Tangle Podcast: “Suspension of the Rules”

Featuring: Isaac Saul (Host) & Lydia Moynihan (New York Post columnist) Date: December 5, 2025

Main Theme & Purpose

In this episode, Isaac Saul welcomes Lydia Moynihan to dive into three hot-button political topics: the Venezuelan boat strikes authorized by the Trump administration, debates over the “Trump economy” and affordability crisis, and the influence and growth of socialism within the Democratic Party. The episode is built around open disagreement and constructive arguments, illustrating Tangle’s mission of non-partisan, viewpoint-diverse debate on current political events.

Episode Outline & Key Discussion Points

1. Introducing Lydia Moynihan and Her Media Journey

[02:10–06:13]

• Lydia recounts her path from growing up in Washington State, homeschooling, and attending a small Christian college in Manhattan, to interning at CNBC and rising through Fox Business to her current column at the New York Post.
  • Quote:

    “Once you come to New York, it’s kind of addicting … and then again, it’s like New York. Once you get in it, it’s kind of addicting.”
    — Lydia Moynihan [04:15]

• She discusses the excitement and unpredictability of the media world—and working with Charlie Gasparino, whom both she and Isaac call a rare, honest broker in journalism.
  • Quote:

    “He just does not give a fuck … he will piss off anybody, fire shots at his own side.”
    — Isaac Saul [06:03]

2. Venezuelan Boat Strikes: Legal, Moral, and Media Framing

[06:40–26:23]

Lydia's Critique of Media Coverage & Selective Outrage

• Lydia argues the boat strikes have received outsize media attention largely because they happened under Trump; similar or worse actions under Obama/Biden got less scrutiny.
  • Quote:

    “It’s sort of selective outrage. ... The media only seems to care about it when it’s Trump. They didn’t seem that concerned when it was Biden or Obama.”
    — Lydia Moynihan [08:03]

War Crime Allegations & Legal Debate

• Lydia pushes back on calling the strikes a “war crime,” citing new reporting suggesting those targeted were not surrendering but calling for reinforcements.
  • Full legal context around “laws of armed conflict”: A second strike on surrendering combatants could be a war crime, but evidence suggests those killed were not surrendering.
  • Quote:

    “It doesn’t seem to fit that bill of war crime … I’ve yet to hear from any Republican that they don’t want to look more into this … it should be investigated.”
    — Lydia Moynihan [11:24]

Isaac’s Rebuttal: Selectivity & Fundamental Objections

• Isaac agrees media scrutiny should be consistent regardless of which party’s in power—Trump or Obama.
  • Quote:

    “The solution isn’t that this isn’t as big of a deal. It’s that … we should have been dogs about this when it was Obama or Biden in office, not just when it’s Trump.”
    — Isaac Saul [13:00]

• He challenges the very premise: Are we at war with drug smugglers? Should suspected traffickers be killed without judicial process?
  • Questions legitimacy of executive war powers and the idea that narco traffickers are proper targets of extrajudicial killing.
  • Notes cases where survivors were found to be innocent fishermen from Ecuador and Colombia, not “narco-terrorists.”
  • Quote:

    “Where in the United States is there a death penalty for smuggling drugs? … What makes it okay to kill people before they’re put on trial for the crime of smuggling drugs … then it’s okay?”
    — Isaac Saul [15:58]

Lydia’s Counterpoints: Precedent & Proportion

• Lydia cites longstanding executive precedent for military action without formal war declarations, especially in national security contexts.
  • Claims these interventions are proportional compared to other US wars.
  • Highlights the scale of US overdose deaths, comparing them to 9/11 as a rationale for aggressive action.
  • Quote:

    “We went to war in the Middle East because 3,000 people died. ... You look at the number of people who’ve died as a result of drugs, gangs … millions. And in response, we’ve killed just 80 people.”
    — Lydia Moynihan [25:43]

The Limits of Justification

• Isaac presses whether it is ever justifiable to kill for a non-capital crime.
  • Lydia responds by equating cartel violence to terrorism and calling the strikes proportionate and contextually justified to protect US citizens.

