Loading summary
Transcript23 lines
- [00:00]
Instacart Advertiser
This summer, Instacart is bringing back your favorites from 1999 with prices from 1999. That means 90s prices on juice pouches that ought to be respected, 90s prices on box Mac and cheese, and 90s prices on ham, cheese and cracker lunches. Enjoy all those throwbacks and more at throwback prices only through Instacart. $4.72 maximum discount per $10 of eligible items. Limit one offer per order. Expires September 5 while supplies last based on CPI comparison a dog's love letter.
- [00:35]
Lemonade Pet Insurance Narrator
To his Squeaky Avocado Dearest Squeaky Avocado, my heart yearns to chew thee. Alas, I've devoured a small action figure and have taken ill, unable to partake in our jubilant squeakings. Worry not, as I am on the mend and Lemonade pet insurance covered 90% of the veterinarian's cost. I recommend all the cats and dogs of the land. Get a've@lemonade.com Peter soon my tummy will be unburdened and we shall frolic once more.
- [01:02]
LinkedIn Ads Promoter
Yours, Jerry does it ever feel like you're a marketing professional just speaking into the void? Well, with LinkedIn ads, you can know you're reaching the right decision makers. You can even target buyers by job title, industry, company seniority, skills. Wait, did I say job title yet? Get started today and see how you can avoid the void and reach the right buyers with LinkedIn ads. We'll even give you a $100 credit on your next campaign. Get started@LinkedIn.com Campaign terms and conditions apply.
- [01:40]
Narrator/Producer
From executive producer Isaac Saul.
- [01:43]
Isaac Saul
This is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening and welcome to the Tangle, the place where we get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking and a little bit of my take. I'm your host, Isaac Saul, and on today's episode we're going to be talking about the potential deal with intel between the federal government led by Donald Trump and some leaders at Intel. We don't have as much information as I'd like, but this story's fascinating and I'm excited to cover it in part because I'm not sure I agree with a lot of the commentary that I'm seeing about it. So it's a good one. We're gonna dive in today. Before we do, though, I wanna give you a quick heads up that tomorrow we're releasing a behind the scenes look at our little mini documentary on our three days we spent with Representative Jake Auchincloss, the Democrat from Massachusetts. We got inundated with questions about the video, specifically questions about what happened off camera and what viewers didn't see. Tomorrow in our Members Only Friday edition, we're going to answer those questions. We'll cover how the video came together, why we didn't see Auchincloss fundraising, what his staff actually does, and whether the influence of lobbyists was apparent. A quick reminder that this is part of our members only stuff on the podcast. So we'll release this as a Friday edition in the newsletter and then we'll get a members only podcast version of that newsletter out at some point over the weekend. If you want to receive those members only podcasts, well, you need to become a member. You have to go to readtangle.com forward/membership and and buy a membership. If you scroll down to the bottom, you can get a podcast only membership if you are just a listener. If you want to bundle it with a newsletter subscription or a membership that accesses our whole website, you can do that as well. And it's affordable. Just 99 bucks a year for the bundle and less than $5 a month if you get an annual subscription just for the podcast. All right, with that, I'm going to send it over to John for today's main story and I'll be back for.
- [04:00]
John Law
Thanks Isaac and welcome everybody. Here are your quick hits for today. First up, the Texas House of Representatives voted 88 to 52 to pass a new state congressional map, advancing the Republican led mid decade redistricting effort. Number two, President Donald Trump called for Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook's resignation, citing unconfirmed claims that she committed mortgage fraud. Trump is reportedly considering firing Cook if she does not resign. Number three, a federal district court in Texas issued a preliminary injunction temporarily blocking a new law requiring public schools to display the Ten Commandments in every classroom in the state. Number four, Israel said it will call up 60,000 reservists in advance of an expanded military operation in Gaza City. At number five, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence reportedly plans to reduce its workforce by 30 to 40% and cut its annual budget by approximately $700 million.
- [05:09]
Narrator/Producer
One name under the spotlight today, intel shares popped nearly 7% on news the struggling chip maker secured a $2 billion investment from SoftBank. And as Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick confirms, the White House is considering buying a stake in the company.
