Podcast appearances and mentions of Mark Mazzetti

Nicolle Wallace on the Trump Administration's continued capitulation to Russia, Trump loyalist Kash Patel's confirmation to lead the FBI, and Netflix's newest political thriller “Zero Day.” Joined by: Bill Browder, Mark Mazzetti, Ben Rhodes, Julie Turkewitz, Lee Gelernt, Marc Elias, Mike Schmidt, Noah Oppenheim, and Eric Newman.

Nicolle Wallace discusses Trump's retribution in action at the Department of Justice, continued fallout from his January 6 pardons as well as a fresh pardon for the architect of a digital drug marketplace, alarm bells surrounding his pick to lead the FBI – and a new, fast-moving fire in Southern California.   Joined by: Mark Mazzetti, Mary McCord, Andrew Weissmann, Ryan Reilly, Kristy Greenberg, Frank Figliuzzi, Charlie Sykes, Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, and Liz Kreutz.

Since October 7th, a low-grade regional war has played out across the Middle East, pitting Israel and its Western allies against various Iran-backed forces. The Yemeni Houthi faction has targeted ships in the Red Sea in response to Israel's war on Gaza, prompting a wave of US and British airstrikes on Yemen. Meanwhile, Iraqi militias have repeatedly fired rockets at US forces in their country. Hezbollah and Israel have also traded deadly fire on the Lebanon–Israel border, leading to mass displacement on both sides.Now, with Israel's recent assassinations of a senior Hezbollah commander in a Beirut suburb, and of Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Iran, these relatively-limited conflicts threaten to turn into a far-bloodier conflagration. On this episode of On the Nose, senior reporter Alex Kane interviews regional expert Trita Parsi and scholar Karim Makdisi about these assassinations, the strategies and interests of Iran and Hezbollah, and the Biden administration's response to the prospect of a full-scale regional war.Thanks to guest producer Will Smith and to Nathan Salsburg for the use of his song “VIII (All That Were Calculated Have Passed).”ARTICLES MENTIONED AND FURTHER READING“Regional War: An Explainer,” Alex Kane and Jonathan Shamir, Jewish Currents“The Middle East Is Inching Toward Another War,” Trita Parsi, TIME“Biden Warns Netanyahu Against Escalation As Risk Of Regional War Grows,” Barak Ravid, Axios“Bomb Smuggled Into Tehran Guesthouse Months Ago Killed Hamas Leader,” Ronen Bergman, Mark Mazzetti, and Farnaz Fassihi, The New York Times

In today's special episode, Phillip Smyth, a leading expert on Iranian-backed militias, returns to dissect the latest wave of conflict in the Middle East. Recent escalations have claimed the lives of a dozen Israeli civilians and two senior leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah. Retaliation from Iran and its allies is expected at any moment, leaving the region once again on the brink of a potentially more widespread and unrestrained war. Phillip sheds light on who these two men were and what their deaths mean for their organizations, parses the delicate messaging and maneuvering behind the scenes, and offers his insights on what Iran and Hezbollah's imminent response might entail. Phillip's work for the Washington Institute for Near East Policy: https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/experts/phillip-smyth Phillip's work for West Point's Combatting Terrorism Center: https://ctc.westpoint.edu/authors/phillip-smyth Follow Phillip on Twitter: https://twitter.com/PhillipSmyth Reporting discussed in the episode "Who Is Fuad Shukr, Target of the Israeli Strike on Beirut?" by Aaron Boxerman, Ronen Bergman & Euan Ward: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/30/world/middleeast/fuad-shukr-hezbollah-israel-strike.html "Bomb Smuggled Intro Tehran Guesthouse Months Ago Killed Hamas Leader" by Ronen Bergman, Mark Mazzetti & Farnaz Fassihi: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/01/world/middleeast/how-hamas-leader-haniyeh-killed-iran-bomb.html "Iran Arrests Dozens in Search for Suspects in Killing of Hamas Leader" by Farnaz Fassihi: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/03/world/middleeast/iran-security-response-hamas-assassination.html "Houthis Launch Deadly Drone Strike on Tel Aviv, Evading Israel's Defenses" by Gabby Sobelman, Aaron Boxerman, Ronen Bergman, Lara Jakes & Erin Mendel: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/19/world/middleeast/houthis-drone-strike-tel-aviv.html Support Secrets and Spies Become a “Friend of the Podcast” on Patreon for £3: www.patreon.com/SecretsAndSpies Buy merchandise from our shop: https://www.redbubble.com/shop/ap/60934996 Subscribe to our YouTube page: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDVB23lrHr3KFeXq4VU36dg For more information about the podcast, check out our website: https://secretsandspiespodcast.com Connect with us on social media Twitter / X: https://twitter.com/SecretsAndSpies Instagram: https://instagram.com/secretsandspies Blue Sky: https://bsky.app/profile/secretsandspies.bsky.social Facebook: https://facebook.com/secretsandspies Spoutible: https://spoutible.com/SecretsAndSpies

With the intense focus on Gaza, other critical issues in Israel have slipped into the background. Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Mark Mazzetti joins Marc Polymeropoulos to discuss the lack of coverage on settler violence in the West Bank and how Israel's rightward shift poses significant challenges both domestically and internationally. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

With the intense focus on Gaza, other critical issues in Israel have slipped into the background. Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Mark Mazzetti joins Marc Polymeropoulos to discuss the lack of coverage on settler violence in the West Bank and how Israel's rightward shift poses significant challenges both domestically and internationally. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A recent New York Times investigation reveals how violent radical elements in Israel's settler movement in the West Bank have been allowed to operate with impunity for decades. The report, based in part on accounts by Israeli officials, examines a two-tier system of justice where the authorities systematically ignored or enabled settler violence against Palestinians. Today, leaders of this extremist fringe have gained powerful positions within Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government. We'll talk with the report's co-author, Mark Mazzetti, about the rise of Israeli extremism and what it means for the current war and U.S.-Israel relations. Guest: Mark Mazzetti, investigative reporter focusing on national security, New York Times; co-author, the May 16 cover story "The Unpunished: How Extremists Took Over Israel"

A recent New York Times investigation reveals how violent radical elements in Israel's settler movement in the West Bank have been allowed to operate with impunity for decades. The report, based in part on accounts by Israeli officials, examines a two-tier system of justice where the authorities systematically ignored or enabled settler violence against Palestinians. Today, leaders of this extremist fringe have gained powerful positions within Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government. We'll talk with the report's co-author, Mark Mazzetti, about the rise of Israeli extremism and what it means for the current war and U.S.-Israel relations. Guests: Mark Mazzetti, investigative reporter focusing on national security, New York Times; co-author, the May 16 cover story "The Unpunished: How Extremists Took Over Israel"

Nicolle Wallace is joined by Andrew Weissmann, Tim Heaphy, Dahlia Lithwick, Sen. Richard Blumenthal, Igor Novikov, Kristy Greenberg, Lachlan Cartwright, George Grasso, Ronen Bergman, and Mark Mazzetti.

Two members of Congress, one from each side of the aisle and each branch of Congress, are currently under criminal indictment, yet are steadfastly clinging to their roles as lawmakers. In this episode, we've got the dirt straight from the criminal indictments of Rep. George Santos of New York and Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey. Please Support Congressional Dish – Quick Links Contribute monthly or a lump sum via Support Congressional Dish via (donations per episode) Send Zelle payments to: Donation@congressionaldish.com Send Venmo payments to: @Jennifer-Briney Send Cash App payments to: $CongressionalDish or Donation@congressionaldish.com Use your bank's online bill pay function to mail contributions to: Please make checks payable to Congressional Dish Thank you for supporting truly independent media! Background Sources Recommended Congressional Dish Episodes Sen. Bob Menendez The Indictment Egypt Aysha Bagchi and Josh Meyer. November 13, 2023. USA Today. Mark Mazzetti and Vivian Yee. October 14, 2023. The New York Times. Larry Neumeister. October 12, 2023. AP. Nicole Hong et al. October 1, 2023. The New York Times. Jeremy M. Sharp. May 2, 2023. Congressional Research Service. Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam October 24, 2020. BBC News. September 2, 2020. The New York Times. Marriage Nina Burleigh. October 31, 2023. Intelligencer. Previous Indictment Nick Corasaniti and Nate Schweber. November 16, 2017. The New York Times. April 1, 2015. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs. Initial Appointment to Senate Marek Fuchs. December 9, 2005. The New York Times. Rep. George Santos The Indictment House Ethics Committee Investigation November 16, 2023. House Ethics Committee. November 9, 2023. House Ethics Committee, Investigative Subcommittee. Brazil Fraud Case Andrew DePietro. October 21, 2022. Forbes. Expulsion Attempts Kevin Freking. November 17, 2023. PBS NewsHour. Kevin Freking and Stephen Groves. November 2, 2023. AP. Wealthiest Districts Andrew DePietro. October 21, 2022. Forbes. IRS Doesn't Fight Dark Money Maya Miller. April 18, 2019. ProPublica. Bills Audio Sources October 28, 2023 Chat Box with David Cruz Clips 3:25 Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ): You know, I have drawn from my personal credit union savings account, for the better part of 30 years, $400 every week in cash. And while that may seem old fashioned, some people may think of it as crazy, the reality is that the government has those records. They have the accounts that show that and they chose not to use it. So, you know, this is why I look forward to being in a position to actually speak to these issues, so that New Jerseyans will have a different set of facts than the ones they have right now. 5:20 Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ): I was not barred from going into an intelligence briefing. I still have all of my intelligence credentials. 7:20 Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ): I have not missed a beat. I've been here for votes and for hearings, and for pursuing the issues that are important to the people in New Jersey. 11:35 Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ): I still serve on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which gives me a perch on all of these global issues, and I am pursuing them in the same way as I did before. The difference is that I am not leading the [Senate Foreign Relations] Committee, but I am very much active in the Committee pursuing the things that I care about for New Jersey. 15:25 David Cruz: So the considerations that Egypt received, including getting a green light from your committee, the quid pro quo as it were, was Egypt behaving better in exchange for arms sales and other considerations? Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ): Each consideration depended upon the nature of the sale, whether it was for example, defensive equipment, whether it was equipment for the Sinai, where they are playing a vital role for security with Israel, which everybody -- Democrats and Republicans -- have called for. So these followed the traditional uses of both foreign aid and arms sales in a way to ensure that the US national security interests was pursued and that's simply the case. 16:15 David Cruz: And in the case of one of your co-defendants receiving a contract to certify halal — Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ): I can't answer for my co-defendant, you'll have to ask him. David Cruz: Well, the question is, was it your relations with Egyptian officials that helped ease the way for him to get that contract? Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ): David, there's a lot of suggestions. As a matter of fact, as I read the indictment, there's a lot of inferences, but not a lot of facts at the end of the day. Those inferences try to play and create a storyline. That is the most negative pejorative storyline you can create. But when those get challenged by the facts, as we will, in the legal proceedings that both motions and trials will allow us to do, then we will see a totally different story. May 27, 2021 Senate Foreign Relations Committee Witnesses: Robert F. Godec, Acting Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of African Affairs Sarah Charles, Assistant to the Administrator, Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance, United States Agency for International Development Clips Sen. Bob Menenedez (D-NJ): Then, finally, I will make a comment. It is not a question. I have spoken to the Egyptians on more than one occasion on this issue at their behest. I have a real sense that if the GERD issue is not dealt with in a way that assures them of their concerns about the Nile flowing into what would be the heart of their water supply in Egypt that they will do what is necessary. I do not like red lines, but they have suggested that they have red lines and I take them at their word that they have red lines. Not that they are desirous of doing that. They also have a very strong expression that they hope to have a resolution peacefully, but that they have their own red lines. I hope that we are engaging in that very robustly because the last thing we need, in addition to everything that is going on in Ethiopia, in addition to the possibility of a famine, to the sexual violence that is taking place, is to then have a military conflict over the GERD. So I just seriously hope we are fully engaged and understand where the parties are and how serious some of them are of purpose. Executive Producer Recommended Sources Music by Editing Production Assistance

New York Times reporter Mark Mazzetti says prior to Oct. 7, Israel's leadership was focused on an attack by Iran and its proxies —not Hamas. "They were ... myopic about what the true threat was."TV critic David Bianculli reviews the Netflix miniseries adaptation of All the Light We Cannot See.

New York Times reporter Mark Mazzetti says prior to Oct. 7, Israel's leadership was focused on an attack by Iran and its proxies —not Hamas. "They were ... myopic about what the true threat was."TV critic David Bianculli reviews the Netflix miniseries adaptation of All the Light We Cannot See.

Analyzing a possible US defense alliance with Saudi Arabia; sports diplomacy and sportswashing; Zelensky's speech at the UN General Assembly; and Marcus is confusedSubscribe and leave a review in Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your podcast player of choiceEmail your questions and comments or leave a voicemail for a future podcast episodeFurther reading:Edward Wong and Mark Mazzetti. 2023. “Biden Aides and Saudis Explore Defense Treaty Modeled After Asian Pacts.” New York Times. Drew Richardson. 2023. “Saudi crown prince says he will keep ‘sportswashing' as criticism of the practice grows.” CNBC.See all Cheap Talk episodes

Shoot the Messenger: Espionage, Murder and Pegasus Spyware concludes its first season with its tenth episode. Up until now, this show has focused on the use of Pegasus in foreign countries. But while we were in the middle of releasing the episodes of this season, a pair of New York Times journalists published a bombshell report that showed that the US government is making monthly payments to the NSO Group despite the official blacklisting of the company. Last month, Mark Mazzetti and Ronen Bergman published an article in the New York Times describing the secret deal that occurred between the US government and the NSO Group. Guests: New York Times Reporters Ronen Bergman and Mark Mazzetti  We'd like to extend a special thanks to the Committee to Protect Journalists for their special collaboration on the first season of Shoot the Messenger. For more information on the status of journalists and freedom of the press - visit at cpj.org. Shoot the Messenger is hosted by Rose Reid and Nando Vila and is a production of Exile Content Studio.

A little over a decade ago, a small Israeli company created what would become the world's most powerful and notorious hacking tool.Mark Mazzetti, who is a Washington investigative correspondent for The Times, explains the surprising story of the NSO Group and why, despite banning its technology, the United States kept trying to use it.Guest: Mark Mazzetti, a Washington investigative correspondent for The New York Times.Background reading: The Biden administration has been trying to choke off use of hacking tools made by the Israeli firm NSO. It turns out that not every part of the government has gotten the message.The president signed an executive order seeking to limit deployment of a tool that has been abused by autocracies — and some democracies — to spy on dissidents, human rights activists and journalists.For more information on today's episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.

