Podcasts about Wittes

Trump stands and salutes a shadow version of the national anthem, and may rehire the treasonous Paul Manafort to help out in '24. Plus, the dust settles on the Fani Willis' prosecution in Georgia, and Aileen Cannon seriously entertains Trump's absurd claim in the docs case. Kristol and Wittes join Tim.

From September 28, 2019: At the Texas Tribune Festival in Austin, Texas, Benjamin Wittes sat down in front of a live audience with Judge John Bates, a senior district judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Bates has served on the court since 2001, and from 2009 to 2013, he served as the presiding judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FISA) Court. Wittes and Judge Bates talked about the role of the FISA Court, its procedures and caseload, its recent prominence in the news, and how the court might respond to cases that have an overtly political context.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The courts aren't taking care of Trump and we can't live in denial about the state of play. Meanwhile, words keep failing him at his weird rallies—and telling Romney voters you don't need them doesn't seem all that smart when Nikki gets 30% of the vote. Kristol rejoins Tim, and Wittes is back for a mini-Trump Trials. show notes: Send your questions here: BulwarkPodcast@TheBulwark.com Tim's Not My Party: https://t.snapchat.com/SnxQ5aG0

Alexei Navalny heroically stood up to Putin, but Tucker and MAGA's worst actors can't get enough of the Russian leader—and Russia itself. Plus, another anti-Biden witness bites the dust, and Fani Willis' table-turning moment. Wittes joins Tim Miller for the weekend pod. show notes: Navalny's investigation into Putin's $1.3 billion Black Sea villa 

On April 13, 2022, in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Lawfare Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes conducted his first “special military operation” at the Russian embassy in Washington, DC. Now, Wittes is conducting these protests abroad on what he calls the ERAS (Eradicating Russian Ambassadorial Sleep) Tour. In his conversation with Katherine Pompilio, one of Lawfare's associate editors and this week's Chatter guest host, Wittes talks about his most successful special military operation yet, dealing with international law enforcement, NATO's impact on Baltic countries, the American versus European understanding of the war in Ukraine, and more.Works mentioned in this episode:Ben's Substack Dog Shirt DailyBen's speech at a rally in StockholmThe work of Nikita TitovChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On April 13, 2022, in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Lawfare Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes conducted his first “special military operation” at the Russian embassy in Washington, DC. Now, Wittes is conducting these protests abroad on what he calls the ERAS (Eradicating Russian Ambassadorial Sleep) Tour. In his conversation with Katherine Pompilio, one of Lawfare's associate editors and this week's Chatter guest host, Wittes talks about his most successful special military operation yet, dealing with international law enforcement, NATO's impact on Baltic countries, the American versus European understanding of the war in Ukraine, and more.Works mentioned in this episode:Ben's Substack Dog Shirt DailyBen's speech at a rally in StockholmThe work of Nikita TitovChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On April 13, 2022, in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Lawfare Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes conducted his first “special military operation” at the Russian embassy in Washington, DC. It involved 14 theater stage lights that Wittes and other activists used to project images of the Ukrainian flag onto embassy walls. Since then, Wittes's special military operations have garnered increased attention and become more complex—technically and diplomatically. In his conversation with Katherine Pompilio, one of Lawfare's associate editors and this week's Chatter guest host, Wittes talks about the genesis of these special military operations, what it's like conducting international negotiations with Russian diplomats via the U.S. Secret Service, the international law of light protests, how a paper mache washing machine is involved in all of this, his career, his other projects, and more.Works mentioned in this episode:Ben's Substack Dog Shirt DailyThe video Defect and Repent: A Laser PoemThe video "It's Almost Like the Russians Don't Negotiate in Good Faith": A Video Parable.The video U.S. Ukrainian Activists Presents Umbrella BoyThe podcast #LiveFromUkraine: Katya Savchenko Survived Bucha—and Wrote About ItThe Washington Post article “Activists train spotlight of Ukrainian flag on Russian Embassy”The video of the spotlight cat and mouse gameThe work of Robin BellChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On April 13, 2022, in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Lawfare Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes conducted his first “special military operation” at the Russian embassy in Washington, DC. It involved 14 theater stage lights that Wittes and other activists used to project images of the Ukrainian flag onto embassy walls. Since then, Wittes's special military operations have garnered increased attention and become more complex—technically and diplomatically. In his conversation with Katherine Pompilio, one of Lawfare's associate editors and this week's Chatter guest host, Wittes talks about the genesis of these special military operations, what it's like conducting international negotiations with Russian diplomats via the U.S. Secret Service, the international law of light protests, how a paper mache washing machine is involved in all of this, his career, his other projects, and more.Works mentioned in this episode:Ben's Substack Dog Shirt DailyThe video Defect and Repent: A Laser PoemThe video "It's Almost Like the Russians Don't Negotiate in Good Faith": A Video Parable.The video U.S. Ukrainian Activists Presents Umbrella BoyThe podcast #LiveFromUkraine: Katya Savchenko Survived Bucha—and Wrote About ItThe Washington Post article “Activists train spotlight of Ukrainian flag on Russian Embassy”The video of the spotlight cat and mouse gameThe work of Robin BellChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Benjamin Wittes, Editor-in-Chief of Lawfare and writer of the Substack Dog Shirt Daily, has been projecting Ukrainian messages onto the Russian Embassies in D.C., and throughout the world. The Russians have fought back, and Twitter, once an amplifier of these "Special Operations" has kicked Wittes off its platform. Plus, the stupid statements under oath that may have doomed Trump's Civil defense. And why would any Hispanic American want to fund reparations for African-Americans, a wealthier group than Hispanics? Produced by Joel Patterson and Corey Wara Email us at thegist@mikepesca.com To advertise on the show, visit: https://advertisecast.com/TheGist Subscribe to The Gist Subscribe: https://subscribe.mikepesca.com/ Follow Mikes Substack at: Pesca Profundities | Mike Pesca | Substack Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Mike Pence is erasing his own profile in courage by trying to resist special counsel Jack Smith's subpoena, a Mar-a-Lago document prosecution is still viable, and Ben Wittes — who once challenged Putin to a fistfight — is still irritating the Russians. Wittes joins Charlie Sykes today. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Mike Pence is erasing his own profile in courage by trying to resist special counsel Jack Smith's subpoena, a Mar-a-Lago document prosecution is still viable, and Ben Wittes — who once challenged Putin to a fistfight — is still irritating the Russians. Wittes joins Charlie Sykes today. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Israeli Supreme Court has a “huge amount of power while the foundation of that power is paper thin,” says Benjamin Wittes, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and editor-in-chief of the Lawfare Blog, in an interview with Haaretz Weekly host Allison Kaplan Sommer.  This problematic combination, Wittes says, is why the Supreme Court is now “particularly vulnerable. It's as if you've built this giant and extremely powerful weapon, but built it on a pillar of sand.”  In a deep dive, Wittes explains and analyzes each of the controversial reforms planned by the Netanyahu government, their implications for the U.S.-Israel relationship and the likelihood that, if they pass, Israel's arguments for resisting international tribunals will be weakened.  Some elements of the judicial reform, Wittes warns, are “corrupt” and “very dangerous.” And speaking personally as a legal scholar and expert who has “engaged deeply” with Israel in the past, he says that if the reforms are implemented, it would “fundamentally change my regard for the integrity of the Israeli legal system.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