- [05:27]
John Law
On Tuesday, White House press Secretary Caroline Levitt confirmed reports that the Trump administration is working on a deal with intel that would grant the US government a 10% stake in the computer technology company. The possible agreement first reported on Aug. 14 may involve converting roughly $10.86 billion in federal grants issued to intel during the Biden administration into equity in the company, though the exact mechanism for doing so is unclear. Under the deal, the government would not have voting or governance power, according to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and any agreement will likely require approval by Intel's board of directors. For context, intel is the only US company with leading edge semiconductor manufacturing capabilities. The Chips act of 2022 allocated $39 billion in grants to support semiconductor production in the United States, and Intel has been the largest recipient of those funds. The company has since spent billions of dollars building up chip fabrication facilities in Ohio, with additional plans to build in Arizona, New Mexico and Oregon. On Tuesday, Commerce Secretary Lutnick criticized the Biden administration for giving billions to intel and other companies without a tangible return. The Biden administration literally was giving intel for free and giving TSMC Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Money for free and all these companies just giving them money for free, lutnick said. Donald Trump turns that into saying, hey, we want equity for the money. If we're going to give you the money, we want a piece of the action. US Government intervention in private companies is rare but not unprecedented. During the 2008 financial crisis, the government authorized spending roughly $1 trillion to stabilize banks and financial institutions facing insolvency and spent billions to prop up Chrysler and General Motors and support the US Auto industry. While intel is not facing insolvency, the chipmaker is experiencing protracted struggles. Despite surging demand for semiconductor chips, it has fallen behind its competitors and has faced significant manufacturing setbacks over the past decade, leading to CEO Pat Gelsinger's resignation in 2024. Under new CEO Lipp Bhutan, and with billions in federal grants, intel is seeking to modernize its operations. However, President Trump recently called for Tan's resignation over alleged conflicts of interest following Senator Tom Cotton's claims that Tan extensive ties to Chinese businesses. Tan met with the president earlier this month at the White House, where the two discussed Intel's commitment to strengthening US Technology and manufacturing leadership, according to a statement from Intel. On Tuesday, the Japanese investment company Softbank announced it would invest $2 billion in intel, viewed as a vote of confidence in the company's future and the Trump administration's efforts to bolster U.S. semiconductor manufacturing. Today, we'll explore reactions to the potential deal from the right, left and technology writers, and then Isaac's.
- [08:32]
Isaac Saul
We'Ll be right back after this quick break. Why drop a fortune on basics when you don't have to Quince has the good stuff. High quality fabrics, classic fits and lightweight layers for warm weather. All at prices that make sense. Everything I've ordered from Quince has been nothing but solid. I've been telling all my friends this summer that I am a linen guy now. This is the summer of linen for Isaac because I have been absolutely raiding the Quint's wardrobe buying linen shirts, linen pants, linen shorts. And it's not just the linens. Casual T shirts, fun jackets, long pants. Everything on their website that I've snagged has really been an awesome addition to my wardrobe and I've gotten compliments on basically all of it, even from my wife who never really thinks I'm dressing myself well. So if you want to keep it classy and cool, I highly recommend the long lasting staples from quince. Go to quince.comtangle for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. That's Quince Q-U-I-N-C-E.comtangle and get free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.comtangle if you've been listening to this podcast, you know the world is full of uncertainty and craziness right now, and amid all that, it's good to take care of yourself. Most people do this by buckling down and saving some money and making sure they have a nest egg. But one of the best ways that you can do it is to make sure that you're not underinsured, overpaying and underprotected. Especially if your life insurance policy is through your job. That's why I'm using Selectquote to find my own life insurance policy. For over 40 years, SelectQuote has been one of the most trusted brokers in insurance, and they help more than 2 million Americans secur over 700 billion with a B dollars in coverage. Their mission is simple to find you the right insurance policy for your unique needs. They shop and you save. Get the right life insurance for you for less and save more than 50%@SelectQuote.com tangle save more than 50% on term life insurance@SelectQuote.com tangle today to get started, that's SelectQuote.com tangle.
