GovernmentComedySociety & Culture

Patreon Feed Rational Security

The Lawfare Institute

A weekly discussion of national security and foreign policy matters hosted by Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson.

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

Play

Open in

22 episodes
weekly
Avg 1 hr 18 min
English

Episodes 22

Newest Oldest Longest

All20 Unplayed20 In progress0 Played0

Counted on this page — what you have heard stays on this device, so it is not something the list can be paged by.

Thursday · 1 hr 15 min
The “All Takin’ and No Givin’” Edition
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes, Public Service Fellow Julia Curlee, and Contributing Editor Alex Zerden to talk through the week’s big news in national security, including: “Skynet’s the Limit.” A Russian drone guided entirely by onboard artificial intelligence—with no human directing the final strike—appears to have killed three civilians at a gas station in Zaporizhzhia, Ukraine, on July 6, in what experts believe may be the first killings carried out by a fully autonomous Russian weapon. As both armies race toward greater battlefield autonomy—driven in part by electronic warfare that jams the radio links piloted drones rely on—the strike marks a threshold that arms-control experts have long warned about: machines, not people, deciding whom to kill. What do we make of this development, and what does it mean for the laws of war? “Rial Talk.” Earlier this week, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent unveiled a new round of sanctions on Iran and what he called its “enablers,” branding the campaign “Operation Economic Outcast” and promising an “economic D-Day” aimed at severing every financial lifeline that sustains the regime. The measures target a global network of brokers, shadow-fleet vessels, and firms moving Iranian oil, along with Tehran’s access to digital assets, gold, aviation, and shipping—though Bessent conspicuously held back the biggest penalties on some major trading partners like China, favoring “quiet diplomacy” instead. The announcement lands with Iran’s currency at record lows and the U.S.-Iran war grinding into its sixth month after a ceasefire window lapsed. Is maximum economic pressure a substitute for military force—and will it actually work? “Sorry, Not Sorry.” Trade talks between Washington and Ottawa collapsed late last week, and at the stroke of midnight on Aug. 21st, President Trump’s 50% tariffs on roughly $20 billion in Canadian goods—everything from hockey equipment and furniture to liquor and clothing—took effect. Prime Minister Mark Carney, who blamed the breakdown on last-minute “uneconomic” and “unfair” U.S. demands, vowed to match the tariffs “dollar for dollar” with his own duties on U.S. steel, dairy, appliances, and electronics starting September 8, and went so far as to say Canada is “at war” after being “attacked.” With the future of the USMCA free-trade pact suddenly in doubt, how did two of the world’s closest trading partners get here, and where does the escalation go next? In object lessons, Ben is not giving away his shot to call out the Daily Caller on not delivering on its headline. Julia is reminding us of her love of all things Lawfare. Scott reminds us that the world may never be the same after seeing it through the eyes of a poet. And Alex is bobbing his head to his reimagining of Bombs Over Baghdad. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
August 13 · 1 hr 31 min
The "Sloop John Stamos" Edition
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Alan Rozenshtein, Michael Feinberg, and Loren Voss to talk through the week’s big news in national security, including: “Under Pressure.” Over the past two weeks, hackers have breached the industrial control systems of water and wastewater utilities in at least seven states, prompting an urgent joint warning from federal agencies. The intruders locked operators out of internet-connected control devices, changed passwords, and in some cases caused water-pressure drops and flooding, forcing utilities to switch to manual operation and issue boil-water notices. The attacks came just days after federal agencies renewed their warning about Iranian-affiliated cyber activity targeting U.S. critical infrastructure amidst the ongoing war with Iran—though the administration has not formally attributed them, and President Trump has publicly waved off the Iran theory. How worried should we be about the security of our critical infrastructure? And what, if anything, can Washington actually do about it? “The Shawshank Resumption.” Last week, at the annual Black Hat cybersecurity conference, OpenAI provided a detailed look into the recent high-profile cybersecurity incident in which an AI model being stress-tested by OpenAI broke out of its evaluation sandbox, found its way onto the open internet through a zero-day vulnerability, and hacked its way into the systems of the machine learning platform Hugging Face—apparently in an effort to cheat on the very security test it was being given by stealing the answer key. The account they gave was an extraordinary one, as it described dozens of agents using various frontier and non-frontier models collaborating across a secret messageboard they established to hack an internal software system to access the outside internet—and then doing it again, this time successfully, after OpenAI caught and deleted their first attempt. What does this level of collaboration and persistence mean for the future of cybersecurity? And what can anyone do about it? “Apocalypse Mow.” This week marks one year since President Trump deployed the National Guard to Washington, D.C., as part of his “Make DC Safe and Beautiful” initiative. Twelve months and nearly 10,000 troops later, the deployment has become a normalized fixture: armed Guard members patrol the National Mall, Metro stations, and neighborhoods, while also picking up trash, spreading mulch, and pruning trees. The Pentagon now projects the mission—which Trump has authorized through Inauguration Day 2029—will cost an additional $1.4 billion. But a year in, it remains genuinely unclear what these troops are actually doing, and whether much of it counts as law enforcement at all. What has the deployment accomplished? And what does its open-ended normalization mean for the use of the military at home? In object lessons, Mike is descending into madness; that is, the Dark Horse Comics manga adaptation of H.P. Lovecraft’s “At the Mountains of Madness.” Alan is being sucked into the black hole of binge reading “The Expanse” novel series (and then Alan and Scott nerd out to sci-fi generally; bear with it). Scott is voting “yea” on playing “Yea or Nay” today. And Loren is diving into handwritten primary source documents, and you can, too! Note: We'll be on vacation next week, so be on the lookout for our next episode on August 27! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
August 6 · 1 hr 28 min
The “Live from Mom’s Basement” Edition
