Tangle - Texas Governor pardons man who killed BLM protester.

Starting point is 00:00:00 Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca.

Starting point is 00:01:00 From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle podcast, the place where you 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 are going to be talking about Daniel Perry, who was pardoned by Texas Governor Greg Abbott. We're going to review the case, some of the information we got about the pardon, and then, as always, we'll share some views from the left and the right, and then my take. And on today's episode, we are also joined by Cam Edwards, who is one of our right-leaning writers who's going to share his perspective about the pardon, which I thought was really great. It was kind of refreshing to

Starting point is 00:01:57 hear somebody answer some of the questions the way he answered them, just saying, I'm not totally sure because we don't have enough information for me to have an informed opinion, which is something I try and do often on this show and in our newsletter. And it was just really fun to be on the other side of somebody taking that position. So I'm excited to share a little bit of that interview with us today under what the right is saying, which you'll hear in a bit. Before we jump in, though, I want to give you a quick heads up. is saying, which you'll hear in a bit. Before we jump in, though, I want to give you a quick heads up. Yesterday, I interviewed two political strategists, one Democrat and one Republican, who are working together to implement a proposal to have the national popular vote determine the

Starting point is 00:02:35 president. During our interview, they made a surprising argument to me that the 2024 election will be our last election that is not determined by a popular vote. In tomorrow's Members Only Friday edition, which we'll be sharing via the newsletter, I'm going to share a transcript of that interview about why they think they are so close to radically changing how elections are won. If you are not yet a Tangle member and you want to get that in your inbox, you can go to readtangle.com, subscribe to our newsletter, and make sure that you pick a paying member option. That unlocks Friday and Sunday editions. I'm hopeful that some point down the road we'll release that interview

Starting point is 00:03:16 as a podcast, but we've got a couple other things coming up before it. So I encourage you to go become a member and subscribe, and you'll get that edition in your inbox tomorrow around noon. All right, with that out of the way, we'll jump in with some quick hits and today's main story, and I'm going to pass it over to John for those, and I'll be back for my take. Thanks, Isaac, and welcome, everybody. Here are your quick hits for today. First up, former U.N. ambassador and Republican nominee Nikki Haley said she plans to vote for former President Donald Trump in November. Number two, daily marijuana use has now outpaced daily alcohol consumption in the U.S. for the first time, according to a new study. Daily or near-daily marijuana use grew by 269% from 2008 to 2022. Number three, the city of Uvalde, Texas, agreed to police training reforms

Starting point is 00:04:11 as part of a $2 million settlement with the families of children killed by a gunman at Robb Elementary School in 2022. Number four, the centrist Attorney General candidate Nathan Vasquez, who ran on a tough-on-crime platform, defeated the incumbent progressive in the race to be Portland, Oregon's top prosecutor. Number five, the House will vote today on a GOP bill to repeal a Washington, D.C. law that allows noncitizens to vote in local elections. bit of breaking news. The Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling that found South Carolina did not unlawfully consider race when legislators drew a congressional district that removed thousands of Black voters. One year ago, a jury in Austin convicted Daniel Perry,

Starting point is 00:05:06 a former Army sergeant in the death of Black Lives Matter protester Garrett Foster. Perry was sentenced to 25 years in prison. Daniel Perry, the former Army sergeant convicted in the murder of a Black Lives Matter protester, has been pardoned by Texas Governor Greg Abbott and released from prison today. After reviewing the case, the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles recommended a full pardon. The governor then made it official and then also restored Perry's firearms rights. The governor then said in a statement today, and I'll quote here, Texas has one of the strongest stand-your-ground laws of self-defense that cannot be nullified by a jury or a progressive district attorney.

Starting point is 00:05:51 Last Thursday, Texas Governor Greg Abbott pardoned Daniel Perry, a former U.S. Army sergeant who was convicted of murdering Black Lives Matter protester Garrett Foster in Austin, Texas of 2020. Abbott's decision came shortly after the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles recommended a full pardon for Perry. Perry's firearms rights will be fully restored as part of the pardon, though he still faces a misdemeanor deadly conduct charge for the shooting. As a reminder, in 2023, a Texas State District Judge sentenced Perry to 25 years in prison for the murder of Garrett Foster, a U.S. Air Force veteran. In July of 2020, Foster was participating in a protest against police violence and racial

Starting point is 00:06:31 injustice when Perry, who was working for Uber at the time of the shooting, drove down the street where the protest was happening, honking his horn and drawing a group of protesters, including Foster, to the vehicle. As the crowd formed around his car, Perry opened fire, striking Foster, who was legally carrying an AK-47. Perry was also legally armed. At his trial, Perry said that Foster pointed the rifle at him, but witnesses contested this retelling, saying Foster never raised his rifle. In his initial interview with police, Perry told officers, I believe he was going to aim his rifle at me. I didn't want to give him the chance. The defense argued Perry acted in self-defense and maintained his actions were justified under Texas's stand your ground law. Court records unsealed after