- [10:48]
John Law
Alright, first up, let's start with what the right is saying. Many on the right acknowledge Trump's desire to bolster U.S. chipmaking but see intel as a failed company, not worth the investment. Others argue a government stake in intel would violate conservative economic principles. In the Spectator, Matthew Lynn said Trump may regret investing in intel microchips. There is a case to be made for state support. Microchips are a key strategic industry, and just like Joe Biden, President Trump wants to make sure that the United States has enough manufacturing capacity on its home soil. He wants to ensure the country is not completely reliant on imports from South Korea, Japan or, most worryingly of all, Taiwan, given that it could be invaded by China one day, lin wrote. The trouble is, intel also faces huge challenges. The days when laptops proudly boasted intel inside are long in the past. The the company's share price has halved over the last five years in the mass market, Samsung has overtaken it, and Chinese manufacturers are snapping at its heels. It may have been one of the pioneers of the computer age, but it is now looking well past its prime, lin said. In reality, intel has become hooked on subsidies and grants. The company has become very good at hustling cash out of governments. It has not been so good at making chips or serving customers. It's very hard to see how a few more billions from the White House is going to turn that around. In the Wall Street Journal, Daniel J. Smith wrote about Trump intel and the Road to Serfdom The Trump administration is pursuing federal ownership stakes in companies such as intel and US Steel, ostensibly to advance national security and domestic manufacturing. Yet these moves risk leading us down the road to serfdom that Friedrich Hayek warned against in 1944. Such actions pave the way for future administrations to impose DEI environmental and regulatory mandates on businesses through backdoor control, Smith said. Hayek warns in the Road to Serfdom that state ownership threatens both prosperity and liberty. As he defined it, socialism involves state ownership and direction of the economy, which President Trump's policies increasingly resemble. A government stake in intel could override market driven innovation, favoring bureaucratic priorities over consumer needs. State ownership also expands public sector employment, leading to concentrated special interest groups and the suppression of dissent. Even a modern share of federal ownership would be a powerful bargaining chip for striking unions, especially if a Democrat sat in the White House, smith wrote. Even if well intentioned, Mr. Trump's actions erode the GOP's free market credentials. Lawmakers will soon argue that if chips and steel are too important to leave to free markets, food and medicine are as well. Alright, that is it for what the right is saying. Which brings us to what the left is saying. The left is also critical of the potential deal, suggesting it is an extension of Trump's desire to exert control over the entire US Economy. Some note how Trump's supporters have seemingly abandoned their pro market principles in the American Prospect, Harold Meyerson said the US Goes in for state capitalism. To be sure, there have been times in our history when the government has involved itself directly in business affairs and taken temporary stakes in them, but until now that's always been during particular and time limited emergencies. When the domestic auto industry faced the prospect of collapse in the wake of the 2008 financial crash, the government took a temporary stake in both General Motors and Chrysler in return for bailing them out, myerson wrote, while also bailing out the largest banks. However, it did not take a stake in them. And while the Biden administration boosted the strategically important green energy industry with tax credits, it took no stake in those companies. It's impossible to imagine Trump or Republicans in general supporting any form of state capitalism. However, if it occurred under anyone else's presidency, it's happened under Trump. Because like Louis xiv, Trump adheres to the doctrine l' est a c' est moi. I am the state under his rule. The state has become primarily the vehicle through which he can maximize his personal control of whatever he wishes to control, myerson said. No broader doctrine not nationalism, not mercantilism, not liberalism's preference for regulated capitalism or a mixed economy, and certainly not social democracy or any form of socialism is at the root of Trump's embrace of state capitalism. In cnn, Alison Morrow and Phil Mattingly questioned corporate America's silence as Trump abandons free market principles. Not long ago, American conservative orthodoxy held that when it comes to doing business, the government that governs least governs best. The orthodoxy manifested itself in familiar ways. Groups that claimed the mantle of individual liberties would decry new legislation, talk radio and podcasts would mock unnamed bureaucrats for ham fisted overreach. And powerful business lobbies were quick to denounce in press releases and even lawsuits, regulations or taxes they saw as government overreach, Morrow and Mattingly wrote. But when faced with President Donald Trump's efforts to seize control of private enterprise, those same groups have gone quiet. The silence from corporate America to Trump's incursion