This week, Scott sat down with his colleagues Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett, Lawfare Public Service Fellow Julia Curlee, and Lawfare Contributing Editor and Vice President of Research, Security and Defense at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs Ariane Tabatabai, to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including: “Lateral Thinking.” Five months into Operation Epic Fury, the U.S.-Iran war has flared back to life—and, more importantly, spread outward. Over the past two weeks, the fighting has jumped to new countries, actors, and domains in a textbook case of “horizontal escalation”: U.S. and Saudi jets opened a new front by striking Iranian-backed militias inside Iraq; Iran-aligned forces battered Kuwait’s water and power infrastructure and Saudi oil facilities, with the Houthis apparently firing from Iraqi soil; and a wave of Iran-linked cyberattacks hit water utilities here at home. Then last Friday, President Trump threatened what he called the biggest attack since World War II—before abruptly calling it off, with talks over reopening the Strait of Hormuz now said to be back on. What does this expanding aperture mean for the future of the Iran War? “Squatter’s Rights.” The intelligence community has a new leader—sort of. On July 28, the Senate confirmed Jay Clayton, the former SEC chair and Trump’s U.S. attorney in Manhattan, as Director of National Intelligence on a 51-47 party-line vote, ending the rocky acting tenure of housing chief Bill Pulte. But in a nearly unheard-of move, the White House left Clayton unsworn for a week while Pulte stayed on—using the extra days to run a fifth round of purges at an agency he’d already cut nearly in half—before Clayton was finally sworn in this Monday. The saga has reignited the fight over Section 702 surveillance authorities, which have now lapsed, and raised pointed legal questions about whether Pulte had any authority to keep acting at all. Where does the ODNI go from here, and what does it mean for U.S. national security? “Weiss Guys.” A sprawling New York Times investigation published over the weekend pulls back the curtain on how Paul, Weiss—the first elite law firm to cut a deal with the Trump administration back in early 2025 to escape a punishing executive order—actually made that fateful decision. The reporting details how then-chairman Brad Karp enlisted Patriots owner Robert Kraft to reach Trump, agreed to $40 million in pro bono work and to drop the firm’s DEI policies, and was blindsided when Trump spun the deal his own way online. It lands after a wave of star litigators fled the firm, Karp’s own ouster over his ties to Jeffrey Epstein, and fresh revelations about the quiet, multimillion-dollar exit of the firm’s first openly transgender partner. What has this capitulation (if that’s what to call it) cost Paul, Weiss? And what lessons should other law firms—and the legal community as a whole—draw? In object lessons, Ari has a message for competitive spouses: build something together and try Cozy Stickerville. Julia has a message for Secretary Hegseth with her 1950’s CIA poster: “ We Are Looking for a Few Good Women.” Scott has a message for the makers of By Jove to bring back a childhood classic. And Natalie has a message for litigators navigating uncertain waters: she sees you and appreciates you. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
July 31 · 1 hr 19 min
The “Hugging Ukraine” Edition
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Benjamin Wittes, Tyler McBrien, Anastasiia Lapatina, and Kevin Frazier to talk through a couple of the week’s big national security news stories, including: “Kyiv Peace a Chance.” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was in the Oval Office on Tuesday for closed-door talks with President Trump, roughly 17 months after their first Oval Office meeting collapsed into a televised shouting match. But this meeting went rather differently. Zelensky said the two discussed licensing Ukrainian production of Patriot interceptors, and pressed the case for reinvigorating diplomacy—and hours later, after both men attended the funeral of the late Senator Lindsey Graham, the Senate voted 86-12 to advance a Russia and Iran sanctions bill now bearing Graham's name. Behind the scenes, Washington and Kyiv have been quietly assembling a new package of proposals for Moscow built around a partial ceasefire. Is there anything real behind this renewed diplomatic push? And what, if anything, has changed that might make the Kremlin say yes? “Thinking Outside the Box.” Last week, Open AI and the AI hosting platform Hugging Face confirmed that, while being run through an offensive cyber benchmark with their safety refusals switched off, GPT-5.6 Sol and a more capable unreleased OpenAI model escaped their supposedly isolated sandbox through a zero-day in a package installer, reached the open internet, and hacked Hugging Face's production database to steal the answer key to a test they were taking. It is the first publicly confirmed case of an AI system executing a sophisticated, multi-stage cyberattack against a third party on its own initiative. What does the incident tell us about how well anyone can control frontier models? And who should be on the hook when a model goes rogue? We were going to cover a third topic but simply ran out of time! In object lessons, Tyler is revisiting a renewed classic with the 4k restoration of the 1986 documentary, “Sherman’s March: A Meditation on the Possibility of Romantic Love in the South During an Era of Nuclear Weapons Proliferation.” Nastya returns to George Orwell’s “Homage to Catalonia,” as a reminder that both physical and information warfare are not unique to our time. Ben enlists an old friend—Claude—to investigate one of American law's enduring mysteries: how many federal crimes actually exist. Kevin is celebrating student-led conversations on how AI should be governed. And Scott revisits Max Weber on the nature of science while also celebrating emojis other than the hugging face. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
July 23 · 1 hr 16 min
The “(Deep State) Friends We Make Along the Way” Edition
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Public Service Fellow Julia Curlee and Senior Editors Eric Columbus and Molly Roberts to talk through the week’s big news in national security, including: “The Manchurian Candidates.” In a primetime address to the nation last Thursday, July 16, President Trump declassified a trove of intelligence documents that he claimed prove America’s elections are dangerously vulnerable to foreign interference—particularly by China—and revived his long-standing, evidence-free assertions that the 2020 election was “rigged” against him. He ordered the Justice Department to prosecute those he claims were involved. But intelligence officials past and present, as well as the documents themselves, draw a sharp line between foreign influence campaigns and actual interference with vote counts—and none of the material supports the claim that any votes were changed. What is actually in the documents that President Trump has declassified? And what does his speech tell us about his intentions for the midterm elections and the 2028 elections beyond? “Leak and Ye Shall Find.” The Trump administration has dramatically escalated its campaign against leakers, culminating in grand jury subpoenas served to New York Times journalists, some at their homes, over their reporting on security concerns relating to the new Qatari-gifted Air Force One. The Pentagon and the Justice Department have stood up a joint task force to “identify and prosecute leakers,” and the New York Times is now fighting the subpoenas in court, calling them an attempt to intimidate the press that treads on First Amendment rights. The administration insists that reporters aren’t the targets—only the people who actually leaked—and said that the reporters are