Discover
The Lawfare Podcast

The Lawfare Podcast
Author: The Lawfare Institute
Subscribed: 11,857Played: 1,332,295Subscribe
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.
2414 Episodes
Reverse
Chris Miller, a professor at the Fletcher School at Tufts University and Nonresident Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and Marshall Kosloff, Senior Fellow at the Niskanen Center and co-host of the Realignment Podcast, join Kevin Frazier, a Contributing Editor at Lawfare and adjunct professor at Delaware Law, and Alan Rozenshtein, Senior Editor at Lawfare and associate professor of law at the University of Minnesota, to discuss AI, supply chains, and the Abundance Agenda.We value your feedback! Help us improve by sharing your thoughts at lawfaremedia.org/survey. Your input ensures that we deliver what matters most to you. Thank you for your support—and, as always, for listening!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 February 7, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes spoke to Lawfare Senior Editors Anna Bower, Quinta Jurecic, and Roger Parloff about the lawsuits against executive actions by President Trump and his administration, including the actions by DOGE to gain access to executive agencies, the attempt to dissolve USAID, the attempt to produce a list and potentially fire FBI agent and employees who were involved with the Jan. 6 investigations, and more.We value your feedback! Help us improve by sharing your thoughts at lawfaremedia.org/survey. Your input ensures that we deliver what matters most to you. Thank you for your support—and, as always, for listening!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 22, 2023: In 2003, President Bush created the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR, and in the twenty years since, the program has been credited with saving over 25 million lives and stabilizing health systems around the world. On Sept. 30, 2023, the program will expire if Congress doesn’t act, putting millions of people at risk of losing access to HIV/AIDS treatment.Lawfare Associate Editor of Communications Anna Hickey sat down with Emily Bass, a writer and activist who has spent more than twenty years writing about and working on HIV/AIDS. In 2021, she wrote “To End a Plague,” a book on America's war on AIDS in Africa. They discussed how PEPFAR has changed over the past 2 decades, why it is at risk of expiring this fall, and what the expiration would mean for the millions of people who depend on it.We value your feedback! Help us improve by sharing your thoughts at lawfaremedia.org/survey. Your input ensures that we deliver what matters most to you. Thank you for your support—and, as always, for listening!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 31, 2020: Earlier this month, the Trump administration re-imposed tariffs on aluminum imports from Canada, signaling a new salvo in the now years-long trade war it has been waging with countless U.S. trading partners. But what gives the president the authority to pursue such measures unilaterally, even when he lacks support from members of his own party in Congress? To talk through this question, Scott R. Anderson sat down with Kathleen Claussen of the University of Miami School of Law and Timothy Meyer of Vanderbilt Law School. They discussed the scope of the president's authority over trade, where it came from and what a future Congress might be able to do about it.We value your feedback! Help us improve by sharing your thoughts at lawfaremedia.org/survey. Your input ensures that we deliver what matters most to you. Thank you for your support—and, as always, for listening!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 podcast, Lawfare Associate Editor for Communications Anna Hickey spoke to Nayna Gupta, Director of Policy at the American Immigration Council, about the Laken Riley Act, the first piece of legislation signed by President Trump in his second term, its start as a messaging bill in the last Congress, and its impact on the immigration detention system.We value your feedback! Help us improve by sharing your thoughts at lawfaremedia.org/survey. Your input ensures that we deliver what matters most to you. Thank you for your support—and, as always, for listening!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 Foreign Policy Editor and Georgetown professor Daniel Byman sits down with Holly Berkley Fletcher, a former Senior Africa Analyst at the Central Intelligence Agency, to discuss the complex and tragic situation in Sudan and her recent Lawfare article on the subject, “The Sudan War and the Limits of American Power.” They talk about the initial hope following the overthrow of Omar al-Bashir in 2019, the subsequent military conflicts in Sudan, the country’s humanitarian crisis, the role of regional powers, and the challenges faced by civilians and the international community in addressing the ongoing violence and suffering. We value your feedback! Help us improve by sharing your thoughts at lawfaremedia.org/survey. Your input ensures that we deliver what matters most to you. Thank you for your support—and, as always, for listening!