into private businesses isn't entirely unexpected. Businesses have lost their appetite for the kind of social progressive rhetoric many adopted in response to the 2020 murder of George Floyd. At the same time, Trump's return to the White House came with a cost benefit analysis for any business leaders thinking of speaking out. Make yourself a target or fall in line and wait for the massive tax cuts the president has promised. Alright, that is it for what the right and the left are saying. Which brings us to what technology writers are saying. Some Tech writers see the merits of Trump's idea but suggest he should do more to save Intel. Others worry government investment could make it harder for intel to compete in Silicon angle Dave Valente explored Trump's intel pivot. President Donald Trump's 180 on Intel Corp. Is at least directionally correct, certainly more so than calling for the ouster of Lipp Bhutan, Intel's CEO. But a contemplated investment by the US in intel without a significant restructuring of Intel's entire business is a recipe for failure, valente said. Specifically, we continue to urge Intel's board to spin out its foundry business. Every day it waits further decreases Foundry's value. Moreover, we call on the U.S. government to use money from the Chips act and its influence on large U.S. chip designers and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company to secure a position for a U.S. domiciled company in advanced semiconductor manufacturing. U.S. taxpayers via a combination of Chips act funding and direct equity injections under the Trump administration's manufacturing push would take a controlling 51% stake. That majority position is designed not just to inject capital, but to guarantee US Leverage over advanced semiconductor manufacturing capacity at a time when supply chain security is a national priority, Valente wrote. TSMC's participation at 30% brings not only a massive $30 billion commitment, but also the critical intellectual property and operational expertise required to make the venture globally competitive. This mix of public capital, TSMC expertise, domestic assets and private funding could give the US Its most credible shot in decades at not only reshoring but controlling a meaningful share of advanced semiconductor production. In the Financial Times, John Foley said, uncle Sam taking a stake in intel is sane in an absurd world. For a transactionally minded president, this calculus is pretty clear. Given all that largess, why not demand something back? Previous administrations presumably realized that rewards come in other forms, such as national prosperity and global greatness. But converting grants and other goodies earmarked for intel into equity creates a more tangible return on that investment, foley wrote. The company is too important to fail, since it still commands the only substantial US Controlled source of leading edge chip production. Why not invest preemptively instead, if doing so might make failure less likely? The risk is that government investors have an incentive to urge companies to do things other shareholders would rather they didn't. For example, intel recently slowed construction of its Ohio mega plant, the kind of move that might prove harder with the government on the shareholder register, Foley said. One important question is whether the White House really needs shares to get its way. Companies have generally kowtowed to President Trump readily without such linkages Trump's recent fleeting call for intel chief Lipputan to be ousted undoubtedly focused minds. Alright, let's head over to Isaac for his take.
- [19:38]
Isaac Saul
All right, that is it for what the left, the right, and some technology writers are saying. Which brings us to my take. Government involvement in a company like intel could go south for a few obvious reasons. Most importantly, government stakeholders have different motivations than private investors. For instance, intel could, say, take billions of dollars from the federal government to invest in manufacturing, and then maybe they determine the best location for a new foundry is New York instead of Pennsylvania. Would a Republican president like Trump publicly rethink the government's investment, given the political upside of sending those jobs to Pennsylvania? Maybe a future Democratic president could determine the intel border leadership group wasn't diverse enough, even if it was doing its job well, and push for a disruptive shakeup that corporate shareholders would grit their teeth over. These kinds of mixed incentives drive most conservatives free market instincts. I tend to share those ideals. I think capitalism is flawed, but it's still the best economic system for prosperity, wealth and quality of life that anyone has come up with. And in general, I want the government to regulate our collective industries, but stay out of our individual businesses. Laws governing fair enterprise are one thing, but I'm not particularly keen to see the government take over private entities, whether it's grocery stores in Manhattan or international chip makers like Intel. Nevertheless, I was surprised to see that so many people on the right and left opposed this plan, because my initial reaction was that the idea had some merit. The devil will be in the details, but it seems possible for President Trump to convert already allocated support from the CHIPS act into a non voting equity stake