Rational Security

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Benjamin Wittes, Natalie Orpett and Eric Ciaramella to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including:

• “The Art of the Ordeal.” The Trump administration has been at the center of yet another bout of shuttle diplomacy the last several weeks, after an initial “28-point plan” for peace in Ukraine it appeared to hash out with Russia was met with widespread skepticism, both at home and in Kiev — leading it to shift focus to a “19-point plan” officials hashed out in closer consultation with Ukrainian officials and European officials, which was subsequently rejected by Russian President Vladimir Putin. What does this chaotic process tell us about the Trump administration’s strategy and priorities? And what is it likely to mean for America’s Ukrainian allies? 

• “The War Crime on Drugs.” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is at the center of another controversy, this time over his reported order to “kill everybody” in the first strike on an alleged narcotics-smuggling boat this past September—an order that, intentionally or not, led to a second strike that killed several people who were by that point clinging to wreckage in the open sea, in seemingly clear violation of Defense Department practice and the laws of armed conflict. Hegseth and the White House have sought to shift responsibility for the second strike to senior military personnel, but it’s not clear whether Congress—where Democrats and Republicans on the armed services committees are threatening oversight—are persuaded.

• “Unlawful Good.” Several legislators who are also current or former servicemembers have been labeled the “Seditious Six” by the Trump administration and its allies for public statements they made reiterating that servicemembers’ are only obligated to follow lawful orders, specifically in relation to ongoing counter-narcotics military operations in the Caribbean. And at least one—Sen. Mark Kelly, a retired naval officer—has been publicly threatened with a court martial by the Defense Department. How seriously should we take these legal actions? And what could the broader ramifications be for the military?

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Anna Bower, Michael Feinberg, and Roger Parloff to talk through the week’s big domestic news stories, including:

• “Diving Head First into the Shallow End of the Jury Pool.” A federal magistrate judge has concluded that the government may well have made substantial misrepresentations and other errors before the Grand Jury in the prosecution of former FBI director James Comey, and has ruled that Comey is entitled access to extraordinary discovery to make his case that these errors warrant dismissal, among other possible remedies. What does this ruling—which is now on appeal—mean for the Comey prosecution and for the Trump administration’s other efforts to prosecute the president’s enemies?
• “The Ep Files: Fight the Future.” Republicans in Congress are hotly divided on the question of the Epstein files. While some Republicans (along with many Democrats) have sought broader disclosures from the Justice Department, among other sources, Speaker Mike Johnson and others have thrown up roadblocks to relevant requests, in part out of apparent concern that they may contain damaging revelations about President Trump. But the White House did an about-face this week, switching to support legislation that would compel disclosure of the investigatory materials—clearing the way for it to move forward. What explains the switch in time? And where might it lead?
• “Pipe Dreams.” The right wing media outlet The Blaze released a bombshell report last week, indicating that they had identified a law enforcement and intelligence official as the likely perpetrator of the Jan. 6, 2021, attempted pipe bombing of the DNC and RNC headquarters in Washington, D.C.—a longstanding obsession in certain corners of the internet. But its claims were quickly rebuked by senior FBI officials, triggering a round of mutual incrimination and accusation. What does this tell us about the state of the investigation and the broader relationship between the Trump administration, law enforcement officials, and prominent portions of his support base?

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Natalie Orpett, Eric Columbus, and Molly Roberts, to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including:

• “I Don’t Think You’re Ready for the Shutdown.” The record-setting shutdown of the U.S. government is set to come to an end after eight Democratic senators agreed to a continuing resolution that will fund all of the government through January 30, certain chunks of the government all the way through the end of the fiscal year, and made a number of concessions along the way. What should we make of this deal, and what are the political ramifications—particularly for Democrats, many of whom are quite angry at those who ultimately voted for this plan?
• “Overt Acts.” Last week, in a move quite publicly celebrated by his controversial clemency czar Ed Martin, President Trump issued pardons for dozens of individuals accused of participating in efforts to manipulate the results of the 2020 election in his favor, including his former attorney Rudy Giuliani and other alleged “unindicted co-conspirators” in his own, since-abandoned federal criminal prosecution. Indeed, Trump himself was the only one who was federally indicted for 2020 election manipulations, making the most immediate legal effect of these pardons unclear. What is Trump trying to accomplish in issuing them? And what could the ramifications be for future elections?
• “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit.” Even as his prosecutions against James Comey and Letitia James have faced headwinds, the Trump administration appears to be moving full speed ahead with criminal investigations against other of his perceived enemies—including a large-scale investigation into government reports alleging Russian support for Trump in 2016 that was recently transferred from Justice Department officials in Eastern Pennsylvania to the more Trump-friendly terrain of Southern Florida. What is the current state of the revenge campaign the Trump administration has been pursuing, and where does it seem set to lead?

This week, Scott sat down with co-hosts emeritus Benjamin Wittes and Alan Rozenshtein, and Senior Editor Kate Klonick, to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including:

• “Cracks in the Foundation.” The conservative Heritage Foundation—and the broader conservative movement it plays a central role in—has been going through a very public crisis over the past week after its president, Kevin Roberts, came to the defense of right-wing commentator Tucker Carlson after Carlson chose to host white nationalist Nick Fuentes on his podcast. This has led to resignations at the Heritage Foundation, condemnation by certain figures on the right, and a pseudo apology by Roberts. It has also led to a little bit of a reckoning over how some on the right, and to some extent Americans more broadly, have dealt with accusations of anti-Semitism, its relationship to various policy questions, as well as hate speech and other political perspectives. What should we be making of this crisis and what does it tell us about the different policy aspects that intersect with this question of anti-Semitism?
• “Turning Back the Clock.” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent promised that President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping would “consummate” a TikTok deal at their face-to-face last week. But no details have emerged to date. What should we make of this apparent hold-up—and of the TikTok saga altogether?  
• “A Foe By Any Other Name.” As the Trump administration has continued its military campaign against narcotics traffickers in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, U.S. officials have continued to draw parallels between current policies and the Global War on Terrorism, calling detainees “unlawful enemy combatants” and the groups being targeted “designated terrorist organizations.” “If you are a narco-terrorist…,” Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth recently tweeted in relation to one of the strikes, “we will treat you like we treat Al-Qaeda.” But how accurate are these parallels, and why is the Trump administration deploying them in this way?

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Public Service Fellow Ari Tabatabai and Managing Editor Tyler McBrien to talk through the week’s big news in national security, including:

• “Great APEC-tations.” President Trump is headed to Asia this week, both for a meeting of the regional Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) organization and a one-on-one sit down with Chinese president Xi Jinping. It’s a moment destined to spotlight one of the more quixotic areas of the second Trump administration’s foreign policy, only complicated further by his (and China’s) increasingly aggressive trade maneuvers, particularly around rare earth minerals. What should we expect this week? And what does it tell us about the Trump administration’s Asia policy?
• “Pirates of the Caribbean.” The U.S. military build-up in the Caribbean has continued apace, even as the Trump administration has expanded its controversial military campaign against narcotics traffickers into the eastern Pacific. Even as both sets of actions have put pressure on the Maduro regime, they’ve also created rifts within Trump’s coalition—where a few legislators have begun to join Democrats in demanding more answers from the Trump administration—and the executive branch, where tensions appear to have contributed to the early retirement of the military commander in charge of the operation. What constraints are there on how far the president can go in this space? And how far will he push them?
• “Too Calm After the Storm.” Hurricane Melissa, one of the strongest on record, made landfall in Jamaica yesterday, and is now hovering over Cuba (in weakened form) on its way to the Bahamas. The devastation it is expected to have left in its wake would in the past have been the subject of an almost immediate U.S. assistance response—but it’s not clear what will be forthcoming today or how effective it will be given the dismantling of U.S. foreign assistance agencies. How should we expect the Trump administration to respond? And what could the long term consequences be?