The annual war authorization (NDAA) is an excellent opportunity to examine our military's roles and goals in the world. In this episode, learn about how much of our tax money Congress provided the Defense Department, including how much of that money is classified, how much more money was dedicated to war than was requested, and what they are authorized to use the money for. This episode also examines our Foreign Military Financing programs with a deep dive into a new partner country: Ecuador. Please Support Congressional Dish – Quick Links Contribute monthly or a lump sum via PayPal Support Congressional Dish via Patreon (donations per episode) Send Zelle payments to: Donation@congressionaldish.com Send Venmo payments to: @Jennifer-Briney Send Cash App payments to: $CongressionalDish or Donation@congressionaldish.com Use your bank's online bill pay function to mail contributions to: 5753 Hwy 85 North, Number 4576, Crestview, FL 32536. Please make checks payable to Congressional Dish Thank you for supporting truly independent media! View the shownotes on our website at https://congressionaldish.com/cd269-ndaa-2023-plan-ecuador Background Sources Recommended Congressional Dish Episodes CD244: Keeping Ukraine CD243: Target Nicaragua CD230: Pacific Deterrence Initiative CD229: Target Belarus CD218: Minerals are the New Oil CD191: The “Democracies” Of Elliott Abrams CD187: Combating China CD176: Target Venezuela: Regime Change in Progress CD172: The Illegal Bombing of Syria CD147: Controlling Puerto Rico CD128: Crisis in Puerto Rico CD108: Regime Change CD102: The World Trade Organization: COOL? World Trade System “IMF vs. WTO vs. World Bank: What's the Difference?” James McWhinney. Oct 10, 2021. Investopedia. The Profiteers: Bechtel and the Men Who Built the World. Sally Denton. Simon and Schuster: 2017. Littoral Combat Ships “The Pentagon Saw a Warship Boondoggle. Congress Saw Jobs.” Eric Lipton. Feb 4, 2023. The New York Times. “BAE Systems: Summary.” Open Secrets. Foreign Military Sales Program “Written Testimony of Assistant Secretary of State Jessica Lewis before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee at a hearing on the ‘Future of Security Sector Assistance.'” March 10, 2022. Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Ecuador “Ecuador - Modern history.” Encyclopedia Britannica. “Ecuador Tried to Curb Drilling and Protect the Amazon. The Opposite Happened.” Catrin Einhorn and Manuela Andreoni. Updated Jan 20, 2023. The New York Times. “Ecuador: An Overview,” [IF11218]. June S. Beittel and Rachel L. Martin. Sep 9, 2022. Congressional Research Service. “Ecuador: In Brief,” [R44294]. June S. Beittel. Updated Feb 13, 2018. Congressional Research Service. “Ecuador's 2017 Elections,” [IF10581] June S. Beittel. Updated April 20, 2017. Congressional Research Services. Debt Default “Ecuador's Debt Default: Exposing a Gap in the Global Financial Architecture.” Sarah Anderson and Neil Watkins. Dec 15, 2008. Institute for Policy Studies. “Ecuador: President Orders Debt Default.” Simon Romero. Dec 12, 2008. The New York Times. Violence and Drugs “Ecuador's High Tide of Drug Violence.” Nov 4, 2022. International Crisis Group. “Lasso will propose to the US an Ecuador Plan to confront drug trafficking.” Jun 8, 2022. EcuadorTimes.net. “‘Es hora de un Plan Ecuador': el presidente Lasso dice en entrevista con la BBC que su país necesita ayuda para enfrentar el narcotráfico.” Vanessa Buschschluter. Nov 4, 2021. BBC. “Ecuador declares state of emergency over crime wave.” Oct 19, 2021. Deutsche Welle. Mining “An Ecuadorean Town Is Sinking Because of Illegal Mining.” Updated Mar 28, 2022. CGTN America. “New Mining Concessions Could Severely Decrease Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in Ecuador.” Bitty A. Roy. Jun 19, 2018. Tropical Conservation Science. Foreign Infrastructure Investments “Ecuador prioritizing 4 road projects involving more than US$1bn.” Nov 28, 2022. BNamericas. “USTDA Expands Climate Portfolio in Ecuador.” May 27, 2022. U.S. Trade and Development Agency. “Ecuador's controversial and costliest hydropower project prompts energy rethink.” Richard Jiménez and Allen Panchana. Dec 16, 2021. Diálogo Chino. “Ecuador's Power Grid Gets a Massive Makeover.” Frank Dougherty. Mar 1, 2021. Power. Fishing “China fishing fleet defied U.S. in standoff on the high seas.” Joshua Goodman. Nov 2, 2022. Chattanooga Times Free Press. “Report to Congress: National 5-year Strategy for Combating Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing (2022-2026).” October 2022. U.S. Interagency Working Group on IUU Fishing. “United States Launches Public-Private Partnership In Peru And Ecuador To Promote Sustainable, Profitable Fishing Practices.” Oct 7, 2022. U.S. Agency for International Development. “US Coast Guard Conducts High Seas Boarding for First Time in the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organization Convention Area.” U.S. Coast Guard. Oct 5, 2022. Diálogo Americas. “Walmart, Whole Foods, and Slave-Labor Shrimp.” Adam Chandler. Dec 16, 2015. The Atlantic. South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation (SPRFMO) Cutter Ships 22 USC Sec. 2321j, Update “Coast Guard Cutter Procurement: Background and Issues for Congress,” [R42567]. Ronald O'Rourke. Updated August 30, 2022. Congressional Research Service. Julian Assange “How Julian Assange became an unwelcome guest in Ecuador's embassy.” Luke Harding et al. May 15, 2018. The Guardian. “Ecuador Expels U.S. Ambassador Over WikiLeaks Cable.” Simon Romero. Apr 5, 2011. The New York Times. Chevron Case “Controversial activist Steven Donziger is a folk hero to the left, a fraud to Big Oil.” Zack Budryk. Dec 27, 2022. The Hill. Venezuela “Ecuador: Lasso Calls for Increased Pressure on Venezuela.” Apr 14, 2021. teleSUR. China Trade Deal “Ecuador reaches trade deal with China, aims to increase exports, Lasso says.” Jan 3, 2023. Reuters. “On the Ecuador-China Debt Deal: Q&A with Augusto de la Torre.” Sep 23, 2022. The Dialogue. “Ecuador sees trade deal with China at end of year, debt talks to begin.” Alexandra Valencia. Feb 5, 2022. Reuters. Business Reforms “Will Ecuador's Business Reforms Attract Investment?” Ramiro Crespo. Mar 3, 2022. Latin American Advisor. U.S. Ecuador Partnership “Why Ecuador's president announced his re-election plans in Washington.” Isabel Chriboga. Dec 22, 2022. The Atlantic Council. “USMCA as a Framework: New Talks Between U.S., Ecuador, Uruguay.” Jim Wiesemeyer. Dec 21, 2022. AgWeb. “US seeks to bolster Ecuador ties as China expands regional role.” Dec 19, 2022. Al Jazeera. “As China's influence grows, Biden needs to supercharge trade with Ecuador.” Isabel Chiriboga. Dec 19, 2022. The Atlantic Council. “The United States and Ecuador to Explore Expanding the Protocol on Trade Rules and Transparency under the Trade and Investment Council (TIC).” Nov 1, 2022. Office of the United States Trade Representative. “A delegation of U.S. senators visits Ecuador.” Oct 19, 2022. U.S. Embassy & Consulate in Ecuador. Referendum “Guillermo Lasso Searches for a Breakthrough.” Sebastián Hurtado. Dec 19, 2022. Americas Quarterly. State Enterprise Resignation “Ecuador President Guillermo Lasso asks heads of all state firms to resign.” Jan 18, 2023. Buenos Aires Times. Lithium Triangle “Why the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act Could Benefit Both Mining and Energy in Latin America.” John Price. Aug 22, 2022. Americas Market Intelligence. Colombia “Latin America's New Left Meets Davos.” Catherine Osborn. Jan 20, 2023. Foreign Policy. “How Colombia plans to keep its oil and coal in the ground.” María Paula Rubiano A. Nov 16, 2022. BBC. “Colombia: Background and U.S. Relations.” June S. Beittel. Updated December 16, 2021. Congressional Research Service. Tax Reform “In Colombia, Passing Tax Reform Was the Easy Part.” Ricardo Ávila. Nov 23, 2022. Americas Quarterly. “U.S. Government Must Take Urgent Action on Colombia's Tax Reform Bill.” Cesar Vence and Megan Bridges. Oct 26, 2022. U.S. Chamber of Commerce. “Letter from ACT et. al. to Sec. Janet Yellen, Sec. Gina Raimondo, and Hon. Katherine Tai.” U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Relationship with U.S. “Does glyphosate cause cancer?” Cancer Treatment Centers of America. Jul 8, 2021. City of Hope. “Colombian Intelligence Unit Used U.S. Equipment to Spy on Politicians, Journalists.” Kejal Vyas. May 4, 2020. The Wall Street Journal. “Exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides and risk for non-Hodgkin lymphoma: A meta-analysis and supporting evidence.” Luoping Zhang et al. Mutation Research/Reviews in Mutation Research Vol. 781, July–September 2019, pp. 186-206. “Colombia to use drones to fumigate coca leaf with herbicide.” Jun 26, 2018. Syria “Everyone Is Denouncing the Syrian Rebels Now Slaughtering Kurds. But Didn't the U.S. Once Support Some of Them?” Mehdi Hasan. Oct 26, 2019. The Intercept. “U.S. Relations With Syria: Bilateral Relations Fact Sheet.” Jan 20, 2021. U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs. “Behind the Sudden Death of a $1 Billion Secret C.I.A. War in Syria.” Mark Mazzetti et al. Aug 2, 2017. The New York Times. “Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With Aid From C.I.A.” C. J. Chivers and Eric Schmitt. Mar 24, 2013. The New York Times. Government Funding “House Passes 2023 Government Funding Legislation.” Dec 23, 2022. House Appropriations Committee Democrats. “Division C - Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2023.” Senate Appropriations Committee. Jen's highlighted version “Division K - Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2023.” Senate Appropriations Committee. Laws H.R.2617 - Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 H.R.7776 - James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 Jen's highlighted version Bills H.R. 8711 - United States-Ecuador Partnership Act of 2022 S. 3591 - United States-Ecuador Partnership Act of 2022 Audio Sources A conversation with General Laura J. Richardson on security across the Americas January 19, 2023 The Atlantic Council Clips 17:51 Gen. Laura Richardson: The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) that has been ongoing for the last over a decade in this region, 21 of 31 countries have signed on to this Belt and Road Initiative. I could take Argentina last January, the most recent signatory on to the Belt and Road Initiative, and $23 billion in infrastructure projects that signatory and signing on to that. But again, 21 of 31 countries. There are 25 countries that actually have infrastructure projects by the PRC. Four that aren't signatories of the BRI, but they do actually have projects within their countries. But not just that. Deepwater ports in 17 countries. I mean, this is critical infrastructure that's being invested in. I have the most space enabling infrastructure in the Western Hemisphere in Latin America and the Caribbean. And I just caused question, you know, why? Why is all of this critical infrastructure being invested in so heavily? In terms of telecommunications, 5G, I've got five countries with the 5G backbone in this region. I've got 24 countries with the PRC Huawei 3G-4G. Five countries have the Huawei backbone infrastructure. If I had to guess, they'll probably be offered a discount to upgrade and stay within the same PRC network. And so very, very concerning as we work with our countries. 20:00 Gen. Laura Richardson: What I'm starting to see as well is that this economy...the economy impacts to these partner nations is affecting their ability to buy equipment. And you know, as I work with our partner nations, and they invest in U.S. equipment, which is the best equipment, I must say I am a little biased, but it is the best equipment, they also buy into the supply chain of spare parts, and all those kinds of things that help to sustain this piece of equipment over many, many years. So in terms of the investment that they're getting, and that equipment to be able to stay operational, and the readiness of it, is very, very important. But now these partner nations, due to the impacts of their economy, are starting to look at the financing that goes along with it. Not necessarily the quality of the equipment, but who has the best finance deal because they can't afford it so much up front. 24:15 Gen. Laura Richardson: This region, why this region matters, with all of its rich resources and rare earth elements. You've got the lithium triangle which is needed for technology today. 60% of the world's lithium is in the lithium triangle: Argentina Bolivia, Chile. You just have the largest oil reserves -- light, sweet, crude -- discovered off of Guyana over a year ago. You have Venezuela's resources as well with oil, copper, gold. China gets 36% of its food source from this region. We have the Amazon, lungs of the world. We have 31% of the world's freshwater in this region too. I mean, it's just off the chart. 28:10 Gen. Laura Richardson: You know, you gotta question, why are they investing so heavily everywhere else across the planet? I worry about these dual-use state-owned enterprises that pop up from the PRC, and I worry about the dual use capability being able to flip them around and use them for military use. 33:30 Interviewer: Russia can't have the ability to provide many of these countries with resupply or new weapons. I mean, they're struggling to supply themselves, in many cases, for Ukraine. So is that presenting an opportunity for maybe the US to slide in? Gen. Laura Richardson: It is, absolutely and we're taking advantage of that, I'd like to say. So, we are working with those countries that have the Russian equipment to either donate or switch it out for United States equipment. or you Interviewer: Are countries taking the....? Gen. Laura Richardson: They are, yeah. 45:25 Gen. Laura Richardson: National Guard State Partnership Program is huge. We have the largest National Guard State Partnership Program. It has come up a couple of times with Ukraine. Ukraine has the State Partnership Program with California. How do we initially start our great coordination with Ukraine? It was leveraged to the National Guard State Partnership Program that California had. But I have the largest out of any of the CoCOMMs. I have 24 state partnership programs utilize those to the nth degree in terms of another lever. 48:25 Gen. Laura Richardson: Just yesterday I had a zoom call with the U.S. Ambassadors from Argentina and Chile and then also the strategy officer from Levant and then also the VP for Global Operations from Albermarle for lithium, to talk about the lithium triangle in Argentina, Bolivia and Chile and the companies, how they're doing and what they see in terms of challenges and things like that in the lithium business and then the aggressiveness or the influence and coercion from the PRC. House Session June 15, 2022 Clips Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA): The GAO found that the LCS had experienced engine failure in 10 of the 11 deployments reviewed. Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA): One major reason for the excessive costs of LCS: contractors. Unlike other ships where sailors do the maintenance, LCS relies almost exclusively on contractors who own and control the technical data needed to maintain and repair. Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA): Our top priority and national defense strategy is China and Russia. We can't waste scarce funds on costly LCS when there are more capable platforms like destroyers, attack submarines, and the new constellation class frigate. A review of the President's Fiscal Year 2023 funding request and budget justification for the Navy and Marine Corps May 25, 2022 Senate Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Defense Watch full hearing on YouTube Witnesses: Carlos Del Toro, Secretary, United States Navy Admiral Michael M. Gilday, Chief of Naval Operations General David H. Berger, Commandant of the Marine Corps Clips Sen. Jerry Moran (R-KS): I think the christening was just a few years ago...maybe three or so. So the fact that we christened the ship one year and a few years later we're decommissioning troubles me. Sen. Jerry Moran (R-KS): Are there not other uses, if there's something missing from this class of ships, that we would avoid decommissioning? Adm. Michael Gilday: We need a capable, lethal, ready Navy more than we need a larger Navy that's less capable, less lethal, and less ready. And so, unfortunately the Littoral combat ships that we have, while the mechanical issues were a factor, a bigger factor was was the lack of sufficient warfighting capability against a peer competitor in China. Adm. Michael Gilday: And so we refuse to put an additional dollar against that system that wouldn't match the Chinese undersea threat. Adm. Michael Gilday: In terms of what are the options going forward with these ships, I would offer to the subcommittee that we should consider offering these ships to other countries that would be able to use them effectively. There are countries in South America, as an example, as you pointed out, that would be able to use these ships that have small crews. Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken and Secretary ofDefense Lloyd J. Austin III Remarks to Traveling Press April 25, 2022 China's Role in Latin America and the Caribbean March 31, 2022 Senate Foreign Relations Committee Watch full hearing on YouTube Witnesses: Kerri Hannan, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Diplomacy, Policy, Planning, and Coordination, Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, U.S. Department of State Peter Natiello, Senior Deputy Assistant Administrator, Latin America and Caribbean Bureau, U.S. Agency for International Development Andrew M. Herscowitz, Chief Development Officer, U.S. International Development Finance Corporation Margaret Myers, Director of the Asia & Latin America Program, Inter-American Dialogue Evan Ellis, Senior Associate, Center for Strategic and International Studies Clips 24:20 Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA): Ecuador for example, nearly 20 years ago, former President Rafael Correa promised modernization for Ecuador, embracing Chinese loans and infrastructure projects in exchange for its oil. Fast forward to today. Ecuador now lives with the Chinese financed and built dam that's not fully operational despite being opened in 2016. The Coca Codo Sinclair Dam required over 7000 repairs, it sits right next to an active volcano, and erosion continues to damage the dam. The dam also caused an oil spill in 2020 that has impacted indigenous communities living downstream. And all that's on top of the billions of dollars that Ecuador still owes China. 56:40 Peter Natiello: One example that I could provide is work that we've done in Ecuador, with Ecuadorian journalists, to investigate, to analyze and to report on the issue of illegal and unregulated fishing off Ecuador's coast. And we do that because we want to ensure that Ecuadorian citizens have fact-based information upon which they can make decisions about China and countries like China, and whether they want their country working with them. 1:23:45 Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA): There are 86 million tons of identified lithium resources on the planet. On the planet. 49 million of the 86 million are in the Golden Triangle. That's Argentina, Bolivia, Chile. So what's our plan? 1:54:10 Evan Ellis: In security engagement, the PRC is a significant provider of military goods to the region including fighters, transport aircraft, and radars for Venezuela; helicopters and armored vehicles for Bolivia; and military trucks for Ecuador. 2:00:00 Margaret Myers: Ecuador is perhaps the best example here of a country that has begun to come to terms with the challenges associated with doing business with or interacting from a financial or investment perspective with China. And one need only travel the road from the airport to Quito where every day there are a lot of accidents because of challenges with the actual engineering of that road to know why many Ecuadorians feel this way. Examining U.S. Security Cooperation and Assistance March 10, 2022 Senate Committee on Foreign Relations Watch Full Hearing on YouTube Witnesses: Jessica Lewis, Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs, U.S. Department of State Mara Elizabeth Karlin, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans and Capabilities, U.S. Department of Defense Clips 1:23:17 Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT): According to one study, the DoD manages 48 of the 50 new security assistance programs that were created after the 9/11 attacks and out of the 170 existing security assistance programs today, DOD manages 87, a whopping 81% of those programs. That is a fundamental transition from the way in which we used to manage security assistance. And my worry is that it takes out of the equation the people who have the clearest and most important visibility on the ground as to the impact of that security assistance and those transfers. Sen. Chris Murphy: We just spent $87 billion in military assistance over 20 years in Afghanistan. And the army that we supported went up in smoke overnight. That is an extraordinary waste of U.S. taxpayer dollars, and it mirrors a smaller but similar investment we made from 2003 to 2014 in the Iraqi military, who disintegrated when they faced the prospect of a fight against ISIS. Clearly, there is something very wrong with the way in which we are flowing military assistance to partner countries, especially in complicated war zones. You've got a minute and 10 seconds, so maybe you can just preview some lessons that we have learned, or the process by which we are going to learn lessons from all of the money that we have wasted in Iraq and Afghanistan. Jessica Lewis: Senator, I'll be brief so that Dr. Karlin can jump in as well. I think we do need to learn lessons. We need to make sure, as I was just saying to Senator Cardin, that when we provide security assistance, we also look not just at train and equip, but we look at other things like how the Ministries of Defense operate? Is their security sector governant? Are we creating an infrastructure that's going to actually work? Mara Elizabeth Karlin: Thank you for raising this issue, Senator. And I can assure you that the Department of Defense is in the process of commissioning a study on this exact issue. I will just say in line with Assistant Secretary Lewis, it is really important that when we look at these efforts, we spend time assessing political will and we do not take an Excel spreadsheet approach to building partner militaries that misses the higher order issues that are deeply relevant to security sector governance, that will fundamentally show us the extent to which we can ultimately be successful or not with a partner. Thank you. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT): You know, in Iraq, last time I was there, we were spending four times as much money on security assistance as we were on non-security assistance. And what Afghanistan taught us amongst many things, is that if you have a fundamentally corrupt government, then all the money you're flowing into the military is likely wasted in the end because that government can't stand and thus the military can't stand. So it also speaks to rebalancing the way in which we put money into conflict zones, to not think that military assistance alone does the job. You got to be building sustainable governments that serve the public interests in order to make your security assistance matter and be effective. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. National Security Challenges and U.S. Military Activity in North and South America March 8, 2022 House Armed Services Committee Watch full hearing on YouTube Witnesses: Melissa G. Dalton, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Hemispheric Affairs Office of the Secretary of Defense General Laura Richardson, USA, Commander, U.S. Southern Command General Glen D. VanHerck, USAF, Commander, U.S. Northern Command and North American Aerospace Defense Command Clips 17:30 General Laura Richardson: Colombia, for example, our strongest partner in the region, exports security by training other Latin American militaries to counter transnational threats. 1:20:00 General Laura Richardson: If I look at what PRC (People's Republic of China) is investing in the [SOUTHCOM] AOR (Area of Responsibility), over a five year period of 2017 to 2021: $72 billion. It's off the charts. And I can read a couple of the projects. The most concerning projects that I have are the $6 billion in projects specifically near the Panama Canal. And I look at the strategic lines of communication: Panama Canal and the Strait of Magellan. But just to highlight a couple of the projects. The nuclear power plant in Argentina: $7.9 billion. The highway in Jamaica: $5.6 billion. The energy refinery in Cuba, $5 billion. The highway in Peru: $4 billion. Energy dam in Argentina: $4 billion, the Metro in Colombia: $3.9 billion. The freight railway in Argentina: $3 billion. These are not small projects that they're putting in this region. This region is rich in resources, and the Chinese don't go there to invest, they go there to extract. All of these projects are done with Chinese labor with host nation countries'. U.S. Policy on Democracy in Latin America and the Caribbean November 30, 2021 Senate Foreign Affairs Committee Watch full hearing on YouTube Witnesses: Brian A. Nichols, Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, U.S. Department of State Todd D. Robinson, Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, U.S. Department of State Clips 1:47:15 Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX): I'd like to start with Mexico. I am increasingly concerned that the Mexican government is engaged in a systematic campaign to undermine American companies, and especially American energy companies that have invested in our shared prosperity and in the future of the Mexican people and economy. Over the past five months, Mexican regulators have shut down three privately owned fuel storage terminals. Among those they shut down a fuel terminal and Tuxpan, which is run by an American company based in Texas, and which transports fuel on ships owned by American companies. This is a pattern of sustained discrimination against American companies. And I worry that the Mexican government's ultimate aim is to roll back the country's historic 2013 energy sector liberalisation reforms in favor of Mexico's mismanaged and failing state-owned energy companies. The only way the Mexican government is going to slow and reverse their campaign is if the United States Government conveys clearly and candidly that their efforts pose a serious threat to our relationship and to our shared economic interests. 2:01:50 Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ): Mr. Nichols, can you can you just be a little more specific about the tactics of the GEC? What are some of the specific activities they're doing? And what more would you like to see them do? Brian A. Nichols: The Global Engagement Center both measures public opinion and social media trends throughout the world. They actively work to counter false messages from our strategic competitors. And they prepare media products or talking points that our embassies and consulates around the hemisphere can use to combat disinformation. I think they do a great job. Obviously, it's a huge task. So the the resources that they have to bring to bear to this limit, somewhat, the ability to accomplish those goals, but I think they're doing vital, vital work. 2:13:30 Todd D. Robinson: We are, INL (International Narcotics and Law Enforcement) are working very closely with the Haitian National Police, the new Director General, we are going to send in advisors. When I was there two weeks ago, I arrived with -- they'd asked for greater ability to get police around the city -- I showed up with 19 new vehicles, 200 new protective vests for the police. The 19 was the first installment of a total of 60 that we're going to deliver to the Haitian National Police. We're gonna get advisors down there to work with the new SWAT team to start taking back the areas that have been taken from ordinary Haitians. But it's going to be a process and it's going to take some time. Sen. Bob Menendez: Well, first of all, is the Haitian National Police actually an institution capable of delivering the type of security that Hatians deserve? Todd D. Robinson: We believe it is. It's an institution that we have worked with in the past. There was a small brief moment where Haitians actually acknowledged that the Haitian National Police had gotten better and was more professional. Our goal, our long term goal is to try to bring it back to that Sen. Bob Menendez: How much time before we get security on the ground? Todd D. Robinson: I can't say exactly but we are working as fast as we can. Sen. Bob Menendez: Months, years? Todd D. Robinson: Well, I would hope we could do it in less than months. But we're working as fast as we can. Global Challenges and U.S. National Security Strategy January 25, 2018 Senate Committee on Armed Services Watch the full hearing on YouTube Witnesses: Dr. Henry A. Kissinger, Chairman of Kissinger Associates and Former Secretary of State Dr. George P. Shultz, Thomas W. and Susan B. Ford Distinguished Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University and Former Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage, President, Armitage International and Former Deputy Secretary of State Clips Dr. George Shultz: Small platforms will carry a very destructive power. Then you can put these small platforms on drones. And drones can be manufactured easily, and you can have a great many of them inexpensively. So then you can have a swarm armed with lethal equipment. Any fixed target is a real target. So an airfield where our Air Force stores planes is a very vulnerable target. A ship at anchor is a vulnerable target. So you've got to think about that in terms of how you deploy. And in terms of the drones, while such a system cannot be jammed, it would only serve to get a drone—talking about getting a drone to the area of where its target is, but that sure could hit a specific target. At that point, the optical systems guided by artificial intelligence could use on-board, multi-spectral imaging to find a target and guide the weapons. It is exactly that autonomy that makes the technologic convergence a threat today. Because such drones will require no external input other than the signature of the designed target, they will not be vulnerable to jamming. Not requiring human intervention, the autonomous platforms will also be able to operate in very large numbers. Dr. George Shultz: I think there's a great lesson here for what we do in NATO to contain Russia because you can deploy these things in boxes so you don't even know what they are and on trucks and train people to unload quickly and fire. So it's a huge deterrent capability that is available, and it's inexpensive enough so that we can expect our allies to pitch in and get them for themselves. Dr. George Shultz: The creative use of swarms of autonomous drones to augment current forces would strongly and relatively cheaply reinforce NATO, as I said, that deterrence. If NATO assists frontline states in fielding large numbers of inexpensive autonomous drones that are pre-packaged in standard 20-foot containers, the weapons can be stored in sites across the countries under the control of reserve forces. If the weapons are pre-packaged and stored, the national forces can quickly deploy the weapons to delay a Russian advance. So what's happening is you have small, cheap, and highly lethal replacing large, expensive platforms. And this change is coming about with great rapidity, and it is massively important to take it into account in anything that you are thinking about doing. Foreign Military Sales: Process and Policy June 15, 2017 House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade Watch the full hearing on YouTube Witnesses: Tina Kaidanow, Acting Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, U.S. Department of State Vice Admiral Joseph Rixey, Director, U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency Clips 14:40 Tina Kaidanow: Arms Transfers constitute an element of foreign policy. We therefore take into account foreign policy considerations as we contemplate each arms transfer or sale, including specifically, the appropriateness of the transfer in responding to U.S and recipient security needs; the degree to which the transfer supports U.S. strategic foreign policy and defense interests through increased access and influence; allied burden sharing and interoperability; consistency with U.S. interests regarding regional stability; the degree of protection afforded by the recipient company to our sensitive technology; the risk that significant change in the political or security situation of the recipient country could lead to inappropriate end use or transfer; and the likelihood that the recipient would use the arms to commit human rights abuses or serious violations of international humanitarian law, or retransfer the arms to those who would commit such abuses. As a second key point, arms transfers support the U.S. Defense industrial base and they reduce the cost of procurement for our own U.S. military. Purchases made through the Foreign Military Sales, known as the FMS, system often can be combined with our Defense Department orders to reduce unit costs. Beyond this, the US defense industry directly employs over 1.7 million people across our nation. 20:20 Vice Admiral Joseph Rixey: FMS is the government-to-government process through which the U.S. government purchases defense articles, training, and services on behalf of foreign governments, authorized in the Arms Export Control Act. FMS is a long standing security cooperation program that supports partner and regional security, enhances military-to-military cooperation, enables interoperability and develops and maintains international relationships. Through the FMS process, the US government determines whether or not the sale is of mutual benefit to us and the partner, whether the technology can and will be protected, and whether the transfer is consistent with U.S. conventional arms transfer policy. The FMS system is actually a set of systems in which the Department of State, Department of Defense, and Congress play critical roles. The Department of Defense in particular executes a number of different processes including the management of the FMS case lifecycle which is overseen by DSCA (Defense Security Cooperation Agency). Technology transfer reviews, overseen by the Defense Technology Security Administration, and the management of the Defense Acquisition and Logistics Systems, overseen by the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, and the military departments. This process, or a version of it, also serves us well, in the DoD Title X Building Partnership Capacity arena, where the process of building a case, validating a requirement and exercising our U.S. acquisition system to deliver capability is modeled on the FMS system. I want to say clearly that overall the system is performing very well. The United States continues to remain the provider of choice for our international partners, with 1,700 new cases implemented in Fiscal Year 2016 alone. These new cases, combined with adjustments to existing programs, equated to more than $33 billion in sales last year. This included over $25 billion in cases funded by our partner nations' own funds and approximately $8 billion in cases funded by DOD Title X program or Department of State's Appropriations. Most FMS cases move through the process relatively quickly. But some may move more slowly as we engage in deliberate review to ensure that the necessary arms transfer criteria are met. Cover Art Design by Only Child Imaginations Music Presented in This Episode Intro & Exit: Tired of Being Lied To by David Ippolito (found on Music Alley by mevio)

