Tangle - A standoff in the Strait.

Episode Date: April 20, 2026

On Sunday, President Donald Trump said that the U.S. fired on and seized an Iranian-flagged cargo ship attempting to pass through the Strait of Hormuz from the Gulf of Oman. The vessel is the first ship seized by the U.S. Navy since it began blockading the gulf on April 13. Iran said on Friday it would remove all restrictions on commercial ships passing through the strait, then closed the waterway again on Saturday in response to the ongoing U.S. military blockade. That day, gunboats linked to Iran reportedly opened fire on two ships attempting to transit the strait. Ad-free podcasts are here!To listen to this podcast ad-free, and to enjoy our subscriber only premium content, go to ReadTangle.com to sign up!Data center development: Yes or no?Data center construction is quickly becoming a hot-button issue in the United States. Tech companies seek sufficient computing power for their artificial intelligence products, but local communities push back on the projects’ footprints. On Friday, Managing Editor Ari Weitzman and Associate Editor Lindsey Knuth took part in the first-ever Tangle debate edition, arguing for and against building more data centers. You can read today's podcast⁠ ⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠, today’s “Under the radar” story ⁠here⁠ and today’s “Have a nice day” story ⁠here⁠.You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Take the survey: For how long do you believe the war in Iran will last? Let us know.Our Executive Editor and Founder is Isaac Saul. Our Executive Producer is Jon Lall.This podcast was written by: Isaac Saul and audio edited and mixed by Dewey Thomas. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75.Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Senior Editor Will Kaback, Lindsey Knuth, Bailey Saul, and Audrey Moorehead. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle podcast, a place we get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking, and a little bit of my take. I'm your host, Isaac Saul. Today is April 20th. It's a Monday, and we are covering the updates on the war with Iran that came through over the weekend. and what the current status of the Strait of Hormuz is. I know we've covered this story a lot, but the developments continue to be worthwhile of our primary coverage. So as long as that's happening, and we think this story is critical enough to get that attention,

we're going to keep giving it that attention. That being said, before we jump in, I do want to give a quick promo for our very unique podcast and newsletter that came out on Friday. We did a breakdown of data centers, and we allowed our managing editor Ari Weitzman and our associate editor Lindsay Canuth to take part in the first ever tangled debate,

arguing for and against building more data centers. I thought the piece was super interesting. It was a new format that if you guys like it, we might actually replicate. So I encourage you to check it out, shoot us an email, or leave a comment on the article letting us know what you think, and we'll keep an eye out for your feedback.

With that, I'm going to hand it over to John for today's main topic, and I'll be back for my take. Thanks, Isaac, and welcome everybody. Hope you all had a wonderful weekend. Let's get started with today's quick hits. First up, Louisiana authorities said a man killed eight children, including seven of his own and wounded two other people in a shooting spree spanning at least three locations in Shreveport.

The shooter died while attempting to evade police by car. Number two, Congress approved an extension of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act until April 30th. The Act allows some federal agencies to collect and analyze communications outside of the United States without a warrant. Number three, Customs and Border Protection's tariff refund system, called Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries, launched on Monday, allowing companies to submit refund claims for duties deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. Number four, President Donald Trump signed an executive order to expedite research into certain psychedelic drugs as potential treatments for mental health disorders. The president also directed the Food and Drug Administration to accelerate its review of new treatments.

And number five, a gunman killed seven people and wounded at least 14 others in a mass shooting in Kiev, Ukraine's capital. Ukrainian security forces killed the suspect who was reportedly born in Russia and had lived in the Donbos region for an extended period. More breaking news right now. A new truth social post from President Donald Trump saying this. Today, an Iranian-flagged cargo ship named Tuska, nearly 900 feet long and weighing almost as much as an aircraft carrier, tried to get past our naval blockade, and it did not go well for them. The U.S. Navy, guided missile destroyer, USS Spruance, intercepted the Tuska in the Gulf of Oman and gave them fair warning to stop. The Iranian crew refused to listen, so our Navy ship stopped them right in their tracks by blow. blowing a hole in the engineer room. Right now, U.S. Marines have custody of the vessel.

