The Jan. 6 select committee has wrapped up its first spree of hearings, and it has announced a second set of hearings when Congress returns in September. The month of lull gives us a good opportunity to assess where the committee has come so far and where it might be going.Benjamin Wittes sat down in Twitter Spaces on Thursday with Lawfare’s executive editor and host of The Aftermath Natalie Orpett, Lawfare senior editors Quinta Jurecic and Molly Reynolds, and Lawfare managing editor Tyler McBrien, who read questions from the live audience. They discussed what the committee has accomplished institutionally, what it has accomplished from an adding-new-evidence point of view, what the purpose of this next round of hearings might be, and what relationship this investigation might have to the Justice Department's recent spree of activities.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett and Cyber Fellow Eugenia Lostri join Rational Security to discuss the disqualification of Trump's candidacy in Colorado, the impact of Houthi attacks on global commerce, and the new Argentine president. They also share object lessons and a mulled wine recipe.

In the summer of 2020, Lawfare’s editor in chief Benjamin Wittes found out that he had been the subject of intelligence reports compiled by the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis. It was a bizarre but troubling revelation, and it raised a lot of questions, not only about the propriety of those reports but also about the practice in general. Who else was I&A compiling intelligence reports about and on what basis? So, Ben filed a FOIA request and subsequently a lawsuit in hopes of getting some answers. He's written about this matter for Lawfare a number of times, including in an update published yesterday.Lawfare executive editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Ben to talk through it all. They discussed the background of the case, why so-called open source intelligence reports can be so dangerous, and what we've learned about DHS over the course of the litigation.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Lawfare editors and legal experts discuss the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. United States and its implications for ongoing cases against former President Trump. They analyze the challenges in applying the new standard, legal complexities in evidence presentation, and potential Supreme Court interventions. The podcast also explores the impact of presidential immunity, strategic considerations in Trump's trial, and the selection of staff for a president under prosecution.

Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett joins the team to discuss the inadmissibility of Abdul Raheem al-Nashiri's confession due to prior torture, conservative scholars arguing that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment disqualifies former President Trump, and Elon Musk's role in Ukrainian military efforts. The challenges of podcast production and the political complexities of resolving Guantanamo Bay are also explored.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by the long absent Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including:“Next Fear in Jerusalem.” This week, Israel’s Knesset voted to abolish the “reasonableness doctrine” that had allowed its courts to review administrative decisions by the executive branch—a revolutionary move that triggered unprecedented protest around the country and a wave of resignations throughout the armed forces and other corners of the country. What is the significance of this change? And what does it mean for the future of Israeli democracy?“Rio Grandstanding.” The Biden administration sued the state of Texas this week for installing barriers across the Rio Grande river, purportedly to stymie the flow of unlawful immigration. Texas, meanwhile, maintains that it has the right to take these measures as part of its sovereign authority as a state. Who has the better of these arguments, and what does it tell us about the state of the law and politics surrounding immigration in the United States?“Gone Fishing.” Despite months of revelations regarding ethical shortcomings by its members, the Supreme Court has thus far resisted efforts to install stronger accountability mechanisms. But earlier this week, the Senate Judiciary Committee adopted a measure (along party lines) that would force the Court to do so by directing it to adopt a Code of Ethics. Is this the right approach?For object lessons, Alan recommended that other weekend blockbuster, the new Mission Impossible movie. Quinta gave her (slightly qualified) endorsement to the Barbie movie. Scott wholeheartedly recommended the true winner in this year’s weird movie sweepstakes, the Dungeons & Dragons movie. And Natalie broke the movie streak to join the chorus of praise for the Libby app (hooray public libraries!) and to endorse Mirasa baby clothes, both of which she found a new appreciation of on family leave.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Jan. 6 committee issued its final report Thursday night, and the team at Lawfare spent Friday reading through it and formulating some initial thoughts, observations, bewilderments, and questions. To give you an overview and some analysis, Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare executive editor Natalie Orpett, and Lawfare senior editors Scott R. Anderson, Quinta Jurecic, Molly Reynolds, and Roger Parloff. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Thomas Barrack, former advisor to the Trump campaign, faces a criminal trial for allegedly acting as a foreign agent of the UAE. Natalie Orpett, executive editor of Lawfare, joins to unpack the legal implications surrounding this high-profile case. They delve into the connections between UAE influence and U.S. policy decisions, including cabinet appointments and immigration. The discussion highlights vital legal frameworks like FARA, the dangers of foreign interference, and what Barrack's trial could mean for future national security efforts.

Join Natalie Orpett, an expert in national security, Anna Bower, a savvy political commentator, and Matt Gluck, a contemporary national security analyst, as they dissect pivotal themes impacting our world. They analyze President Biden's speech at the U.N., reflecting on foreign policy legacies amidst ongoing crises. Georgia's election rule changes spark debates on election integrity and potential manipulations ahead of 2024. Delve into the interplay between political pressures and public trust in democracy as the discussion unfolds.

Molly Reynolds, an insightful analyst at Lawfare, joins team members Natalie Orpett and Tyler McBrien for a lively discussion. They dive into hot takes on judicial ethics and the potential implications of open borders. The trio humorously evaluates the treatment of AI, comparing it to wild animals in terms of accountability. The conversation also critiques modern journalism and its sensationalism while reflecting on the need for coherence in narratives. Listeners can expect thought-provoking insights and some lighthearted banter as they celebrate three years of engaging discussions.