The Lawfare Podcast: Patreon Edition

On April 14, 2022, New York Times technology reporters Kate Conger and Ryan Mac woke up to a stunning four-word tweet from Elon Musk’s Twitter account: “I made an offer.” Having long covered the technology and social media beat, they read Musk’s terse post as the “unbelievable but inevitable culmination of two storylines we had pursued for a decade as journalists in Silicon Valley.”On today’s episode, Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien spoke to Conger and Mac about the cloak-and-dagger corporate dealings that preceded the offer, as well as the drama that unfolded after the ink dried, which they reported in detail in their new book, “Character Limit: How Elon Musk Destroyed Twitter.” They discussed Musk’s predecessors—Jack Dorsey and Parag Agrawal—as well as the platform’s troubled history of content moderation, and why the billionaire wanted it all for himself.  

Science journalist Sarah Scoles has written extensively about astronomy and the UFO community, including in her 2021 book They Are Already Here. She joined David Priess to discuss how scientists look at ETs, pop cultural takes on first contact with extraterrestrials, the incredible influence of Carl Sagan's Contact, the Allan Hills meteorite, the evolution over time of beliefs about aliens contacting humans, how the Roswell myth emerged, the International UFO Congress, the Mutual UFO Network, UFO investigators, seeing lights around Area 51, SETI salvationalism, extraterrestrial-visitation belief as a religious movement, and more.Works mentioned in this episode:The book Contact by Carl SaganThe movie ContactThe book Making Contact by Sarah ScolesThe book They Are Already Here by Sarah ScolesThe book Countdown by Sarah ScolesThe event "UAP: The Search for Clarity," at the Michael V. Hayden Center for Intelligence, Policy, and International Security, November 15, 2023Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Jay Venables of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.

Jane Bambauer, Professor at Levin College of Law; Ramya Krishnan, Senior Staff Attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute and a lecturer in law at Columbia Law School; Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School and a Senior Editor at Lawfare, join Kevin Frazier, Assistant Professor at St. Thomas University College of Law and a Tarbell Fellow at Lawfare, to break down the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ hearing in TikTok v. Garland, in which a panel of judges assessed the constitutionality of the TikTok bill.

It's been a rough couple of weeks in Ukraine, as Russian forces have hit major cities with intense bombardments, killing an unusually large number of people. Moreover, the front in Donetsk continues to erode. On the other hand, Ukrainian forces are still in Kursk, occupying about 500 square miles of Russian territory, in an embarrassing show of forces to the Russians, and discussions continue with Western governments about relaxing restrictions on Ukrainian use of long-range missiles inside of Russia proper. There was also a cabinet reshuffle recently. That's all a lot to talk about with Lawfare's Ukraine fellow, Anastasiia Lapatina, and Eric Ciaramella of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, who joined Benjamin Wittes for an update on the war.

Gharun Lacy has an unusual job. He’s the head of cybersecurity at the State Department, responsible for securing computers and their users in every embassy and consulate and responsible for making sure senior diplomats can communicate securely even in the most forbidding overseas environments. In a wide-ranging conversation, he sat down with Lawfare’s Benjamin Wittes to talk about the challenging work of the Diplomatic Security Service generally and its work in the cyber and technology security area particularly.

From December 24, 2016: Whatever the President-elect might say on the matter, the question of Russian interference in the presidential election is not going away: calls continue in the Senate for an investigation into the Kremlin's meddling, and the security firm Crowdstrike recently released new information linking one of the two entities responsible for the DNC hack with Russia's military intelligence agency. So how should the United States respond?In War on the Rocks, Evan Perkoski and Michael Poznansky recently reviewed the possibilities in their piece, "An Eye for an Eye: Deterring Russian Cyber Intrusions." They've also written on this issue before in a previous piece titled "Attribution and Secrecy in Cyber Intrusions." We brought them on the podcast to talk about what deterrence of Russian interference would look like and why it's necessary.

In a live recording on September 10, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes moderated a panel discussion featuring Lawfare Senior Editor and Brookings Fellow Scott R. Anderson, Co-Founder and Chairman of Silverado Policy Accelerator Dmitri Alperovitch, American Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow Kori Schake, and the Center for Middle East Policy Director and Brookings Senior Fellow Natan Sachs. They discussed Harris’s policy positions on U.S. military and economic aid to Ukraine, the Israel-Gaza War, NATO, and aid to Taiwan. This was the first panel in Lawfare's new livestream series, Lawfare Live: National Security and the 2024 Election. The next panel will be on Sept. 24.This episode also includes a conversation between Benjamin Wittes and Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien about the national security policies discussed at the Sept. 10 debate between Vice President Harris and former President Trump.

Helen Toner, Director of Strategy and Foundational Research Grants at Georgetown University's Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET), and Zach Arnold, Analytic Lead at Georgetown University's Center for Security and Emerging Technology, join Kevin Frazier, Assistant Professor at St. Thomas University College of Law and a Tarbell Fellow at Lawfare, to discuss their recent article "AI Regulation's Champions Can Seize Common Ground—or Be Swept Aside." The trio explore the divide between AI "doomers" and "ethicists," and how finding common ground could strengthen efforts to govern AI responsibly.