“Exclusion is so last season” Britney Wittes started modeling and acting at 10 years old. As she got older (but not taller), she started to notice the amount of jobs she was offered was slowly diminishing — simply because she didn't meet the 5'7" height requirement for most of the modeling opportunities. Now, she stands proud at 5'3" and is making big waves in the modeling and fashion industry! She founded a community where petite models can feel seen, heard, and empowered to reach their full potential. Why Not Petites offers valuable resources for models and aspiring models, to learn, flourish, and slay the camera! Learn more about Why Not Petites

Merrick Garland has been getting a lot of criticism these days, and a lot of it is less than entirely fair, or at least it's premature. But Andrew Kent, Quinta Jurecic and Benjamin Wittes argue in a Lawfare piece published today that there is at least one matter on which Garland's decision-making is ripe for criticism: He is not speaking enough.Garland has modeled himself after Attorney General Ed Levi, the first post-Watergate attorney general, and in their article entitled, “Merrick Garland Needs To Speak Up,” Kent, Jurecic and Wittes argue that Levi actually used public speaking as a big part of his strategy to rejuvenate confidence in the Justice Department. Garland, by contrast, has been very quiet. Kent, Jurecic and Wittes hold the two up against one another and argue that Garland should make more of a case for what he's doing than he has so far. This episode is a reading of that article.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Starting a Statistics Consultancy | Janet Wittes The following interview was a keynote fireside chat with Janet Wittes (Statistics Collaborative, Inc.) titled "Statisticians as Entrepreneurs". It was recorded for the BBSW 2021 Conference (Nov 3 - 5 in Foster City, CA). References: BBSW 2021 Conference: https://www.bbsw.org/bbsw2021   Topics: 0:00 Janet's background prior to founding Statistics Collaborative, Inc. 3:00 Janet's initial research interest as a consultant 4:10 Why did Janet start her own business as opposed to joining a company or university.  5:45 Who were Janet's first clients? 8:00 What did Janet want to instill in her company? 15:50 Earning enough money to hire people 18:55 Initial ratio of clients to employees 22:42 Janet's company's statistical tech stack 25:00 Different challenges at different stages of the company 27:28 Growing a company but not taking on every possible client or project 28:13 Statisticians as entrepreneurs 37:00 Choosing the right people

Craig Dippman joins us this week to talk about his racing at Lima, Eldora and Oakshade as well as this weekend's upcoming Dippman Motorsports Night at Oakshade Raceway. Jordan Wittes, car owner and DirtIsMyGlitter photographer will talk about her Driver of the Week program. Plus all the latest racing news.

From August 12, 2017: The new Netflix documentary Icarus may seem at first glance off the beaten path for Lawfare. It's a film about doping in international sports, not national security law or policy. But as Benjamin Wittes explained when he reviewed it here, it's really about much more than that:Icarus is not about L'Affaire Russe or Russian interference with the 2016 election. But if you want to understand L'Affaire Russe, you should watch it. Because Icarus is the story of the Russian government's corruption of the integrity of supposedly neutral international processes and its use of covert action to tamper with those processes. If that sounds a little familiar, it should. It is easy to substitute in one's mind as one watches this film a foreign country's electoral system for the elaborate anti-doping testing regime whose systematic circumvention and undermining Icarus portrays. The corruption of process is similar. The motivation—the elevation of Russian national pride—significantly overlaps. The lies about it in the face of evidence are indistinguishable. And the result in both cases is a legitimacy crisis, of Olympic medals in one case and of a presidential election in another—a crisis that produces investigation and scandal.This week, Wittes asked Fogel to come on the podcast and talk about the film and its relationship to the broader concerns about Russia that have dominated public attention of late.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Maries Eltern sind in finanzielle Not geraten, es droht die Zwangsversteigerung ihres Pferdehofes. Die Steinbachs haben eine tolle Idee, denn eine Gemeinde ist nur so stark wie ihr Zusammenhalt. Schafft es die Gemeinde von Altmühlen den Wittes zu helfen?

Maries Eltern sind in finanzielle Not geraten, es droht die Zwangsversteigerung ihres Pferdehofes. Die Steinbachs haben eine tolle Idee, denn eine Gemeinde ist nur so stark wie ihr Zusammenhalt. Schafft es die Gemeinde von Altmühlen den Wittes zu helfen?

Maries Eltern sind in finanzielle Not geraten, es droht die Zwangsversteigerung ihres Pferdehofes. Die Steinbachs haben eine tolle Idee, denn eine Gemeinde ist nur so stark wie ihr Zusammenhalt. Schafft es die Gemeinde von Altmühlen den Wittes zu helfen?