“Zero-click spyware” is making it easier for governments to get their hands on individuals' personal data. New York Times investigative reporter Mark Mazzetti says that when it comes to spyware, the United States is both an arsonist and a firefighter. This episode was produced by Amanda Lewellyn, edited by Matt Collette, fact-checked by Laura Bullard, engineered by Efim Shapiro, and hosted by Sean Rameswaram. Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained Support Today, Explained by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Ronen Bergman and Mark Mazzetti investigate Pegasus, an Israeli spying tool that was acquired for use by the F.B.I., and which the United States government is now trying to ban.Pegasus is used globally. For nearly a decade, NSO, an Israeli firm, had been selling this surveillance software on a subscription basis to law-enforcement and intelligence agencies around the world, promising to consistently and reliably crack the encrypted communications of any iPhone or Android smartphone.The software has helped the authorities capture drug lords, thwart terrorist plots, fight organized crime, and, in one case, take down a global child-abuse ring, identifying suspects in more than 40 countries. But it has been prone to abuses of power: The Mexican government deployed Pegasus against journalists and political dissidents; and it was used to intercept communications with Jamal Khashoggi, a columnist for The Washington Post, whom Saudi operatives killed and dismembered in Istanbul in 2018.Cyberweapons are here to stay — but their legacy is still to be determined.This story was written by Ronen Bergman and Mark Mazzetti and recorded by Audm. To hear more audio stories from publications like The New York Times, download Audm for iPhone or Android.

The NSO's Pegasus has the power to invade the personal space of almost everyone on the planet. The New York Times's Mark Mazzetti explains the rise of this world-changing spyware that governments around the globe — the United States included — have lined up to buy.   Read Mazzetti and Ronen Bergman's story: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/28/magazine/nso-group-israel-spyware.html Today's episode was engineered by Cristian Ayala, and hosted by Adam Clark Estes. Support Recode Daily by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Nicolle Wallace discusses GOP governors threatening lawsuits over Biden's vaccine mandates. Plus, Pennsylvania Republicans launch an investigation into 2020, the evolving terror threat since 9/11, new reporting about what law enforcement knew in the few days before January 6th, Democrats in the Senate inch closer to a compromise on federal voting rights legislation, what it was like as a journalist on September 11th, and reflecting on that day 20 years later. Joined by: David Jolly, John Heilemann, Dr. Kavita Patel, Josh Shapiro, Ben Rhodes, Donna Edwards, Betsy Woodruff Swan, Scott MacFarlane, Frank Figliuzzi, Reverend Al Sharpton, Elizabeth Bumiller, Mark Mazzetti, and Donny Deutsch

Nicolle Wallace discusses the U.S. ending its military involvement in Afghanistan, bringing to an close a two-decade long operation. Plus, a look at the U.S. service members who lost their lives in last week's suicide bombing and the historical context of this moment. Joined by: Courtney Kube, Yamiche Alcindor, Mark Mazzetti, Mark Jacobson, Claire McCaskill, Richard Engel, Jeremy Bash, Amy McGrath, Matthew Dowd, Anne Gearan, and Michael Beschloss

From December 3, 2016: Earlier this week, the New York Times published a story by Charlie Savage, Eric Schmitt, and Mark Mazzetti informing us that the Obama administration had changed its interpretation of the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force to more broadly cover the use of force against al-Shabaab, expanding its previous reading of the AUMF as only authorizing force against members of al-Shabaab individually linked to al-Qaeda. Bobby noted the story on Lawfare and provided a few comments. While the news has been somewhat drowned out amidst the hubbub of the presidential transition, the significance of this change in legal interpretation shouldn't be lost—so we brought Bobby and Charlie Savage on the podcast to talk with Benjamin Wittes about where this change came from and what it might mean. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Nicolle Wallace discusses the deadline today for the Trump Organization to argue against charges from New York prosecutors. Plus, the latest update from the building collapse in Florida, reporting that Trump aides drafted an order to invoke the Insurrection Act against protesters last summer, the partisan divide growing over teaching the military about racism, two top Trump aides speak out, the House is set to vote on a January 6th commission this week, a right-wing spy operation targeting Democrats, and a new study shows vaccinations offer protection for years.Joined by: Joyce Vance, Josh Dawsey, Frank Figliuzzi, Ellison Barber, Paul Rieckhoff, Michael Schmidt, Eddie Glaude, Philip Rucker, Olivia Troye, Matt Miller, Clint Watts, Mark Mazzetti, and Dr. Vin GuptaNOTE: There is a slight audio glitch at the beginning of the show, but it gets resolved quickly.

Nicolle Wallace discusses President Biden addressing the rise in crime across the country. Plus, reporting reveals that some of the Saudis who murdered Jamal Khashoggi received paramilitary training in the U.S., Speaker Pelosi set to announce this week the next steps on investigating January 6th, more proof that the big lie is a lie, Gen. Mark Milley fires back at GOP disinformation, and the attorney general says an inspector general is best positioned to review the Trump-era Justice Department.Joined by: Ashley Parker, Robert Gibbs, Cedric Alexander, Mark Mazzetti, Rep. Jim Himes, Jocelyn Benson, Michael Eric Dyson, Tim Miller, and Barbara McQuade   

On this edition of Parallax Views, on May 13th, 2021 the New York Times published a tantalizing report by journalists Adam Goldman and Mark Mazzetti. "Activists and Ex-Spy Said to Have Plotted to Discredit Trump ‘Enemies’ in Government", read the eye-catching headline that promised to add yet another scandalous chapter to the already scandal-ridden story of the Trump Presidency. Following the attention-grabbing headline, Goldman & Mazzetti, through documents and interviews, details a "campaign" by pro-Trump elements to discredit government officials perceived as potentially disloyal to the modus operandi of President Trump in the early years of his Presidency. Brining to mind Richard Nixon's "dirty tricks" and the tradition of what in D.C. slang has come to be known as political "ratf*cking, said campaign included a "planned sting operation against Mr. Trump’s national security adviser at the time, H.R. McMaster" and "secret surveillance operations against F.B.I. employees, aimed at exposing anti-Trump sentiment in the bureau’s ranks". According to Goldman & Mazzetti's reporting the plot involved former British spy Richard Seddon, controversial private security contractor Erik Prince of Blackwater infamy (and, for what it's worth, the younger brother of Trump's Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos), and operatives of Project Veritas, a right-wing conservative activist group founded by James O'Keefe and previously known for its operations against Planned Parenthood, ACORN, and others. In regards specifically to the sting operation against Gen. McMaster, which involved what in intelligence circles is known as a "honey trap", the NYT story mentioned another player in this cast of character: Barbara Ledeen. A former GOP Senate Judiciary Committee staffer, Ledeen admits to at least a minor role in the plot against McMaster in the NYT report. However, she is only mentioned rather briefly in the article itself. Investigative journalist Russ Baker, author of Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, America's Invisible Government, and the Hidden History of the Last Fifty Years and CEO/Editor-in-Chief of the news outlet WhoWhatWhy, joined me to discuss his recent article, co-authored with Matt Harvey, detailing how there may be another angle to explore in this story after taking a closer look at who Barbara Ledeen is and the circles she travels in. As Baker explains, Ledeen is the wife of one Michael Ledeen. Michael Ledeen, for the uninitiated is "a historian, campaign adviser, and freelance intelligence operative, who served as a consultant to the National Security Council and departments of State and Defense under Republican administrations" who figures into such political intrigues as the Iran/Contra affair and the Niger yellowcake forgeries that played a role in launching the Bush administration war on Iraq on the basis of that Saddam Hussein possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs). Michael Ledeen is part of a milieu that has come to be known as the Neoconservatives. The neocons reached the apex of their political influence during the Presidency of George W. Bush and took hawkish positions on Iraq, Iran, and other countries in the Middle East even prior to 9/11. Prominent elements of the movement included the Project for a New American Century think tank and long-time D.C. mainstays like Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, and Elliot Abrams among others.  In our conversation, Baker notes the complexity of this story and why the Ledeen connection matters. Chiefly, Baker points out the the Ledeens are heavily associated collaborators of Gen. Mike Flynn, who was fired from a prominent position under President Obama only to return to prominence under President Donald Trump. However, Flynn's return proved short-lived and he was ultimately replaced by Gen. H.R. McMaster. Additionally, Baker discusses the issue of neoconservatism and its relation to Israel and Netanyahu's Likud Party. Specifically, neoconservatives take an approach of strong, hardline support to Israel. In fact, for some neocons, this support is so hardline that it has led to right-wing admonishments of generally Israel-friendly Presidents like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama for being perceived as not sufficiently supportive of Israel. McMaster, Baker, argues may, despite not having a particularly radical stance on Israel, be seen in this regard by some neocons. Baker is quick to point out in our conversation that this discussion of neoconservatism and pro-Likud politics should not be used to support anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. Instead he believes we should examined how the foreign policy ideas of neocons like the Ledeen and their relationship to Flynn may figure into the contour of a broader story about why politically right-wing elements in Washington, D.C. would seek to craft a sting operation against Gen. H.R. McMaster. And moreover how this plot against McMaster by alleged 'Anti-Deep State' elements may instead actually represent feuding factions of the deep state (by which, Russ points out, we mean the entrenched bureaucracy in D.C. rather than the lunatic fringe conspiracy theories of QAnon and its ilk). All that and more on this edition of Parallax Views!