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 Benjamin Wittes, Molly Reynolds, and Anna Bower to talk through another big week of national security news, including:“Checked Out and Off Balance.” Over its first two weeks in office, the Trump administration has pushed against the traditional limits of congressional authority by unlawfully impounding funds, terminating federal employees contrary to statute, and seeking to dismantle at least one federal agency contrary to statute. But the Republican-controlled Congress has thus far remained almost entirely complacent, if not supportive of the president’s actions. How far will the Trump administration be able to go? And what will the long-term consequences be for the separation of powers?“Jus Soli? Jus Kidding.’” As one of his first acts after returning to the White House, Donald Trump issued an executive order refusing to recognize birthright citizenship in the United States for anyone whose parents are not citizens or lawful permanent residents. All told, it seems like a clear effort to trigger a review of the traditional understanding of the 14th Amendment as implementing jus soli, meaning citizenship based on place of birth. But how likely is it to work?“Fo’ Drizz(coll).” The Trump administration’s promised campaign of retribution has hit the Justice Department, where senior supervisors have been reassigned and prosecutors involved in the Jan. 6 investigations have been terminated, perhaps unlawfully. But now efforts to gather the names of FBI agents involved in those same investigations for presumed retribution are facing serious pushback, including from the Bureau’s Acting Director Brian Driscoll (known as “the Drizz”). How hard can the FBI and Justice Department push back? And where are the legal limits on what the Trump administration can do?In object lessons, Molly chose not to gamble and stayed on-brand with her recommendation of local-NPR-affiliate podcast Scratch & Win. Ben asked himself the question that many at the FBI are asking themselves these days: “WWDD?” Scott followed the sentiment with an endorsement of “Civil servants shouldn’t quit their jobs,” by Matthew Yglesias. And Anna insisted that her reverence of the TV show Severance has absolutely nothing—really, nothing—to do with belly buttons.We value your feedback! Help us improve by sharing your thoughts at lawfaremedia.org/survey. Your input ensures that we deliver what matters most to you. Thank you for your support—and, as always, for listening!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.Use promo code RATIONALSECURITY at the link below to get an exclusive 60% off an annual Incogni plan:https://incogni.com/rationalsecuritySupport this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
On Jan. 28, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) sent out an email offering a “deferred resignation program” to over 2 million federal employees, encouraging them to resign effective Sept. 30. The offer is only open until Feb. 6—and in the intervening days since OPM announced the program, federal employees have received a blizzard of followup emails offering confusing and rapidly changing information. Writing in Lawfare, Nick Bednar has examined the OPM offer and raised questions about whether federal employees who take this option will be able to seek legal recourse if their contract is not paid out. On the podcast, Bednar, an associate professor of law at the University of Minnesota, joined Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic to walk through the many legal issues raised by the program and how federal employees are handling this period of uncertainty.We value your feedback! Help us improve by sharing your thoughts at lawfaremedia.org/survey. Your input ensures that we deliver what matters most to you. Thank you for your support—and, as always, for listening!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.
Today’s episode is a recording of Feb. 3 livestream that Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson hosted with George Ingram and Tony Pipa, both Senior Fellows in Global Economy and Development at the Brookings Institution, and Jonathan Katz, Senior Director of the Anti-Corruption, Democracy, and Security project also at Brookings—all three of whom are also alumni of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Among other topics, they discussed the USAID’s tumultuous experience over the first two weeks of the Trump administration, the serious consequences of the sudden freeze President Trump installed on U.S. foreign assistance, the sudden removal of hundreds of USAID personnel, and rumors that USAID is set to be subsumed into the U.S. Department of State.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.