The Tusca is under U.S. Treasury sanctions because of their prior history of illegal activity. We have full custody of the ship and are seeing what's on board. President Donald J. Trump. On Sunday, President Donald Trump said that the U.S. fired on and seized an Iranian-flagged cargo ship attempting to pass through the Strait of Hermuz from the Gulf of Oman. The vessel is the first ship seized by the U.S. Navy since it began blockading the Gulf on April 13th. Iran said on Friday it would remove all restrictions on commercial ships passing through the strait, then closed the waterway again on Saturday in response to the ongoing U.S. military blockade.

That day, gunboats linked to Iran reportedly opened fire on two ships attempting to transit the strait. For context, the sides agreed to a ceasefire on April 7th, but the status of the Strait of Hermuz has remained unclear. On April 12th, President Trump announced a naval blockade of Iran's ports to prevent countries friendly with Iran from circumventing restrictions imposed on other ships. Although leaders from both nations communicated that the strait would be open for transit on April 17th, several ships reportedly turned back over confusion about the requirements for safe passage. In one incident on Saturday, a crew member on an Indian flag tanker radioed Iran's military saying the ship was under attack and asking for permission to turn the vessel around. In a second incident, an Indian flagged container ship was hit by an unknown projectile, damaging some containers. Both incidents are under investigation, and India's external affairs ministry called on Iran to resume at the earliest the process of facilitating India-bound ships across the strait.

The U.S. had turned back over 20 Iranian vessels attempting to cross the strait prior to Sunday's incident. In a truth social post, Trump said the Iranian-linked ship refused to listen to warnings to stop, after which U.S. Spruents blew a whole. hole in the engine room. U.S. Central Command added that the ship was attempting to travel to an Iranian port and failed to comply with repeated warnings over a six-hour period. In a statement, Iran called the incident an act of armed piracy and said it would retaliate. The seizure comes ahead of scheduled peace talks this week. Vice President J.D. Vance, special envoy Steve Whitkoff, and Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law, will travel to Pakistan on Monday in anticipation of a second round of negotiations with Iran. However, Iran's participation is uncertain, and it threatened

to not attend the meeting over excessive demands, unrealistic expectations, constant shifts in stance, repeated contradictions, and the ongoing naval blockade. Today, we'll cover these developments with views from the left, right, and Middle East riders, and then Isaac's take. We'll be right back after this quick break. All right, first of let's start with what the left is saying. Many on the left see Trump's maneuvers in the strait as risky and counterproductive. Others say the U.S. continues to act unlawfully in the conflict. In CNN, Stephen Collinson wrote about the gamble in Trump's Iran blockade that could decide the war. The growing hopes of U.S. officials, conservative editorial pages, and analysts that the blockade could bring Iran to its knees,

rest on an assumption that has repeatedly led the U.S. astray in the Middle East, Collinson said. The hope is that Iran's leaders offer concessions to alleviate the blockcad. 's eventual extreme repercussions. The plan also hints at an unspoken hope that deteriorating economic conditions could set off new internal political dissent and test the regime's grip. But the idea that Iranian leaders will view the stakes in this way may be a leap. The blockade presents Iran with a new strategic puzzle. Its options for escalation are risky, since they could trigger a resumption of fighting and a rupture of the ceasefire with the U.S. and Israel. Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps forces could respond to the blockading of their ports

by renewing attacks on U.S. Gulf allies, Collinson wrote. Another option would be for Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen to shut down an alternative oil trafficking route through the Red Sea. Such a move would be a hammer blow to the world economy and would surely heap political pressure on Trump as the war would threaten to Kareen out of control. In the nation, Miriam Jamsidi argued only one side has clearly broken the law in the straight of her moods. The Trump administration has made half-hearted attempts to justify its joint attack against Iran as defensive. Hardly anyone, including Americans' Western allies, has bought into these legal justifications, even though many still support the U.S. Israeli war politically and militarily, Jamshidi said.