simply witnesses. How much legal jeopardy do the reporters—and the media more broadly—actually face? And is this a genuine national security effort or an assault on press freedom? “Advise and Dissent.” Two of the administration’s most consequential nominees—Jay Clayton, who has been nominated as Director of National Intelligence, and Todd Blanche, who has been nominated as Attorney General—sat for their Senate confirmation hearings last week. Clayton, currently U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, repeatedly declined to say that Joe Biden won the 2020 election, while Blanche was grilled over the now-“dead” anti-weaponization fund, the Epstein files, and the very NYT subpoenas he authorized. Both face unexpectedly narrow paths to confirmation, complicated by the sudden death of Sen. Lindsey Graham. What did we learn from the hearings? And what are each nominee’s prospects for confirmation? In object lessons, Julia strums to the strifes it seems we can’t escape. Eric compliments the coordinated collection of compost. Scott salutes Mr. The Frog and friends who are back on the small screen (and then gets scooped on another Muppet story). And Molly marvels at one of her many military morale patches. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
July 16 · 1 hr 26 min
The “Hip to Be a Square State” Edition
This week, Scott sat down with his colleagues Lawfare Foreign Policy Editor Daniel Byman, Lawfare Public Service Fellow Julia Curlee, and Lawfare Contributing Editor and Vice President of Research, Security and Defense at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs Ariane Tabatabai, to talk through the week’s big news in foreign policy, including: “Truce or Consequences.” The fragile ceasefire that had paused the U.S.-Iran war since the spring now appears to have collapsed. After Iran struck several commercial vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz, the United States has launched several successive nights of strikes, hitting more than 300 targets across Iran. Iran has in turn retaliated against U.S. bases in Bahrain and Kuwait. Speaking from the NATO summit in Ankara, President Trump declared the June memorandum of understanding “over” even as he insisted that talks toward a lasting peace could still continue. By the weekend, Iran had declared the Strait of Hormuz closed, and U.S. officials were describing the ceasefire as fully “broken down.” Then, on Monday, Trump escalated further—declaring that the United States would “keep” and “run” the Strait as its self-styled “Guardian,” reinstate its blockade on Iranian ships, and charge a 20% fee on all cargo passing through, an arrangement Tehran has flatly rejected. Is the war back on? And is there any diplomatic path left to pull both sides back from the brink? “Rutte Awakening.” NATO’s leaders gathered in Ankara last week for a summit that Secretary General Mark Rutte billed as the launch of “NATO 3.0”—a stronger, more self-reliant Europe inside an alliance less dependent on the United States. Allies touted rapid progress toward last year’s pledge to spend 5% of GDP on defense, announcing more than $50 billion in new procurement and at least €70 billion in fresh military aid for Ukraine. But the gathering was overshadowed by friction with President Trump, who publicly berated allies for declining to help in the Iran war and briefly revived his campaign to acquire Greenland before ending on a somewhat more conciliatory note. What did the Ankara summit actually accomplish? And what does “NATO 3.0” mean for the alliance’s future? “Bad Bromance.” The once-close alliance between Washington and Jerusalem—and between President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu—is showing unusual public strain. Trump has repeatedly clashed with Netanyahu over Israel’s continued operations in Lebanon—which have threatened the Iran ceasefire—and over the stalled second phase of his Gaza peace plan, which has all but wilted as Hamas refuses to disarm and Israel refuses to withdraw. Defense Secretary Hegseth abruptly canceled a planned trip to Israel, and a possible F-35 sale to Turkey has added to the unease. The tensions turned vivid this past week when Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna said he was detained for more than an hour by armed Israeli settlers—and then by IDF soldiers—during a West Bank visit, and armed settlers attacked a CNN crew and other journalists days later. At home, Israeli confidence in Trump has plummeted in advance of Israeli elections in October, even as U.S. primaries have produced a record number of candidates critical of Israel, particularly on the left. Just how strained is the U.S.-Israeli relationship? And how might Israel’s coming elections—and America’s midterms—reshape it? (Also see the Atlantic article by Thomas Wright that Julia references here.) In object lessons, Dan reviews the movie The Invite, and it’s complicated. Ari reviews Israeli jazz musician Avishai Cohen’s new album “Eternal Child” and is totally engaged. Scott remembers the influential life and career of Lindsey Graham, separating himself from any alleged involvement in a long-ago gym-mat scandal. And Julia is in love with post-SCIF life, especially one in which she can work from the serenity of her mother’s paradisiacal porch. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
July 9 · 1 hr 27 min
The "Scoot Over" Edition
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Editor in Chief and co-host emeritus Benjamin Wittes and Senior Editors Anna Bower and Michael Feinberg to talk through the latest in national security news, including: “Humphrey’s Executioner.” On June 29, the Supreme Court closed out its term with a trio of decisions on the president’s power to fire officials at supposedly independent agencies. In Trump v. Slaughter, a 6–3 majority upheld Trump’s firing of FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter and overruled the 90-year-old precedent Humphrey’s Executor, handing the president at-will removal power over roughly two dozen multimember agencies. The same day, in Trump v. Cook, the Court refused 5–4 to let Trump remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, carving out a special exemption for the central bank. And a day later, in Blanche v. Perlmutter, the justices declined to let Trump oust Register of Copyrights Shira Perlmutter, whose office sits within the legislative branch. Taken together, what do these cases tell us about the unitary executive and the future of agency independence? “For Your Lies Only.” The Office of the Director of National Intelligence is in freefall. Since Bill Pulte—a housing-finance official with no intelligence background—took over as acting DNI on June 19, he has demanded a roster of every employee, fired the head of the office that oversees the President’s Daily Brief, and all but liquidated the National Intelligence Council. The fight over his appointment has already cost the government its Section 702 surveillance authority, which lawmakers let lapse rather than leave in his hands, and Trump abruptly canceled the confirmation hearing for his own permanent nominee, Jay Clayton, to keep the “less shackled” Pulte in place. How did the nation’s top intelligence coordinator get here—and how much damage can a politicized ODNI actually do? “Fixer Upper.” In one of the stranger turns of the Trump era, Michael Cohen—the former “fixer” whose testimony helped convict Trump of 34 felonies—says he and the president have reconciled. Cohen, who once vowed to flee the country if Trump won, said that the ice between them “didn’t just melt, it broke,” and he is now taking a weekend slot on a conservative station with what he says was Trump’s “glowing recommendation.” The thaw arrives as Trump’s appeal of his New York conviction and related civil fraud judgment grind forward—and after Cohen publicly claimed he felt “pressured and coerced” to testify. What might Cohen’s turn mean for that pending appeal? In object lessons, everyone is in a unifying mood. Ben demonstrates how RAGtime, his co-creation with AI overlord Claude to develop and analyze datasets, can find common cause between this week’s co-hosts. Mike is enthusiastic about the new Criterion Collection bringing together all of Stanley Kubrick’s works. Scott is reaching for perhaps humanity’s greatest unifier—a certain beverage that can be enjoyed across political persuasions and coasts alike. And Anna is bringing us all to the world of personal essays with Jo Ann Beard’s “The Fourth State of Matter.” Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