Last week, a Senate committee outlined the Trump 2016 campaign's ties to Russia, and a Russian opposition leader was hospitalized in a potential poisoning. We'll talk Vladimir Putin's strategy of power. Masha Gessen and Mark Mazzetti join Meghna Chakrabarti.

Christiane Amanpour speaks exclusively with Khalid Aljabri, son of a former Saudi intelligence official who claims Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman sent an assassination squad after him in 2018. To unpack this, Mark Mazzetti, New York Times investigative correspondent, weighs in. He explains the significance of the AlJabri's family allegations against the Saudi government. Turning to Lebanon: Beirut professor Mona Fawaz assesses the Lebanese government's response to the Beirut explosion and the political fallout still to come. Then our Hari Sreenivasan talks to Theranos whistleblower Tyler Shultz who explains how the company put lives in grave danger.To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy

Torture is illegal, not just under US law but also according to the Geneva Conventions, the internationally agreed upon rules for how we treat prisoners of war. So when the CIA decided to engage in torture, it needed a legal defense that would protect interrogators form being prosecuted. And for that they turned to a team of White House attorneys.Guests: Katherine Hawkins of the Project on Government Oversight, Mark Mazzetti of The New York Times Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In episode 3 of The Report podcast, Mark Mazzetti joins hosts Kelly McEvers and Daniel J. Jones. Mazzetti tells the story of how James Mitchell and Bruce Jessen, the architects of the CIAs torture program, convinced the CIA leadership to hire them as contractors to torture and interrogate detainees — despite having never run in a single interrogation themselves. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This special episode of Stay Tuned is brought to you by the Amazon Original motion picture, The Report. The film tells the story of Daniel Jones, a Senate staffer who investigated the CIA's secret Detention and Interrogation program implemented in the aftermath of 9/11. Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Mark Mazzetti joins Preet for a wide-ranging discussion that covers his related reporting, interrogation techniques, congressional oversight, and the inherent challenges of the national security news beat. You’ll also hear from Daniel J. Jones himself, who recounts his experience during the production of the film. Enjoy the episode and don’t forget to see The Report in Theaters November 15th and on Prime Video November 29th. Sign up to receive free references and supplemental materials for Stay Tuned episodes, a weekly newsletter, and updates from Preet. As always, tweet your questions to @PreetBharara with hashtag #askpreet, email us at staytuned@cafe.com, or call 699-247-7338 to leave a voicemail.

The testimony is crystal clear. Trump's Russia adviser was "shocked" by the phone call at the center of the controversy. His Ukraine expert said there was "no ambiguity" about the quid pro quo. Attention now shifts to Mick Mulvaney and Rudy Giuliani, who are both implicated at the center of it all. Meanwhile, Trump tries to distance himself from another damning witness. CNN political director David Chalian dives into the week's final set of transcripts with CNN political correspondent Abby Philip. Plus, Pulitzer Prize winner Mark Mazzetti, a New York Times investigative correspondent and a CNN contributor, provides revelatory details about Giuliani's "shadow foreign policy."

As Robert Mueller, the former Special Counsel, gives testimony in Congress about Trump and collusion with Russia, Jim Baker, the former FBI General Counsel joins Christiane Amanpour to discuss what was said and what happens next. Susan Glasser, staff writer at The New Yorker, and Mark Mazzetti, the Washington investigative correspondent at The New York Times, dissect Mueller's testimony. Our Hari Sreenivasen sits down with Richard Clarke, who served as the national coordinator for security and counter-terrorism in both the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations, to talk protecting yourself online in an age of cyber warfare.

First, Chris goes one on one with Mark Mazzetti discussing Robert Mueller's letter to Barr objecting his description of Russia investigation findings. Chris continues that discussion with Phil Mudd and Mike Rogers. Then, Chris brings on Asha Rangappa and Ken Cuccinelli for a session of "Cuomo's Court."To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy

First, Chris goes one on one with Mark Mazzetti discussing Robert Mueller's letter to Barr objecting his description of Russia investigation findings. Chris continues that discussion with Phil Mudd and Mike Rogers. Then, Chris brings on Asha Rangappa and Ken Cuccinelli for a session of "Cuomo's Court."To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy

Yemen: Most of us don't know where that is but we Americans have been participating in a war there since 2015. In a surprise move, the 116th Congress recently put a resolution on President Trump's desk that would LIMIT our participation in that war. In this episode, learn about our recent history in Yemen: Why are we involved? When did our involvement start? What do we want from Yemen? And why is Congress suddenly pursuing a change in policy? In the second half of the episode, Jen admits defeat in a project she's been working on and Husband Joe joins Jen for the thank yous. Please Support Congressional Dish – Quick Links Click here to contribute monthly or a lump sum via PayPal Click here to support Congressional Dish for each episode via Patreon Send Zelle payments to: Donation@congressionaldish.com Send Venmo payments to: @Jennifer-Briney Send Cash App payments to: $CongressionalDish or Donation@congressionaldish.com Use your bank's online bill pay function to mail contributions to: 5753 Hwy 85 North, Number 4576, Crestview, FL 32536 Please make checks payable to Congressional Dish Thank you for supporting truly independent media! Recommended Congressional Dish Episodes CD167: Combating Russia (NDAA 2018) LIVE CD131: Bombing Libya CD102: The World Trade Organization: COOL? Additional Reading Article: Hurricane Michael upgraded to a Category 5 at time of U.S. landfall, NOAA, April 19, 2019. Article: US carries out first airstrikes in Yemen in nearly 3 months by Ryan Browne, CNN, April 1, 2019. Article: The assassination of Jamal Khashoggi by Joyce Lee and Dalton Bennett, The Washington Post, April 1, 2019. Article: Trump revokes Obama rule on reporting drone strike deaths, BBC News, March 7, 2019. Article: US carried out 36 airstrikes in Yemen last year by Andrew Kennedy, The Defense Post, January 7, 2019. Article: See no evil: Pentagon issues blanket denial that it knows anything about detainee abuse in Yemen by Alex Emmons, The Intercept, January 7, 2019. Report: Senate bucks Trump's Saudi approach by Jeff Abramson, Arms Control Association, January/February 2019. Article: Saudi strikes, American bombs, Yemeni suffering by Derek Watkins and Declan Walsh, The New York Times, December 27, 2018. Article: The wooing of Jared Kushner: How the Saudis got a friend in the White House by David D. Kirkpatrick, Ben Hubbard, Mark Landler, and Mark Mazzetti, The New York Times, December 8, 2018. Report: Saudi lobbyists bout 500 nights at Trump's DC hotel after 2016 election by John Bowden, The Hill, December 5, 2018. Article: Hidden toll of US drone strikes in Yemen: Nearly a third of deaths are civilians, not al-Quaida by Maggie Michael and Maad al-Zikry, Military Times, November 14, 2018. Article: Jamal Khashoggi's friends in Washington are in shock by Scott Nover, The Atlantic, October 12, 2018. Report: Catastrophic Hurricane Michael strikes Florida Panhandle, National Weather Service, October 10, 2018. Article: Yemen's President Hadi heads to US for medical treatment, Aljazeera, September 3, 2018. Article: Bab el-Mandeb, an emerging chokepoint for Middle East oil flows by Julian Lee, Bloomberg, July 26, 2018. Report: YEM305: Unknown reported killed, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, March 29, 2018. Article: Yemen: Ex-President Ali Abdullah Saleh killed, Aljazeera, December 10, 2017. Article: In Yemen's secret prisons, UAE tortures and US interrogates by Maggie Michael, AP News, June 22, 2017. Report: Yemen: UAE backs abusive local forces, Human Rights Watch, June 22, 2017. Article: What we know about Saudi Arabia's role in 9/11 by Simon Henderson, Foreign Policy, July 18, 2016. Report: Yemen: Background and U.S. relations by Jeremy M. Sharp, Congressional Research Service, February 11, 2015. Article: How al Qaeda's biggest enemy took over Yemen (and why the US government is unlikely to support them) by Casey L. Coombs and Jeremy Scahill, The Intercept, January 22, 2015. Report: Yemen protests erupt after fuel price doubled, Aljazeera, July 30, 2014. Article: U.S. charges saudi for 2002 oil tanker bombing by MAREX, Feburary 6, 2014. Report: "Between a Drone and Al-Qaeda": The civilian cost of US targeted killings in Yemen, Human Rights Watch, October 22, 2013. Article: Yemen: Opposition leader to be sworn in Saturday by Reuters, The New York Times, December 7, 2011. Article: Yemen's Saleh signs deal to give up power by Marwa Rashad, Reuters, November 23, 2011. Article: Yemen's leader agrees to end 3-decade rule by Kareem Fahim and Laura Kasinof, The New York Times, November 23, 2011. Article: Yemeni president's shock return throws country into confusion by Tom Finn, The Guardian, September 23, 2011. Article: Yemen: President Saleh 'was injured by palace bomb', BBC News, June 23, 2011. Article: Government in Yemen agrees to talk transition by Laura Kasinof, The New York Times, April 26, 2011. Article: Hundreds take to streets in Yemen to protest by Faud Rajeh, The New York Times, February 16, 2011. Article: U.S. plays down tensions with Yemen by Eric Schmitt, The New York Times, December 17, 2010. Article: Cables depict range of Obama diplomacy by David E. Sanger, The New York Times, December 4, 2010. Article: Yemen's drive on Al Qaeda faces international skepticism by Mona El-Naggar and Robert F. Worth, The New York Times, November 3, 2010. Article: Op-Ed: The Yemeni state against its own people by Subir Ghosh, Digital Journal, October 11, 2010. Roundtable Summary: Reform priorities for Yemen and the 10-Point agenda, MENAP, Chatham House, February 18, 2010. Article: As nations meet, Clinton urges Yemen to prove itself worthy of aid by Mark Landler, The New York Times, January 27, 2010. Article: After failed attack, Britain turns focus to Yemen by John F. Burns, The New York Times, January 1, 2010. Resources Congress.gov: S.J.Res.54 - A joint resolution to direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities in the Republic of Yemen that have not been authorized by Congress Govtrack: S.J.Res. 7: A joint resolution to direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities in the Republic of Yemen that have not been authorized by ... Congress IMF.org: Gulf Cooperation Council Countries Middle East Institute: Addressing the Crisis in Yemen: Strategies and Solutions Open Knowledge Repository: Leveraging Fuel Subsidy Reform for Transition in Yemen US Dept. of Treasury: International Monetary Fund Sound Clip Sources House Proceedings: Yemen Resolution Debate, 116th Congress, April 4, 2019. Congressional Record Sound Clips: 1:06:30 Rep. Michael McCaul (TX):This resolution stretches the definition of war powers hostilities to cover non-U.S. military operations by other countries. Specifically, it reinterprets U.S. support to these countries as ‘‘engagement in hostilities.’’ This radical reinterpretation has implications far beyond Saudi Arabia. This precedent will empower any single Member to use privileged war powers procedures to force congressional referendums that could disrupt U.S. security cooperation agreements with more than 100 countries around the world. 1:14:30 Rep. Barbara Lee (CA): Yes, Madam Speaker, I voted against that 2001 resolution, because I knew it was open-ended and would set the stage for endless wars. It was a blank check. We see this once again today in Yemen. We must repeal this 2001 blank check for endless wars. Over the past 18 years, we have seen the executive branch use this AUMF time and time again. It is a blank check to wage war without congressional oversight. 1:21:30 Rep. Ro Khanna (CA): My motivation for this bill is very simple. I don’t want to see 14 million Yemenis starve to death. That is what Martin Griffith had said at the U.N., that if the Saudis don’t stop their blockade and let food and medicine in, within 6 months we will see one of the greatest humanitarian crises in the world. Senate Floor Proceedings: Yemen Resolution Debate, 115th Congress, 2nd Session, December 12, 2018. Congressional Record Pt. 1 Congressional Record Pt. 2 Sound Clips: 7:09:00 Sen. Bernie Sanders (VT): Finally, an issue that has long been a concern to many of us—conservatives and progressives—is that this war has not been authorized by Congress and is therefore unconstitutional. Article I of the Constitution clearly states it is Congress, not the President, that has the power to send our men and women into war—Congress, not the President. The Framers of our Constitution, the Founders of this country, gave the power to declare war to Congress—the branch most accountable to the people—not to the President, who is often isolated from the reality of what is taking place in our communities. The truth is—and Democratic and Republican Presidents are responsible, and Democratic and Republican Congresses are responsible—that for many years, Congress has not exercised its constitutional responsibility over whether our young men and women go off to war. I think there is growing sentiment all over this country from Republicans, from Democrats, from Independents, from progressives, and from conservatives that right now, Congress cannot continue to abdicate its constitutional responsibility. 7:14:45 Sen. Bob Corker (TN): I have concerns about what this may mean as we set a precedent about refueling and intelligence activities being considered hostilities. I am concerned about that. I think the Senator knows we have operations throughout Northern Africa, where we are working with other governments on intelligence to counter terrorism. We are doing refueling activists in Northern Africa now, and it concerns me—he knows I have concerns—that if we use this vehicle, then we may have 30 or 40 instances where this vehicle might be used to do something that really should not be dealt with by the War Powers Act. 7:49:06 Sen. Todd Young (IN): We don’t have much leverage over the Houthis. We have significant leverage over the Saudis, and we must utilize it. 7:58:30 Sen. Jim Inhofe (OK): The Sanders-Lee resolution is, I think, fundamentally flawed because it presumes we are engaged in military action in Yemen. We are not. We are not engaged in military action in Yemen. There has been a lot of discussion about refueling. I don’t see any stretch of the definition that would say that falls into that category. 8:01:00 Sen. Jim Inhofe (OK): Saudi Arabia is an important Middle Eastern partner. Its stability is vital to the security of our regional allies and our partners, including Israel, and Saudi Arabia is essential to countering Iran. We all know that. We know how tenuous things are in that part of the world. We don’t have that many friends. We can’t afford to lose any of them. 8:04:30 Sen. Chris Murphy (CT): It is important to note some-thing that we take for granted in the region—this now long-term detente that has existed between the Gulf States and Israel, which did not used to be something you could rely on. In fact, one of the most serious foreign policy debates this Senate ever had was on the sale of AWACS to Saudi Arabia back in the 1980s. The objection then was that by empowering Saudi Arabia, you were hurting Israel and Israeli security. No one would make that argument today because Saudi Arabia has been a good partner in trying to figure out a way to calm the tensions in the region and, of course, provide some balance in the region, with the Iranian regime on the other side continuing to this day to use inflammatory and dangerous rhetoric about the future of Israel. So this is an important partnership, and I have no interest in blowing it up. I have no interest in walking away from it. But you are not obligated to follow your friend into every misadventure they propose. When your buddy jumps into a pool of man-eating sharks, you don’t have to jump with him. There is a point at which you say enough is enough. 8:06:00 Sen. Chris Murphy (CT): Muhammad bin Salman, who is the Crown Prince, who is the effective leader of the country, has steered the foreign policy of Saudi Arabia off the rails. Folks seem to have noticed when he started rounding up his political opponents and killing one of them in a consulate in Turkey, but this has been ongoing. Look back to the kidnapping of the Lebanese Prime Minister, the blockade of Qatar without any heads-up to the United States, the wholesale imprisonment of hundreds of his family members until there was a payoff, the size of which was big enough to let some of them out. This is a foreign policy that is no longer in the best interests of the United States and cannot be papered over by a handful of domestic policy reforms that are, in fact, intended to try to distract us from the aggressive nature of the Saudis’ foreign policy in the region. 8:08:15 Sen. Chris Murphy (CT): I am appreciative that many of my colleagues are willing to stand up for this resolution today to end the war in Yemen. I wish that it weren’t because of the death of one journalist, because there have been tens of thousands who have died inside Yemen, and their lives are just as important and just as worthwhile as Jamal Khashoggi’s life was, as tragic as that was. But there is a connection between the two, which is why I have actually argued that this resolution is in some way, shape, or form a response to the death of Jamal Khashoggi, for those who are primarily concerned with that atrocity. Here is how I link the two: What the Saudis did for 2 weeks was lie to us, right? In the most bald-faced way possible. They told us that Jamal Khashoggi had left the consulate, that he had gotten out of there alive, that they didn’t know what happened, when of course they knew the entire time that they had killed him, that they had murdered him, that they had dismembered his body. We now know that the Crown Prince had multiple contacts all throughout the day with the team of operatives who did it. Yet they thought we were so dumb or so weak— or some combination of the two—that they could just lie to us about it. That was an eye-opener for a lot of people here who were long-term supporters of the Saudi relationship because they knew that we had trouble. They knew that sometimes our interests didn’t align, but they thought that the most important thing allies did with each other was tell the truth, especially when the truth was so easy to discover outside of your bilateral relationship. Then, all of a sudden, the Saudis lied to us for 2 weeks—for 2 weeks—and then finally came around to telling the truth because everybody knew that they weren’t. That made a lot of people here think, well, wait a second—maybe the Saudis haven’t been telling us the truth about what they have been doing inside Yemen. A lot of my friends have been supporting the bombing campaign in Yemen. Why? Because the Saudis said: We are hitting these civilians by accident. Those water treatment plants that have been blowing up—we didn’t mean to hit them. That cholera treatment facility inside the humanitarian compound—that was just a bomb that went into the wrong place, or, we thought there were some bad guys in it. It didn’t turn out that there were. It turns out the Saudis weren’t telling us the truth about what they were doing in Yemen. They were hitting civilian targets on purpose. They did have an intentional campaign of trying to create misery. I am not saying that every single one of those school buses or those hospitals or those churches or weddings was an attempt to kill civilians and civilians only, but we have been in that targeting center long enough to know—to know—that they have known for a long time what they have been doing: hitting a lot of people who have nothing to do with the attacks against Saudi Arabia. Maybe if the Saudis were willing to lie to us about what happened to Jamal Khashoggi, they haven’t been straight with us as to what is happening inside Yemen, because if the United States is being used to intentionally hit civilians, then we are complicit in war crimes. And I hate to tell my colleagues that is essentially what the United Nations found in their most recent report on the Saudi bombing campaign. They were careful about their words, but they came to the conclusion that it was likely that the Saudi conduct inside Yemen would amount to war crimes under international law. If it is likely that our ally is perpetuating war crimes in Yemen, then we cannot be a part of that. The United States cannot be part of a bombing campaign that may be—probably is— intentionally making life miserable for the people inside of that country. 8:14:00 Sen. Chris Murphy (CT): There is no relationship in which we are the junior partner—certainly not with Saudi Arabia. If Saudi Arabia can push us around like they have over the course of the last several years and in particular the last several months, that sends a signal to lots of other countries that they can do the same thing—that they can murder U.S. residents and suffer almost no consequences; that they can bomb civilians with our munitions and suffer no consequences. This is not just a message about the Saudi relationship; this is a message about how the United States is going to interact with lots of other junior partners around the world as well. Saudi Arabia needs us a lot more than we need them, and we need to remind folks of that over and over again. Spare me this nonsense that they are going to go start buying Russian jets or Chinese military hardware. If you think those countries can protect you better than the United States, take a chance. You think the Saudis are really going to stop selling oil to the United States? You think they are going to walk away from their primary bread winner just because we say that we don’t want to be engaged in this particular military campaign? I am willing to take that chance. We are the major partner in this relationship, and it is time that we start acting like it. If this administration isn’t going to act like it, then this Congress has to act like it. 8:44:15 Sen. Mike Lee (UT): Many of my colleagues will argue—in fact some of them have argued just within the last few minutes—that we are somehow not involved in a war in Yemen. My distinguished friend and colleague, the Senator from Oklahoma, came to the floor a little while ago, and he said that we are not engaged in direct military action in Yemen. Let’s peel that back for a minute. Let’s figure out what that means. I am not sure what the distinction between direct and indirect is here. Maybe in a very technical sense—or under a definition of warfare or military action that has long since been rendered out- dated—we are not involved in that, but we are involved in a war. We are co-belligerents. The minute we start identifying targets or, as Secretary James Mattis put it about a year ago, in December 2017, the minute we are involved in the decisions involving making sure that they know the right stuff to hit, that is involvement in a war, and that is pretty direct. The minute we send up U.S. military aircraft to provide midair refueling assistance for Saudi jets en route to bombing missions, to combat missions on the ground in Yemen, that is our direct involvement in war. 8:48:00 Sen. Mike Lee (UT): Increasingly these days, our wars are high-tech. Very often, our wars involve cyber activities. They involve reconnaissance, surveillance, target selection, midair refueling. It is hard—in many cases, impossible—to fight a war without those things. That is what war is. Many of my colleagues, in arguing that we are not involved in hostilities, rely on a memorandum that is internal within the executive branch of the U.S. Government that was issued in 1976 that provides a very narrow, unreasonably slim definition of the word ‘‘hostilities.’’ It defines ‘‘hostilities’’ in a way that might have been relevant, that might have been accurate, perhaps, in the mid-19th century, but we no longer live in a world in which you have a war as understood by two competing countries that are lined up on opposite sides of a battlefield and engaged in direct exchanges of fire, one against another, at relatively short range. War encompasses a lot more than that. War certainly encompasses midair refueling, target selection, surveillance, and reconnaissance of the sort we are undertaking in Yemen. Moreover, separate and apart from this very narrow, unreasonably slim definition of ‘‘hostilities’’ as deter- mined by this internal executive branch document from 1976 that contains the outdated definition, we our- selves, under the War Powers Act, don’t have to technically be involved in hostilities. It is triggered so long as we ourselves are sufficiently involved with the armed forces of another nation when those armed forces of another nation are themselves involved in hostilities. I am speaking, of course, in reference to the War Powers Act’s pro- visions codified at 50 USC 1547(c). For our purposes here, it is important to keep in mind what that provisions reads: ‘‘For purposes of this chapter [under the War Powers Act], the term ‘introduction of United States Armed Forces’ includes the assignment of members of such Armed Forces to command, coordinate, participate in the movement of, or accompany the regular or irregular military forces of any foreign country or government when such military forces are engaged, or there exists an imminent threat that such forces will become engaged, in hostilities.’’ In what sense, on what level, on what planet are we not involved in the commanding, in the coordination, in the participation, in the movement of or in the accompaniment of the armed forces of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia-led coalition in the civil war in Yemen? 9:57:15 Sen. Richard Blumenthal (CT): In March of this year, I led a letter to the Department of Defense with my colleague Senator JACK REED of Rhode Island, along with many of our colleagues on the Senate Armed Services Committee, stating our concern regarding U.S. support for Saudi military operations against the Houthis in Yemen and asking about the DOD’s involvement, apparently without appropriate notification of Congress, and its agreements to provide refueling sup- port to the Saudis and the Saudi coalition partners. We were concerned that the DOD had not appropriately documented reimbursements for aerial re- fueling support provided by the United States. Eight months later—just days ago— the Department of Defense responded to our letter and admitted that it has failed to appropriately notify Congress of its support agreements; it has failed to adequately charge Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates for fuel and refueling assistance. That admission 8 months after our inquiry is a damning indictment. These errors in accounting mean that the United States was directly funding the Saudi war in Yemen. It has been doing it since March of 2015. Video: Trump: Khashoggi case will not stop $110bn US-Saudi arms trade, The Guardian, October 12, 2018. Donald Trump: I would not be in favor of stopping from spending $110 billion, which is an all-time record, and letting Russia have that money, and letting China have that money. Because all their going to do is say, that's okay, we don't have to buy it from Boeing, we don't have to buy it from Lockheed, we don't have to buy it from Ratheon and all these great companies. We'll buy it from Russia and we'll buy it from China. So what good does that do us? Hearing: U.S. Policy Toward Middle East, House Foreign Affairs Committee, C-SPAN, April 18, 2018. Witnesses: David Satterfield: Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Wess Mitchell: Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Sound Clips: 18:00 David Satterfield: We all agree, as does the Congress, that the humanitarian crisis in Yemen is unacceptable. Last month, the governments of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates provided $1 billion to Yemen's humanitarian response appeal, and this complements the US government pledge of $87 million and more than $854 million contributed since beginning of fiscal year 2017. 19:45 Wess Mitchell: Turkey is a 66 year member of the NATO alliance and member of the defeat ISIS coalition. It has suffered more casualties from terrorism than any other ally and hosts 3.5 million Syrian refugees. It supports the coalition through the use of Incirlik air base through its commitment of Turkish military forces against Isis on the ground in (Dibick? al-Bab?) And through close intelligence cooperation with the United States and other allies. Turkey has publicly committed to a political resolution in Syria that accords with UN Security Council. Resolution 2254. Turkey has a vested strategic interest in checking the spread of Iranian influence and in having a safe and stable border with Syria. Despite these shared interests, Turkey lately has increased its engagement with Russia and Iran. Ankara has sought to assure us that it sees this cooperation as a necessary stepping stone towards progress in the Geneva process, but the ease with which Turkey brokered arrangements with the Russian military to facilitate the launch of its Operation Olive Branch in Afrin district, arrangements to which America was not privy, is gravely concerning. Ankara claims to have agreed to purchase, to, to purchase the Russian S 400 missile system, which could potentially lead to sanctions under section 231 of CAATSA and adversely impact Turkey's participation in the F-35 program. It is in the American national interest to see Turkey remains strategically and politically aligned with the west. Hearing: U.S. Policy Toward Yemen, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, C-SPAN, April 17, 2018. Witnesses: Robert Jenkins: Deputy Assistant Administrator at USAID Bureau for Democracy, Conflict, & Humanitarian Assistance David Satterfield: Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Robert Karem: Assistant Defense Secretary for International Security Affairs Nominee and former Middle East Adviser to Vice President Cheney Sound Clips: 9:30 Chairman Bob Corker (TN): Well, Yemen has always faced significant socioeconomic challenges. A civil war, which began with the Houthis armed takeover of much of the country in 2014 and their overthrow of Yemen's legitimate government in January 2015, has plunged the country into humanitarian crisis. 17:25 Chairman Bob Corker (TN): Our first witness is acting assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern Affairs, Ambassador David Satterfield. Ambassador Satterfield is one of the most distinguished, one of our most distinguished diplomats. He most recently served as director general, the multinational force and observers in the Sinai peninsula and previously served as US Abassador to Lebanon. 17:45 Chairman Bob Corker (TN): Our second witness is Robert Jenkins, who serves as the Deputy Assistant Administrator for USA ID Bureau for Democracy, conflict and humanitarian assistance. Mr. Jenkins, recently mark 20 years at USAID and previously served as the Director of Office of Transition Initiatives. 18:15 Chairman Bob Corker (TN): Our third witness is Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, Robert Kerem. Prior to his Senate confirmation last year, Mr. Karem served as National Security of Staff of Vice President Cheney and then as National Security Advisor to the House, majority leader's Eric Cantor and Kevin McCarthy. 20:15 David Satterfield: US military support serves a clear and strategic purpose to reinforce Saudi and Mrid self defense in the face of intensifying Houthi and Iranian enabled threats and to expand the capability of our Gulf partners to push back against Iran's regionally destabilizing actions. This support in turn provides the United States access and influence to help press for a political solution to the conflict. Should we curtail US military support? The Saudis could well pursue defense relationships with countries that have no interest in either ending the humanitarian crisis, minimizing civilian casualties or assisting and facilitating progress towards a political solution. Critical US access to support for our own campaign against violent extremists could be placed in jeopardy. 30:00 Robert Karem: Conflict in Yemen affects regional security across the Middle East, uh, and threatens US national security interests, including the free flow of commerce and the Red Sea. Just this month, the Houthi, his attack to Saudi oil tanker and the Red Sea threatening commercial shipping and freedom of navigation and the world's fourth busiest maritime choke point, the Bab el Mandeb. 32:00 Robert Karem: The Defense Department is currently engaged in two lines of effort in Yemen. Our first line of effort and our priority is the fight against al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and ISIS in Yemen, two terrorist organizations that directly threaten the United States, our allies and our partners. To combat AQIP, AQAP, and ISIS, US forces in coordination with the UN recognized government of Yemen are supporting our regional key counter terrorism partners in ongoing operations to disrupt and degrade their ability to coordinate, plot and recruit for external terrorist operations. Additionally, US military forces are conducting airstrikes against AQAP and ISIS in Yemen pursuant to the 2001 a authorization for the use of military force to disrupt and destroy terrorist network networks. Our second line of effort is the provision of limited noncombat support to the Saudi led coalition in support of the UN recognized government of Yemen. The support began in 2015 under President Obama and in 2017 president Trump reaffirmed America's commitment to our partners in these efforts. Fewer than 50 US military personnel work in Saudi Arabia with the Saudi led coalition advising and assisting with the defense of Saudi territory, sharing intelligence and providing logistical support, including aerial refueling. 