Blockades are prototypical examples of illegal uses of force and acts of aggression. We're not justified by the right of self-defense or a Security Council resolution. In the case of Iran, the U.S. blockade is both unlawful and effectively ends the ceasefire between the United States and Iran. The U.S. blockade also violates the laws of naval warfare, which prohibit blockades if damage to the civilian population is or may be expected to be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated from the action, Joms Chidi wrote. The purpose of the U.S. blockade is not to pursue any military advantage against Iran, but rather to achieve the political objective of increasing U.S. U.S. leverage in ongoing negotiations with the Iranian government. Even if that objective was somehow a valid military one, the blockade would still be illegal because it is designed to do significant damage to the civilian population by collapsing

the Iranian economy. All right, that is it for what the left is saying, which brings us to what the right is saying. Many on the right encouraged Trump to keep up pressure in the strait. Some contend the U.S. Navy is well equipped to achieve its goals. In Fox News, Lisa Doftari said, Hormuz's whiplash proves Tehran cannot honor any deal its signs. Within days, Tehran went from signaling that the Strait of Hermuz would remain open to threatening to close it. That reversal is a reminder that the regime cannot be trusted to uphold any deal at signs because its strategy depends on constant threats and keeping the world off balance, D'FTARI,

wrote. For years, U.S. and European officials have negotiated as if Iran's commitments on paper would translate into predict. behavior, but the regime's most powerful actors are not invested in keeping those commitments. This regime was not designed to be constrained, reformed, or tamed. Washington cannot afford to treat diplomacy as an end itself. An agreement that is not backed by real enforcement, credible military deterrence, and a clear understanding of who holds power in Tehran will not hold. It will be tested, stretched, and eventually broken when the regime decides it can get away

with it, Duff Tari said. A regime that turns a vital energy choke point into a pressure tool is not a responsible partner. It is the opposite. The back and forth over her moves is a hard reminder that Tehran's core strategy is leveraged through threat, not cooperation. In the Washington Examiner, Joel Griffith and Ali Holcomb suggested our Navy was built for this moment. President Donald Trump must not forget that the U.S. Navy was created with one thing in mind, securing the freedom of navigation for Americans. and that is exactly what he needs to do in the Strait of Hermuz, Holcomb and Griffith wrote.

Amid the hand-wringing over this conflict, one crucial fact goes unacknowledged. The U.S. still holds overwhelming military superiority. The U.S. made a serious mistake in negotiations by even entertaining the possibility of Iran profiting from the strait. Thankfully, we have since corrected course. Innocent passage is the right of vessels of all nations to traverse through territorial seas, even through a different nation's exclusive economic zone. Straight passage is even more permissive, Holcomb and Griffith said. The U.S. is the world's leading enforcer of these laws and norms of the sea.

When Libyan dictator Mumar Gaddafi declared the entire Gulf of Sidra to be Libyan territorial waters, the U.S. responded by deploying a carrier-strike group straight into the Gulf and shot down Libyan fighter jets attempting to enforce Gaddafi's claims. We even have a formalized term for such operations, freedom of navigation operations, and we back up our declarations with action. All right, that is different with the left and the writer saying, which brings us to what writers in the Middle East are saying. Many writers in the Middle East note the wide-ranging consequences stemming from the straits closure.

Others say the war is already reshuffling our understanding of the global order. In Arab news, Abdul Rahman al-Rashid wrote about the threats against Gulf ports. The fighting has not stopped since negotiations in Islamabad came to a halt. U.S. President Donald Trump's dangerous decision to impose a blockade on Iran's maritime trade has disrupted the entire landscape, as Iran is now threatening to target Gulf ports, Al-Rashit said. The blockade is the most dangerous weapon that can be used against Iran. Impeding Iran's maritime trade could bring down the regime if it is sustained long enough and enforced strictly. Of course, choking Iran at sea has consequences and could potentially reignite a broader war.

The U.S. has shown a willingness to continue fighting. could be argued that more strikes that force Iran into surrender would be Trump's best option, as they would allow him to emerge victorious in the eyes of the world, Al-Rashid, wrote. Iran's new leadership may appear fanatical, but this same leadership has expressed a desire to return to negotiations. It has a strong interest in avoiding destruction that risks the very existence of the regime. A blockade and devastation would be less likely if the American and Iranian delegations were to return to the negotiating table. In Al Jazeera, Khalid al-Jabbar said, Iran war has exposed the limits of neutrality. The course of the war demonstrated that the concept

of neutrality is no longer viable in contemporary regional contexts, particularly in the Middle East, Al-Jabar wrote. Neutrality is easier to declare than to maintain. Iranian strikes on energy infrastructure across Gulf states forced several producers to declare force major and suspend their operations. In Qatar, Qatar energy halted LNG production, and the effects were felt almost immediately in Europe, through a surge in gas prices of almost 50% in the Netherlands and the UK. Calling for a secession of hostilities without addressing the root causes of the crisis may amount to nothing more than postponing the inevitable explosion, while pursuing radical change without a clear vision for the day after, may open the door to even wider chaos,