Starting point is 00:07:15 the trial showed social media posts and texts from Perry that expressed a desire to harm protesters and used racist language when discussing them. Both Perry and Foster are white, but prosecutors argued that posts and texts were proof that Perry intended to commit violence on the night of the shooting. One day after the jury convicted Perry, Abbott announced that he had asked the state parole board to review Perry's conviction on an expedited basis, saying he intended to pardon Perry pending the board's recommendation. Abbott also criticized Travis County's Democratic District Attorney, Jose Garza, alluding to him as a rogue district attorney who needed to be reined in. The State Parole Board said its evaluation of the case encompassed a meticulous review of pertinent documents,

Starting point is 00:07:58 from police reports to court records, witness statements, and interviews with individuals linked to the case, and it voted unanimously to recommend a full pardon and restoration of firearms rights for Perry. The members of the board were all appointed by Abbott. Critics of the pardon quickly voiced their disapproval. Today, a convicted murderer will walk the streets of Texas. Texas Republicans have once again proven that they cannot keep the public safe. They are not the party of tough-on-crime, and they are not the party of law and order, said Texas Democratic Party Chair Gilberto Hinojosa.

Starting point is 00:08:31 Make no mistake, Daniel Perry is a murderer who was on a mission to commit violence against Texans, and today our justice system was hijacked for political gain. Clint Brodin, Perry's attorney, called the case tragic but welcomed the pardon, saying Perry acted in self-defense when confronted with an angry crowd and a person with an assault rifle in the low-ready position. Today, we're going to explore some reactions to the pardon from the We'll be right back after this quick commercial break. All right, first up, here's what the right is saying. The right is mixed on the pardon, though many say the left's depiction of the case is skewed. Some criticize Abbott's rationale for the pardon. Others say Abbott and the pardons board need to share more about what informed their decision.

Starting point is 00:09:29 In PJ Media, Rick Moran said the pardon put Perry's actions in context. There were many twists and turns in this case. It was not a cut-and-dried case of self-defense, nor was it a racist attacking a Black Lives Matter protest, Moran wrote. Perry's social media posts and texts don't matter materially. He could have posted anything on Facebook, including any racist writings, and the jury could only give it the same weight as they would any other evidence. What was important was his state of mind at the time of the shooting, and Perry claims he was in fear for his life. Perry's pardon will upset supporters of Black Lives Matter and the family of Garrett Foster, but you have to view what happened in the context of the times.

Starting point is 00:10:07 The hysteria that Black Lives Matter generated during these protests made people feel threatened, Moran said. Was Foster advancing toward Perry's care in a menacing fashion? Was the crowd surrounding his car getting out of hand? Whatever went through the mind of Daniel Perry, it almost certainly wasn't racism. Garrett Foster was white. In reason, Billy Binion argued, Perry's pardon makes a mockery of self-defense. That there are government officials who politicize the law is about as foundational to the discourse as any complaint I can think of.

Starting point is 00:10:38 The criticism is sometimes quite fair, and for the latest example of a soft-on-crime politician flouting law and order, we can look to Texas Governor Greg Abbott, Binion wrote. Abbott, of course, is no self-styled progressive, but his recent decision to pardon Daniel Perry, who was convicted last year of murdering Garrett Foster, channels the spirit of the progressive prosecutors he criticizes for allegedly refashioning the law to suit their ideological preferences. So what about that stand your ground defense Abbott alleges the jury nullified? Cora Taperi's case and trial was whether he reasonably feared for his life that July evening. Foster indeed had a rifle on him, because open carry

Starting point is 00:11:16 is legal in Texas. The Second Amendment does not solely exist for people with conservative views, Binion said. That the jury reached the conclusion they did is not a mystery nor is it an outrage. What is an outrage, however, is that a governor who claims to care about law and order has made clear that his support for crime victims is at least in part conditional on having the right politics. In Bearing Arms, Cam Edwards shared a contrarian take on the party. I Isaac got a chance to sit down with Cam, and here's their conversation. All right, Cam Edwards, thanks so much for coming on the show, man. I appreciate it. Yeah, absolutely, Isaac. Thanks for the invite.

Starting point is 00:11:55 So I want to start by just giving you a chance to maybe summarize your reaction to this pardon from Governor Abbott. Maybe you could give us like a quick one to two minute rundown of sort of how you're feeling right now. Sure. You know, I didn't honestly have an opinion, a strong opinion one way or the other. Curiosity, I think, was my biggest reaction when I heard about the pardon, because anytime you have a self-defense case or at least a self-defense allegation, I'm going to be interested in that. In this case, you've got two people on the streets of Austin that night who are both exercising their Second Amendment rights. One of them ended up dead. A jury convicted the other individual of murder. So I want to know, my initial reaction was, what did the pardon and parole board find out that led them to recommend unanimously that Daniel Perry should be pardoned.