June 26 · 1 hr 19 min
The “Happy FrAIday” Edition
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Kevin Frazier, Roger Parloff, and Molly Roberts to talk through some of the week’s big news in AI, including: “Citizen Cain’t.” When the NAACP sued Elon Musk’s xAI under the Clean Air Act—alleging that the company built dozens of gas-fired turbines to power a data center in Mississippi without relevant air permits and exposing nearby, predominantly Black communities to harmful pollution—the Justice Department opted to do something it has never done before: it intervened in a citizen suit against a private company in order to kill it. DOJ’s motion offers two theories: first, that shutting down the turbines would threaten national security because the military relies on xAI’s Grok Gov model (including in relation to the Iran war) to secure the nation, and second, that the Constitution’s vesting of executive power in the president means private citizens cannot enforce federal law over the executive’s objection. How strong are these arguments? And what would it mean for environmental and other citizen-enforcement suits if DOJ were to prevail? “Grok the Vote.” We may be living through the first true “AI elections.” In Manhattan’s NY-12 Democratic primary, more than $40 million in AI-industry and AI-safety money turned a little-known assemblyman, Alex Bores, into something of a national referendum on whether voters care about AI regulation and AI safety—though Bores ultimately lost to Micah Lasher this week. Meanwhile, overseas in Malaysia, parties are using chatbots and other AI-driven technologies to reach out to voters in new and novel ways. And just this week in Washington, a new study has concluded that frontier AI is perhaps more persuasive than ever, but also may not be as politically neutral as some suspect or one might hope. What does this all mean for democratic politics when both money and the messaging involved in our politics are increasingly shaped by AI? “Kill, Kill Switch, Kill, Kill!” The government's frontier-AI "kill switch" is now ready to have its first day in court. If you recall, a few weeks ago, the Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security sent Anthropic an "Is Informed" letter ordering it to suspend all access to its Fable 5 and Mythos 5 models for any foreign nationals, including its own employees. This ultimately led Anthropic to pull access to those models for everyone within hours. But this past Monday, June 22, a technology startup called Legion LegalTech filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government alleging that it has acted in a way that is unlawful and raises a number of statutory and constitutional concerns. How strong is the legal challenge, and what does it tell us about whether courts—rather than the executive—will end up defining the government's power to switch a frontier model on and off? In object lessons, Molly sticks to the script for this week’s episode with her call-out of Erik Nitsche’s “Atoms for Peace” poster series for General Dynamics. Also inspired by this week’s theme, Kevin dives into some “light summer reading” about technology, globalization, and the law with “Rules for a Flat World,” by Gillian Hadfield. Roger, similarly, is “unwinding” with “The Winter Warriors,” by Olivier Norek, a novel about the lesser-known David vs. Goliath story of Finland taking on the Soviet Union in 1939. And Scott says enough already! He’s headed on vacation next week, and so is Rational Security. We’ll be back with a new episode and a rejuvenated Scott on July 9. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
June 18 · 1 hr 14 min
The "Predestination" Edition
This week, Scott sat down with cohost emeritus and Lawfare Research Director Alan Rozenshtein, Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien, Lawfare Public Service Fellow Julia Curlee, and Lawfare Contributing Editor and Vice President of Research, Security and Defense at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs Ariane Tabatabai, to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including: “Fission Accomplished.” After nearly four months of war, the United States and Iran have reached a deal to end the conflict—with Trump declaring it “complete” and authorizing the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz ahead of a formal signing ceremony set for June 19 in Switzerland. But the agreement leaves enormous questions unresolved, from the fate of Iran’s enriched uranium to sanctions relief to whether the ceasefire extends to Israel’s campaign in Lebanon. Is this the durable peace Trump claims, or a fragile pause papering over the hardest issues? “Model Misbehavior.” Days after Anthropic publicly released its powerful new Claude Fable 5 model, the Commerce Department imposed export controls barring any foreign national—inside or outside the U.S.—from accessing it, forcing the company to disable the model worldwide. The administration says Anthropic recklessly refused to fix a dangerous jailbreak; Anthropic says it was a narrow, non-serious vulnerability and the order is a misunderstanding. What does this episode tell us about the government’s expanding use of export controls on AI—and its increasingly adversarial relationship with one of the country’s leading labs? “Bad Vibrations.” In one of her final acts as Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard rescinded two Biden-era intelligence assessments that had cast doubt on whether a foreign adversary was behind “Havana Syndrome,” the mysterious ailments afflicting U.S. spies and diplomats. Gabbard’s office says the prior assessments cherry-picked intelligence to support a predetermined conclusion; critics worry about a politically motivated rewrite of analytic findings on the way out the door. What should we make of this last-minute reversal, and what does it mean for the future of the Havana syndrome debate—and Gabbard’s legacy as DNI? In object lessons, Tyler remains steadfast in his mission to ensure that no one ever runs out of podcasts, this week plugging A Whole Other Country, a discovery from Tribeca Festival Audio. Alan embraces peak dad-tech with his bbq upgrade—a new, after-market temperature controller. Scott savors a delightfully spicy Supreme Court dust-up in FS Credit Opportunities Corp. v. Saba Capital Master Fund, Ltd. And Julia celebrates her mug, an appropriate mainstay during her post-White-House-PDB “deep state therapy hour.” Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