in the company. This is a clever, albeit fairly novel way to turn subsidies into an investment, and it would do so while avoiding giving the government direct power over high level decision making. The government already acts in a myriad of ways to stimulate the economy, and investing directly in intel is really an extension of the CHIPS act that passed with bipartisan support under President Biden and a rerun of attempts to help an industry like those made by President Obama after the 2008 financial crisis. Elsewhere, the Pentagon has already approved what could be a model for what an intel deal could look like purchasing 15% equity in a rare earth company contingent upon its selling to defense contracts with the goal of doubling the company's stock. To me, the counterargument of the government shouldn't pick winners fails because it already does pick companies like intel or SpaceX to support through grants or contracts. This would just give a more tangible potential return for that support. Maybe more to the point is just how critical this industry is to our economy and national security. Advanced semiconductors and microprocessors are in everything from refrigerators to missiles. Current and past administrations would literally consider going to war with China to protect Taiwan, in large part due to the role it plays in supplying semiconductor chips to the United States. Though most political leaders will emphasize its strategic location and democratic government, a 10% government stake in intel won't magically create total independence from foreign suppliers of these critical chips in the next year. But if this industry is critical enough for us to stare down China, is it not so critical to justify taking an unusually aggressive stake in the industry's premier American company? Most commentators have focused on the downside risk of the US Government interfering or putting taxpayer dollars towards a company that's bleeding out billions. But not considered is the upside. Imagine a world where intel turns its business around. A public equity stake significantly offsets the cost of chips act and as Intel's share prices increase, we succeed in onshoring more semiconductor factories and jobs. Again, the details of any deal will matter a lot. The government stake would have to be a non intrusive and non voting one. An agreement would have to set clear milestones for intel to hit on U.S. capacity and intel would have to build that capacity domestically, not entirely unlike the Pentagon's recent deal. And then there would need to be automatic sell downs to exit the government stake once intel clears those milestones. That's the upside. Now for the downside. For one, President Trump, who's reportedly negotiating the deal, has shown an unusual penchant, putting it kindly for profiting from his position in office. We found out yesterday that Trump has purchased $100 million in government bonds since taking office. By some estimates, the Trump family has made about 4 billion with a B dollars off five separate crypto ventures attached to Trump's name or brand. In his first term, his son in law Jared Kushner scored a $2 billion investment from Saudi Arabia to his firm. And Kushner has gotten billions more from Qatari and Emirati firms. This time around, of course, Trump has also sold tens of millions of dollars of merchandise, from bibles to hats and collected millions more in fees at his clubs, all since taking office. If Trump negotiates a deal with a gigantic corporation like Intel, I'll be very concerned that he finds a way to profit personally, and any deal would need to avoid that outcome. Second, there's all the usual risk that comes with government intervention, even with a well structured deal, a large equity stake comes with the implication that the money could disappear if the company does something to upset its giant investor, especially given the way Trump has treated government grants for other institutions. All the while, the public is basically underwriting corporate risk without consent. Aside from electing Trump and sending a negative market signal that a giant like intel needs our help, which actually sent intel stock lower. And if things for Intel's fortunes continue to go south, then that's a lot of public money down the drain. Third, and maybe most convincingly, is just the precedent this sets. Historically speaking, the US Government directly intervening in businesses has been reserved for the most extreme and desperate circumstances, like the 2008 financial crisis. No such crisis exists now, even though the federal government does pick winners to some degree. This would be a step further, which would open the door to more meddling and spend specific companies like this in the future. Ultimately, my free market inclinations are not dogmatic enough to oppose a deal that resembles what's being discussed here. I think this sector is important enough, intel is strong enough, and our position is vulnerable enough to justify unusual action. But I do appreciate the significant risks of this proposal. Until we see the details of a deal that gives the government a light touch, ensures the president or his family do not profit in any way, and sets clear landmarks for how the government will get out, it's hard to know if the risks are worth taking. We'll be right back after this quick break.
- [26:23]
John Law
A Real Lemonade Pet Insurance Review by.
- [26:25]
Madison H.