35:45 Sen. Ben Cardin (MD): Mr. Karem. I'm gonna Start with you. Um, in regards to the US military assistance that we give to the kingdom, you said that is to embolden their capacity and to reduce noncombatant casualties. Last March, the CENTCOM commander General Votel stated that the United States government does not track the end results of the coalition missions. It refills and supports with targeting assistance. So my question to you is, how do you determine that we are effectively reducing the non combatant casualties if we don't in fact track the results of the kingdoms military actions? Robert Karem: Senator, thank you. Um, it's correct that we do not monitor and track all of the Saudi aircraft, um, uh, a loft over Yemen. Uh, we have limited personnel and assets in order to do that. Uh, and CENTCOM's focus is obviously been on our own operations in Afghanistan, in Iraq and in Syria. Sen. Ben Cardin (MD): I understand that, but my question is, our stated mission is to reduce noncombat and casualties. If we don't track, how do we determine that? Robert Karem: So I think one of our stated missions is precisely that. Um, there are multiple ways that I think we do have insight into, uh, Saudi, uh, targeting behavior. Um, we have helped them with their processes. Um, we have seen them implement a no strike list. Um, and we have seen their, their, their uh, capabilities, uh, improved. So the information is based upon what the Saudis tell you, how they're conducting the mission rather than the after impact of the mission. I think our military officers who are resident in Saudi Arabia are seeing how the Saudis approach, uh, this, this effort that took getting effort. Sen. Ben Cardin (MD): But you know, obviously the proof is in the results and we don't know whether the results are, there are not fair statement. Robert Karem: I think we do see a difference in how the Saudis have operated in Yemen, how they operate. Sen. Ben Cardin (MD): I understand how they operate but we don't know whether in fact that's been effective. The United Nations Security Council panel of experts on Yemen concluded in recent reports that the cumulative effect of these airstrikes on civilian infrastructure demonstrates that even with precaution, cautionary measures were taken, they were largely inadequate and ineffective. Do you have any information that disagrees with that assessment? Robert Karem: Senator, I think the assessment of, uh, our central command is that the Saudi, uh, and Emirati targeting efforts, uh, have improved, um, uh, with the steps that they've taken. We do not have perfect understanding because we're not using all of our assets to monitor their aircraft, but we do get reporting from the ground on what taking place inside Yemen. 40:15 Sen. Rand Paul (KY): Ambassador Satterfield. I guess some people when they think about our strategy might question the idea of our strategy. You know, if your son was shooting off his pistol in the back yard and doing it indiscriminately and endangering the neighbors, would you give hmi more bullets or less? And we see the Saudis acting in an indiscriminate manner. They've bombed a funeral processions, they've killed a lot of civilians. And so our strategy is to give them more bombs, not less. And we say, well, if we don't give him the bomb, somebody else will. And that's sort of this global strategy, uh, that many in the bipartisan foreign policy consensus have. We have to, we have to always be involved. We always have to provide weapons or someone else will and they'll act even worse. But there's a, I guess a lot of examples that doesn't seem to be improving their behavior. Um, you could argue it's marginally better since we've been giving them more weapons, but it seems the opposite of logic. You would think you would give people less where you might withhold aid or withhold a assistance to the Saudis to get them to behave. But we do sort of the opposite. We give them more aid. What would your response be to that? David Satterfield: Senator, when I noted in my remarks that progress had been made on this issue of targeting, minimizing or mitigating civilian casualties, that phrase was carefully chosen into elaborate further on, uh, my colleagues remarks, uh, Robert Karem. We do work with the Saudis and have, particularly over the last six to nine months worked intensively on the types of munitions the Saudis are using, how they're using, how to discriminate target sets, how to assure through increased loiter time by aircraft that the targets sought are indeed clear of collateral or civilian damage. This is new. This is not the type of interaction… Sen. Rand Paul (KY): And yet the overall situation in Yemen is a, is a disaster. David Satterfield: The overall situation is extremely bad. Senator. Sen. Rand Paul (KY): I guess that's really my question. We had to rethink...And I think from a common sense point of view, a lot of people would question giving people who misbehave more weapons instead of giving them less on another question, which I think is a broad question about, you know, what we're doing in the Middle East in general. Um, you admitted that there's not really a military solution in Yemen. Most people say it's going to be a political solution. The Houthis will still remain. We're not going to have Hiroshima. We're not going to have unconditional surrender and the good guys win and the bad guys are vanquished. Same with Syria. Most people have said for years, both the Obama administration and this administration, probably even the Bush administration, the situation will probably be a political solution. They will no longer, it's not going to be complete vanquished meant of the enemy. We're also saying that in Afghanistan, and I guess my point as I think about that is I think about the recruiter at the station in Omaha, Nebraska, trying to get somebody to sign up for the military and saying, please join. We're going to send you to three different wars where there is no military solution. We're hoping to make it maybe a little bit better. I think back to Vietnam. Oh, we're going to take one more village. If we take one more village, they're going to negotiate and we get a little better negotiation. I just can't see sending our young men and women to die for that for one more village. You know the Taliban 40% in Afghanistan. Where are we going to get when they get to 30% don't negotiate and when we it, it'll be, it'll have been worth it for the people who have to go in and die and take those villages. I don't think it's one more life. I don't think it's worth one more life. The war in Yemen is not hard. We talk all about the Iranians have launched hundreds of missiles. Well, yeah, and the Saudis have launched 16,000 attacks. Who started it? It's a little bit murky back and forth. The, the Houthis may have started taking over their government, but that was a civil war. Now we're involved in who are the good guys of the Saudis, the good guys or the others, the bad guys. Thousands of civilians are dying. 17 million people live on the edge of starvation. I think we need to rethink whether or not military intervention supplying the Saudis with weapons, whether all of this makes any sense at all or whether we've made the situation worse. I mean, humanitarian crisis, we're talking about, oh, we're going to give my, the Saudis are giving them money and I'm like, okay, so we dropped, we bomb the crap out of them in this audience. Give them $1 billion. Maybe we could bomb last maybe part of the humanitarian answers, supplying less weapons to a war. There's a huge arms race going on. Why do the Iranians do what they do? They're evil. Or maybe they're responding to the Saudis who responded first, who started it? Where did the arms race start? But we sell $300 billion a weapons to Saudi Arabia. What are the Iranians going to do? They react. It's action and reaction throughout the Middle East. And so we paint the Iranians as the, you know, these evil monsters. And we just have to correct evil monster. But the world's a much more complicated place back and forth. And I, all I would ask is that we try to get outside our mindset that we, uh, what we're doing is working because I think what we're doing hasn't worked, and we've made a lot of things worse. And we're partly responsible for the humanitarian crisis in Yemen.  48:30 David Satterfield: The political picture on the ground in Yemen has changed radically with the death, the killing of a Ali Abdullah Saleh, uh, with the fragmentation of the General People's Congress. All of that, while tragic in many of its dimensions, has provided a certain reshuffling of the deck that may, we hope, allow the United Nations to be more effective in its efforts. 1:05:45 Sen. Todd Young (IN): Approximately how many people, Mr. Jenkins require humanitarian assistance in Yemen? David Jenkins: 22 million people. Sen. Todd Young (IN): What percent of the population is that? David Jenkins: Approximately 75% was the number of people requiring humanitarian assistance increase from last year. It increased by our, we're estimating 3.5 million people. Sen. Todd Young (IN): And how much has it increased? David Jenkins: About 3.5 million people. Sen. Todd Young (IN): Okay. How many are severely food insecure? David Jenkins: 17.8 million. Sen. Todd Young (IN): How many children are severely malnourished? David Jenkins: 460,000 Sen. Todd Young (IN): How many people lack access to clean water and working toilets? David Jenkins: We estimate it to be around 16 million people. Sen. Todd Young (IN): Does Yemen face the largest cholera outbreak in the world? David Jenkins: It does. Sen. Todd Young (IN): How many cholera cases have we seen in Yemen? David Jenkins: A suspected over a 1 million cases. Sen. Todd Young (IN): And how many lives has that cholera outbreak claim? David Jenkins: Almost 2100. 1:46:00 Robert Jenkins: I do know that the vast majority of people within that, the majority of people in need, and that 22 million number live in the northern part of the country that are accessible best and easiest by Hodeidah port, there is no way to take Hodeidah out of the equation and get anywhere near the amount of humanitarian and more importantly, even commercial goods into the country. Hearing: Violence in Yemen, House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Middle East and North America, C-SPAN, April 14, 2015. Witnesses: Gerald Feierstein: Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. Former Ambassador to Yemen (2010-2013) Sound Clips: 1:45 Rep. Illeana Ros-Lehtinen (FL): On September 10th of last year, President Obama announced to the American public his plan to degrade and destroy the terrorist group ISIL. While making his case for America's role in the fight against ISIL, the president highlighted our strategy in Yemen and held it up as a model of success to be emulated in the fight against ISIL. Yet about a week later, the Iran backed Houthis seized control of the capital and the government. Despite this, the administration continued to hail our counter-terror operations in Yemen as a model for success, even though we effectively had no partner on the ground since President Hadi was forced to flee. But perhaps even more astonishingly in what can only be described as an alarmingly tone deaf and short sighted, when Press Secretary Ernest was asked at a press briefing if this model was still successful after the Yemeni central government collapsed and the US withdrew all of our personnel including our special forces, he said yes, despite all indications pointing to the contrary. So where do we stand now? That's the important question. President Hadi was forced to flee. Saudi Arabia has led a coalition of over 10 Arab nations and Operation Decisive Storm, which so far has consisted of airstrikes only, but very well could include ground forces in the near future. 4:45 Rep. Illeana Ros-Lehtinen (FL): Iran has reportedly dispatched a naval destroyer near Yemen in a game of chicken over one of the most important shipping routes in the Gulf of Aden. This area is a gateway between Europe and the Middle East and ran was not be allowed to escalate any tensions nor attempt to disrupt the shipping lanes. 13:30 Rep. David Cicilline (NJ): I think it's safe to say that the quick deterioration of the situation in Yemen took many people here in Washington by surprise. For many years, Yemen was held up as an example of counter-terrorism cooperation and it looked as if a political agreement might be achieved in the aftermath of the Arab spring. The United States poured approximately $900 million in foreign aid to Yemen since the transition in 2011 to support counter-terrorism, political reconciliation, the economy and humanitarian aid. Now we face a vastly different landscape and have to revise our assumptions and expectations. Furthermore, we risk being drawn deeply into another Iranian backed armed conflict in the Middle East. 17:30 Rep. Ted Deutch (FL): Following the deposition of Yemen's longtime autocratic Saleh in 2011, the US supported an inclusive transition process. We had national dialogue aimed at rebuilding the country's political and governmental institutions and bridging gaps between groups that have had a long history of conflict. Yemen's first newly elected leader, President Hadi made clear his intentions to cooperate closely with the United States. 18:00 Rep. Ted Deutch (FL): Yemen, the poorest country on the peninsula, needed support from the international community. The United States has long viewed Yemen as a safe haven for all Qaeda terrorists, and there was alarming potential for recruitment by terrorist groups given the dire economic conditions that they faced. In fact, the US Department of Homeland Security considers al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the affiliate, most likely the al Qaeda affiliate, most likely to attempt transnational attacks against the United States. 18:30 Rep. Ted Deutch (FL): While the national dialogue was initially viewed as successful, the process concluded in 2014 with several key reforms still not completed, including the drafting of the new constitution. The Hadi government had continued to face deep opposition from Yemen's northern tribes, mainly the Shiite Iranian backed Houthi rebels, over the past year. The Houthis, in coordination with tribes and military units still loyal to Saleh, began increasing their territorial control, eventually moving in to Sanaa. Saleh had long been thought to have used his existing relationship to undermine the Hadi government. Houthis are well trained, well funded, and experienced fighters, having fought the Yemeni government and Saudi Arabia in 2009. 23:15 Gerald Feierstein: I greatly appreciate this opportunity to come before you today to review recent developments in Yemen and the efforts that the United States is undertaking to support the government of Yemen under president Rabu Mansour Hadi and the Saudi led coalition of Operation Decisive Storm, that is aimed at restoring the legitimate government and restarting the negotiations to find peaceful political solutions to Yemen's internal conflict. 26:45 Gerald Feierstein: To the best of our understanding, the Houthis are not controlled directly by Iran. However, we have seen in recent years, significant growth and expansion of Iranian engagement with the Houthis. We believe that Iran sees opportunities with the Houthis to expand its influence in Yemen and threatened Saudi and Gulf Arab interests. Iran provides financial support, weapons training, and intelligence of the Houthis and the weeks and months since the Houthis entered Sanaa and forced the legitimate government first to resign and ultimately to flee from the capitol, we have seen a significant expansion of Iranian involvement in Yemen's domestic affairs. 27:30 Gerald Feierstein: We are also particularly concerned about the ongoing destabilizing role played by former President Saleh, who since his removal from power in 2011 has actively plotted to undermine President Hadi and the political transition process. Despite UN sanctions and international condemnation of his actions, Saleh continues to be one of the primary sources of the chaos in Yemen. We have been working with our Gulf partners and the international community to isolate him and prevent the continuation of his efforts to undermine the peaceful transition. Success in that effort will go a long way to helping Yemen return to a credible political transition process. 42:00 Gerald Feierstein: From our perspective, I would say that that Yemen is a unique situation for the Saudis. This is on their border. It represents a threat in a way that no other situation would represent. 52:30 Gerald Feierstein: I mean, obviously our hope would be that if we can get the situation stabilized and get the political process going again, that we would be able to return and that we would be able to continue implementing the kinds of programs that we were trying to achieve that are aimed at economic growth and development as well as supporting a democratic governance and the opportunity to try to build solid political foundations for the society. At this particular moment, we can't do that, but it's hard to predict where we might be in six months or nine months from now. 1:10:00 Gerald Feierstein: When the political crisis came in Yemen in 2011, AQAP was able to take advantage of that and increase its territorial control, to the extent that they were actually declaring areas of the country to be an Islamic caliphate, not unlike what we see with ISIL in Iraq and Syria these days. Because of our cooperation, primarily our cooperation with the Yemeni security forces, uh, we were able to, uh, to defeat that, uh, at a significant loss of a life for AQAP. Uh, as a result of that, they changed their tactics. They went back to being a more traditional terrorist organization. They were able to attack locations inside of, uh, inside of Sanaa and and elsewhere. But the fact of the matter is that, uh, that we, uh, were achieving a progress in our ability to pressure them, uh, and, uh, to keep them on the defensive as opposed to giving them lots of time. And remember in 2009 in 2010, uh, we saw AQAP mount a fairly serious efforts - the underwear bomber and then also the cassette tape effort to attack the United States. After 2010, uh, they were not able to do that, uh, despite the fact that their intent was still as clear and as strong as it was before. And so a while AQAP was by no means defeated and continue to be a major threat to security here in the United States as well as in Yemen and elsewhere around the world, nevertheless, I think that it was legitimate to say that we had achieved some success in the fight against AQAP. Unfortunately what we're seeing now because of the change in the situation again, inside of Yemen, uh, is that we're losing some of the gains that we were able to make, uh, during that period of 2012 to 2014. That's why it's so important that we, uh, have, uh, the ability to get the political negotiation started again, so that we can re-establish legitimate government inside of Sanaa that will cooperate with us once again in this fight against violent extremist organizations. 1:16:45 Rep. Ted Yoho (FL): How can we be that far off? And I know you explained the counter-terrorism portion, but yet to have a country taken over while we're sitting there working with them and this happens. I feel, you know, it just kinda happened overnight the way our embassy got run out of town and just says, you have to leave. Your marines cannot take their weapons with them. I, I just, I don't understand how that happens or how we can be that disconnected. Um, what are your thoughts on that? Gerald Feierstein: You know, it was very, it was very frustrating. Again, I think that, if you go back to where we were a year ago, the successful conclusion of the National Dialogue Conference, which was really the last major hurdle and completion of the GCC initiative, Houthis participated in that. They participated in the constitutional drafting exercise, which was completed successfully. Uh, and so we were in the process of moving through all of the requirements of the GCC initiative that would allow us to complete successfully the political transition. I think there were a combination of things. One, that there was a view on the part of the Houthis that they were not getting everything that they wanted. They were provoked, in our view, by Ali Abdullah Saleh, who never stopped plotting from the very first day after he signed the agreement on the GCC initiative. He never stopped plotting to try to block the political transition, and there was, to be frank, there was a weakness in the government and an inability on the part of the government to really build the kind of alliances and coalition that would allow them to sustain popular support and to bring this to a successful conclusion. And so I think that all through this period there was a sense that we were moving forward and that we believed that we could succeed in implementing this peaceful transition. And yet we always knew that on the margins there were threats and there were risks, and unfortunately we got to a point where the Houthis and Ali Abdullah Saleh, my personal view is that they recognized that they had reached the last possible moment, where they could obstruct the peaceful political transition that was bad for them because it would mean that they wouldn't get everything that they wanted, and so they saw that time was running out for them, and they decided to act. And unfortunately, the government was unable to stop them. Hearing: Targeted Killing of Terrorist Suspects Overseas, Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Constitution, Civil Rights, and Human Rights, C-SPAN, April 23, 2013. Sound Clips: 44:30 Farea al-Muslimi: My name as you mentioned, is Farea al-Muslimi, and I am from Wessab, a remote village mountain in Yemen. I spent a year living with an American family and attended an American high school. That was one of the best years of my life. I learned about American culture, managed the school basketball team and participated in trick or treat and Halloween. But the most exceptional was coming to know someone who ended up being like a father to me. He was a member of the U S Air Force and most of my year was spent with him and his family. He came to the mosque with me and I went to church with him and he became my best friend in America. I went to the U.S. as an ambassador for Yemen and I came back to Yemen as an ambassador of the U.S. I could never have imagined that the same hand that changed my life and took it from miserable to a promising one would also drone my village. My understanding is that a man named Hamid al-Radmi was the target of the drone strike. Many people in Wessab know al-Radmi, and the Yemeni government could easily have found and arrested him. al-Radmi was well known to government officials and even local government could have captured him if the U.S. had told them to do so. In the past, what Wessab's villagers knew of the U.S. was based on my stories about my wonderful experiences had. The friendships and values I experienced and described to the villagers helped them understand the America that I know and that I love. Now, however, when they think of America, they think of the terror they feel from the drones that hover over their heads ready to fire missiles at any time. What violent militants had previously failed to achieve one drone strike accomplished in an instant. 1:17:30 Farea al-Muslimi: I think the main difference between this is it adds into Al Qaeda propaganda of that Yemen is a war with the United States. The problem of Al Qaeda, if you look to the war in Yemen, it's a war of mistakes. The less mistake you make, the more you win, and the drones have simply made more mistakes than AQAP has ever done in the matter of civilians. News Report: Untold Stories of the underwear bomber: what really happened, ABC News 7 Detroit, September 27, 2012. Part 1 Part 2 Hearing: U.S. Policy Toward Yemen, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, C-SPAN, July 19, 2011. Witnesses: Janet Sanderson: Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Daniel Benjamin: State Department Counterterrorism Coordinator Sound Clips: 21:00 Janet Sanderson: The United States continues its regular engagement with the government, including with President Ali, Abdullah Saleh, who's currently, as you know, recovering in Saudi Arabia from his injuries following the June 3rd attack on his compound, the acting president, Vice President Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi, the opposition, civil society activists, and others interested in Yemen's future. We strongly support the Gulf Cooperation Council's initiative, which we believe would lead to a peaceful and orderly political transition. The GCC initiative signed by both the ruling General People's Congress party and the opposition coalition, joint meeting parties. Only president Saleh is blocking the agreement moving forward and we continue to call on him to sign the initiative. 22:30 Janet Sanderson: While most protests in Yemen have been peaceful over the last couple of months, there have been violent clashes between pro- and anti-government demonstrators and between protesters and government security forces and irregular elements using forced to break up demonstrations. The United States is strongly urged the Yemeni government to investigate and prosecute all acts of violence against protesters. 27:00 Janet Sanderson: We strongly believe that a transition is necessary, that an orderly, peaceful transition is the only way to begin to lead Yemen out of the crisis that it has been in for the last few months. 34:30 Daniel Benjamin: Really, I just want to echo what ambassador Sanderson said. It is vitally important that the transition take place. 1:02:15 Daniel Benjamin: The the view from the administration, particularly from a DOD, which is doing of course, the lion's share of the training, although State Department through anti-terrorism training is doing, uh, uh, a good deal as well, is that the Yemenis are, uh, improving their capacities, that they are making good progress towards, uh, being, able to deal with the threats within their border. But it is important to recognize that, uh, uh, our engagement in Yemen was interrupted for many years. Uh, Yemen, uh, did not have the kind of mentoring programs, the kind of training programs that many of our other counter-terrorism partners had. Um, it was really when the Obama administration came into office that a review was done, uh, in, in March of, uh, beginning in March of 2009, it was recognized that Yemen was a major challenge in the world of counter terrorism. And it was not until, uh, December after many conversations with the Yemenis that we really felt that they were on-board with the project and in fact took their first actions against AQAP. This, as you may recall, was just shortly before the attempted, uh, December 25th bombing of the northwest flight. So this is a military and a set of, uh, Ministry of Interior that is civilian, uh, units that are making good progress, but obviously have a lot to learn. So, uh, again, vitally important that we get back to the work of training these units so that they can, uh, take on the missions they need to. Press Conference: Yemen Conference, C-SPAN, January 27, 2010. Speakers: David Miliband - British Foreign Secretary Hillary Clinton - Secretary of State Abu Bakr al-Kurbi - Yemeni Foreign Minister Sound Clips: 3:30 David Miliband: And working closely with the government of Yemen, we decided that our agenda needed to cover agreement on the nature of the problem and then address the, uh, solutions across the economic, social, and political terrain. Five key items were agreed at the meeting for the way in which the international community can support progress in Yemen. First, confirmation by the government of Yemen, that it will continue to pursue its reform agenda and agreement to start discussion of an IMF program. The director of the IMF represented at the meeting made a compelling case for the way in which economic reform could be supported by the IMF. This is important because it will provide welcome support and help the government of Yemen confront its immediate challenges. 11:45 Hillary Clinton: The United States just signed a three year umbrella assistance agreement with the government of Yemen that will augment Yemen's capacity to make progress. This package includes initiatives that will cover a range of programs, but the overarching goal of our work is to increase the capacity and governance of Yemen and give the people of Yemen the opportunity to better make choices in their own lives. President Saleh has outlined a 10 point plan for economic reform along with the country's national reform agenda. Those are encouraging signs of progress. Neither, however, will mean much if they are not implemented. So we expect Yemen to enact reforms, continue to combat corruption, and improve the country's investment in business climate. 15:45 Abu Bakr al-Kurbi: This commitment also stems from our belief that the challenges we are facing now cannot be remedied unless we implement this agenda of reforms and the 10 points that her exellency alluded to because this is now a priority number of issues that we have to start with, and I hope this is what will be one of the outcomes of this meeting. 16:30 Hillary Clinton: One of the factors that's new is the IMF's involvement and commitment. the IMF has come forward with a reform agenda that the government of Yemen has agreed to work on. 24:30 Hillary Clinton: We were pleased by the announcement of a cease fire, um, between the Saudis and the Houthis. That should lead, we hope, to broader negotiations and a political dialogue that might lead to a permanent, uh, end to the conflict in the north. It's too soon to tell. The Daily Show with John Stewart: Terror 2.0 by Yemen - Sad Libs, CC.com, January 6, 2010. The Daily Show with John Stewart: Terror 2.0 by Yemen, CC.com, January 4, 2010. Community Suggestions See Community Suggestions HERE. Cover Art Design by Only Child Imaginations Music Presented in This Episode Intro & Exit: Tired of Being Lied To by David Ippolito (found on Music Alley by mevio)