Maries Eltern sind in finanzielle Not geraten, es droht die Zwangsversteigerung ihres Pferdehofes. Die Steinbachs haben eine tolle Idee, denn eine Gemeinde ist nur so stark wie ihr Zusammenhalt. Schafft es die Gemeinde von Altmühlen den Wittes zu helfen?

Collaboration is starting to take shape as the village's Jews weigh reporting themselves to the authorities. Meanwhile, the rest of the town goes to the movies, where someone boos a clip os Petain and Hitler shaking hands. Armistice Day is awkward when the Germans are in charge. Marcel gets sent off to a camp, but a German soldier saves his son. Sarah and Ben agree that the way Mr. and Mrs. Schwartz kiss is really gross.

Sarah and Ben talk about episodes 3 and 4, including who exactly counts as “French” in the French village, what happens to France after the German occupation, what the Communists are up to, and who that guy was who fell out of the sky was. The hosts also delve—as promised—into the nature of complicity, resistance, and what lessons we can apply to our current moment. Ben has some problems with Mr. Schwartz, but maybe it’s too soon to judge?

Sarah has watched the whole show. Ben has just started, so no spoilers! The hosts discuss what makes “A French Village” resonate so well with modern politics. Yes, it’s about Nazis. But it’s not about camps or the front lines. Instead, it’s about relatively normal, relatable people trying to come to grips with events they don’t entirely understand. It involves both cowardice and heroism, but maybe more importantly, a lot in between. There’s moral ambiguity — something that happens a lot in politics (especially lately) but that we don’t talk about enough. Sarah and Ben review the setting, the characters, and the events of the first two episodes. Sarah gives her literary analysis and criticism of the show, Ben provides some historical explanation and color. They agree that, at this pace, it’ll take about a year for Ben to make it through the entire series. À bientôt!

Brookings scholars Tamara Wittes and Madiha Afzal discuss their policy proposals for international security, part of the new Blueprints for American Renewal & Prosperity project at Brookings. Wittes focuses on what *not* to do in the Middle East; Afzal on countering extremism through education. Also David Wessel, focuses on the proposed child tax credit in President Biden's COVID-19 relief package, which Wessel says would substantially reduce the number of children living in poverty. Subscribe to Brookings podcasts here or on iTunes, send feedback email to BCP@Brookings.edu, and follow us and tweet us at @policypodcasts on Twitter. The Brookings Cafeteria is part of the Brookings Podcast Network.

Most of the problems we face as feds aren't new and there are tons of orgs out there doing great work we should leverage. Think tanks are one of the main producers of research products we can use - and you should understand what's out there in your area of expertise. The amazing Benjamin Wittes joined me to discus what think tanks are and how you can use their output to work smarter, not harder. I connected with him via the fantastic organization, #NatSecGirlSquad. (Not gonna lie - was totally fan-girling while recording this interview. If there was a pantheon of wonk gods, Benjamin Wittes would be in it.) You can find Mr. Wittes' work in lots of places, but I recommend starting with these links: https://benjaminwittes.com/ https://www.lawfareblog.com/contributors/bwittes  https://www.brookings.edu/experts/benjamin-wittes/ https://www.amazon.com/Unmaking-Presidency-Donald-Trumps-Powerful/dp/0374175365  

On the Gist, election feelings. In the interview, Lawfare’s Benjamin Wittes is here as we continue working through the results after election day. He and Mike discuss how the next few months could play out, what a transition might look like, and the ways Trump is considering fighting dirty. Wittes is the author of Unmaking the Presidency: Donald Trump’s War on the World’s Most Powerful Office. In the spiel, the Trafalgar group got too much wrong. Email us at thegist@slate.com Podcast production by Daniel Schroeder and Margaret Kelley. Slate Plus members get bonus segments and ad-free podcast feeds. Sign up now. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On the Gist, election feelings. In the interview, Lawfare’s Benjamin Wittes is here as we continue working through the results after election day. He and Mike discuss how the next few months could play out, what a transition might look like, and the ways Trump is considering fighting dirty. Wittes is the author of Unmaking the Presidency: Donald Trump’s War on the World’s Most Powerful Office. In the spiel, the Trafalgar group got too much wrong. Email us at thegist@slate.com Podcast production by Daniel Schroeder and Margaret Kelley. Slate Plus members get bonus segments and ad-free podcast feeds. Sign up now. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We are halfway through our guest hosting week. Today, Kate Klonick takes the mic. She is an assistant professor at St. John’s Law School, a fellow at the Information Society Project at Yale Law School, and researcher of the intersection between law and tech. She’s also co-host of a daily YouTube series called In Lieu of Fun. On the Gist, how Kate found herself on a daily live show during quarantine. In the interview, Kate talks to Ben Wittes, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, co-founder and editor-in-chief of Lawfare, and Kate’s co-host on In Lieu of Fun. They discuss how the global pandemic spurred a need for intelligent discussion in a less than lateral way. Guests on their show have ranged from apiarists to the former president of Estonia. Wittes wanted to build something that welcomed a community, allowing for audience input around guest selection and conversation topics. Along the way, he found an avenue that continues to forge new friendships without the stale in-person meet and greets we so often find at happy hours. In the spiel, what it’s like to build an online community during this crisis. Email us at thegist@slate.com Podcast production by Daniel Schroeder and Margaret Kelley. Slate Plus members get bonus segments and ad-free podcast feeds. Sign up now. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We are halfway through our guest hosting week. Today, Kate Klonick takes the mic. She is an assistant professor at St. John’s Law School, a fellow at the Information Society Project at Yale Law School, and researcher of the intersection between law and tech. She’s also co-host of a daily YouTube series called In Lieu of Fun. On the Gist, how Kate found herself on a daily live show during quarantine. In the interview, Kate talks to Ben Wittes, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, co-founder and editor-in-chief of Lawfare, and Kate’s co-host on In Lieu of Fun. They discuss how the global pandemic spurred a need for intelligent discussion in a less than lateral way. Guests on their show have ranged from apiarists to the former president of Estonia. Wittes wanted to build something that welcomed a community, allowing for audience input around guest selection and conversation topics. Along the way, he found an avenue that continues to forge new friendships without the stale in-person meet and greets we so often find at happy hours. In the spiel, what it’s like to build an online community during this crisis. Email us at thegist@slate.com Podcast production by Daniel Schroeder and Margaret Kelley. Slate Plus members get bonus segments and ad-free podcast feeds. Sign up now. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

