Ari Weitzman (6:21)

This is Managing Editor Ari Weitzman. This is what my voice sounds like. This is Senior Editor Will Kaback. And here's my voice.

Audrey Moorhead (6:29)

I'm Associate Editor Lindsey Knuth. And I'm Associate Editor Audrey Moorh.

Isaac Saul (6:42)

We're gonna start with the story that broke that the DOJ was prosecuting Jerome Powell. After that news broke, I staked out a pretty hardline position in my take, which I think has aged well, for whatever it's worth. One, I stated plainly that this was an obviously partisan prosecution and did not entertain alternative theories. And two, I refused to engage with criticisms of Powell, arguing that they were irrelevant to this story. And third, I shared Powell's statement in full as part of my take. This is the conversation that ensued after I shared the take with our team.

Ari Weitzman (7:17)

I struggled editing the take today. I wanted to find some pushback to the tone you took, but I don't have any. If anything, my edits intensify the language of your position. I really love this take. This feels actually like a line in the sand moment for you, possibly for tangle with covering Trump to the point where I might even suggest pulling ripcord and dedicating a Friday edition to saying something like, trump has crossed the Rubicon, or just answering mailbag questions from readers concerned about the impartiality of our coverage as the Trump criticism crescendos.

Isaac Saul (7:50)

Yeah, it's just like, come on, I'm not even trafficking in the well, let see stuff at this point, and I think it's disingenuous, too.

Ari Weitzman (7:59)

Yeah, I mean, every conservative editorial board has come out against this. The New York Post, Washington examiner, and then the ones that you'd expect to like National Review and the Wall Street Journal and then the Federalist, Hot Air, PJ Media, et cetera. They've published almost nothing about it, even news articles, which to me is always telling.

Audrey Moorhead (8:19)

I agree with that assessment. The tone of this piece feels different even from past criticisms of Trump. I'm not sure how I feel about it overall. I basically agree with the take, and I don't think the take should be edited down to become more milquetoast and less honest. Nevertheless, the tone bothers me and I could see it losing a lot of conservative readers. Of the two approaches you suggested, Ari, I'd favor a reader mailbag version, though. I also think we could run a Crossing the Rubicon piece and then a mailbag in response.

Isaac Saul (8:48)

Yeah, I don't really feel like we need to write some Crossing of the Rubicon piece, which we already kind of did with the yes, things are Pretty Bad piece I wrote. I'm happy to answer mailbag questions about it, but I'd rather just let the take stand on its own. I feel like drawing more attention to it is unhelpful in almost every way.

Ari Weitzman (9:06)

On point two, I agree. I don't want to suggest another piece that just emphasizes today's take on point 1. Honestly, it seems like things have gotten worse since we published that piece though, and the posture you're taking in Tangle is more oppositional to Trump at root. I felt like the moment on our Suspension of the Rules podcast when you said you don't think you've ever forgiven Trump for January 6th was informative for me at least, and I think for listeners too. And I think something that gives you a chance to talk about this stance would be helpful if today's survey results from the one from January 12th when we surveyed readers on the Don Row Doctrine. If there are any indication, we still have a good deal of Trump friendly and traditional conservative readers and we should speak to them.

Audrey Moorhead (9:50)

I agree with that. I also think that a large amount of our newsletter readers don't listen to Suspension of the Rules and as such your feelings as expressed in the newsletter are going to feel more out of left field for them. I think you should address those people.

Isaac Saul (10:02)

I guess today's take didn't feel Rubicon y to me, which is interesting. Just feel like it's obvious and a lot of concerns conservative writers are stating it plainly. Maybe that's the point. In terms of my perspective, I Think.

Audrey Moorhead (10:15)

As far as Tangle goes, the harshness of your tone here, with no buttresses or moderate qualifiers and even with an explicit rejection of moderating qualifiers is crossing a Rubicon.

Ari Weitzman (10:27)

Yeah, thanks, Audrey. I think that explicit rejection of the moderation you would have struck in like March is what I'm realizing stood out to me.

Audrey Moorhead (10:36)

I feel like we've been beating the drum, calling out political prosecutions on both sides, and this one seems particularly egregious given its effect on the economy and the targeting of a clearly reliable figure. The take didn't overly read as a broader castigation of Trump, and I'm curious whether our conservative readers would support these charges. I see Pro Fed independence as pretty.

Ari Weitzman (10:57)

Nonpartisan, and to that point this is just about the only defense of the investigation that I could find online. And I think the headline speaks for itself. And then I shared a screenshot of an article on Town hall from the writer Kurt Schlichter, and the headline is so what if targeting Jerome Powell is politically motivated? And then I continued to me, a Rubicon moment would be a take like this on an issue where there is substantive disagreement and debate between the sides. And Isaac just solely advocates for the Trump critical view because he feels that Trump has moved beyond the pale.

Audrey Moorhead (11:33)

Today feels like a Rubicon for me, because I think the defining feature of Tangle has long been that even in moments where it doesn't make sense, Isaac is willing to add in those reasonable discussions about problems with Powell's tenure, and that always reads to me as a peacemaking gesture to people who disagree, and then he'll explain why they're irrelevant. I also think today's take will be more grading for conservative readers, presented alongside the reader queue about Renee Goodstaff, which is another situation where I feel like Isaac is usually more moderate, but is today being much more overt about his moral outrage over the situation.