Nema Milaninia, a former prosecutor at the International Criminal Court and International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and a current partner at the law firm King & Spalding, joins Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien to discuss legislation in the U.S. Congress and recent executive actions taken by the Trump administration to, once again, sanction the International Criminal Court. Milaninia discusses what is motivating the most recent sanctions campaign, broke down the many criticisms—some legitimate, some less so—against the Court, and explained why sanctions, which are typically reserved for criminal organizations, would benefit no one. He also speaks about how, despite the ICC's best efforts to insulate itself, sanctions pose an existential threat to the institution.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 May 9, 2022: Many individuals seeking asylum or other forms of immigration relief in the U.S. are subject to a program run by Immigration Customs Enforcement, or ICE, called the Intensive Supervision Appearance Program, which uses various kinds of tracking technologies as a way of keeping tabs on individuals who are not detained in ICE custody.Stephanie Pell sat down with Sejal Zota, legal director of Just Futures Law, to talk about this program and the kinds of tracking technologies it employees. They discussed what is publicly known about these technologies, the privacy concerns associated with them, as well as some of the harms experienced by individuals who are subjected to the surveillance. Not withstanding these concerns, they also discussed whether the Intensive Supervision Appearance Program is a reasonable alternative to ICE detention, considering ICE’s need to keep track of individuals who are both seeking immigration relief and who may be ordered removed from the U.S. if that relief is not granted.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 January 30, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes spoke to Lawfare Senior Editors Anna Bower, Quinta Jurecic, and Roger Parloff and contributing editor Renee DiResta about the confirmation hearings of Kash Patel to be FBI director, Tulsi Gabbard to be the director of national intelligence, and Robert F. Kennedy to be the health and human services secretary.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
For today’s episode, Lawfare General Counsel and Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Chris Mirasola, an assistant professor at the University of Houston Law Center and former Defense Department lawyer, to talk through the ways that the Trump administration is using the military to enforce its new immigration policies.They discussed the steps the Trump administration has taken thus far, from transporting migrants on military flights to threatening to send them to Guantanamo Bay; the legal theories that the Trump administration is putting out there that might justify other, broader uses of the military; additional steps we should expect the administration to pursue in the near future; and what it all might mean for the rule of law and civil-military relations in our country.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, the Office of Management and Budget announced a breathtakingly broad freeze on federal funds—before scrambling to clarify that freeze and seemingly rolling it back only two days later. The crisis touches on profound questions about the congressional power of the purse and limitations on presidential power under the Impoundment Control Act. To explain what’s going on, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic spoke with Eloise Pasachoff, a professor at Georgetown Law School, and Zachary Price of the University of California College of Law San Francisco.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 was joined by his colleagues Kevin and Eugenia—in what is sadly her last episode before leaving Lawfare—as well as special guest Peter Harrell for a deep dive into the week’s national security news, including:“Tariff or Takeoff.” The Trump administration got into what is arguably its first major international spat this week when Colombia’s refusal to accept a U.S. military flight returning migrants to that country led President Trump to threaten an array of punitive measures, from visa cut-offs to sanctions and tariffs. After Colombian President Gustavo Petro backed down, the White House was quick to claim victory. But how sustainable is Trump’s strategy? And is it really the route to restoring respect for the United States that the White House claims it is?“Talk to Me When They Get To ‘Project: The Fifth Element.’” Last week, the Trump administration announced Project Stargate—an initiative not to revive ‘90s sci-fi classics, but to instead make a massive investment in the U.S. development of artificial intelligence and related technologies. But a few days later, an announcement by Chinese AI platform DeepSeek indicating it had reached comparable results at a lower cost triggered a sudden decline in the value of AI-related stocks. What do these developments tell us about the competitive dynamics surrounding AI? And how should the United States be navigating them?“A Friend in Need is a Friend Shit Out of Luck.” The Trump administration has issued an across-the-board freeze of U.S. foreign assistance programs for 90 days as it reviews them for consistency with the administration’s vision of “America First” foreign policy. But what ramifications will this pause really have for U.S. foreign policy and beyond?For object lessons, Kevin plugged the Seattle University School of Law’s Technology, Innovation Law, and Ethics Program. Eugenia got back to her roots in recommending the indie RPG video game Wildermyth, which follows a troupe of fantasy heroes from modest origins through their sunset years. Scott out-nerded Eugenia by recommending a pen-and-paper indie RPG, the physically gorgeous Thousand Year Old Vampire. And Peter kept it professional by recommending Arthur Herman’s book “Freedom’s Forge” as a case study on U.S. industrial policy that may have lessons for our current historical moment.Use promo code RATIONALSECURITY at the link below to get an exclusive 60% off an Incogni annual plan:https://incogni.com/rationalsecurityTo 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.
