x

75% of people globally want unbiased news (Pew Research) but are concerned they're not getting that.

Get balanced coverage with Symby. See how stories are covered across diverse outlets and spot when one side covers a story the other skips.

PODCAST

The Rule of Law Brief

Nathan M. F. Charles — Former federal prosecutor and Navy SEAL officer; Managing Partner at Charles International Law.

A principled defense of constitutional governance, civil liberties, and professional ethics in the face of rising authoritarianism—anchored in legal rigor, national security insight, and a commitment to nonviolent resistance. natecharles.substack.com

news news commentary

All Episodes

2:55

Trump’s Pardon Strategy Isn’t the End—It’s the...

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/04/24

In this episode, we examine new reporting that Donald Trump has privately promised sweeping, preemptive pardons for members of his administration before leaving office in 2029. According to those reports, he has even suggested he might “pardon everyone who has come within 200 feet of the Oval Office.”This discussion builds on an observable pattern: since returning to office, Trump has issued more than 1,600 clemency grants, including mass pardons for over 1,500 January 6 defendants, as well as

en

7:35

DOJ’s Case Against SPLC Is Bad Faith — But Here’s the...

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/04/23

The Justice Department’s case against the Southern Poverty Law Center is being framed as a bombshell.It’s not.In this episode of The Rule of Law Brief, Nate Charles breaks down what the indictment actually says—and why the government’s narrative doesn’t match the facts.Here’s what you’ll learn:* Why the claim that SPLC was “funding hate groups” is fundamentally misleading* How the indictment itself describes classic human intelligence tradecraft* Why the fraud charges hinge on materiality—and are

en

5:21

America’s Broken Promise to Afghan Special Operators

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/04/14

Afghan special operators—commandos and special forces—fought side by side with U.S. Special Operations Forces for nearly two decades. They were trained, equipped, vetted, and deployed alongside American units in some of the most dangerous missions of the war.But when the war ended, a legal technicality left many of them without access to the Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) program. Instead, they were forced into the asylum system—a process that can take years and does not allow immediate family

en

8:55

Trump’s Hormuz Blockade: Escalation, Not Strategy

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/04/12

In this episode of The Rule of Law Brief, Nate Charles breaks down Donald Trump’s announcement that the United States will blockade the Strait of Hormuz following failed peace talks with Iran.This isn’t a policy adjustment—it’s escalation inside an ongoing conflict.Nate walks through:* Why a naval blockade is legally and strategically an act of war* How the negotiations with Iran were built around an unrealistic demand* Why Iran’s nuclear program is not a bargaining chip—but an existential issue*

en

9:57

Is Mohammed an Illegal Immigrant? The Truth About...

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/04/10

Meet Mohammed—a fictional client, but one whose story reflects the reality faced by thousands of asylum seekers every year.In this video, we walk step-by-step through what Mohammed actually experiences:* Why he had to flee Mauritania* Why he couldn’t just “come legally” on a plane* The dangerous journey through Central America* How smugglers control the border crossing process* What really happens when he reaches the U.S. border* Why seeking asylum is legal, even after crossing unlawfully* The

en

4:23

When Are Civilian Deaths a War Crime?: It's Not as...

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/04/08

Civilian casualties are often treated as automatic evidence of a war crime.That’s not how the law works.In this video, I break down a common misconception about the law of armed conflict using some of the most controversial examples in modern history: Frankfurt, Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki.In response to a thoughtful comment by Scott Graham, we take a hard look at how the law actually evaluates these events—and why the answer is more complicated than most people expect.This episode

en

4:24

Are Trump's Rants a War Crime?

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/04/07

Are statements about targeting “power plants” and “bridges” just political rhetoric—or do they implicate the law of armed conflict?In this explainer, I break down what actually constitutes a war crime under international humanitarian law, including the core principles of distinction, proportionality, and military necessity.I explain when civilian infrastructure—like bridges and power plants—can lawfully be targeted, and when those same attacks become illegal. I also analyze recent rhetoric

en

3:26

The “Open Border” Claim Is a Distortion

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/04/06

Everyone has heard the phrase: “the border was wide open.”But what does that actually mean—and is it true?In this video, I break down the difference between political rhetoric and operational reality at the U.S. border. I explain what a “border encounter” really is, why high encounter numbers don’t mean unchecked entry, and how a complex system has been reduced to a misleading narrative.This is not a defense of current policy. There are real problems—capacity limits, backlogs, and inconsistent

en

1:59

Faith, Sacrifice, and the Case for Separation of...

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/04/05

In this Easter reflection, I speak directly to fellow Christians—and to anyone trying to reconcile faith with the realities of a pluralistic society.I consider myself a Christian, but not one with easy answers. Faith, for me, is something I wrestle with daily. What I return to, again and again, are the core teachings of Jesus: love your neighbor, show mercy, and recognize the inherent dignity of every human being.Scripture is clear:* Genesis 1:27 — All people are created in the image of God* Matthew

en

2:49

Tactical Wins. Strategic Failure.