“What if J. Edgar Hoover Had Been a Moron?” That’s the question Lawfare’s editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes asks in a new article about his experience learning that his tweets had been written up in an intelligence report by the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis. After reporting on an internal DHS document and publishing other documents to Twitter, Wittes learned that I&A had distributed intelligence reports about those tweets along with the tweets of New York Times reporter Mike Baker. After Shane Harris reported on I&A’s activities at the Washington Post, DHS announced that it was halting the practice of collecting information on journalists and the head of the office was reassigned. Quinta Jurecic discussed the bizarre story with Wittes and former Assistant Attorney General for National Security David Kris.

Unmaking the Presidency: Donald Trump's War on the World's Most Powerful Office (Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2020) guides the reader through both historical and contemporary considerations of how the American presidency was originally structured and how it has evolved over more than 200 years. This fascinating examination of the presidency starts with the oath of office, as outlined in the Constitution, and explains how Donald Trump, from the very moment he became the 45th president of the United States, was at odds with the constitutional system designed in 1787. Susan Hennessey and Benjamin Wittes, respectively executive editor and editor in chief of Lawfare and both senior fellows at The Brookings Institution, detail the historical basis for what they and many scholars refer to as the “traditional” presidency. This concept of the traditional presidency—which contains both the formal powers of the presidency as outlined in the Constitution as well as the norms and traditions that have taken root within the office over the course of American history—is being replaced, according to Hennessey and Wittes, by the “expressive” presidency. The expressive presidency presents a distinctly different vision of the office itself and essentially replaces the process through which presidential actions are taken and decisions are made with a much more personal approach to the office and the way that it functions. Hennessey and Wittes explain that this reinterpretation of the presidency conflates the person and the office, combining the two in ways that rely much more on the president’s personality and far less on the role of the office within the constitutional system. While the American presidency was unique in the way it combined the role of symbolic head of state and political leader, the transformation of the office by President Donald Trump has, essentially, unmade structural aspects of the office that held these two roles as separate and distinct. As most scholars and students of the presidency know, the office itself has changed in many ways over the course of 45 presidents and more than 200 years. The authors acknowledge this evolution of the office itself and the way that the president’s personality has become more integral to the office, but Unmaking the Presidency argues that the Trump presidency has potentially taken the office off of its constitutional underpinning, and through a variety of norm disruptions and structural changes, has essentially “unmade” the office. Whether it remains on this trajectory or returns to its previous position in some form is dependent on the outcome of the 2020 election. Lilly J. Goren is professor of political science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She is co-editor of the award winning book, Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Unmaking the Presidency: Donald Trump's War on the World's Most Powerful Office (Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2020) guides the reader through both historical and contemporary considerations of how the American presidency was originally structured and how it has evolved over more than 200 years. This fascinating examination of the presidency starts with the oath of office, as outlined in the Constitution, and explains how Donald Trump, from the very moment he became the 45th president of the United States, was at odds with the constitutional system designed in 1787. Susan Hennessey and Benjamin Wittes, respectively executive editor and editor in chief of Lawfare and both senior fellows at The Brookings Institution, detail the historical basis for what they and many scholars refer to as the “traditional” presidency. This concept of the traditional presidency—which contains both the formal powers of the presidency as outlined in the Constitution as well as the norms and traditions that have taken root within the office over the course of American history—is being replaced, according to Hennessey and Wittes, by the “expressive” presidency. The expressive presidency presents a distinctly different vision of the office itself and essentially replaces the process through which presidential actions are taken and decisions are made with a much more personal approach to the office and the way that it functions. Hennessey and Wittes explain that this reinterpretation of the presidency conflates the person and the office, combining the two in ways that rely much more on the president’s personality and far less on the role of the office within the constitutional system. While the American presidency was unique in the way it combined the role of symbolic head of state and political leader, the transformation of the office by President Donald Trump has, essentially, unmade structural aspects of the office that held these two roles as separate and distinct. As most scholars and students of the presidency know, the office itself has changed in many ways over the course of 45 presidents and more than 200 years. The authors acknowledge this evolution of the office itself and the way that the president’s personality has become more integral to the office, but Unmaking the Presidency argues that the Trump presidency has potentially taken the office off of its constitutional underpinning, and through a variety of norm disruptions and structural changes, has essentially “unmade” the office. Whether it remains on this trajectory or returns to its previous position in some form is dependent on the outcome of the 2020 election. Lilly J. Goren is professor of political science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She is co-editor of the award winning book, Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Unmaking the Presidency: Donald Trump's War on the World's Most Powerful Office (Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2020) guides the reader through both historical and contemporary considerations of how the American presidency was originally structured and how it has evolved over more than 200 years. This fascinating examination of the presidency starts with the oath of office, as outlined in the Constitution, and explains how Donald Trump, from the very moment he became the 45th president of the United States, was at odds with the constitutional system designed in 1787. Susan Hennessey and Benjamin Wittes, respectively executive editor and editor in chief of Lawfare and both senior fellows at The Brookings Institution, detail the historical basis for what they and many scholars refer to as the “traditional” presidency. This concept of the traditional presidency—which contains both the formal powers of the presidency as outlined in the Constitution as well as the norms and traditions that have taken root within the office over the course of American history—is being replaced, according to Hennessey and Wittes, by the “expressive” presidency. The expressive presidency presents a distinctly different vision of the office itself and essentially replaces the process through which presidential actions are taken and decisions are made with a much more personal approach to the office and the way that it functions. Hennessey and Wittes explain that this reinterpretation of the presidency conflates the person and the office, combining the two in ways that rely much more on the president’s personality and far less on the role of the office within the constitutional system. While the American presidency was unique in the way it combined the role of symbolic head of state and political leader, the transformation of the office by President Donald Trump has, essentially, unmade structural aspects of the