Two years and 448 pages later, a redacted version of the Mueller report has been made public. Here’s what we’ve learned. Guests: Michael S. Schmidt and Mark Mazzetti, who have been covering the special counsel investigation for The New York Times. For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily.This episode includes disturbing language.Background reading:The Mueller report laid out the scope of Russian election interference and President Trump’s frantic efforts to thwart the special counsel investigation.Read a rundown of what we know so far from the report.Times reporters shared key annotated excerpts from the report.

Chris begins the show with a session of "Cuomo's Court," with Mark Mazzetti and Garrett Graff. They discuss the latest reporting on what to anticipate from the release of the Mueller report. Chris continues that conversation with Representative Jim Himes (D-CT). Next, Chris brings on Van Jones and Scott Jennings for "The Great Debate," discussing the timing of the report, as well as what the findings will mean for President Trump. Chris wraps up the show with Former Virginia Governor, Terry McAuliffe and a Closing Argument on how Attorney General Bill Barr is shaping the narrative of the Mueller report.To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy

Chris begins the show with a session of "Cuomo's Court," with Mark Mazzetti and Garrett Graff. They discuss the latest reporting on what to anticipate from the release of the Mueller report. Chris continues that conversation with Representative Jim Himes (D-CT). Next, Chris brings on Van Jones and Scott Jennings for "The Great Debate," discussing the timing of the report, as well as what the findings will mean for President Trump. Chris wraps up the show with Former Virginia Governor, Terry McAuliffe and a Closing Argument on how Attorney General Bill Barr is shaping the narrative of the Mueller report.To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy

First, Chris goes one on one with Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT). The two discuss President Trump's pleasure with Bill Barr's use of the term "spying" in his testimony. Chris continues that conversation with Phil Mudd and Mark Mazzetti. Then, Chris sits down with Former Counsel to Julian Assange, Geoffrey Roberts, to discuss his former client's arrest for his alleged conspiring with Chelsea Manning. Chris wraps up the show with the top five heated capitol hill hearings with Mike Rogers.To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy

First, Chris goes one on one with Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT). The two discuss President Trump's pleasure with Bill Barr's use of the term "spying" in his testimony. Chris continues that conversation with Phil Mudd and Mark Mazzetti. Then, Chris sits down with Former Counsel to Julian Assange, Geoffrey Roberts, to discuss his former client's arrest for his alleged conspiring with Chelsea Manning. Chris wraps up the show with the top five heated capitol hill hearings with Mike Rogers.To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy

First, Chris goes one on one with Mark Mazzetti and Phil Mudd in a session of "Cuomo's Court." They discuss AG Bill Barr's wording while testifying on the hill on Wednesday. Then, Chris heads to the Magic Wall to break down Barr's history of protecting presidents and the Trump Treasury department's refusal to disclose the President's taxes. Chris continues discussing that topic with Van Jones and Jim Schultz in "The Great Debate." Chris wraps up the show with another session of "Cuomo's Court," with Elliot Williams and Jim Schultz and a Closing Argument on Barr's playbook.To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy

First, Chris goes one on one with Mark Mazzetti and Phil Mudd in a session of "Cuomo's Court." They discuss AG Bill Barr's wording while testifying on the hill on Wednesday. Then, Chris heads to the Magic Wall to break down Barr's history of protecting presidents and the Trump Treasury department's refusal to disclose the President's taxes. Chris continues discussing that topic with Van Jones and Jim Schultz in "The Great Debate." Chris wraps up the show with another session of "Cuomo's Court," with Elliot Williams and Jim Schultz and a Closing Argument on Barr's playbook.To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy

It's been a rapid fire few days in special counsel Robert Mueller's ongoing investigation into Russian collusion during the run-up to the 2016 presidential, with sentencing memos for Paul Manafort and Michael Cohen last week, followed by Cohen's sentencing this week. Also this week, we learned from federal prosecutors that the National Enquirer’s parent company, American Media Inc. has admitted to paying hush money to silence a woman who alleged an affair with Donald Trump in “concert with” the Trump Campaign, corroborating Cohen's account. And in a separate investigation, Maria Butina pleaded guilty to conspiracy, admitting that she tried to influence high profile Republicans and National Rifle Association members on behalf of Russia. All the while, President Donald Trump has doubled down, again referring to the investigation as a "witch hunt." But how do these latest developments fit into the larger picture of Mueller's investigation, and are we anywhere near the end? This week on Politics with Amy Walter from The Takeaway, we attempt to break it all down and examine what we know from all different angles, hearing from a reporter, a former FBI agent, a historian, a Democratic Congressman, and a conservative publisher during the course of the hour. Guests: Mark Mazzetti is the New York Times' Washington Investigative Correspondent. Asha Rangappa is a discussing Senior lecturer at Yale University's Jackson Institute for Global Affairs and a former FBI special agent. Julian Zelizer is a professor of History and Public Affairs at Princeton University. Congressman Adam Schiff is on track to become the Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Chris Buskirk is the publisher and editor of the conservative publication American Greatness. Opening music composed by Tina Guo. Check out her music here. All other music composed by Jay Cowit. 

CeCe PenistonCeCe Peniston (/siːˈsiː ˈpɛnistən/; born Cecilia Veronica Peniston; September 6, 1969)[1] is an American recording artist and former beauty queen.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8] In the early 1990s, she was one of the most successful dance club artists in the history of the U.S. Billboard Hot Dance Music/Club Play, scoring five number one hits in the chart within three years.[9][10] Her signature song "Finally" (#5 in the Hot 100[10] and #2 in UK Top 75[11]) became one of the biggest dance singles, selling three million copies worldwide.[12]Peniston has performed at private engagements for Aretha Franklin's private birthday party in Detroit, Michigan, Pope John Paul II in Rome at the Vatican (as a member of the gospel band Sisters of Glory) and the 42nd President of the United States, Bill Clinton, during both of his inauguration ceremonies in Washington, D.C.[13] She was the first foreign female entertainer to perform in post-apartheid South Africa.[13][14]On February 4, 2011, Peniston signed a record deal with West Swagg Music Group/Bungalo Records, with full distribution through Universal Music Group Distribution, and announced release of a new solo album 15 years after her last studio set (I'm Movin' On from 1996 on A&M Records).[15]By the end of the year, however, only three digital singles had been issued including a new song called "Stoopid!",[16] and two cover versions of her prior hits, "Keep On Walkin'" and "Finally".[17][18]In December 2016, Billboard magazine listed her among the 100 Top Dance Club Artists of All Time (as the 52nd) 1969–90: Early life[edit]Peniston was born in Dayton, Ohio, in United States, but spent the majority of her formative years in Phoenix, where she was raised since she was nine. As a daughter of a former military father, Ronald Peniston (born 1934, married Barbara Anne in 1960), she started singing at church[20] and doing plays and musicals such as H.M.S. Pinafore in the 6th grade. She participated in local karaoke contests and singing talent shows, while taking piano lessons.[4][8]She attended Trevor G. Browne High School, class of 1987, in Phoenix,[21] and landed a part in a local theater group's production of Bubblin' Brown Sugar[3][4] (playing the young Sweet Georgia Brown[22]). After earning her diploma, she continued to study liberal arts at the Phoenix College, where she got involved in athletics, and entered beauty pageants. She was crowned Miss Black Arizona in 1989[3][4][5][6][7][8][12] and Miss Galaxy in 1990.[3][7]Peniston began writing pop lyrics already at school. The words of her international hit "Finally" were purportedly penned during a chemistry class, while thinking about dating in college. Her music career began in January 1991, when Felipe "DJ Wax Dawg" Delgado, her friend and a record producer based also in Phoenix, asked Peniston to record back-up vocals for Tonya Davis, a black female rapper known as Overweight Pooch after her childhood nickname.[3][4][24]Davis, headed in a direction of a "new" Monie Love, was searching for a singer to add vocals to the title track of her album Female Preacher, which was to be released on A&M Records that summer. At a talent show she met a woman named Malaika LeRae Sallard, but when it came time to get Sallard into the studio, the rapper found she'd lost her future label-mate's number. When Delgado, who'd preferred Peniston instead, brought his favorite in to do background parts, the response from everyone was immediate, but did not move the Pooch to invite Peniston back for more vocals – unless she was successful in locating Sallard.[24]Later, as it became clear that Peniston was leaping from the Overweight Pooch's album to the top of the charts, rumor had it the Pooch was stewing over Peniston's using Female Preacher as her springboard. Tonya Davis, pregnant at the time of recording her album, swore she harbored no jealousy towards Peniston. "There's no jealousy, because she has a voice. I gave her the chance, but I didn't give her a voice,"[24] the rapper insisted for Phoenix New Times in July 1992, and Peniston, interviewed by the same newspaper in the meantime, reacted by her own words. "I feel like anything's possible and I know one thing. If I wasn't at this spot, I still would be achieving to get to this spot."[24] Ironically enough, Sallard eventually threw in a few back-up vocals for Peniston on a song with a significant title, "You Win, I Win, We Lose", while Peniston, who in return played an agent to get a record deal also for Malaika (whose album Sugar Time scored in 1993 two Top 5 hits on the US Dance chart, including the No. 1 single "Gotta Know (Your Name)") mentioned the Pooch's name on her own debut album in addition, leaving Davis a note saying "thanks for letting me be a part of Female Preacher".[25]Besides the Peniston's vocal performance on three tracks in total, of which "I Like It" was released as a single with a moderate success (at #16 in US Dance[26] and #58 in UK Top 75[27] the following January), she was eventually given also a credit for co-writing two of those, "Kickin' Da Blues" and the title's, "Female Preacher". But the Overweight Pooch's album flopped on the market, and A&M was the first major label for Delgado himself, who was facing contractual disputes with the record company. After Manny Lehman (a DJ, then A&M Art Director and one of the executive producers of Female Preacher) also noticed the powerful voice of a still back-up vocalist, he offered Delgado a second chance, and commissioned him to produce a track for Peniston herself as a solo artist.[4] Not looking to lose his major deal connections, Delgado called on a hometown friend and music producer too, Rodney K. Jackson (they two met through mutual friends in Arizona), who was brought then to A&M family to help co-produce the Peniston's single, which was soon to be recognized as “Finally”.[28]Despite an initial label's resistance to sign Peniston to more than a one-off single deal, the “Finally” session resulted in recording her own debut album after the final approval of A&M's Vice President, Mark Mazzetti.[29]1991–92: Finally[edit]Peniston with Felipe Delgado at Chaton Studios in Phoenix, Arizona, putting final touches to her debut albumI was sitting in a Chicago pizza parlor in October and I heard over the radio 'Finally by CeCe Peniston'. I just started looking around going 'That's me! That's me!"[5]—Peniston recalled for EW magazine in 1992. (Almost 20 years later, when asked by Mega 104.3, she denied saying it, during her interview broadcast live on April 5, 2011.)[30]Peniston was 21 years old when her debut single "Finally" was released. The song burst on to the US club scene in the fall of 1991, where it became an instant dance anthem peaking, in October,[10] at the top of the Billboard Hot Dance Music/Club Play for two weeks, while achieving a respectful starting position (at No. 29)[11] overseas.After her first song climbed the international charts, Peniston was headed into the studio to record a full-length album. However, she "had two months to pull the whole album together" and "didn't realize the impact the record was having until it reached the top five". She also described how difficult it was to begin her career at such an extreme pace, but [4] the result was a solidly produced ten track collection titled Finally, issued in January of the following year.Both the single and album entered the US Hot 100, as well as the UK Top 75 chart (at No. 5[10] and No. 2 for single,[11] respectively at No. 70[10] and at No. 10 for album release[11]), and ultimately earned Peniston a gold or silver certification in both countries. By the end of 1992 her debut (in Europe re-released in 1997 with a bonus remix "Finally '97") sold over 540,000 in United States.[31]"We Got a Love Thang", the second single (co-written by Chantay Savage), with a video clip in heavy rotation on TV music channels, went to No. 1 in the US Dance chart in February (No. 20 in the Hot 100),[10] and in England (where "Finally" skipped to No. 2 eventually[11]) "We Got a Love Thang" peaked at No. 6.[11] Might the only controversial question regarding the title remain who had provided background vocals on the record? While on her album Finally Darnnel Rush was credited, on its single release, the name of Kym Sims (who was a co-writer of "Keep On Walkin'") appeared as one of back-up vocalists actually.[32]With another hit record on the charts, Peniston began a year of touring clubs and small theaters in the USA in support of her album. Her travels started with a series of shows in the Philippines, Japan, the United Kingdom, Germany, Spain and Italy, and after her return to the USA, Peniston continued with such R&B acts as Joe Public, the Cover Girls, R. Kelly and Levert.[4] While on tour, "Keep On Walkin'", a hip hop swinging composition, joined the list of Peniston's three consecutively running hits, bringing Peniston in June her third No. 1 in the U.S. Billboard Hot Dance Music/Club Play chart (No. 15 in the Hot 100),[9] and another Top 10 hit in UK.[11] Later in August, that was also her highest outing in the US R&B chart, scoring at No. 3.On October 17, Billboard magazine announced that Peniston was the leading nominee in the Billboard Music Awards, being nominated in four categories: three times in the dance category with "Finally" (Best New Artist, Best Female Artist and Best Director), and one in the R&B/Rap category (Best Female Artist) for her urban hit "Keep On Walkin'".[33] Ultimately the song won two awards, and three of her singles released in 1992 were listed also within the Top 100 songs of the Billboard Year-End chart (at No. 20 with "Finally", at No. 61 with "Keep On Walkin'", and at No. 97 with "We Got a Love Thang"[34]). In the UK, Peniston was listed as the 20th of Top Selling Singles Artists in 1992.Additional songs taken from album Finally achieved the Top 40 status at least in the hip hop/R&B field. The grieving lyrics of her ballad "Inside That I Cried", co-written by Peniston's then-husband, Malik Byrd (who appeared also in its video), and produced in conjunction with Anita Baker's cohort, Steve Lindsey, peaked at No. 10 in the US R&B (No. 94 in the Hot 100[10] and No. 42 in UK Top 75[11]). The fifth single, a midtempo, "Crazy Love", climbed to No. 31 (No. 97 in the Hot 100[10] and No. 44 in UK[11]).By the end of the year, Peniston received several awards for her achievements in the music industry for 1992. Among them, one Billboard Music Award (as Best New Artist – Dance, the second went to the video director Claude Borenzweig), three ASCAP Awards (for Song of The Year, Most Performed Song of The Year, and Pop Songwriter of The Year), another three awards (as Best New Dance Artist, Best Dance Solo Artist, and for Best 12" Dance Record) at the Annual Winter Music Conference, and the BMI Urban Award of Achievement.[13] The album itself was nominated on a Soul Train Music Award '93 in the Best R&B/Soul Album – Female category.[35]1993–95: Thought 'Ya KnewWithin a year, Peniston was back in the studios to record her sophomore release, and the particular challenge for the vocalist was to avoid getting pigeonholed into the dance genre. For that reason, several ballads were arranged to appear on the final set (in the front with "Forever In My Heart", produced by Brian McKnight), of which, however, none was chosen for a single release. This time around, Peniston co-authored three of thirteen tracks ("Whatever It Is", "Give What I'm Givin" and "Maybe It's The Way",[4] a ballad about her father[8]), and along with Manny Lehman and Damon Jones, who later became Peniston's manager, she was also credited as an executive producer of her scheduled album release, Thought 'Ya Knew. Apart from others, also fellow Ohio-born singer Norma Jean Wright joined the session.[36]After a certain level of hesitation over the first single, "I'm in the Mood" (originally produced by Soulshock and Karlin) was picked to be the final leader—though as support for "Searchin'", which would be separately delivered on vinyl only to DJs. "I'm in the Mood" did well by itself, and with a video accompanied by a hip-hop remix from M-Doc & Jere M.C. (better known as In Da Soul) the title was on singles reproduced by David Morales for the dance floor. The song spawned Peniston's fourth No. 1[10] (dethroning from the top of the US Dance chart Aretha Franklin's "A Deeper Love") and peaked at No. 16 in UK[11] (#32 in the Hot 100[10]).On January 25, 1994, the album Thought 'Ya Knew, which was to represent Peniston's musical zenith at that time, arrived on all available formats, including digital compact cassettes. However, as the record promptly entered the music charts, it was soon to be evident Thought 'Ya Knew was not enjoying the high-profile success of her previous set Finally. After its progress had stalled in the Billboard 200 at No. 96,[10] Thought 'Ya Knewclimbed to No. 31 in the UK,[11] but the album charted for only two weeks in the UK.Not certain about the second single either, "Keep Givin' Me Your Love" was accepted to become the British follow-up. But the track, remixed by Eddie Gordon's West End production team, had no supporting music video, and after peaking at No. 36 in April in the United Kingdom,[11] an alternative title ("I'm Not Over You") was chosen for the US market as the second cut from the Thought 'Ya Knew album."I'm Not Over You" (written by Steve Hurley, Jamie Principle, and M-Doc) might have missed the highest position of the US Dance chart, but only by about one point (at No. 2),[10] and the single was later classified in the overall Billboard Hot Dance Music/Club Play chart as the ninth most successful track of 1994 (leaving "I'm in the Mood" far behind, at #44). However, although the song had sealed the Top 10 of the US R&B chart, it did not succeed in the Hot 100 that much, failing to crack Top 40 (No. 41).[37] Considering that expectations of A&M Records company must have been bigger than a club play sale of Peniston's singles, "I'm Not Over You" was released in UK only on B-side of the "Hit by Love" release."Hit by Love" was to be the third song taken from the album. As with her previous releases, the song (with additional remixes by David Morales) became Peniston's next US Dance hit in a line of her No. 1s, but while on the top of the chart "Hit by Love" stayed for another week, the single stuck at No. 33 in the UK Top 75,[11] as well as on the bottom positions of the American Hot 100 chart (at No. 90).[10]Along with "Hit by Love" in the charts, A&M issued a rare compilation, Remix Collection, in Japan with nine alternate versions of her songs previously available only on vinyl, which tracked Peniston's music career since the "Keep On Walkin'" release. A similar remix collection, however, consisting of only two singles ("Finally" and "We Got a Love Thang"), was earlier issued in Japan as an EP under the title Finally / We Got a Love Thang: Remix Collection featuring overall eight remixed versions.At the end of the year Peniston was named the No. 1 Billboard Hot Dance Music/Club Play Artist,[37] summarizing all her songs released in 1994 ("I'm Not Over You" #9, "Hit by Love" #24, and I'm in the Mood" #44). While A&M was listed as the sixth best dance label in the Billboard Year-End chart, Peniston was also rated as the 5th Top R&B Singles Female Artist (behind Janet Jackson, Toni Braxton, Aaliyah and Mariah Carey).[38]In addition, a remix of "Keep Givin' Me Your Love" was popularized on the original motion picture soundtrack of the Prêt-à-Porter (Ready To Wear) film, and released in the U.S. after a one-year delay, scoring No. 4 in the US Dance charts in March 1995. "Keep Givin' Me Your Love" became Peniston's first song not to enter the Hot 100 chart (No. 101),[10] possibly as the result of appearing as a B-side on her previous release, and sharing its sales with the single "Hit by Love". See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