Madison H. You know, I thought it was a little ridiculous to get pet insurance, but I really didn't want to not take my little kitten to the vet because of money. In the last eight months, I've taken him in six times because of ear infections and saved literally hundreds of dollars. He may even need to get surgery, and I couldn't consider it without Lemonade's help. I recommend Lemonade to all my friends constantly and now I'm recommending it to you.
- [26:49]
John Law
Check it out@lemonade.com pet hey, I'm Trisha.
- [26:54]
Narrator/Producer
Hershberger, gamer, streamer and Amazon Live host. I stream about tech, gaming and the stuff I actually buy right here with my community. And Amazon Live makes it easy. Streaming, gameplay, scouting, new gear, chatting and shopping all at the same time. That's my kind of multitasking. And it all happens on Amazon Live. Shop on Amazon Live by searching Amazon Live in the Amazon Shopping app and follow your favorite creators today.
- [27:31]
Isaac Saul
All right, that is it for my take, which brings us to your questions answered. This one from Perry in Fitzwilliam, New Hampshire. Perry said, if ICE is raiding workplaces and capturing people who they say are illegal, why isn't anything happening to the company who is hiring them? Isn't it illegal to hire someone without proper work documents? So, yes, you are correct. Hiring someone who does not have legal residency status in the United States is illegal. The Immigration and Nationality act, the INA of 1952 contains a provision which states, quote, it is unlawful for a person or other entity to hire or to recruit or refer for a fee for employment in the United States. An alien knowing the alien is an unauthorized alien with an exemption for employers contracting an unauthorized alien for seasonal farm labor. Pretty big exemption as long as the employer is compliant with the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act. This law was later amended and further defined in 1986 by the immigration Reform and Control Act. That's a lot of words and acronyms and stuff. The upside is basically, yes, it's usually illegal. Employers who are shown to have illegally hired someone not authorized to work in the United States can be fined up to $3,000 for each violation. Furthermore, employers face civil fines for violating I9 requirements ranging from several hundred dollars to over $27,000 for repeat violations. And in the most extreme cases, employers who violate the law may be fined hundreds of thousands of dollars, imprisoned, or have their personal assets seized. While we primarily hear about ICE raid's consequences for workers in the news, employers are also facing punishments. In April, ICE said it fined three Denver businesses over $8 million, and a San Diego manager was prosecuted by the U.S. attorney for employing unauthorized workers and was sentenced to one year probation in June. Additionally, ICE has increased its i9 audits tenfold since January, ramping up pressure on employers to comply with the law. That said, the Trump administration is mostly focused on prosecuting the workers themselves. One potential reason for this is that the government has a burden to prove that an employer has knowingly hired unauthorized workers, making the law difficult to enforce. In general, the administration looks to be following a policy of maximizing deportations but not penalizing employees of raiding workspaces but not prosecuting them. All right, that is it for your questions answered. I'm going to send it back to John for the rest of the pod and I'll see you guys tomorrow. Have a good one. Peace.