office that held these two roles as separate and distinct. As most scholars and students of the presidency know, the office itself has changed in many ways over the course of 45 presidents and more than 200 years. The authors acknowledge this evolution of the office itself and the way that the president’s personality has become more integral to the office, but Unmaking the Presidency argues that the Trump presidency has potentially taken the office off of its constitutional underpinning, and through a variety of norm disruptions and structural changes, has essentially “unmade” the office. Whether it remains on this trajectory or returns to its previous position in some form is dependent on the outcome of the 2020 election. Lilly J. Goren is professor of political science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She is co-editor of the award winning book, Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Unmaking the Presidency: Donald Trump's War on the World's Most Powerful Office (Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2020) guides the reader through both historical and contemporary considerations of how the American presidency was originally structured and how it has evolved over more than 200 years. This fascinating examination of the presidency starts with the oath of office, as outlined in the Constitution, and explains how Donald Trump, from the very moment he became the 45th president of the United States, was at odds with the constitutional system designed in 1787. Susan Hennessey and Benjamin Wittes, respectively executive editor and editor in chief of Lawfare and both senior fellows at The Brookings Institution, detail the historical basis for what they and many scholars refer to as the “traditional” presidency. This concept of the traditional presidency—which contains both the formal powers of the presidency as outlined in the Constitution as well as the norms and traditions that have taken root within the office over the course of American history—is being replaced, according to Hennessey and Wittes, by the “expressive” presidency. The expressive presidency presents a distinctly different vision of the office itself and essentially replaces the process through which presidential actions are taken and decisions are made with a much more personal approach to the office and the way that it functions. Hennessey and Wittes explain that this reinterpretation of the presidency conflates the person and the office, combining the two in ways that rely much more on the president’s personality and far less on the role of the office within the constitutional system. While the American presidency was unique in the way it combined the role of symbolic head of state and political leader, the transformation of the office by President Donald Trump has, essentially, unmade structural aspects of the office that held these two roles as separate and distinct. As most scholars and students of the presidency know, the office itself has changed in many ways over the course of 45 presidents and more than 200 years. The authors acknowledge this evolution of the office itself and the way that the president’s personality has become more integral to the office, but Unmaking the Presidency argues that the Trump presidency has potentially taken the office off of its constitutional underpinning, and through a variety of norm disruptions and structural changes, has essentially “unmade” the office. Whether it remains on this trajectory or returns to its previous position in some form is dependent on the outcome of the 2020 election. Lilly J. Goren is professor of political science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She is co-editor of the award winning book, Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Unmaking the Presidency: Donald Trump's War on the World's Most Powerful Office (Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2020) guides the reader through both historical and contemporary considerations of how the American presidency was originally structured and how it has evolved over more than 200 years. This fascinating examination of the presidency starts with the oath of office, as outlined in the Constitution, and explains how Donald Trump, from the very moment he became the 45th president of the United States, was at odds with the constitutional system designed in 1787. Susan Hennessey and Benjamin Wittes, respectively executive editor and editor in chief of Lawfare and both senior fellows at The Brookings Institution, detail the historical basis for what they and many scholars refer to as the “traditional” presidency. This concept of the traditional presidency—which contains both the formal powers of the presidency as outlined in the Constitution as well as the norms and traditions that have taken root within the office over the course of American history—is being replaced, according to Hennessey and Wittes, by the “expressive” presidency. The expressive presidency presents a distinctly different vision of the office itself and essentially replaces the process through which presidential actions are taken and decisions are made with a much more personal approach to the office and the way that it functions. Hennessey and Wittes explain that this reinterpretation of the presidency conflates the person and the office, combining the two in ways that rely much more on the president’s personality and far less on the role of the office within the constitutional system. While the American presidency was unique in the way it combined the role of symbolic head of state and political leader, the transformation of the office by President Donald Trump has, essentially, unmade structural aspects of the office that held these two roles as separate and distinct. As most scholars and students of the presidency know, the office itself has changed in many ways over the course of 45 presidents and more than 200 years. The authors acknowledge this evolution of the office itself and the way that the president’s personality has become more integral to the office, but Unmaking the Presidency argues that the Trump presidency has potentially taken the office off of its constitutional underpinning, and through a variety of norm disruptions and structural changes, has essentially “unmade” the office. Whether it remains on this trajectory or returns to its previous position in some form is dependent on the outcome of the 2020 election. Lilly J. Goren is professor of political science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She is co-editor of the award winning book, Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Doctors take a stand for single payer health care. How Donald Trump is unmaking the presidency. Plus Bill Press on the state of America’s labor movement.   Why doctors are leading a movement to cover medical care for all Americans.Donald Trump’s lasting impact on the highest office in the land. Plus Bill Press talks with Stephen Greenhouse, author of Beaten Down, Worked Up: The Past, Present, and Future of American Labor.   Susan Rogers As a physician, Dr. Susan Rogers knows well the daily failures of a profit driven health care system and the inequities it creates. That’s why she says only a single payer system can provide the kind of health care all Americans deserve.   Benjamin Wittes A new book from Benjamin Wittes and co-author Susan Hennessey offers a piercing analysis of Donald Trump’s presidency and a compelling argument that he is transforming the nature of the office.  Wittes says that as Trump continues to put his personal interest ahead of the public good, the future of democratic governance is at risk.   Steven Greenhouse Are unions making a comeback? Bill Press talks about the past, present, and future of American labor with Steven Greenhouse, author of Beaten Down, Worked Up: The Past, Present, and Future of American Labor.  If you'd like to hear the entire interview, visit BillPressPods.com.   Jim Hightower Will Democrats Be Democrats, or Fraidy Cats?

In this episode, Dr. Janet Wittes, Founder and President of WCG Statistics Collaborative sits down with WCG’s President of Patient Advocacy, Steve Smith. Their conversation focuses on the importance of reliability and efficiency in clinical trials, and how biostatisticians work closely with clinicians and patients to help ensure clear results from trials. Moreover, they dive into how biomarkers can serve as surrogate endpoints for a trial, especially in the case of rare disease studies.

