Rational Security – “The Wea Culpa Edition”
Lawfare Institute | November 5, 2025
Host: Scott R. Anderson
Guests: Benjamin Wittes (co-host emeritus), Alan Rozenshtein (co-host emeritus), Kate Klonick

Episode Overview

This episode explores three intertwined national security and policy debates: the Heritage Foundation’s crisis over its handling of antisemitism and right-wing identity politics; the Trump administration’s failure to execute the TikTok ban and its broader implications for the rule of law; and the current administration’s problematic use of “Global War on Terror” legal language to justify military actions, especially in anti-narcotics operations. The show brings together Lawfare’s seasoned editors for candid, sometimes self-deprecating reflection and analysis.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Heritage Foundation Crisis and Right-Wing Antisemitism

Main Story:

• The Heritage Foundation faces internal turmoil after its president, Kevin Roberts, defended Tucker Carlson for hosting neo-Nazi figure Nick Fuentes, prompting resignations and wider condemnation.
• Roberts later issued a partial walk-back, but the episode has sparked debate over how conservatives confront (or fail to confront) explicit antisemitism in their ranks.

Analysis & Reactions:

• Alan Rozenshtein [10:53]:
  • Highlights the pervasiveness of antisemitism on the right even as some elements seek plausible deniability.
  • Critiques the “no enemies on the right” mentality, noting:

    “The problem with the no enemies on the right is that the right has Nazis at some point. … There are real out and out anti-Semites on the far right. … There are more of them on the far right than on the far left. This is just a fact—confirm with a ton of social science data.”

  • Raises concerns about young conservatives:

    “You have just a lot of antisemitism and certainly Nazi adjacent rhetoric increasingly prevalent among the young people on the right. … and so do my small children. It doesn't feel great.”

• Scott R. Anderson [15:38]:
  • Notes Heritage’s rhetorical inconsistency: on the left, the foundation lumps anti-Israel sentiment with antisemitism but now seeks to separate those on the right when it’s politically expedient.

    “Heritage is switching the game … trying to do that now, albeit a little unsuccessfully.”

• Benjamin Wittes [17:52]:
  • Traces antisemitism’s roots as a phenomenon transcending left/right politics:

    “Antisemitism is old and it is primal and it exists in all political movements. … The mistake the conservative movement under Trump made was to declare war on antisemitism as though it is a creature of the left.”

• Kate Klonick [25:45]:
  • Brings in an ‘outsider’ perspective:

    “There was always going to be—MAGA had an insane white nationalist faction … nothing—what did they think would happen?”

• On the Israel/US Conservative Alliance [32:41–34:40]:
  • Discussion on shifting US–Israel political alliances, growing generational discontent, and vulnerability of transactional support in a MAGA-dominated GOP.

Memorable Quotes:

• “Every Jew should have next to their mezuzah, a horseshoe, just to remind them of the reality of politics.” — Alan Rozenshtein [24:08]
• “The structure of the MAGA blood and soil nationalist–Israel alliance is very strong, and the tolerance for antisemitism among the Israeli leadership … will be very near infinite.” — Benjamin Wittes [34:40]

2. The TikTok Ban Collapse: Rule of Law and Institutional Failure

Main Story:

• The Trump administration fails to follow through on a TikTok ban, even as Congress and executive agencies abdicate enforcement responsibility.
• Alan Rozenshtein reflects on his prior written analysis, admitting he failed to anticipate not just legal, but institutional collapse.

Insights & Mea Culpa:

• Alan Rozenshtein [42:37, 46:16]:
  • Admits “I completely screwed up, like, man, that I missed this,” expecting that legal and policy mechanisms would matter:

    “A policy is worth shit if your institutions can't execute it. … It never occurred to me that the institutions would fail. No, that's what I'm paid to figure out.”

• Kate Klonick [46:36]:
  • Offers context: unprecedented levels of lawlessness were not widely predictable, nor would forecasting would’ve been “an interesting prediction.”

    “There was no path … everyone would have thought you were completely batshit … if you had argued … that what was really going to happen was now that the law was just going to get ignored and stuck in a drawer.”

• Benjamin Wittes [51:01]:
  • Reiterates that analysts aren’t expected to “assume the entire system fails to work”:

    “Once you dispense with that, … you’ve taken away all the constraints … and you're basically dealing with a warlord culture.”

• Scott R. Anderson [53:35]:
  • Points to the collapse of political will as a central factor:

    "It was this moment where clearly the political backbone to do what the law said was gone."