Peter Hyun, then-Acting Chief of the Enforcement Bureau at the Federal Communications Commission, discusses with Lawfare Contributing Editor Justin Sherman the FCC’s data security and cybersecurity enforcement authorities and how those authorities fit into addressing national security threats to the communications supply chain. He covers some recent enforcement actions and issues in this area, ranging from the FCC’s data breach notification rule to submarine cables to rip-and-replace efforts targeting Chinese telecom components, and he offers predictions for how technology supply chains, national security risks, and entanglement with China may evolve in the years to come.Note: Peter Hyun was in his position at the FCC at the time of recording and is now no longer with the Commission following the change in administration.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 today’s episode, Lawfare Senior Editor Alan Z. Rozenshtein speaks with his University of Minnesota Law colleague, Nick Bednar, about the wave of Day 1 executive orders affecting the civil service. Bednar recently analyzed these orders in a piece for Lawfare. They discuss what the orders say, how they might be challenged in court, and what this means for the next four years and beyond.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 January 23, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes spoke to Lawfare Senior Editors Scott R. Anderson, Anna Bower, Quinta Jurecic, and Alan Rozenshtein and assistant law professor at Pace University Amelia Wilson about the first batch of executive orders by President Trump in his second term, including suspending enforcement of the TikTok ban, the use of the military at the border, the birthright citizenship order, and the legal challenges some of these orders are facing.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 February 15, 2023: The Jan. 6 committee’s final report on the insurrection is over 800 pages, including the footnotes. But there’s still new information coming out about the committee’s findings and its work.Last week, we brought you an interview with Dean Jackson, one of the staffers who worked on the Jan. 6 committee’s investigation into the role of social media in the insurrection. Today, we’re featuring a conversation with Jacob Glick, who served as investigative counsel on the committee and is currently a policy counsel at Georgetown’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection. His work in the Jan. 6 investigation focused on social media and far-right extremism. Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic spoke with Jacob about what the investigation showed him about the forces that led to Jan. 6, how he understands the threat still posed by extremism, and what it was like interviewing Twitter whistleblowers and members of far-right groups who stormed the Capitol.You can read Jacob’s Lawfare article here, his essay with Mary McCord on countering extremism here in Just Security, and an interview with him and his Jan. 6 committee colleagues here at Tech Policy Press.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 3, 2023: Since Hamas’s attack on Israel on Oct. 7, the Israel-Hamas war has largely been fought in Gaza, a small strip of land along the border of the Mediterranean Sea. But farther inland, there has been an uptick in hostilities between Israelis and Palestinians in the Palestinian territory of the West Bank. Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem says that at least 13 Palestinian herding communities in the West Bank have been forcibly displaced since the beginning of the war due to Israeli settler violence and intimidation, and nearly 100 Palestinians in the territory are reported to have been killed since the war began by both Israeli military strikes as well as settler violence. The fraught relationship between the Israeli government, Israeli settlers, Palestinians, and the Palestinian Authority are not new. But in part because of those existing issues, the West Bank has the potential to expand and complicate the bounds of the Israel-Hamas war—and some may argue that that is already underway. To understand how the West Bank fits into the ongoing hostilities between Israel and Hamas, Lawfare Associate Editor Hyemin Han spoke to Dan Byman from the Center for Strategic & International Studies, who is also Lawfare’s Foreign Policy Editor; Ghaith al-Omari of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy; and Scott R. Anderson, Lawfare Senior Editor and Fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution. They talked about the international law that currently governs the rules of engagement in the West Bank, the political responses of the Israeli government and other Arab states, and how West Bank dynamics will impact the broader outcomes of the Israel-Hamas war. 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.
Top Podcasts
The Best New Comedy Podcast Right Now – June 2024The Best News Podcast Right Now – June 2024The Best New Business Podcast Right Now – June 2024The Best New Sports Podcast Right Now – June 2024The Best New True Crime Podcast Right Now – June 2024The Best New Joe Rogan Experience Podcast Right Now – June 20The Best New Dan Bongino Show Podcast Right Now – June 20The Best New Mark Levin Podcast – June 2024
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
this pod use to be interesting. sadly it's just another tedious lefty circle jerk.
After Roe is gone how many rich white republicans will be sitting in a private clinic somewhere committing a felony seeking their own abortions? 😂
anyone who would threaten the use of American nuclear weapons over Taiwan is a lunatic. Taiwan holds no strategic interest to the United States, and if they're counting on the word of the United States to defend them I feel very sorry for them. you could ask the Ukraine how that goes.
to be clear, President Donald Trump is the only reason we shifted to containment of China, and he deserves all of the credit for it. imagine if that cleptocrat Hillary Clinton had been elected. TPP anyone? Thank the gods for Donald J Trump.
what are you folks thinking in using this archive piece after the whole idea of a Russian hack job on our elections for the benefit of Donald Trump has been so roundly and completely been destroyed and that the whole hoax has now been shown clearly to be a DNC contrived dirt piece? for shame.