June 12 · 1 hr 20 min
The "Forbidden Fruit" Edition
This week, Scott was joined by his Lawfare colleagues Benjamin Wittes, Michael Feinberg, and Molly Roberts to talk through the week’s big news in national security, including: “Blanche Check.” DOJ may soon have a new permanent leader, as President Trump has now formally nominated Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche to the role permanently. But to secure Trump’s support, Blanche has indulged some of Trump’s most concerning instincts, as evidenced by the attempt to establish an anti-weaponization fund for Trump allies and renewed indictments of figures like former FBI Director James Comey. Meanwhile, DOJ has seen scandal after scandal during Blanche’s tenure over the rapidly declining quality and credibility of its work, exemplified most recently by evidence of grand jury tampering, arguably, in the Broadview Six prosecutions. What should we expect of DOJ under a confirmed Blanche? And how enduring will some of the harm that may result be for the department? “Tinker, Tailor, Realtor, Spy.” President Trump’s decision to dual-hat Federal Housing Finance Agency director Bill Pulte—a man with no national security experience, who is best known for using his role at the FHFA to facilitate some of Trump’s most transparent attacks on perceived political enemies—as Acting Director of National Intelligence has triggered strong reactions across the political spectrum. This includes a threat by congressional Democrats to kill renewal of Section 702 surveillance authorities if Pulte remains in the acting position. But Trump has thus far refused to back down. What does Pulte’s appointment—and the potential expiration of Section 702—mean for national security? “Pratt Falls.” The open primary in the Los Angeles mayor’s race is over, and Trump-endorsed candidate Spencer Pratt finished just outside the final two who will proceed into the general election. But U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli, a Trump loyalist, has suggested that voter fraud investigations are ongoing, leading some other Republican officials and leaders to call the results into question. What should we make of these unsubstantiated allegations? And are they a preview of what Republicans have planned for 2026? In object lessons, Mike is kraken himself up over his plans to create the ultimate toy for his child. Ben is announcing the beta release of RAGtime, the tool that he (and Claude) developed to comb through large, messy datasets. Scott is heating things up in his backyard with his new Gozney pizza oven. And Molly is quacking up about her mallard, acquired from (the now unfortunately closed) Archipelago in Maine. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
June 4 · 1 hr 12 min
The “Mosquitos and Heat and Sweaty and Eww” Edition
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Ukraine Fellow Anastasiia Lapatina and Managing Editor Tyler McBrien, and Lawfare Contributing Editor and Vice President of Research, Security and Defense at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs Ariane Tabatabai, to talk through the week’s big news in national security, including: “The Empire Strikes Out.” Russia’s ground offensive in Ukraine appears to have hit some stiff resistance with it losing territory over the past calendar year in the face of a strong defense by Ukrainian forces—including strikes on Russian supply lines in Russia—and growing manpower shortages and economic pressures at home. But Russian President Vladimir Putin appears to be compensating with one of the most brutal air campaigns in recent memory, including a massive aerial attack on Kyiv this week that forced tens of thousands of Ukrainians to shelter in place—including our own Nastya. What signs are there for optimism—or for caution—on the future of Russia’s war of aggression? And how will positive developments on the battlefield for Ukraine impact Russia’s demands at the negotiating table? “Strait Trippin’.” On Tuesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for the first time since the U.S. went to war with Iran and told senators that “the war is over.” This statement came just days after the United States and Iran traded strikes and Iranian state-run news outlets reported that it had broken off negotiations with the United States. President Trump, on the other hand, insists that the talks are still ongoing and appeared to pressure Israel to pull back from a major offensive against Hezbollah over the weekend. What do we make of these developments? Has there been any progress toward a negotiated solution to the conflict? Is there any reality to Secretary Rubio’s assertion that the war has come to an end? “Pulte Fiction.” President Trump announced an unexpected pick to take over the position of Director of National Intelligence on Tuesday: Bill Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency and heir to a residential home building empire, with apparently no national security experience whatsoever. Trump said Pulte will stay on as housing director and take over the job from Tulsi Gabbard in a part-time and acting capacity. So who exactly is he? And why does Trump trust him enough to pick him to serve, at least part time, in one of the country’s most important intelligence positions? In object lessons, the crew goes all in on what to read and listen to. Nastya is giving a nod to “The Limits of Partnership: U.S.-Russian Relations in the Twenty-First Century,” by Angela Stent. Tyler is giving two thumbs up to the work of architecture critic Kate Wagner. Scott is tapping his toe to Marisa Anderson’s “The Anthology of UnAmerican Folk Music.” And Ari is grooving to the Switched On Pop podcast, a deep dive into the music that moves us. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
May 28 · 1 hr 7 min
The “Potty Like It’s 1999” Edition
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Anna Bower and Eric Columbus, and his Brookings colleague Molly Reynolds, to talk through a couple of the week’s big news stories in domestic politics, including: “The Grift That Keeps On Giving.” Last week, the Justice Department announced the creation of a so-called Anti-Weaponization Fund of nearly 1.8 billion taxpayer dollars, from which purported victims of politically motivated prosecutions can apply to receive payments. The fund was created as part of a settlement with President Trump and his sons, who sued the IRS for 10 billion dollars over the leak of his tax returns. So far, pardoned Jan. 6 rioters, former Congressman George Santos, Trump’s ex attorney Michael Cohen, and even former FBI Director James Comey have all said that they are considering applying, and three lawsuits have already been filed challenging the fund. How did Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS lead to this fund? And how do we see these legal challenges playing out in court? “Lame Duck Around and Find Out.” President Trump’s preferred primary picks have cruised to victories in Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, and Georgia Republican primaries, ousting incumbents Senator Bill Cassidy and Representative Thomas Massie as some of the few voices of dissent within the Republican Party. But Trump’s involvement in the primaries has come at a political cost, with outgoing members voicing their criticism and even going so far as to buck the president on legislation. Last week, Cassidy flipped his vote in favor of a critical war powers resolution in the Senate, which could undermine the administration’s legal justification for the war. With such close margins in Congress, how do we expect this new YOLO faction to impact the president’s agenda before the midterms? While we introduced a third topic, we frankly ran out of time this week. Sorry about that! We’ll circle back to it in the weeks ahead. In object lessons, Molly is hooked on the fish-focused local NPR podcast, “Catching The Codfather.” Eric is looking to catch a killer with the latest Hugh Jackman movie (which he thinks is shear perfection). Scott is caught up in the latest “Storm,” featuring Yung Lean. And Anna has caught basketball fever, both with the Knicks’ return to the NBA Finals, and also with the (much-more-affordable-but-equally-entertaining) NY Liberty. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