President Trump has not just violated the norms of his office with haphazard foreign policy, vindictive impulses and counterfactual narratives. He has also, according to Lawfare's Benjamin Wittes, begun to reshape our common understanding of the American presidency itself. In his new book "Unmaking the Presidency," Wittes argues that Trump has stripped the office of civic virtue, replacing it with a system that "elevates the expressive and personal dimensions of the office over everything else." We'll talk to Wittes about his book, the status of the Senate impeachment trial, and why he says it's time to defend traditional notions of the presidency. ***IMPORTANT CHANGES TO FORUM COMMENTS*** To help us focus on other ways to connect with you, Forum is going to discontinue online comments on KQED.org as of Feb 7. And we want to hear from you: how would you like to engage with us in the future? Please email forum@kqed.org. You can always join the discussion by emailing forum@kqed.org and calling during the live show and posting to Facebook and Twitter anytime.  

This hour we pull apart one sentence, written in the hours after September 11th, 2001, that has led to the longest war in U.S. history. We examine how just 60 words of legal language have blurred the line between war and peace. Last weekend President Trump authorized a strike that killed Iranian General Qasem Soleimani in Iraq. The news had us thinking about an episode we produced in 2014. We pulled apart one sentence, written in the hours after September 11th, 2001, that has led to the longest war in U.S. history. We examine how just 60 words of legal language have blurred the line between war and peace. In the hours after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, a lawyer sat down in front of a computer and started writing a legal justification for taking action against those responsible. The language that he drafted and that President George W. Bush signed into law - called the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) -  has at its heart one single sentence, 60 words long. Over the last decade, those 60 words have become the legal foundation for the "war on terror." In this collaboration with BuzzFeed, reporter Gregory Johnsen tells us the story of how this has come to be one of the most important, confusing, troubling sentences of the last two decades. We go into the meetings that took place in the chaotic days just after 9/11, speak with Congresswoman Barbara Lee and former Congressman Ron Dellums about the vote on the AUMF. We hear from former White House and State Department lawyers John Bellinger & Harold Koh. We learn how this legal language unleashed Guantanamo, Navy Seal raids and drone strikes. And we speak with journalist Daniel Klaidman, legal expert Benjamin Wittes and Virginia Senator Tim Kaine about how these words came to be interpreted, and what they mean for the future of war and peace. Finally, we check back in with Wittes, to see how the AUMF has trickled into the 2020s. Produced by Matt Kielty and Kelsey Padgett with original music by Dylan Keefe.  Watch Congresswomen Barbara Lee's speech here. 

Welcome to the first episode of Big Data, Big Issues. Today we will be talking about Existential Risks Surveillance and Big Data, taking a look at a series of sensitive topics, and I will provide my thoughts on each and every one of them. Here is the content I am talking about in this video:  ► 1:38 - An overview of the topics ► 3:00 - The Vulnerable World HypothesisNick Bostrom has put up a new working paper to his personal site (for the first time in two years?), called The Vulnerable World Hypothesis. Scientific and technological progress might change people's capabilities or incentives in ways that would destabilize civilization. For example, advances in DIY biohacking tools might make it easy for anybody with basic training in biology to kill millions; novel military technologies could trigger arms races in which whoever strikes first has a decisive advantage; or some economically advantageous process may be invented that produces disastrous negative global externalities that are hard to regulate. This paper introduces the concept of a vulnerable world: roughly, one in which there is some level of technological development at which civilization almost certainly gets devastated by default, i.e. unless it has exited the ‘semi‐anarchic default condition’. Several counterfactual historical and speculative future vulnerabilities are analyzed and arranged into a typology. A general ability to stabilize a vulnerable world would require greatly amplified capacities for preventive policing and global governance. The vulnerable world hypothesis thus offers a new perspective from which to evaluate the risk‐benefit balance of developments towards ubiquitous surveillance or a unipolar world order. ► 7:00 - Rapidly Emerging Gray OrbsWe are talking about Future Weapons and Emerging Threats, based on papers by by Wittes and Blum. From drone warfare in the Middle East to digital spying by the National Security Agency, the U.S. government has harnessed the power of cutting-edge technology to awesome effect. But what happens when ordinary people have the same tools at their fingertips? Advances in cybertechnology, biotechnology, and robotics mean that more people than ever before have access to potentially dangerous technologies-from drones to computer networks and biological agents-which could be used to attack states and private citizens alike. ► 12:26 - Surveillance CapitalismWe are talking about Surveillance Capitalism and Instrumentalism. The challenges to humanity posed by the digital future, the first detailed examination of the unprecedented form of power called "surveillance capitalism," and the quest by powerful corporations to predict and control our behavior. ► 28:48 - Achieving StabilizationWe are looking into potential solutions, like restricting technological development, ensuring that there does not exist a large population of actors representing a wide and recognizably human distribution of motives; establishing extremely effective preventative policing and estrablishing effective global governance. ► 34:16 - Legal Standards, or The State of Exception To learn more visit our website:  ► https://bigdatabigissues.com/ Follow Sheldon Kreger on LinkedIn:► https://www.linkedin.com/in/sheldon-kreger-16054430/ 

At the Texas Tribune Festival in Austin, Texas, Benjamin Wittes sat down in front of a live audience with Judge John Bates, a senior district judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Bates has served on the court since 2001, and from 2009 to 2013, he served as the presiding judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FISA) Court. Wittes and Judge Bates talked about the role of the FISA Court, its procedures and caseload, its recent prominene in the news, and how the court might respond to cases that have an overtly political context.

Attorney General Bill Barr announced on Wednesday, April 10, that the Mueller report will be released next week. While we wait for the release, Quinta Jurecic and Benjamin Wittes have written a "Memo to the Press: How Not to Screw Up on the Mueller Report." Jurecic and Wittes argue that the press got lost in the confusion of Barr's letter to Congress announcing the special counsel's top-line conclusions, and they offer nine principles for how to "[do] better the second time." You can listen to Quinta Jurecic read that article in the latest edition of the Lawfare Podcast Shorts. 