Ari Weitzman (12:07)

That's a good perspective. Thanks for that. I think I'm getting a sense that the answer to the implied question of what's changed is the admin is openly doing political prosecution and openly lying about what its mass quasi police force is doing and is ramping up both those things. And maybe that's what's scratching at me as something to get into explicitly and can explain the stance to conservative readers.

Audrey Moorhead (12:35)

Yeah, maybe. But as someone who does know that that's the underlying impetus for the change in attitude that's slowly occurring in Isaac's takes, it doesn't exactly alleviate the way that the tone grates with me, I do want to make one suggestion though, which is to Will's point about bipartisan condemnation of this. Could we explicate that bipartisan condemnation in the take right now we mention Republicans who are against the move, but that paragraph is still broadly critical of congressional GOP spinelessness regarding Trump. But I think pointing out that even conservative commentators are condemning this move will be a relevant point that might soften the take to more right leaning readers. I can make a suggestion in the draft. I think it could go in the very paragraph where Isaac says there's no need to include the discussion about Powell. Yeah, I like that suggestion, Audrey. I think it could go in a few different places, but it works where you put it.

Isaac Saul (13:24)

I like Audrey's suggestion too. We could even add what Will said, that some places just straight up ignored it.

Ari Weitzman (13:30)

Yeah, I think that'd be powerful. And for what it's worth, I think we can do more of this section about why this is different to you and we can even lengthen it if we wanted to. Not by a ton, but we are currently under our word count limit.

Isaac Saul (13:44)

All right, I added something.

Ari Weitzman (13:46)

Looks great. Some more edits for Madre and me here.

Isaac Saul (13:54)

All right, that was the conversation that took place after my team saw a draft of my take on Jerome Powell. The next thing that we're going to talk about is what happened when Audrey shared her take on the Supreme Court's ruling on banning trans athletes from women's sports. A quick heads up. This is a members only podcast, so to finish the show, going to have to subscribe and become a podcast member in order to get the whole thing. Hey everybody, this is John, executive producer for Tangle. We hope you enjoyed this preview of our latest episode. If you are not currently a newsletter subscriber or a premium podcast subscriber and you are enjoying this content and would like to finish it, you can go to readtangle.com and sign up for a newsletter subscription. Or you can sign up for a podcast subscription or or a bundled subscription which gets you both the podcast and the newsletter and unlocks the rest of this episode as well as ad free daily podcasts, more Friday editions, Sunday editions, bonus content, interviews and so much more. Most importantly, we just want to say thank you so much for your support. We're working hard to bring you much more content and more offerings. So stay tuned. I will join you again for the daily podcast. For the rest of the crew, this is John Law signing off. Have a great day y'.

Ari Weitzman (15:12)

All. Peace.

Isaac Saul (15:18)

Our executive editor and founder is me, Isaac Saul and our executive producer is John Law. Today's episode was edited and engineered by John Law. Our editorial staff is led by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, with Senior Editor Will K. Back and Associate Editors Audrey Moorhead Bailey Saul, Lindsay Knuth and Kendall White. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet75 and John Law. And to learn more about Tangle and to sign up for a membership, please visit our website@readtangle.com.

Audrey Moorhead (15:59)

Foreign.

Isaac Saul (16:03)

Hey, it's Raj and Noah.

Audrey Moorhead (16:05)

And we're back with a new season of Am I Doing It Wrong? The show that explores the all too human anxieties we have about trying to get our lives right.

Isaac Saul (16:11)

Because we're still doing a lot of stuff wrong.

Audrey Moorhead (16:14)

But who isn't? That's why each week we're talking about the topics that we could all use a little helping hit with. Whether it's making new friends as an adult, managing our emotions, or even dreaming.

Isaac Saul (16:22)

We'Ll be talking to experts in their fields who are definitely doing things right so the rest of us can be a bit wiser and a lot better equipped to handle whatever life throws at us.

Audrey Moorhead (16:31)

Subscribe now and listen to new episodes of Am I Doing It Wrong? Dropping every Thursday starting January 1st, wherever you get your podcasts.

Isaac Saul (16:39)

And for the first time ever, we're going to have full video episodes on YouTube. Because as long as there are things to get wrong, we're going to be right here to help you do them better. Blood donation is now more Inclusive More people are able to donate blood with the American Red Cross through FDA guidelines that eliminate eligibility questions based on sexual orientation. The Red Cross celebrates this historic change and welcomes those who may be newly eligible to donate blood. There's a place for everyone in the mission of the Red Cross. The Red Cross is committed to achieving an inclusive blood donation process that treats all potential donors with equality and respect while maintaining the safety of the blood supply. Join us and help save lives. To learn more and make your appointment to donate blood, visit redcrossblood.org LGBTQ that's redcrossblood.org LGBTQ the youth mental health crisis is growing and social media is a major driver. Kids are spending up to nine hours.

Audrey Moorhead (17:39)

A day on screens, often unsupervised, and studies show a direct link to anxiety.

Isaac Saul (17:43)

Depression and even suicidal thoughts. That's where GAB comes in.

Audrey Moorhead (17:47)

GAB offers safe phones and watches with no Internet or social media, just the right tech at the right from smart watches for young kids to advanced parent managed phones for teens, GAB keeps kids connected safely. Visit gab.com getgab and use code getgab for a special offer.

Isaac Saul (18:05)

That's G-A-B-B.com getgab Gab Tech in steps. Independence for them, peace of mind for parents.