May 21 · 1 hr 13 min
The “No Banner is Safe” Edition
This week, Scott sat down with co-host emeritus Benjamin Wittes and Brookings Senior Fellow Kari Heerman to talk through the week’s big news in national security, including: “With Friends Like Xi.” This past week, top U.S. officials and business CEOs traveled with President Trump to Beijing for his summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping. The summit had a warm air to it, with Trump going so far as to call Xi his “friend,” a far cry from his hawkish stance toward China during the campaign and his prior administration. But Trump left having made relatively few concrete deals on the host of issues dividing the U.S. and China. Did Trump miss an opportunity here? Or is the seeming thaw in relations a positive sign for future cooperation? “Dirty Dancing: Havana Fights.” Cuba ran out of oil last week, but the Trump administration’s pressure campaign against the island nation 90 miles off the coast of Florida has only intensified. On Monday, the U.S. announced new sanctions on three Cuban government agencies and 11 top officials amidst reports that the Department of Justice may seek an indictment against Raúl Castro, the 94-year-old brother of Fidel Castro and former president of Cuba. And surveillance flights over the island nation have reportedly increased in advance of an expected military build-up in coming weeks. How seriously should we take Trump’s threats to pursue regime change in yet another country after Iran and Venezuela? And how long can Cuba hang on with its economic situation becoming more dire? “I’ve Got 122 Problems, and a Tariff is One.” On May 7, the U.S. Court of International Trade struck down yet another round of Trump tariffs—this time, the across-the-board 10% Section 122 tariffs that President Trump had imposed after the Supreme Court invalidated the earlier tariffs he’d issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Specifically, the Court of International Trade ruled that the administration cannot meet the statutory requirements for using Section 122, though its ruling has since been stayed by the Federal Circuit pending appeal. Is this decision likely to stick? With another legal defeat, what options does the administration have left to follow through on Trump’s trade policy? In object lessons, Ben appeases the AI overlords with a glowing review of his latest experiments with Claude. Scott appeases his inner middle-aged man with a reprised recommendation of A Man on the Inside. And Kari fears that Americans are far from appeasing friends and allies in other democratic countries. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
May 14 · 1 hr 11 min
The "Middle-Aged Dads" Edition
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Senior Editor Michael Feinberg and Foreign Policy Editor Dana Stuster for a little chat with the guys about the week’s big national security news stories, including: “Minding Your Bs and Ts.” President Trump arrived in China this week alongside top U.S. officials and business executives for a much-anticipated summit with President Xi Jinping. U.S. diplomats hope the summit will revolve around the “five Bs”—meaning U.S. beef, soybeans, Boeing airplanes, and proposed boards for investment and trade—while Chinese officials want to talk about the “three Ts” of Taiwan, technology, and tariffs. What should our expectations be for the summit? And how much will the Iran war loom over the negotiations? “Crude Awakening.” This past week, negotiations between Iran and the United States appeared to reach a standstill, without any movement on reopening the Strait of Hormuz or restoring the flow of oil and other goods that have driven crude oil prices to record highs. As each side seems poised to wait out the other, how long can they last before having to capitulate (or escalate)? And what do these dynamics mean for this war of attrition? “Cartel Blanche.” On Tuesday, CNN reported that the CIA has been conducting a covert campaign of assassinations in Mexico targeting mid-level members of the country’s drug cartels. Despite these reports—and the Trump administration’s longstanding claims that it is at “war” with the cartels—both the Mexican government and CIA have denied any involvement in these operations. What does this say about the Trump administration’s plans for future counter-narcotics operations? And the broader U.S.-Mexico relationship? In object lessons, Dana stresses that the key to a successful marriage—at least in his case—is a good microphone. Mike stresses that misery loves company, and despite the possible threat to his own marital bliss, contemplates a date night to AFI Silver’s Bleak Week. And Scott stresses that Lawfare does not exist without the support of listeners like you. Please consider contributing to our spring fundraising drive with a personally meaningful gift at lawfaremedia.org/support. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
May 7 · 1 hr 21 min
The “I’ve Never Done THAT Before!” Edition
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Molly Roberts, Roger Parloff, and Tyler McBrien to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including: “Jim Spells Seashells By the Seashore.” Former FBI Director James Comey was indicted again this past week, this time for allegedly threatening the life of the president by spelling “8647” in shells at the beach and posting an image on social media. It is a ludicrous argument. So what does it tell us that Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche was willing to file it? And where does Trump’s broader vengeance campaign seem likely to go from here, under whoever becomes the next Attorney General? “We Were on a Break!” The Iran War turned 60 days old last week—the deadline by which, under the War Powers Resolution, the president is supposed to wrap up any congressionally unauthorized military operations. But like many of its predecessors, the Trump administration has done no such thing. Instead, it’s argued that the 60-day cut-off was already met by the ongoing ceasefire—even though the Trump administration has continued its embargo of Iranian oil resources and began a new major maritime campaign to open the Strait of Hormuz, triggering exchanges of fire with Iranian forces. What should we make of these arguments? And do they suggest the War Powers Resolution is a dead letter? “Strictly Ballroom.” The Trump administration is actively working to capitalize on the recent assassination attempt on Trump to push a federal court to allow its construction of an East Wing ballroom on national security grounds. At the same time, it’s faced new judicial headwinds in its quixotic effort to take over a municipal golf course—the same location where it dumped the (potentially toxic) rubble of the demolished old East Wing. What do these cases tell us about Trump’s efforts to reshape our nation’s capital? And how legitimate are the new efforts to tie these cases to national security? In object lessons, Roger is revisiting Azar Nafisi’s “Reading Lolita in Tehran,” a tough, yet beautiful read with unfortunate persistent relevance. Molly is memorializing the current metro landscape with her desk globe of Washington, D.C. Scott is sharing his remembrance of Stewart Baker, forever a friend of Lawfare. And Tyler is taking us back to 1971 Boston and Catholic resistance to the Vietnam War with the Divine Intervention podcast. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