George Papadopoulos, Glenn Greenwald, and Ben Wittes are all a part of this packed episode of Skullduggery. Co-hosts Michael Isikoff and Daniel Klaidman analyze the fallout of the Bill Barr Mueller Report summery even further alongside Wittes, Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution. Then Greenwald joins to talk about journalists from various outlets possibly misleading the public with their coverage of the Russia scandal. Then, excerpts from Isikoff's exclusive one-on-one interview with Papadopoulos from Politics and Prose bookstore in DC in front of a live audience, help paint a clearer picture of what actually did, or didn't happen, to the man who started it all. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

While researching the Watergate Road Map, Benjamin Wittes discovered a letter written by the then-Chairman of the House Committee on the Judiciary Peter Rodino to the chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. In the letter, Rodino requested that any material relevant to the House’s impeachment inquiry be transferred to his committee. This morning, Wittes analyzed in a Lawfare article how the letter could instruct current Chairman of the Judiciary Committee Jerry Nadler on what steps he can take to ensure his committee properly executes its constitutional obligation. In the latest edition of the Lawfare Podcast Shorts, you can listen to that article in-full, read by the author.

Ben Wittes is the Editor-in-Chief and co-Founder of the Lawfare blog, an online publication dedicated to national security issues, published by the Lawfare Institute in cooperation with the Brookings Institution.  It was started in September 2010 by Wittes, a former editorial writer for the Washington Post, Harvard Law School professor Jack Goldsmith and University of Texas at Austin law professor Robert Chesney.  What started out as a fun little project in 2010, quickly turned into a massive news source for those interested in national security law. In 2017 alone the site had 15 million page views.  If you have ever wanted to be a journalist this is the Espresso Shots episode for you. Brew up a flight of different espresso blends, because you need to be energized for today’s amazing episode. Ben Wittes has been a journalist for more than 2 decades and, despite never going to law school, has a ton of knowledge about writing for an audience of those in the law field. For the next little while, Ben is here to give you some advice on the many ways enter the journalism field with a bang! He’s even got two pieces of advice that haven’t been heard before on T4C, so you should definitely stick around! And, to make this interview even better, Andrea and Ben share plenty of laughs along the way. Wanna add some humor to your mug this morning? Why not press Play? It will be a LATTE of fun! The post 103: How to Break Into Legal & National Security Writing, Journalism & Analysis w/ Ben Wittes, Lawfare Blog [Espresso Shots] appeared first on Time4Coffee.

Ben Wittes of Lawfare and the Brookings Institution tells us four things to watch for in the wake of the ouster of Attorney General Jeff Sessions. For more from Wittes on this, check out the latest episode of The Lawfare Podcast. Plus, Mary McCord, who used to lead the National Security Division at the Department of Justice, explains why she remains hopeful that her old agency can keep its blinders on and stay above politics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ben Wittes of Lawfare and the Brookings Institution tells us four things to watch for in the wake of the ouster of Attorney General Jeff Sessions. For more from Wittes on this, check out the latest episode of The Lawfare Podcast. Plus, Mary McCord, who used to lead the National Security Division at the Department of Justice, explains why she remains hopeful that her old agency can keep its blinders on and stay above politics. This episode is brought to you by ZipRecruiter – the smartest way to hire. Try ZipRecruiter for free at ZipRecruiter.com/WhatNext. And by Merrill Lynch. Get the advice and guidance to help you live the life you want at ML.com/you. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ben Wittes is the Editor-in-Chief and co-Founder of the Lawfare blog, an online publication dedicated to national security issues, published by the Lawfare Institute in cooperation with the Brookings Institution.  It was started in September 2010 by Wittes, a former editorial writer for the Washington Post, Harvard Law School professor Jack Goldsmith and University of Texas at Austin law professor Robert Chesney. What started out as a fun little project in 2010, quickly turned into a massive news source for those interested in national security law. The post 32: Lawfare Blog & Nat’l Security w/ Ben Wittes, Editor-in-Chief appeared first on Time4Coffee.

This week, Shannon Togawa Mercer and Benjamin Wittes interviewed David Anderson QC, who served as the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation in the U.K. from 2011 to 2017. Anderson has appeared 150 times in the E.U.'s Court of Justice and the General Court in Luxembourg and is one of the country's leading experts in the national security law field. He joined Wittes and Mercer for a conversation on his career, his role in reviewing terrorism legislation, the changing nature of intelligence in the U.K., and much more. 

President Donald Trump has spent his first months faced with a potential scandal involving Russia, an issue that’s only grown since the election with discussions and investigations about possible obstruction and collusion. In recent weeks, this has dominated national political debates, especially in Congress and the White House. Benjamin Wittes, co-founder and editor-in-chief of the Lawfare blog, joins this episode of Politics & Polls to discuss where things stand in the Trump-Russia scandal. The Lawfare blog is “devoted to sober and serious discussion of ‘hard national security choices.’” Wittes, a journalist who focuses on national security and law, is also a senior fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution. He is the author of “Detention and Denial: The Case for Candor After Guantanamo”, published in November 2011; co-editor of “Constitution 3.0: Freedom and Technological Change,” published in December 2011; and editor of “Campaign 2012: Twelve Independent Ideas for Improving American Public Policy,” published in May 2017 by the Brookings Institution Press.

Benjamin Wittes is editor of Lawfare blog and senior fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution. He's also the man of the moment. Wittes and Lawfare have gone from relatiavely obscure policy wonks to the center of the modern media world thanks to expertise in the legal side of national security and deep connections within Washington D.C. Mashable's senior editor for science and special projects Andrew Freedman joins to talk with Wittes about what that's been like — and why he hopes his moment in the sun will eventually come to an end.