Big Picture:

• The episode raises hard questions about the value of legal and policy analysis in an era of abandonment of institutional norms; the convergence to a form of legal “nihilism” where the law matters only as much as powerful actors allow.

Memorable Quote:

• “I’m just a guy. I’m no longer the umpire, I’m just some guy.” — Alan Rozenshtein [57:09]

3. Recycled “War on Terror” Rhetoric to Justify New Military Adventures

Main Story:

• The Trump administration deploys old “Global War on Terror” (GWOT) terminology—“unlawful enemy combatants,” “terrorist organizations”—to justify military force in anti-drug operations in the Caribbean and Pacific, often without clear legal authorization.

Analysis:

• Scott R. Anderson [57:43]:
  • Sees this as rhetorical camouflage, not legal substantive change:

    “In my mind … this is all just a feint. Like this is a rhetorical move … less legal import than cultural import. It’s a distraction. It’s camouflage.”

• Benjamin Wittes [60:14]:
  • Argues it’s more than window dressing—sometimes “bullshit” and outright lawlessness with deadly stakes:

    “Some of it is window dressing … some of it is bullshit … The idea that you can conduct kinetic strikes against members of an organization because you have designated that organization as a terrorist organization is gibberish.” “We have tools for this problem. And the leap to apply these [GWOT] metaphors … I really find it … repulsive.”

• On Specific Risks:
  • The administration is blurring lines, creating legal and ethical ambiguity to justify violence with little constraint or accountability, especially domestically.
• Comparisons:
  • Alan notes the structural similarity to the rule-of-law breakdown in the TikTok episode, but Wittes draws a final boundary:

    “TikTok is lawlessness that doesn’t kill people—and this is lawlessness at the central core of authoritarianism, which is the ability to kill people with impunity.” [66:49]

• Ongoing Confusion:
  • Alan Rozenshtein, humorously exasperated, illustrates the uncertainty:

    "I have utterly lost the plot on what it is that we are doing right now. Please someone explain this to me." [67:45]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “I have a Z and an SH in my last name and so do my small children. It doesn't feel great.” — Alan Rozenshtein [11:13]
• “Antisemitism is old and it is primal and it exists in all political movements.” — Benjamin Wittes [17:52]
• “A policy is worth shit if your institutions can't execute it.” — Alan Rozenshtein [46:16]
• “The thing that I didn’t foresee about this game of Risk that I am playing is the dog that would come into the room and knock the entire board off the table with its tail.” — Kate Klonick [52:56]
• “We are in Mad Max land by now … and the last thing on anybody’s mind in Mad Max land is the TikTok ban.” — Benjamin Wittes [51:01]
• “We have tools for this problem … the leap to apply these metaphors and legal concepts … for no good reason except to thump your chest … I really find it … repulsive.” — Benjamin Wittes [60:14]
• “I’m just some guy, right? And let’s be clear, I don’t have a lot of skills. Just end it with that.” — Alan Rozenshtein [57:09]

Timestamps for Key Segments

• Heritage Foundation Crisis & Antisemitism: 06:02–38:19
• TikTok Ban Collapse & Legal Analysis Mea Culpa: 41:14–57:16
• GWOT Rhetoric Revival in Counter-Narcotics Operations: 57:22–71:33

Tone and Style

The tone is characteristically sharp, dry, self-aware, and at times irreverent. The hosts use humor and personal anecdotes to ground complex analysis, often pivoting between policy depth and “nerd culture” references. The hosts are willing to criticize their own errors (true to the “Wea Culpa” episode title), and balance serious institutional concern with a measure of schadenfreude and resigned wit.

Final Object Lessons & Recommendations

In true Rational Security fashion, the hosts close with whimsical “object lessons”:

• Ben: Got a new projector. [72:00]
• Alan: Recommends the fantasy novel “City of Stairs” by Robert Jackson Bennett. [72:25]
• Scott: Dives into the new space exploration tabletop RPG, “Pioneer.” [73:23]
• Kate: Championing the fractal beauty of the Romanesco cauliflower. [75:29]

This episode delivers rigorous, skeptical insight into today’s political-legal entropy, national security hypocrisies, and the ever-messier overlap of rhetoric, law, and institutional behavior. For listeners seeking both depth and candor—not to mention gallows humor and nerdy banter—“The Wea Culpa Edition” is a can’t-miss.