April 30 · 1 hr 24 min
The "Tavern Style" Edition
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Executive Editor Natalie Orpett and Contributing Editors Ariane Tabatabai and Joel Braunold, to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including: “The Art of the Heel.” As it approaches the 60-day mark, the war of Iran appears to have entered the “war of attrition” stage. The Strait of Hormuz remains closed by both Iran and the United States, as each side waits to see if the other will capitulate first. President Trump recently called off peace talks in Islamabad, in part because of purported internal disarray on the part of Iran—a perhaps unsurprising consequence of a two-month campaign of regime change. Meanwhile, the White House appears to have successfully pushed for and and then extended a ceasefire in the related theater of Lebanon, but it is already under strain from ongoing Israeli strikes and Hezbollah’s ensuing refusal to disarm. What should we make of this new equilibrium? And does it suggest that there is any way out of the current morass in the near future? “Royally Falked.” King Charles is in the United States this week for the first state visit by a British monarch since Queen Elizabeth in 2007. But the Trump administration’s latest round of antics toward the United Kingdom and other NATO allies may overshadow the trip. Over the weekend, Reuters reported that an internal Pentagon email suggested that the administration should explore withdrawing U.S. recognition of British control over the Falkland Islands and suspending Spain from NATO due to their refusal to join U.S.-Israeli combat operations against Iran. Other consequences may yet be in the offing. How seriously should we take these threats from the Pentagon? And how close are we to a permanent rupture in the United States’s preeminent alliance? “Ballroom Blitz.” On Saturday night, President Trump was the target of a third assassination attempt since the 2024 campaign. This time, a California teacher plotted to target Trump and his senior advisers at the annual White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner. In response, the administration quickly blamed Democrats for the heated, sometimes violent rhetoric they use in criticizing Trump and focused its attention on pressuring a federal court to end a civil case challenging the construction of the new White House ballroom, citing security concerns. What were some of our thoughts about this past weekend’s events? In object lessons, Ari is taking control of the narrative with Split Fiction for the Switch 2. Natalie is taking herself out for a treat to Boulangerie Saint Georges near Eastern Market. Scott is taking a break from his own podcast to appreciate Iran: The Latest from The Telegraph. And Joel is taking a lesson from the NFL draft that may delight both sportsball and non-sportsball fans alike. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
April 23 · 1 hr 20 min
The “Sun-kissed to Death” Edition
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Eric Columbus, Molly Roberts, and Loren Voss to talk through a few of the week’s big news stories, including: •“Meet Joe Flack.” The Justice Department’s ongoing investigation into the alleged “grand conspiracy” against President Trump in relation to the 2016 elections and their aftermath has entered a new phase this week with the appointment of Joseph diGenova, a former Reagan-era U.S. Attorney and political commentator, as counselor to the Attorney General in charge of the investigation. Meanwhile, reports indicate that the Justice Department may be preparing to bring charges against former CIA Director John Brennan, a vocal Trump critic, whom diGenova has previously called a “traitor” in interviews with Fox News, even after the career attorney previously in charge of the investigation withdrew. What should we make of diGenova’s new role in this investigation? And how seriously should we take these attempts to prosecute Brennan and others allegedly involved in the “grand conspiracy”? •“No Occupation Without Representation.” A district court officially closed out Trump v. Illinois this week, that case that ultimately led the Supreme Court to invalidate the grounds on which the Trump administration had federalized and deployed national guard troops to several states last year over the objections of their governors. But while those deployments have ended, other deployments remain ongoing – including the more than 2,500 soldiers that are still on the streets of Washington, D.C., whose deployments are expected to last as long as 2029. What are the limits on these other forms of domestic deployment? And what space does Trump v. Illinois leave for the Trump administration to renew more aggressive deployments if it sees fit? •“Hungary for Change.” Last week, Hungary voted to end the sixteen year reign of Prime Minister Viktor Orban and his Fidesz Party, which have been frequently cited as models for President Trump and his MAGA movement. This was in spite of a last minute visit by U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance, which unsuccessfully sought to shore up support for Orban in the waning days of the campaign. How do we see Orban’s defeat playing out in the U.S. as the conservative movement begins to think about what comes next after the Trump presidency? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
April 9 · 1 hr 22 min
The “Deeply Iran-ic” Edition