Algebra wrote. Between these two options, the world confronts a fundamental question. How can it deal with a regime widely viewed by many states as part of the problem without, allowing the pursuit of its transformation to create an even greater one. What appears evident is that the coming phase will leave little room for the gray zone within which states have long been accustomed to maneuvering. All right, let's head over to Isaac for his take. A note just before we get into Isaac's take that this was recorded before the final edit of today's newsletter.

In the recording, Isaac says that we are on day 51 of the war. We are actually on day 52. This does appear in the newsletter, though not in the podcast. All right, that is it for the left and the right, and some writers from abroad are saying, which brings us to my take. I think a good deal of the chaos that we've seen in the last few weeks can be attributed to a fractured and chaotic Iranian government. To grasp why, I think it's important to revisit the Iranian government's pre-war makeup. On theocratic side, which is the side with all the power, there's the supreme leader at the top.

in this case, Ayatolli Khomeini. He is the ultimate authority. And then underneath him, there's the IRGC, the Revolutionary Guard, this guardian counsel that vets candidates and laws, and then the judiciary, which is appointed by the Supreme Leader. On the other side of Iranian's government is the quote-unquote elected institutions. That's the president, the parliament, the cabinet, the ministries. Some of those people take part in negotiations.

These people are vetted by the Supreme Leader, but they operate a a little bit separately. Theocratic state of the government up top holds most of the power. The supreme leader, he directs all of the military power, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps or IRGC, while the Guardian Council approves all of the elected legislators. The Ayatolls hand-picked parliamentary fell mostly in line with him, but at times it splits. In one notable example, the president, Massoud Pasekian, who ran as a reformer and was almost certainly a reformer, and was almost certainly allowed to win because Supreme Leader Ali Khamene wanted to relieve some tension was much more permissive than Khamenei during the January protests.

Pazchkin even went as far as to say the regime must listen to the people. Now, the Supreme Leader is dead, as are a long list of senior officials in the IRGC, including the Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, the intelligence minister, a top nuclear advisor, the commander-in-chief of the IRC, the defense minister, the chief of staff of Iran's armed forces, and the Navy intelligence chief, just to name a few. The United States was hoping that in the vacuum, created by the deaths of these leaders, reformers like Peschchkian, would rise up, and some have to a degree. Iran's foreign minister, who serves under Peschekian, has been at the center of negotiations to end the war. Yet, by and large,

a reform-minded Iranian government has not emerged. In fact, the opposite has happened. Iran's new younger Supreme Leader is reportedly more extreme, Reed Theocratic and Anti-Western than his predecessor, and the new IRGC leadership is also more radical. Iran's new national security chief is Mohamed Bagar Zolgar Zolgarh Zolgarh, who is so radical that Qasem Soleimani, the General Trump assassinated in 2020, once reportedly quit his role in the military in protest over Zolgader's views. Anti-Western hardliners are dominating military decision-making, and they've expressed their ideology and their power by holding the global economy hostage in the Strait of Hormuz, something Al-Hamaneh opted not to do when Israel and the United States struck Iran's nuclear

facilities last year. The disparity between Iran's negotiating team and its military leadership played out in real time over the weekend. Iran's foreign minister announced the Strait of Hormuz was fully open after negotiations with the United States. Less than 24 hours later, the IRGC said the waterway was still closed, and they're keeping it closed, while the United States attacked an Iranian flag cargo vessel. Power vacuums aren't usually filled in an order of a manner, and right now Iran's leadership is unstable. That instability is upstream of the miscommunications, inconsistencies, and inability to land a stable ceasefire, a word that has been so misapplied as to be totally meaningless. We have a ceasefire right now that includes multiple

exchanges of fire, constant barrages, and very little negotiating. It is also upstream of intensified crackdowns on dissent and the deployment of regime supporters to the streets of Iran. They recognize their leadership is fragile, and they only have one way to keep it, hard power. We're now on day 51 of the war, and it contains all the ingredients for a prolonged conflict. Nothing speaks to this quite as clearly as the celebration of opening a waterway that was once open before the war started and doesn't actually appear to be open at all. The men across from us at the negotiating table represent a government that is somehow how more radical than the one we thought was too radical to negotiate with originally.