3. The Trump Economy & Affordability Politics

[26:33–33:36]

Trump’s Messaging & Economic Realities

• Isaac notes that Trump is mirroring Biden’s mistake by downplaying the real affordability crisis, even calling it a “hoax.”
• Both parties' strategists are observing how misreading public sentiment on affordability can backfire.

Lydia’s Take: The Realities of Prices & Strategy for the Right

• Lydia:
  • Asserts the economy is better under Trump, but cautions that prices, after rising with Biden-era stimulus, won’t come back down.
  • Critiques leftist solutions as thinly veiled socialism and warns Republicans that ignoring cost-of-living realities is a mistake.
  • Quote:

    “I really don’t think there’s any world in which prices come down … I think ignoring that isn’t going to win over anyone.”
    — Lydia Moynihan [28:42]

• Both discuss polling showing young people’s openness to socialism.

4. “Socialism” and Democratic Party Dynamics

[31:57–34:38]

• Isaac questions whether Democrats are truly becoming “socialist,” seeing Mamdani’s election as an exception.
• Lydia disagrees, arguing mainstream Democrats now align with the party’s left wing, citing polling that over 60% of under-30s have a favorable view of socialism.
  • Quote:

    “It seems like the energy of the party is with Zoran Maldani and AOC. … The conventional Democrats want to be associated with this super far-left flank.”
    — Lydia Moynihan [32:25]

5. Episode Wrap-up & Reflections

[34:30–35:54]

• Brief, good-natured debate over whether Mamdani’s policy agenda is dangerous or just unworkable.
• Isaac sincerely thanks Lydia for her candor and willingness to engage in hard arguments.
  • Quote:

    “Thank you so much for having me. This was fantastic. I really enjoyed speaking with you.”
    — Lydia Moynihan [35:54]

Notable Quotes

• “We went to war in the Middle East because 3,000 people died … and you look at the number of people who’ve died as a result of drugs … millions. And in response, we’ve killed just 80 people.”
  — Lydia Moynihan [25:43]

• “Where in the United States is there a death penalty for smuggling drugs yet we’re saying it’s okay to kill people before they’re even put on trial?”
  — Isaac Saul [15:58]

• “The solution isn’t that this isn’t as big of a deal. … We should have been dogs about this when it was Obama or Biden in office, not just when it’s Trump.”
  — Isaac Saul [13:00]

• “It is draconian. I’m not trying to be flip at all about saying that this isn’t a big deal or whatnot, but I don’t think that it is a misuse of force.”
  — Lydia Moynihan [24:27]

• “If there’s a third grader who’s running with the platform of free ice cream in middle school, they’re probably going to win, because all the kids want free ice cream.”
  — Lydia Moynihan (on socialist messaging) [28:42]

Timestamps for Important Segments

| Topic | Timestamp (MM:SS) | |---------------------------------------|---------------------| | Lydia’s media background | 02:10–06:13 | | Venezuelan boat strikes – arguments & debate | 06:40–26:23 | | Trump economy & affordability crisis | 26:33–33:36 | | Socialism in the Democratic party | 31:57–34:38 | | Closing & thanks | 35:45–35:54 |

Tone & Engagement

• The conversation was lively, sometimes combative but respectful—focused on presenting and pressing tough arguments with clarity and good humor.
• Isaac played the role of skeptic and devil’s advocate, Lydia argued with conviction but often conceded nuance and complexity.

For Listeners Who Missed the Episode

This summary captures the essence of a robust, viewpoint-diverse discussion on contentious news topics—a spirited debate about executive power, moral responsibility, fairness in media coverage, and the future of political economy in America. Lydia Moynihan articulated the right's rationale for tough action on narco-trafficking and skepticism toward progressive economics, while Isaac challenged her on points of law, justice, and lived experience—delivering insight, disagreement, and moments of real common ground.