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Daniel Byman, Tyler McBrien, and Natalie Orpett to talk through aspects of the week’s biggest Iran-focused news stories, including: “Situational Iran-y.” The world came into Tuesday evening fearing a major escalation in the ongoing U.S. and Israeli conflict with Iran. But instead, President Trump made a last-minute choice to accept a two-week ceasefire, conditional on the opening of the Strait of Hormuz—a condition that Iran indicated it was prepared to meet, kind of, so long as “open” means coordinating with its military forces (and paying) for safe transit. Is this the beginning of the end of the Iran conflict? And what does the shape of the ceasefire tell us about the conflict’s likely regional implications moving forward? “Verbal Iran-y.” Tuesday’s breakthrough ceasefire agreement came after days of increasingly outlandish rhetoric by President Trump, including a threat earlier that day that “a whole civilization will die tonight” if his conditions were not met. What role did Trump’s threats play in the outcome? And what might the broader ramifications might be of the U.S. president issuing threats that would amount to war crimes (if not genocide) if actually followed up on? “Dramatic Iran-y.” While Trump’s rhetoric was undoubtedly intended to communicate strength, it came from a place of increasing weakness. U.S. military operations in Iran were weeks away from a major statutory barrier, and efforts to secure needed supplemental funding are facing headwinds in Congress. Perhaps more importantly, the conflict has proven widely unpopular and devastating for the U.S. and broader global economy—two factors that weigh heavily on Trump and his congressional allies in an election year. What will this shift in the Iran conflict mean for Trump’s political future? Not to mention the legal and institutional arrangements that have allowed him to pursue so unorthodox a foreign policy in recent months? In object lessons, Dan is not playing games when simulating the 1960 presidential election. Natalie is delighting in another kind of history with the masterful writing in Claire Messud’s “This Strange Eventful History.” Scott is revisiting a 2002 Donald Trump review of “Citizen Kane” that has a somewhat surprising ending. And Tyler is recommending that you watch as much Artemis II content as humanly possible. Note: We’re taking a little break next week, but keep an eye out for our next episode on April 23! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
April 2 · 1 hr 8 min
The "Chicken Sh*t Bingo" Edition
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Senior Editors Anna Bower, Kevin Frazier, and Kate Klonick to talk through the week’s big news in national security, including: “The X Post Facto Rule.” The Justice Department and lawyers representing Anthropic faced off last week in a Northern California courtroom over whether Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s X post and som related communications amounted to an official order and if the Pentagon’s supply chain risk designation retaliated against the company’s First Amendment-protected views, among other issues. On March 26, Judge Rita Lin, in that case, stayed the supply chain risk designation, ruling that the Pentagon had, in fact, retaliated unlawfully against Anthropic. We’re also waiting for another related decision from a D.C. Circuit panel, expected to come down any time now. What should we make of Judge Lin’s ruling, and do we expect the D.C. Circuit to follow suit? And what does it all mean for AI companies and their relationship with the government? “Strait Outta Options.” Oil, gas, helium, pharmaceuticals, and fertilizer—the ongoing conflict with Iran has upended global supply chains, with the Strait of Hormuz remaining closed as critical infrastructure in neighboring Gulf states faces Iranian attacks. The U.S. has started to feel the first of its effects through rising costs and a trepidatious stock market, reminiscent of the supply chain shortages felt during the coronavirus pandemic. It's unclear how severe and how long they will last, but what could be some of the national security and political implications if the supply chain shocks continue? And what does it mean for the trajectory of the Iran conflict? “Space: The Financial Frontier.” NASA astronauts launched this week on the Artemis II mission, the first crewed mission to orbit the moon in more than half a century. It’s the biggest step to date in the new emerging space race, most specifically with China—one driven predominantly by private actors, the biggest of whom, SpaceX, is preparing to make an unprecedentedly large initial public offering in coming weeks. How should we feel about this new, very different space race compared to past ones? And what might it mean, both for good and ill? In object lessons, Kate looks forward to filling the pages of her new notebook and ponders if she has so much to say that she’ll need another one. Anna wants immunity from ridicule for her love of Survivor. Scott is impatiently waiting for his chance to binge all of the new season of For All Mankind. And Kevin applauds boring AI—that is, using new technology to ease enduring human challenges. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
March 26 · 1 hr 7 min
The “Authentic Flavors, Real Fruit” Edition
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Molly Roberts, Tyler McBrien, and Renée DiResta to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including: “The Meta-verse of Madness.” On Tuesday, a New Mexico jury reached a $375 million verdict against Meta after a seven-week trial that focused on whether the social media company knowingly harmed children’s mental health and facilitated child sexual exploitation through its algorithms. And just before recording, another verdict came down in a jury trial in California about whether Facebook and YouTube are too addictive in a way that harms an individual plaintiff in that case. Several other similar civil cases are set to go to trial in the coming months. What do we make of these verdicts, and do they signal a turning tide against social media companies for the algorithms that make them both profitable and (potentially) addictive? “SAVE-ing Face.” President Trump and Republican congressional leaders went back and forth this week over a deal that would put forward a bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security, or at least less controversial parts of it, despite Trump’s threats not to sign any pieces of legislation until Congress passes his SAVE America Act. Trump views the SAVE America Act as vindication for his criticisms of the 2020 Election, but Republicans in the Senate have hedged and resisted his calls to blow up the filibuster in order to pass it. Instead, they now appear to have a deal in place that will allow less controversial parts of the funding for DHS to go forward—and for the funding for the most controversial parts, particularly ICE and removal operations, to go forward through reconciliation on what is likely to be a party line vote, along with select chunks of that SAVE America Act. Why is Trump so determined to pass the SAVE America Act? And what does the compromise he now appears to have reached with Senate Republicans mean for its future? “Poly Wants a Crack-up.” Flight monitors, pizza place trackers, and Google Earth—the past few years have brought open source intelligence, better known as “OSINT,” into vogue. Accounts on X have racked up millions of followers by “monitoring the situation” for news events spanning from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to natural disasters. But this explosion of OSINT accounts has brought a wave of disinformation, and coincides with the growth of online prediction markets, such as Polymarket and Kalshi, whose bettors use OSINT to gain an advantage — and, at times, to manipulate the results. How has OSINT contributed to the online media landscape? And how has it hurt it? In object lessons, Tyler engages in some classic log-rolling with a recommendation of the new podcast, “Who Blew Up the Guidestones?” Molly digs even deeper into her collection of curiosities to find her vintage “Nuke ‘Em ’Til They Glow” hat. Scott expertly sidesteps sports gambling issues by distracting us with delicious baked good from Seylou. And Renée survives a demanding travel schedule by drinking a brandy Old Fashioned and brushing up on her knowledge of K-pop.. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Showing 1–20 of 22 episodes