Iran reportedly still has about 40% of its pre-war stock of drones, and it's using the reduction in fighting to dig out missile launchers it's been hiding underground. Its drone capacity could soon return to 60% of what it was pre-war. These estimates, like all intelligence, are inexact, but at the very least, they implied that Iran is capable of keeping up the fight, and the new regime seems happy to do so. A week ago, I wrote about the risk of Iran becoming a kind of ambient war, a conflict that fades into the background noise we in the U.S. all become accustomed to. This scenario looks something like this.

The United States and Iran work in an uneasy stalemate with few major breakthroughs in the occasional blit. Perhaps Iran kills a U.S. sailor in a drone attack or the U.S. seizes a cargo ship and oil prices temporarily spike, where the Iranian regime engages in a particularly horrific crackdown on protesters or an Israeli-Rashash. hits a civilian center in Beirut, or maybe a Hezbollah missile breaks through and lands in downtown Tel Aviv. This becomes the new normal, relative quiet, punctuated by big, newsy events. Meanwhile, Iran remains controlled by a radical regime, the Middle East remains unstable, and our regional allies remain unsafe, all while stalled negotiations start and stop, and an energy crisis continues to spread across the eastern hemisphere. Eventually, some new thing will demand our

attention. Maybe China invades Taiwan or Russia tests the border of Poland, or the U.S. reconsiders an incursion into Greenland, or we all simply turn to the midterms and other domestic matters instead. In time, we come to accept the war that did not exist two months ago as a fact of life, and the untold money, blood, and even financial sacrifices at home fade into background static. This is my fear. I've made the habit of steel manning alternative views to check this perspective, but that sunny alternative seems less and less likely to me each day. I can make the case, sure. Though committing to dominating the strait would be costly,

our Navy is capable of achieving it. By confiscating Iranian cargo ships that account for so much of the regime's revenue, we could put Iran in a vice grip that requires them to back off their current demands. Maybe the Gulf states turn against the new leadership to create a kind of unified front that totally isolates Iran, fully bringing its theocratic leadership to heal. In a clearly positive development, we have greatly diminished Iran's nuclear program, taking a live Iranian threat off the table. Yet, expecting those upsides to lead to long-term peace anytime soon, within months or even years, feels polyanish to me. Iran is already angling for a cash deal from

the United States, one much larger than the kind they received from previous administrations. If they don't get it, they will likely use their grip on the Strait of Ormuz to squeeze more money from the West. Remember, Iran's current regime is more radical than the last and the window for decisive regime change has closed. How other impacted nations respond now will be crucial to determining the length of the conflict. Gulf states and some European and Asian nations are surely infuriated by and scared of the new Iranian regime. But those same countries also need Iran's oil and the energy pinch they find themselves in is not domestically sustainable. The UAE is already asking the United States for a financial lifeline. I could bet on a future where America's

Eastern allies stand strong with the U.S. while Western allies join in its war with Iran. Or I could bet on Eastern countries desperately meeting whatever condition is asked of them to get their oil from Iran while Western allies criticize the United States from the sidelines. The rational thing is to bet on the latter. Again, we're 51 days into this conflict. We are cheering the opening of a shipping lane that was open pre-war and still isn't really open. We're facing a new, more radical regime. We're still grasping for long-term peace plans, and we're staring down the barrel of a prolonged global energy crisis. I want to be wrong, but every analytical bone in my body believes this is not a better recipe for a peaceful tomorrow than the one we had just a few months ago.