Ben Wittes has a term for the nonsense justifications he observes coming from the Trump administration. He calls it ENSH: errant national security horseshit. On Thursday’s show, Wittes shovels up some of the larger ENSH dumps of the past two weeks. Wittes is editor in chief of Lawfare.  In the Spiel, naming a long overdue Lobstar. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ben Wittes has a term for the nonsense justifications he observes coming from the Trump administration. He calls it ENSH: errant national security horseshit. On Thursday’s show, Wittes shovels up some of the larger ENSH dumps of the past two weeks. Wittes is editor in chief of Lawfare.  In the Spiel, naming a long overdue Lobstar. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What did we learn from Monday’s public testimony of FBI Director James Comey? National security ace Ben Wittes says Comey’s statements were intriguingly “gentle,” though they should still distress the president. Wittes is editor in chief of Lawfare and a senior fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution. For the Spiel, Neil Gorsuch talks about a pointless race he once did and quotes David Foster Wallace, but doesn’t talk about his judicial philosophy. Today’s sponsors: ZipRecruiter. Post your job listing to all the top job sites with a single click. Try it for free by going to ZipRecruiter.com/gist. Green Mountain Coffee. Green Mountain Coffee is passionate about making a smoother tasting cup. Try it today with $4 off when you buy two boxes of most Green Mountain Coffee K-Cup pods at keurig.com with code TRYGMC. Join Slate Plus! Members get bonus segments, exclusive member-only podcasts, and more. Sign up for a free trial today at slate.com/gistplus. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What did we learn from Monday’s public testimony of FBI Director James Comey? National security ace Ben Wittes says Comey’s statements were intriguingly “gentle,” though they should still distress the president. Wittes is editor in chief of Lawfare and a senior fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution. For the Spiel, Neil Gorsuch talks about a pointless race he once did and quotes David Foster Wallace, but doesn’t talk about his judicial philosophy. Today’s sponsors: ZipRecruiter. Post your job listing to all the top job sites with a single click. Try it for free by going to ZipRecruiter.com/gist. Green Mountain Coffee. Green Mountain Coffee is passionate about making a smoother tasting cup. Try it today with $4 off when you buy two boxes of most Green Mountain Coffee K-Cup pods at keurig.com with code TRYGMC. Join Slate Plus! Members get bonus segments, exclusive member-only podcasts, and more. Sign up for a free trial today at slate.com/gistplus. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

President Donald Trump’s management style has created lots of big, messy legal questions. With his new executive order on immigration, and his calls for a congressional investigation into wiretapping, Trump is plunging the government into uncharted territory. Benjamin Wittes of the Brookings Institution is here to explain. Wittes is the editor in chief of the Lawfare blog. In the Spiel, the fight for Tom Price’s old House seat has already become deeply silly. Today’s sponsors: Indochino, the company that’s reinventing men’s fashion. Go to Indochino.com to get any premium Indochino suit for just $389, plus free shipping, when you use promo code gist at checkout. Betterment, an automated investing service that makes investing easy. For a limited time, sign up for Betterment and you may qualify for a free Canary home security system to help secure your home. Visit Betterment.com/gist for more details. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

President Donald Trump’s management style has created lots of big, messy legal questions. With his new executive order on immigration, and his calls for a congressional investigation into wiretapping, Trump is plunging the government into uncharted territory. Benjamin Wittes of the Brookings Institution is here to explain. Wittes is the editor in chief of the Lawfare blog. In the Spiel, the fight for Tom Price’s old House seat has already become deeply silly. Today’s sponsors: Indochino, the company that’s reinventing men’s fashion. Go to Indochino.com to get any premium Indochino suit for just $389, plus free shipping, when you use promo code gist at checkout. Betterment, an automated investing service that makes investing easy. For a limited time, sign up for Betterment and you may qualify for a free Canary home security system to help secure your home. Visit Betterment.com/gist for more details. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

, a senior fellow in Governance Studies and co-founder and editor-in-chief of The LawFare Blog, is co-author of a new study,-“”; and a legislative proposal to close the sextortion sentencing gap. In the podcast, Wittes explains the crime itself; the importance of cyber security and how teens and parents can protect themselves online. “Teenager cyber security hygiene actually matters a great deal,” Wittes says. “It just matters a great deal to protect values and goods that the cyber security community has not traditionally focused on.” Also in this podcast: meet , a fellow for the Project on 21st Century City Governance, part of the Centennial Scholar Initiative. Also stay up-to-date about a potential “Brexit” from the EU with some highlights from our Brookings event “.”   Show Notes   Subscribe to the Brookings Cafeteria on , listen in all the usual places, and send feedback email to . Thanks to audio engineer and producer Zack Kulzer, with editing help from Mark Hoelscher, plus thanks to Carissa Nietsche, Bill Finan, Jessica Pavone, Eric Abalahin, Rebecca Viser, Brionne Smith, and our intern Sarah AbdelRahim.        

With the proliferation of data and technology, new threats to national security are coming, Benjamin Wittes explains in a talk about his book, "The Future of Violence: Robots and Germs, Hackers and Drones – Confronting a New Age of Threat." A senior fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution, Wittes is co-founder of the Lawfare blog and member of the Hoover Institution’s Task Force on National Security and Law. (University of Virginia School of Law, Nov. 12, 2015)

This week, Benjamin Wittes spoke at the Strauss Center for International Security and Law at the University of Texas on his and Gabriella Blum's new book, The Future of Violence. Robert Chesney introduces Wittes in what turns into a lively discussion with an engaged audience.   

(originally aired on 8/30/13) In this inaugural edition of the Brookings Cafeteria podcast, , senior fellow in Governance Studies, talks with host Fred Dews about a range of issues at the junction of liberty and security, privacy and government surveillance. Wittes explains how liberty and security are not always in tension; how we might think about the government's surveillance activities; and why technology makes this moment in the history of the world both exciting and terrifying. Wittes is the co-founder and editor-in-chief of , which is devoted to sober and serious discussion of hard national security choices, and where you can  when he wrote, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

Conor Friedersdorf and Benjamin Wittes debate the ethics of drone warfare at the University of Richmond in November 2013.