- [30:04]
John Law
Thanks, Isaac. Here's your under the Radar story for today, folks. On Tuesday, the American Academy of Pediatrics released its recommendations for COVID 19 vaccinations for children, which differed from current US government guidelines. The AAP strongly advised that children aged 6 months to 2 years should receive a COVID vaccine and said that older children should also get the shot at their parents discretion. Conversely, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's guidelines released under Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Don't recommend COVID vaccinations for healthy children of any age. The AAP has not substantially differed from the government in its vaccination recommendations. In 30 years it is going to be somewhat confusing, but our opinion is we need to make the right choices for children to protect them, Dr. James Campbell, Vice chair of AAP Infectious Diseases Committee, said. The Associated Press has this story and there's a link in today's episode Description alright, next up is our numbers section. Intel was founded in 1968. Intel became a public company in 1971. There have been five chief executive officers at intel since 2019. Intel's approximate annual revenue for 2022 was $63.1 billion, a 20.2% decline from 2021. Intel's approximate annual revenue for 2023 was $54.2 billion, a 14% decline from 2022. Intel's approximate annual revenue for 2024 was $53.1 billion, a 2.1% decline from 2023. The amount of money intel received in CHIPS act grants to support its domestic investment plans was $7.9 billion. The amount of money intel received IN CHIPS act grants to support its semiconductor manufacturing for national security was $3 billion. And Intel's new semiconductor chip factory in Ohio is scheduled to start operations in the year 2030. And last but not least, our have a nice day story. A long day of frustrating delays on an Alaska Airlines flight got a spontaneous burst of positivity last Tuesday when musicians from a jazz group pulled out their instruments and played an impromptu concert on the plane. The plane had been grounded for three hours before being diverted to a different city and then delayed again. Saxophonist Dave Cause said he and the other passengers were at their braking point when a flight attendant asked if the band would be willing to play a song. A few moments later, they whipped out their instruments and launched into Stevie Wonder's you Haven't Done Nothing, a personal favorite song of mine off of the album. Fulfilling this first finale. If you haven't listened to it, you really should start to finish Perfect album. We were just taking a moment to try and make lemonade with lemons and it tasted very good, fellow saxophonist Marcus Anderson said. Good Morning America has this story and the video of the performance, and you can check that out with a link in today's episode Description alright everybody, that is it for today's episode. As always, if you'd like to support our work, Please go to readtangle.com where you can sign up for a newsletter membership, podcast membership, or a bundled membership that gets you a discount on both. If you'd like to hear more about why I think Stevie Wonder is one of the greatest musicians and songwriters of all time, or if you want to debate me on that, or if you just want to share some music back and forth, I would love to do that. So feel free to write me@johnedtangle.com I'm always looking for good news music to listen to and love having discussions on it. We'll be right back here tomorrow. For Isaac and the rest of the crew, this is John Law signing off. Have a great day y'.
- [33:33]
Narrator/Producer
All.
- [33:33]
John Law
Peace.
- [33:35]
Isaac Saul
Our Executive Editor and Founder is me, Isaac Saul and our Executive Producer is John Lowell. Today's episode was edited and engineered by Dewey Thomas. Our editorial staff is led by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman with Senior Editor Will K. Back and Associate Editors Hunter Casperson, Audrey Moorhead Bailey saw Lindsay Knuth and Kendall White. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet75. To learn more about Tangle and to sign up for a membership, please visit our website@retangle.com.
- [34:14]
Nordstrom/Remy Advertiser
With summer winding down, it's the perfect time to refresh your style for fall and Nordstrom has everything you need for this season ahead. Discover top brands like Free People, Favorite Daughter, Reformation Mother and Veronica Beard. Plus the latest trends, everyday essentials and beauty must haves you'll reach for again and again. It's easy too with free shipping, free returns and in store order pickup. Shop today in stores and@nordstrom.com if your.
- [34:42]
Instacart Advertiser
Dog could talk, they'd beg for Ollie. The full body tail wag, the excited little hops, the big goofy grin. That's the Ollie effect. Ollie delivers clean, fresh nutrition in five drool worthy flavors, even for the pickiest eaters. Made in US kitchens with high quality human grade ingredients, Ollie's food contains no fillers, no preservatives, just real food. Just fill out Ollie's 30 second quiz and they'll create a customized meal plan based on your pup's weight, activity level and other health info. Dogs deserve the best and that means fresh, healthy food. Head to ollie.com healthypup Tell them about your dog and use code HEALTHYP off your welcome kit when you subscribe today. Plus they offer a happiness guarantee on the first box so if you're not completely satisfied, you'll get your money back. That's O l l I e.com HealthyPup and enter code HEALTHYPUP to get 60% off your first box.
- [35:36]
Nordstrom/Remy Advertiser
Summer is here, but if you grind your teeth at night, the damage doesn't Take a vacation. Protect your smile with Remy the custom night guard that cost up to 80% less than the dentist. Just take your impressions at home with their step by step kit. Send it back and get your dental grade nightguard delivered to your door. No waiting rooms, no surprise bills, just sunny savings and professional protection backed by a 45 night perfect fit guarantee. Go to shopremy.com and use code summer to get up to 50% off. That's shopremi.com and use code summer for 50% off.