We'll be right back after this quick break. All right, that is it for my take, which brings us to your questions answer. This one's from Jerry in Quebec. Jerry said both the Americans and Israel are bombing the heck out of Iran. What is stopping them from using an atomic bomb? Okay, several important factors make this grim possibility highly unlikely. Two small things off the bat. First, atomic bombs use a nuclear fission process. The United States today maintains a thermonuclear arsenal that uses fission to ignite a hydrogen fusion process, creating a much more destructive explosion. Second, Israel is widely believed that about 90 nuclear warheads compared to the United States roughly 5,000, but they have never officially confirmed that they have any.

Physically, nothing is preventing either the United States or Israel from using a nuclear weapon against Iran, but we have to stress that the largest deterrent against nuclear weapon is the immediate moral implications. An estimated 140,000 people do not. when the United States dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, and today's weapons are many times larger. No country has been able to justify the indiscriminate killing of that many people with just one weapon since the end of World War II. But even put those considerations aside for a moment,

several other factors make the option extremely undesirable. First, dated reports indicate that Russia has a dead-hand nuclear deployment system which would detect incoming ballistic nuclear weapons and deploy its own defensively. The potential for such a system being operational and active in Russia deters any country from using intercontinental ballistic missiles launch from land, or submarine launch ballistic missiles from submarines, especially if their trajectory goes towards Russia. However, the United States and Israel have air superiority in Iran, so they could feasibly drop a nuclear bomb from an airplane.

Of course, the fear of reprisal from Russia or China still remains a deterrent and support and recruiting for Iranian proxies in the region like Hezbollah and the Huzbla and the Huzbollah. these would greatly intensify. That means terrorist attacks in Israel against ships in the Persian Gulf and Red Sea against our other Middle East allies and potentially in the U.S. Even more assured of the diplomatic ramifications. One of the stated reasons for the war was to aid the Iranian people and deploying even a small nuclear weapon would be a devastating strike to Iran, which would severely diminish the U.S. diplomatic standing globally. Even a targeted strike on Iran's nuclear facilities would cause incredible damage by detonating

an unknown amount of fissile material. Even one thermonuclear bomb can make a region hundreds of miles in diameter uninhabitable, contaminate groundwater, and disperse a radiated fallout that has been linked to increased incidence of thyroid cancer across an unknown area.

Such an attack would fracture, if not destroy standing U.S. alliances caused global economic turmoil, destroy the credibility of disarmament backs, and potentially even trigger impeachment proceedings against the president. Simply put, nuclear weapons damage the target country physically, but the sheer cost of human life, the possibility of reprisal and the

potential political damage against the aggressor remain massive deterrence against their usage. 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. Thanks, Isaac. Here's your under-the-radar story for today, folks. On Thursday, the United States signed an agreement with the Philippines to create a U.S.

industrial hub on a 4,000 acres site on the island of Luzon. The land is a gift from the Philippines, and it will function as a special economic zone with diplomatic immunity under U.S. common law. Furthermore, the hub will create access to critical minerals, such as nickel, copper, chromite, and cobalt, independent of Chinese supply chains, giving U.S. companies reliable access to key inputs for high-tech manufacturing. Details on the development timeline have not been announced, but the Trump administration will reportedly ask U.S. companies, to submit bids to take part in the construction with investment from private sector companies.

The Wall Street Journal has this story and there's a link in today's episode description. And last but not least, our Have a Nice Day story. When a former student entered Paul's Valley High School in Oklahoma armed with two semi-automatic handguns, principal Kirk Moore acted instinctively and courageously, charging and tackling the assailant.

Moore took a bullet to the leg before he disarmed the shooter, but no students were harmed in the incident. To show their appreciation, the students voted more Prom King at the school's dance this weekend. He would do anything to save those kids. Madison Knighton, a former Pauls Valley student, said. WBAL News Radio has this story,

and there's a link in today's episode description. All right, 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 send up for a newsletter membership, podcast membership, or a bundled membership that gets you a discount on Both. 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'all. Peace. Our executive editor and founder is me. Isaac Saul and our executive producer is John Wall. Today's episode was edited and engineered by Dewey Thomas. Our editorial staff is led by managing editor Ari Weitzman with senior editor Will Kback and associate editors Audrey Moorhead, Lindsay Canuth, and Bailey Saul. music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75. To learn more about Tangle and to sign up for a membership, please visit our website at retangle.com.