Tangle Podcast Detailed Summary

Episode: PREVIEW: The Friday Edition. - I'm leaking Tangle's internal communications
Host: Isaac Saul
Date: January 16, 2026

Brief Overview

This episode offers a rare, behind-the-scenes look at Tangle's internal editorial debates, transparency, and process before publication. Host Isaac Saul and his editorial team “leak” their internal Slack communications, reenacting forthright staff discussions about sensitive content decisions, challenges in maintaining impartiality, and reader trust. The episode showcases Tangle's commitment to open dialogue and aims to model civil, honest debate for its audience.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Why “Leak” Internal Staff Debate? (04:00 – 06:42)

• Isaac Saul introduces the idea by reflecting on the value of pre-publication discussions:

  "One of my favorite things about Tangle is the process that happens before a publication. The one that our readers and listeners never get to see or experience." (04:13)

• He details how the rich, honest internal back-and-forth not only strengthens the newsletter, but could also help rebuild media trust if made more public.
• The motivation: Show unfiltered staff debate, demonstrate internal checks on bias, and model the healthy discourse Tangle believes the US needs.
• Isaac’s Decision: Without prior staff permission, Isaac begins gathering and pasting notable Slack debates for this episode, confiding he’d “ask for permission after the fact” to preserve authenticity.

2. The Four Leaked Conversations (05:30 – 06:42)

Isaac briefly outlines the four key discussions/leaks:

1. Internal debate over a hardline “take” on the DOJ investigation into Jerome Powell and if it crossed a Rubicon against Trump.
2. Reactions to Associate Editor Audrey Moorhead’s opinion on Supreme Court oral arguments over state bans involving trans women in women’s sports.
3. An argument about whether to re-categorize the Washington Post editorial board from left to right, responding to reader feedback.
4. The team's reactions to Isaac’s handling of the Minneapolis ICE shooting story.

Note: Only the first debate is given in the podcast preview; the rest are for members only.

3. Team Introductions (06:21 – 06:42)

• The panel for this episode includes:

  • Isaac Saul, Host & Editor
  • Ari Weitzman, Managing Editor
  • Will Kaback, Senior Editor
  • Lindsey Knuth, Associate Editor
  • Audrey Moorhead, Associate Editor

  “This is Managing Editor Ari Weitzman. This is what my voice sounds like. This is Senior Editor Will Kaback. And here's my voice. I'm Associate Editor Lindsey Knuth. And I'm Associate Editor Audrey Moorhead.” (06:21–06:29)

4. The Jerome Powell/Trump Rubicon Debate (06:42 – 13:44)

Summary of Incident

• News broke that the DOJ was prosecuting Jerome Powell.
• Isaac’s "Take": Staunchly critical, calling the prosecution “obviously partisan,” refusing to consider alternative interpretations or criticism of Powell. He also shared Powell’s statement in full.

Key Staff Exchange

• Ari Weitzman (07:17):

  “I struggled editing the take today. I wanted to find some pushback... If anything, my edits intensify the language of your position. This feels... like a line in the sand moment for you, possibly for Tangle... to the point where I might even suggest pulling ripcord and dedicating a Friday edition to saying something like, ‘Trump has crossed the Rubicon’...”

• Isaac Saul (07:50):

  "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 (07:59):

  • Notes the unusual breadth of conservative and right-wing editorial boards condemning the prosecution, while even hard-right outlets (Federalist, Hot Air, PJ Media) avoid covering it—suggesting extraordinary consensus.

• Audrey Moorhead (08:19):

  “The tone of this piece feels different even from past criticisms of Trump. I basically agree with the take... Nevertheless, the tone bothers me and I could see it losing a lot of conservative readers.”

  • Favors a mailbag approach for reader concerns, but acknowledges merit in addressing the "Rubicon" idea directly.

• Isaac Saul (08:48):

  "Yeah, I don't really feel like we need to write some Crossing of the Rubicon piece... I'm happy to answer mailbag questions about it, but I’d rather just let the take stand on its own."

• Ari Weitzman (09:06):

  "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. ...we still have a good deal of Trump friendly and traditional conservative readers and we should speak to them."

• Audrey Moorhead (09:50):

  "A large amount of our newsletter readers don't listen to Suspension of the Rules... 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):

  • Seems surprised by the perception of his take as a "Rubicon moment," reiterates that it's aligned with mainstream conservative opinion on the issue, and feels self-evident to him.

• Audrey Moorhead (10:15):

  "As far as Tangle goes, the harshness of your tone here, with no buttresses or moderate qualifiers... is crossing a Rubicon."

• Ari Weitzman (10:27):

  "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):

  • Notes the staff’s typical practice of offering “peacemaking gestures” to dissenters may be absent in this instance.

• Ari Weitzman (10:57):

  • Cites the only real defense found online: "So what if targeting Jerome Powell is politically motivated?" (Townhall, Kurt Schlichter).
  • Argues a true Rubicon would be crossed when Tangle only presents anti-Trump takes where significant debate remains possible.

• Audrey Moorhead (11:33):

  "Today feels like a Rubicon for me, because... even in moments where it doesn't make sense, Isaac is willing to add in those reasonable discussions about problems with Powell's tenure... That always reads to me as a peacemaking gesture. ...I also think today's take will be more grading for conservative readers..."

• Ari Weitzman (12:07):

  • Suggests perhaps it's the administration's “ramping up” of political prosecutions and “open lying” that may justify the shift in Tangle’s tone.

• Audrey Moorhead (12:35):

  • Suggests explicitly laying out the bipartisan condemnation in the take to soften it for right-leaning readers.

• Ari Weitzman (13:30):

  “I think that’d be powerful. ...we can do more... about why this is different to you and we can even lengthen it if we wanted to.”

• Isaac Saul (13:44):

  “All right, I added something.”

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Isaac Saul: "I'm curious what you all think, if you found this exercise helpful and any reactions or comments you might have. So if you have thoughts or feelings, don't forget, you can always send them to Will... he's the best person to complain to." (05:54)
• Ari Weitzman: "This feels... like a line in the sand moment for you, possibly for Tangle..." (07:17)
• Audrey Moorhead: “The tone bothers me and I could see it losing a lot of conservative readers.” (08:19)
• Isaac Saul: “I'm happy to answer mailbag questions about it, but I’d rather just let the take stand on its own.” (08:48)
• Ari Weitzman: "That explicit rejection of the moderation you would have struck in like March is what I'm realizing stood out to me." (10:27)

Important Timestamps

• 04:13 – 06:07: Isaac articulates his motivation for "leaking" internal communications.
• 06:21 – 06:42: Editorial team introduces themselves.
• 06:42 – 13:44: Full team debate over the Jerome Powell take and whether it crosses a line on impartiality and Trump coverage.
• 13:54 – 14:00: Preview ends and announcements for paid-only continuation.

Tone and Style

The entire conversation is candid, reflective, and rigorous, maintaining Tangle’s signature blend of earnestness and humility. The tone oscillates between self-critical, inquisitive, and at times gently confrontational, reflecting a newsroom culture that values transparency and debate without rancor.

Closing Notes

This preview features only the first of four leaked conversations, ending mid-episode. To hear the other debates—on Supreme Court cases, editorial board classification, and the Minneapolis ICE shooting—listeners are prompted to subscribe. The episode delivers a unique, authentic insight into how journalistic objectivity, tone management, and audience perception are actively negotiated at Tangle.