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/04/03

In this Ad Hoc Edition of the Rule of Law Brief, I break down the claim that the war in Iran has been an “enormous success”—and why that framing is dangerously misleading.Yes, there have been tactical victories. Targets have been hit. Capabilities have been degraded. We’ve destroyed valuable assets.But that’s not the same thing as winning a war.Drawing on my experience as a strategic planner at the Department of Defense, I explain the critical distinction between tactical success and strategic

en

3:46

Marco Rubio Is Wrong About NATO—And the Constitution...

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/04/02

In this episode of The Rule of Law Brief, Nate Charles analyzes recent comments by Senator Marco Rubio suggesting that the United States may need to “reexamine” NATO—and that such a decision would ultimately rest with the President.That framing is not just debatable policy—it raises a serious constitutional issue.This video explains:* Why NATO is not a discretionary foreign policy tool, but a ratified treaty* How treaties function as binding federal law under the Supremacy Clause* The constitutional

en

3:17

Protests Work. The Data—and the Military—Prove It.

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/04/01

In this episode of The Rule of Law Brief, Nate Charles breaks down a claim that gets repeated constantly—and is flatly wrong: that protests don’t work.Drawing on empirical research from Harvard political scientist Erica Chenoweth, Nate explains why nonviolent civil resistance is not only effective, but statistically more successful than violent movements—and why participation thresholds matter.But this isn’t just academic theory.Nate connects the research to something far more consequential: U.S

en

9:20

When Judges Stop Reading the Law

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/03/29

In this episode of the Rule of Law Brief, Nate Charles breaks down a rarely discussed but deeply consequential problem inside the legal system: the gradual shift away from the actual text of the law toward subjective interpretations shaped by habit, memory, and personal intuition.Over time, experienced lawyers and judges may stop grounding their decisions in statutes and case law, instead relying on what they believe the law says. This drift creates a system where outcomes are no longer tied to

en

4:18

When Cities Charge You to Protest

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/03/27

Can a city require protest organizers to pay for security measures like barriers, police presence, or traffic control?At first glance, it sounds reasonable. Public safety isn’t free.But the First Amendment places clear limits on what the government can do—and more importantly, what it can charge.In this video, I break down the constitutional line using Forsyth County v. Nationalist Movement and Cox v. New Hampshire, two key Supreme Court cases that define when protest-related fees are allowed—and

en

5:40

Where Is the Line? Kimmy Baylor and the First...

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/03/24

In this update on Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Kimberly Baylor, we explain a key strategic decision: waiving the right to a jury trial in favor of a bench trial.This case is not about violence, threats, or incitement. It is about speech—specifically, repeated phone calls made to a government office protesting charging decisions affecting the rights of women, including the controversial case involving Veronica Celeste Rodriguez.Kimmy Baylor now faces 18 counts of harassment for that conduct.This

en

4:56

The Afroman Case: Why Government Officials Have Fewer...

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/03/23

What happens when police raid the wrong house—and then try to sue over being exposed?In this episode, we break down the failed lawsuit against rapper Afroman and use it to examine a deeper legal principle: the law systematically imposes higher burdens and fewer protections on government officials than on private citizens.This isn’t accidental. It’s foundational to how a functioning democracy operates.We walk through several key areas where the law deliberately favors the public over the government,

en

4:41

That’s Not How Intelligence Works

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/03/19

In a recent exchange on Capitol Hill, the Director of National Intelligence refused to answer a basic question: whether the intelligence community assessed an imminent nuclear threat from Iran.Instead, she claimed that only the President can determine whether a threat is “imminent.”That statement is not just misleading—it directly contradicts one of the intelligence community’s core missions.In this episode, I break down:* The fundamental principle that intelligence must remain apolitical* The

en

3:57

What No Quarter Really Means, Why It’s Illegal, and...

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/03/17

What does “no quarter” actually mean?Most people think it’s just aggressive rhetoric—another way of saying “we’re going to fight hard.” It’s not.In the law of armed conflict, “no quarter” has a precise and deeply consequential meaning: no prisoners will be taken, even if the enemy surrenders. That is explicitly prohibited under international law and U.S. military doctrine.In this episode, I break down:* The actual legal definition of “no quarter”* Why it is flatly illegal under the Hague Convention,

en

6:31

Trump’s Worldview vs. NATO

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/03/17

For nearly eighty years, NATO has been the backbone of Western security and one of the central pillars of the international order created after World War II.But the alliance was built on a particular set of assumptions: that the United States would lead the system, that NATO members would resolve disputes peacefully among themselves, and that the alliance would exist primarily to deter aggression rather than enable it.Recent events—including tensions surrounding U.S. policy in the Middle East and

en

7:11

Why the ODU Shooter Couldn’t Be Deported

The Rule of Law Brief ·

2026/03/13

In the aftermath of the tragic shooting at Old Dominion University that killed Army ROTC instructor Lt. Col. Brandon Shah, many people online are asking a seemingly simple question:Why wasn’t the shooter deported earlier?The legal answer is far more complicated than the internet commentary suggests.In this episode of The Rule of Law Brief, attorney Nate Charles explains how three distinct areas of law intersect in situations like this:• Immigration law• Criminal law• National security lawThe episode

en

109 results

Similar Podcasts

Expres Ráno

Expres FM

PBS News Hour - Full Show

PBS News

CD Voice

China Daily

Israel Today: Ongoing War Report

Noa Levi

Jeffrey Epstein: The Coverup Chronicles

Bobby Capucci