meta researchers and outside academics, studied the platforms’ impact on the 2020 election—and uncovered some nuanced findings, suggesting that these impacts might be less than you’d expect. Today on Arbiters of Truth, our series on the information ecosystem, Lawfare Senior Editors Alan Rozenshtein and Quinta Jurecic are joined by the project’s co-leaders, Talia Stroud of the University of Texas at Austin and Joshua A. Tucker of NYU. They discussed their findings, what it was like to work with Meta, and whether or not this is a model for independent academic research on platforms going forward. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Sander Tordoir is the Chief Economist of the Center for European Reform (CEPR) and a prominent European voice in the E.U.'s debate over its economic and technological relationship with China. With European trade policy toward China shifting over the past two years from integration towards managed trade, Sander joins Lawfare Contributing Editor and host of the Security Economics podcast Peter Harrell to unpack the recent E.U.-China deal involving quotas on hybrid cars and the apparent pause in what Sander refers to as "supply chain warfare." Sander also explains the new trade instruments the European Union is developing to make itself more nimble in pushing back against Chinese trade issues and whether Europe might one day use those instruments against the U.S. as well. Harrell also answers some of Sander's questions about shifting views of trade in the U.S. This episode is part of the Security Economics podcast series, in which Peter Harrell and guests explore the intersection of economics and national security, how countries manage their economies to support national security, and how they deploy economic tools in support of geopolitical objectives. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Lawfare Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Senior Editors Anna Bower and Roger Parloff to discuss three-day preliminary hearing before magistrate Judge Faruqui in the criminal case of former FBI analysts charged with false statements to Congress and obstruction. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Executive Editor Natalie Orpett and Senior Editors Michael Feinberg and Molly Roberts to talk through the week’s big international news stories, including: “Full Metal Ballot.” For more than 160 years, federal law has made it a crime to bring “troops or armed men” to any place where an election is being held. But with President Trump refusing to rule out invoking the Insurrection Act, National Guard troops still on the streets of Washington, and the Justice Department preparing to send roughly 1,000 election monitors to polling sites across the country, many are worried about what voters will encounter on Tuesday. Military leaders say they have no plans to send troops to the polls, and a federal judge just reined in armed Homeland Security agents who had been going door to door questioning suspected noncitizen voters. What does the law actually allow federal personnel to do on Election Day? And what happens if the administration decides to test those limits anyway?“Certifiable.” With Election Day less than a week away, the Justice Department has moved from warning about election fraud to actively trying to shape how votes get counted and certified. Last week, in Alaska, the Justice Department—acting on President Trump’s personal orders—sued to block certification of the U.S. Senate race if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan loses, citing possible voter confusion caused by a second candidate on the ballot named Daniel J. Sullivan. In California, DOJ has sued to stop officials from counting more than 20,000 mail ballots from voters it claims are “likely noncitizens,” threatened election officials in all 58 counties with prosecution, and even tried to leapfrog the trial judge by running straight to the Ninth Circuit, which promptly sent it back. Attorney General Todd Blanche insists DOJ isn’t trying to overturn anything. So what are these lawsuits really for? And what do they tell us about what the administration may have planned for after Nov. 3?“Deepfake in the Heart of Texas.” Russia is back—assuming it ever left. Last week, researchers attributed a pair of AI-generated videos falsely accusing Texas Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico of sexual abuse to Storm-1516, a Kremlin-linked influence operation that ran a similar play against Tim Walz in 2024. That same week, the top Democrats on the congressional intelligence committees, Sen. Mark Warner and Rep. Jim Himes, said a classified briefing showed Russia targeting Democrats and other supporters of Ukraine, with China and Iran running more targeted efforts of their own. All this comes after the Trump administration dismantled much of the federal apparatus for countering foreign election influence. How worried should we be about foreign meddling in the final days of the midterms? And what happens if the administration itself starts invoking foreign interference to cast doubt on the results?In object lessons, Molly is keeping cozy with a surprisingly delicious parmesan cabbage soup. Scott is catching up on the historical horror book, "Between Two Fires." And for any The Velvet Underground fans, Michael recommends "Rock*: A Mainstream Alternative History of Alternative Mainstream Music." Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For today's podcast, Executive Editor Natalie Orpett is joined by Natan Sachs of the Center for Middle East Policy, Joel Braunold of the Center Project, and Lawfare Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes to talk about the Oct. 27 elections in Israel. After record turnout by Israeli voters, especially Arab Israelis, we have an outcome—but the implications are far from clear. They unpack what happened and the questions that remain: Whether longtime Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu has a path to staying in power, whether opposition parties can stay unified, and whether there’s any prospect of a governing coalition or if we’re heading toward another round of elections. The future of Israeli politics is still very uncertain. They explain why. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On this month’s minipod, Lawfare Associate Editor for Communications Anna Hickey talked to Lawfare Senior Editor and German Marshall Fund Senior Fellow Loren Voss about what actions people can be taking now to ensure the 2028 election is not subverted or interfered with. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Andy Hendrickson, the chief of the FCC’s Office of Engineering and Technology (OET), and Alice Jou, the chief of staff and deputy chief of OET, join Lawfare Contributor Justin Sherman to discuss the process for testing and certifying devices in the United States, the offshoring of that apparatus, and how some countries do not allow foreign bodies to certify equipment sold in their borders. They also discuss the national security risks of certain offshoring or foreign-owned or -based testing and certification bodies, a “Minnesota” lab that was actually based in China, the FCC’s “Bad Labs” rulemaking on the problem, and the future of the supply chain and risk space. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Former NSC staffers Cole Bucy and Nate Swanson join Lawfare Contributing Editor and Vice President of Research, Security and Defense at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs Ari Tabatabai and Lawfare Public Service Fellow Julia Curlee to discuss the Iran war eight months in and the administration's likely approach after the midterms. Cole and Nate's new piece in Foreign Policy, "Trump Unleashed" outlines why the president might escalate against Iran and why none of his options is likely to get him what he wants. Ari and Julia also discuss their piece in Foreign Policy, "How Could Iran Happen? An Autopsy," examining how the president's war on the "Deep State" led to this debacle in the Middle East. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In a conversation on YouTube, Lawfare Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Senior Editors Loren Voss, Anna Bower, Eric Columbus, Molly Roberts, and Roger Parloff to discuss developments in the litigation over the Trump administration’s plan for the East Potomac Park and Arch, the 9th Circuit ruling that President Trump exceeded his authority in the deployment of the National Guard in L.A., legal challenges to the Trump administration’s various actions surrounding the election, 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. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From July 11, 2025: John Keller, now a partner at Walden, Macht, Haran, & Williams, channeled his experience as the former chief of the Public Integrity Section at the Department of Justice to talk about bribery with James Pearce, Lawfare Legal Fellow. After explaining the basics of bribery law and whether a current or former president could face a bribery prosecution, Keller analyzed whether three episodes from the first six months of the second Trump administration could plausibly be characterized as bribery: Paramount’s $16 million settlement of Trump’s lawsuit while Paramount awaits federal approval of a merger, law firms agreeing to provide pro bono legal services to causes favored by the administration to rescind or avoid targeted executive orders, and the dismissal of the criminal indictment against New York City Mayor Eric Adams in exchange for Adams’s agreeing to further the administration’s immigration agenda. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From November 22, 2024: After more than a year of pleas from Kyiv, the U.S. finally let Ukraine use Western long-range weapons for attacks inside Russia. Lawfare Ukraine Fellow Anastasiia Lapatina sits down with Fabian Hoffmann, a doctoral research fellow at the University of Oslo, to talk about the strategic and tactical effects of such attacks, what’s behind the timing of this decision, and why it took so long for the U.S. to finally change course. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On today's podcast, Executive Editor Natalie K. Orpett talks with Lawfare Senior Editors Molly Roberts and Loren Voss, Contributing Editor Renée DiResta, and Public Service Fellow Julia Curlee about what they're watching in the run-up to the midterm elections. Each of them is focused on different potential threats to election security and integrity—from what’s being challenged in the courts to what’s happening in the online information ecosystem, from concerns over physical security at the polls to concerns over the health of government institutions. They talk about how they are identifying and evaluating the threats, what impact they might have, and what, if anything, can be done about it. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes; Contributing Editor and Vice President of Research, Security and Defense at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs Ariane Tabatabai; and Contributing Editor and Managing Director of the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace Joel Braunold, to talk through the week’s big international news stories, including: “Pick Me, Bibi, One More Time.” Israelis head to the polls next Tuesday, October 27, in an election widely seen as a referendum on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—held just weeks after the third anniversary of the October 7 attacks, which Netanyahu has steadfastly refused to submit to an independent state commission of inquiry. Polls show his Likud trailing former IDF chief of staff Gadi Eisenkot’s new Yashar party, with neither Netanyahu’s bloc nor the opposition anywhere near the 61 seats needed to govern. Netanyahu has scrambled for a late boost, including by securing a “Complete and Total Endorsement” from President Trump, who suggested that if Israelis choose anyone else, he may not be inclined to “finish the job” against Iran. Is this finally the end of the Netanyahu era? And what would a new government—or a hung Knesset—mean for Israel’s wars and its relationship with Washington?“Crude Awakening.” U.S.-Ukraine relations have hit perhaps their lowest point of the second Trump administration. In the aftermath of President Trump’s deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin easing U.S. sanctions on Russian diesel exports, Trump told Ukraine it had “better damn well stop” striking Russian oil refineries and even called on Ukrainians to replace President Volodymyr Zelensky. Kyiv, meanwhile, says U.S. intelligence sharing was briefly cut off and its Starlink access throttled—just as Russia launched some of its largest drone barrages of the war. Ukraine initially respected Trump’s call to pause attacks on Russia’s diesel refineries but, after Russia did not reciprocate, resumed long-range strikes on Russian energy infrastructure. Now Putin is reportedly floating a summit next month with Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping to decide Ukraine’s fate—without Zelensky at the table. Is Trump actively switching sides? And can Ukraine sustain its momentum on the battlefield if Washington keeps pulling the rug out from under it?“French Toast.” France is reeling after a weekend of some of the worst unrest it has seen in years. What began in mid-September as student protests over overcrowded classrooms and teacher shortages has snowballed into a nationwide movement against the rising cost of living, joined by unions, farmers, and veterans of the “Yellow Vest” movement. On Saturday, more than half a million people marched across the country—before the day degenerated into rioting, looting, and arson, with roughly 1,800 people ultimately getting arrested. President Emmanuel Macron has blamed far-left “insurrectionist elements,” while his would-be successors are already trading blame with an eye on next spring’s presidential election – one in which Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally is currently the frontrunner. What’s driving the unrest? And who stands to benefit politically as France heads toward 2027?In object lessons, Ben issues an enlightened apology to our neighbors to the north. Ari is sailing through her free time with Sleeping Gods. Scott is teaching his kids how to kick it old school in a new way. And Joel, somehow, in a way only Joel can, finds a patriotic message in this age-old battle for devotees and how you spend your weekends. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For today’s episode, Lawfare’s Renée DiResta sits down with Riana Pfefferkorn, a policy fellow at the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence, and Cyndie Demeocq, a doctoral researcher at the University of Edinburgh’s School of Informatics, to discuss their new research examining how existing federal criminal law applies to AI-generated child sexual abuse material (CSAM), and what 71 federal prosecutions reveal about the legal issues created by generative AI. Together, they unpack the Seventh Circuit’s recent decision in United States v. Anderegg; the First Amendment distinctions between real, AI-manipulated, and wholly synthetic imagery; and why the authors argue that existing criminal statutes are proving more effective than public debate suggests. They also discuss what the prosecution data can—and cannot—tell us about the scale of the problem, and how policymakers should approach defining the responsibilities of AI developers, platforms, and safety researchers. Please note that this episode contains content that some people may find disturbing, including conversation about child sexual abuse material. Listener discretion is advised. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.