A Pulitzer Prize–winning reporter's riveting account of the transformation of the CIA and America's special operations forces into man-hunting and killing machines in the world's dark spaces: the new American way of war The most momentous change in American warfare over the past decade has taken place away from the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq, in the corners of the world where large armies can't go. The Way of the Knife is the untold story of that shadow war: a campaign that has blurred the lines between soldiers and spies and lowered the bar for waging war across the globe. America has pursued its enemies with killer drones and special operations troops; trained privateers for assassination missions and used them to set up clandestine spying networks; and relied on mercurial dictators, untrustworthy foreign intelligence services, and proxy armies. Mark Mazzetti is a national security correspondent for the New York Times. He has received numerous awards, including the George Polk Award, and he shared a Pulitzer Prize for reporting. He lives in Washington, D.C

We turn our focus away from Washington intrigue and go to Saudi Arabia, where President Trump was welcomed this weekend, and to China, whose government intentionally crippled American spying operations by killing C.I.A. informants, a Times investigation shows. Guests: Peter Baker, who is in Saudi Arabia with the president; Mark Mazzetti, who has been investigating the mysterious deaths in China. For more information on today’s episode, visit http://nyti.ms/2qfbgtv.

Earlier this week, the New York Times published a story by Charlie Savage, Eric Schmitt, and Mark Mazzetti informing us that the Obama administration had changed its interpretation of the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force to more broadly cover the use of force against al-Shabaab, expanding its previous reading of the AUMF as only authorizing force against members of al-Shabaab individually linked to al-Qaeda. Bobby noted the story on Lawfare and provided a few comments. While the news has been somewhat drowned out amidst the hubbub of the presidential transition, the significance of this change in legal interpretation shouldn't be lost—so we brought Bobby and Charlie Savage on the podcast to talk with Benjamin Wittes about where this change came from and what it might mean.

America's military engagements overseas are often done without any public debate and sometimes without any public knowledge. New York Times correspondent Mark Mazzetti comments. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In Part 2 of this three-part series, SPY Historian Dr. Vince Houghton sat down with Ali Watkins, who covers intelligence and national security for the Huffington Post. Houghton and Watkins discuss the difficulties in reporting on this most secret of topics, the dangers – and benefits – of using anonymous sources, and the ever-changing nature of intelligence and national security journalism. Part 1 of this series was with Mark Mazzetti of the New York Times, and Part 3 will be with Greg Miller of the Washington Post.

In Part 3 of this three-part series, SPY Historian Dr. Vince Houghton sat down with Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Greg Miller, who covers intelligence and national security for the Washington Post. Houghton and Miller discuss the difficulties in reporting on this most secret of topics, the dangers – and benefits – of using anonymous sources, and the ever-changing nature of intelligence and national security journalism. Part 1 of this series was with Mark Mazzetti of the New York Times, and Part 2 was with Ali Watkins of the Huffington Post.

In Part 1 of this three-part series, SPY Historian Dr. Vince Houghton sat down with Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Mark Mazzetti, who covers intelligence and national security for the New York Times. Houghton and Mazzetti discuss the difficulties in reporting on this most secret of topics, the dangers – and benefits – of using anonymous sources, and the ever-changing nature of intelligence and national security journalism. Part 2 of this series will be with Ali Watkins of the Huffington Post, and Part 3 will be with Greg Miller of the Washington Post.

There are many movies about evil CIA agents assassinating supposed enemies of the US. Those who saw the latest Captain America movie will have witnessed the plan by Hydra (a fascist faction within a secret agency presumably within the CIA) build floating gunships that can identify and eliminate those who pose a threat to national security. We are not there yet, but Mark Mazzetti‘s book The Way of the Knife: The CIA, a Secret Army, and a War at the Ends of the Earth (Penguin, 2013)  should give us some anxiety about the current technology used for “extra-judicial killings”. Mazzetti gives us the history of the drone wars – a term hated by the Air Force who note that the drones are piloted aircraft  albeit from a remote location – and their ability to be used for the elimination of… well, enemies of the US and its allies. Having said that, this is not a diatribe of opposition but a balanced and careful examination of history and political process. At the core of the book is a discussion of how the CIA and the US military are running parallel drone operations with different criteria and standards of care and success. Mazzetti’s book presents us with, what I found to be, a frightening insight into operations that are so common that they rarely rate a mention in the media. I highly recommend the book and suggest that anyone running a course on military ethics include it in their reading list. There is more than enough ethical controversy raised in the book to fill a semester of discussion. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

There are many movies about evil CIA agents assassinating supposed enemies of the US. Those who saw the latest Captain America movie will have witnessed the plan by Hydra (a fascist faction within a secret agency presumably within the CIA) build floating gunships that can identify and eliminate those who pose a threat to national security. We are not there yet, but Mark Mazzetti‘s book The Way of the Knife: The CIA, a Secret Army, and a War at the Ends of the Earth (Penguin, 2013)  should give us some anxiety about the current technology used for “extra-judicial killings”. Mazzetti gives us the history of the drone wars – a term hated by the Air Force who note that the drones are piloted aircraft  albeit from a remote location – and their ability to be used for the elimination of… well, enemies of the US and its allies. Having said that, this is not a diatribe of opposition but a balanced and careful examination of history and political process. At the core of the book is a discussion of how the CIA and the US military are running parallel drone operations with different criteria and standards of care and success. Mazzetti’s book presents us with, what I found to be, a frightening insight into operations that are so common that they rarely rate a mention in the media. I highly recommend the book and suggest that anyone running a course on military ethics include it in their reading list. There is more than enough ethical controversy raised in the book to fill a semester of discussion. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

There are many movies about evil CIA agents assassinating supposed enemies of the US. Those who saw the latest Captain America movie will have witnessed the plan by Hydra (a fascist faction within a secret agency presumably within the CIA) build floating gunships that can identify and eliminate those who pose a threat to national security. We are not there yet, but Mark Mazzetti‘s book The Way of the Knife: The CIA, a Secret Army, and a War at the Ends of the Earth (Penguin, 2013)  should give us some anxiety about the current technology used for “extra-judicial killings”. Mazzetti gives us the history of the drone wars – a term hated by the Air Force who note that the drones are piloted aircraft  albeit from a remote location – and their ability to be used for the elimination of… well, enemies of the US and its allies. Having said that, this is not a diatribe of opposition but a balanced and careful examination of history and political process. At the core of the book is a discussion of how the CIA and the US military are running parallel drone operations with different criteria and standards of care and success. Mazzetti’s book presents us with, what I found to be, a frightening insight into operations that are so common that they rarely rate a mention in the media. I highly recommend the book and suggest that anyone running a course on military ethics include it in their reading list. There is more than enough ethical controversy raised in the book to fill a semester of discussion. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

There are many movies about evil CIA agents assassinating supposed enemies of the US. Those who saw the latest Captain America movie will have witnessed the plan by Hydra (a fascist faction within a secret agency presumably within the CIA) build floating gunships that can identify and eliminate those who pose a threat to national security. We are not there yet, but Mark Mazzetti‘s book The Way of the Knife: The CIA, a Secret Army, and a War at the Ends of the Earth (Penguin, 2013)  should give us some anxiety about the current technology used for “extra-judicial killings”. Mazzetti gives us the history of the drone wars – a term hated by the Air Force who note that the drones are piloted aircraft  albeit from a remote location – and their ability to be used for the elimination of… well, enemies of the US and its allies. Having said that, this is not a diatribe of opposition but a balanced and careful examination of history and political process. At the core of the book is a discussion of how the CIA and the US military are running parallel drone operations with different criteria and standards of care and success. Mazzetti’s book presents us with, what I found to be, a frightening insight into operations that are so common that they rarely rate a mention in the media. I highly recommend the book and suggest that anyone running a course on military ethics include it in their reading list. There is more than enough ethical controversy raised in the book to fill a semester of discussion. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Report on the CIA trying to refocus from the drone war; Someone threw a shoe at Hillary; Cliven Bundy talks about the Bureau of Land Management surrounding his cattle

En el programa de esta semana de Ágora Historia en Gestiona Radio trataremos los siguientes temas: - David Benito entrevistará en primicia a Mark Mazzetti, autor del libro "La Guerra en las Sombras" de la Editorial Crítica. El periodista y escritor Mark Mazzetti, ganador del Premio Pulitzer en 2009 por sus reportajes en Afganistán y Pakistán, es uno de los mejores reporteros de seguridad nacional de Estados Unidos. En el programa de hoy nos hablará de la fascinación del actual presidente estadounidense, Barack Obama, por la capacidad de la Agencia Central de Inteligencia (CIA) para asesinar a los enemigos de Estados Unidos y su transformación después del 11 de septiembre, de una agencia de inteligencia a una máquina mundial de asesinatos clandestina. - En la segunda parte del programa Fernando Santa Cecilia, profesor de Geografía en la UNED - Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia y miembro de Sociedad Geográfica Española, que nos hablará de la formación de la Península ibérica y de la islas españolas. - Conoceremos las principales noticias acaecidas en torno a la Historia, de la mano de David Benito y Gema García Ruipérez. Síguenos en Twitter: https://twitter.com/agorahistoria Síguenos en Facebook: www.facebook.com/agorahistoriaprograma www.agorahistoria.com

Om hopp och förtvivlan i Barack Obamas värld. Är den amerikanske presidenten en kalkylerande krigshetsare med välsmort munläder? Eller en missförstådd världsförbättrare som är bakbunden av strukturer större än han själv? Hör röster från Washington, Brooklyn och Halmstad om hemliga krig, svårstängda fångläger och det amerikanska presidentskapets själ. I maj i år besökte Barack Obama den amerikanska försvarshögskolan i Washington DC. Han var där för att tala om krig – men inte den sortens krig som USA verkar ge sig in i nu i dagarna, i Syrien, utan ett krig som vi här på Konflikt följt mycket nära under alla de år som programmet funnits: det amerikanska kriget mot terrorismen. Och på senare år, sedan Barack Obama blev president, har vi allt oftare – från platser som Jemen och hemliga amerikanska militärbaser, tillsammans med såväl juridikprofessorer som uighurer – fått anledning att ställa frågan om hur, när och, för den delen, om det här kriget någonsin ska ta slut. Därför var det inte konstigt att vi spetsade öronen i maj, för Obamas tal handlade om just den frågan. - Besluten vi tar idag, om drönare, om hur vi låser in terroristmisstänkta, kommer å definiera vilket sorts land vi är å vilket sorts land vi kommer vara i framtiden. Amerika befinner sig vid ett vägskäl, sa Obama och fortsatte. - Vi måste definiera vilken sorts kamp det är vi utkämpar, annars kommer kampen att definiera oss, sa Obama. Inget land kan utkämpa ett evigt krig och fortsätta vara fritt. Varken jag eller nån annan president kan lova att helt besegra terrorn. Det var ett klassiskt Obama-tal. Han lyckades formulera riskerna med ett hemligt, evigt krig bättre än så gott som alla hans kritiker. Här var en president som inte bara kunde beskriva, utan verkligen förstod sitt ansvar, som förstod varför ett krig inte kan föras i hemlighet, varför folk inte kan låsas in på obestämd tid utan rättegång, varför man inte kan låta rädslan styra. Talet hölls alltså i maj i år. Men, så kom sommaren… Ljud från en lång, het och i allra högsta grad krigisk sommar. NSA-avslöjanden, vaga terrorhot och en kavalkad av drönarattacker i Jemen. Samma president: men ett helt annat budskap. Hur ska man då förstå dessa motsättningar? Vad styrs av presidentens personlighet? Vad är politik? Och vad är djupare liggande strukturer? Vi börjar med att titta närmare på Obamas krig. Och inte det nya krig i Mellanöstern, i Syrien, som USA motvilligt verkar dras in i i dagarna, eller det öppna krig som han avslutade i Irak, eller det halvhjärtade krig som är på väg att trappas ned i Afghanistan. Istället ska vi titta på det krig som Obama verkar föredra, nämligen skuggkriget. På sistone har flera böcker  kommit ut i ämnet Bland dom mest uppmärksammade finns The Way of the Knife av New York Times-journalisten Mark Mazzetti, som i detalj beskriver hur underrättelsetjänsten CIA – tillsammans med delar av den amerikanska militären – förvandlats till en slags presidentens personliga dödsmaskineri. Konflikts Caroline Salzinger intervjuade honom. Men det finns andra områden där Obamas retorik och politik står i bjärt kontrast mot varandra. Här ytterligare ett klipp från Obamas tal i maj: - Föreställ er en framtid om tio år, då USA forftarande håller människor som inte anklagats för något brott inspärrade på en plats som inte ens hör till vårt land. Se på oss, när vi tvångsmatar fångar som hungerstrejkar. Är det det Amerika vi vill vara? Så sa Obama i maj. Han hade ju lovat att fängelset i Guantanamo Bay under sin valkampanj 2008. Men än står det öppet. Hur har det blivit såhär? Den journalist som i störst detalj beskrivit processen kring Guantanamo är Daniel Klaidman, som till vardags skriver för Newsweek och Daily Beast. Förra året publicerades hans bok Kill or Capture, med underrubriken The War on Terror and the Soul of the Obama Presidency. Enligt Klaidman är vad som hände när Obama 2009 skulle stänga Guantanamo bland dom mest talande händelserna  under hela den första Obama-administrationen.    Biografier och studier av presidenter är något av en industri i USA – varje stor bokaffär har en rejäl hylla i ämnet – och dom tyngsta spelarna i den industrin är presidenhistorikerna, en grupp som faktiskt aktivt uppvaktas av sittande presidenter, som dels är intresserade av att förstå bättre hur deras föregångare handlat, men som också vill försöka påverka hur deras eftermäle kommer att låta. En av de mest respekterade presidenthistorikerna heter Robert Dallek – som redan hunnit äta middag med Obama fyra gånger. Konflikts medarbetare Petra Socolovsky hälsade på hos honom hemma i Washington DC. Gäster i Konflikt för att diskutera presidentskapets förutsättningar och Barack Obamas tid som president är dels Frida Stranne, Freds- och utvecklingsforskare med särskild inriktning USA, och Trita Parsi, författare av flera böcker om amerikansk utrikespolitik och ordförande för det Iranskamerikanska rådet. Programledare: Ivar Ekman Producent: Caroline Salzinger

7 AM - Mark Mazzetti, author of "The Way of the Knife" about the CIA, talks about Obama and drones with us; State senator Ron Calderon's office raided by the FBI.

We all grew up with our own impressions of what covert actions were all about. John le Carre talked about the moral twilight in which these activities operated. But never has that line between military, espionage and covert actions been more blurred than it is today. From 9/11 to the bin Laden raid, the CIA has been front and center as the agency of first resort, to carry out difficult and controversial missions. Now Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Mark Mazzetti lays bear much of this activity in The Way of the Knife: The CIA, a Secret Army, and a War at the Ends of the Earth.My conversation with Mark Mazzetti:

8 AM - NY Times correspondent Mark Mazzetti come back to talk more about his new book "The Way Of The Knife: The CIA, A Secret Army, And A War At The Ends Of The Earth By Mark Mazzetti"; Guy accused of mailing ricin released.

7 AM - Family Guy is somehow mixed up in the Boston Marathon story; Should we play the Dominick Brascia 1 year tribute clip?; Mark Mazzetti from the New York Times talks about his new book "The Way of the Knife: The CIA, a Secret Army, and a War at the Ends of the Earth".

Philip Bennett is the Eugene C. Patterson Professor of the Practice of Journalism and Public Policy at Duke's Sanford School. During an "Office Hours" webcast interview January 28, 2011, he answered questions about national security reporting. He was joined by Mark Mazzetti, a New York Times reporter and Duke alumnus. Learn more at http://sanford.duke.edu.