Starting point is 00:12:45 And so my first reaction was, I want to see the results of that investigation. I want to know what the Pardon and Parole Board learned that led them to that conclusion, because it is, again, diametrically opposed to what a jury of 12 individuals in Travis County, Texas found. And so, you know, really, I think what I want is just more information so that the public is aware of this. And honestly, if you're Daniel Perry, I would think you'd want that information to come out, too, because otherwise, you know, you're going to be tagged as a guy who got away with murder. And I don't think anybody wants to walk around with that hanging over their head.

Starting point is 00:13:15 Yeah, I think this is the thing I'm struggling with the most is, you know, I've been reading about the case. I see all this information about, you know, the evidence the jury saw, body cam footage from the cops, the interview immediately after, you know, some of the videos we have from the protests. They leave with this unanimous verdict. And then the parole board comes out unanimously, you know, recommending the pardon. But we don't really get any details on, you know, what they found that changed their minds or made them feel, you know, that they had to insert themselves into this case. And I thought that was the part of your piece that really resonated with me the most. I guess I'm curious, I mean, do we have any inkling

Starting point is 00:13:55 of, you know, what sort of details or new evidence or anything like that was presented to the parole board that they found that maybe pushed this decision? Or are we really just kind of left with this brief summary they put out? Officially, I think we're left with that brief summary. The Austin American-Statesman had a story out, I believe, on Wednesday, where the Austin Police Department had written a letter to the Pardon and Parole Board recommending a pardon for Daniel Perry. Now, that letter was not sent, but it does contain some information that I think is actually pretty important. One of the allegations is that the district attorney in Travis County, Jose Garza, presented a slanted view of what happened that night when seeking charges before a grand jury did not actually

Starting point is 00:14:46 include evidence that would have supported Perry's claim of self-defense. There were objections raised, I guess, by Perry's defense team at the time, but the judge overseeing the case said that the prosecution basically has no obligation to prevent evidence that is, or to present evidence that is favorable to a defendant at a grand jury. That that that that raises some concerns for me. Right. Was Perry railroaded? Did the prosecution present evidence that was most favorable for a charge while not letting the grand jury see evidence that might have exonerated Perry? The Austin Police Department, the homicide detective who investigated this case, apparently

Starting point is 00:15:25 recommended no charges be filed against Perry, that he concluded this was a justifiable use of force. But the prosecutor sort of ignored that determination and brought this case before a grand jury. So that's another puzzling indication here, right? I think one of my problems is that politics got involved in this case very early on. I mean, you had, you know, again, a shooting at a protest after the death of George Floyd at a time in which, you know, riots and civil unrest were happening all across the country. And I'd like to just find a way, I don't know if it's even possible at this point, but to take the politics out of this and just look at the facts of the case. And I don't know that we've been able to do that to this point.

Starting point is 00:16:08 I'm curious, you know, you're somebody who writes a ton about Second Amendment rights and some of the politics around it, public perceptions about it. How do you think a case like this sort of impacts the public's view of, you know, law abiding citizens who are exercising their right to bear arms. I mean, one of my initial impressions, I guess, just to show my cards here is that this can't be good for folks who want to, you know, conceal carry or open carry. I mean, because we have basically, you know, one guy with an AK-47 and another guy with a handgun and this violent outcome at a protest, which I think leaves a lot of people feeling like we shouldn't allow these

Starting point is 00:16:50 people to be walking around with these guns. We shouldn't allow this in our country. That seems to be a strong reaction from a lot of folks. What do you think about that or how this might impact the public discourse around, you know, the right to carry? Well, I mean, listen, the right to carry is in the Constitution. If you want to take that away, you've got to repeal the Second Amendment. So we can have this argument, we can have this debate, but that's the solution. If you don't like the fact that we have the right to bear arms. It is an interesting case, because as I said, you do have two people who are exercising their Second Amendment rights that night. And so the question then becomes, was, was Daniel Perry in legitimate fear of his life, uh, when he fired those shots? And, uh, you know, look, we live in a complicated world and there are every day, there are going to be cases that, uh, you know, implicate our first amendment rights or second amendment rights. And someone's always going to be able to make an argument that, well, you know, if we didn't have people exercising those rights, this country would be a better place.

Starting point is 00:17:45 in those rights, this country would be a better place. That argument never really resonates with me. But I think what's really most important is that we have confidence in the justice system. And in this case, I think openness and transparency on the part of the pardon and parole board, but also on the part of the prosecutor, on the part of the police department, all of these government agencies that were involved in the investigation or the exoneration of Daniel Perry, I want to hear from them. And the public needs to be able to hear from them. And that, to me, I think is the most important thing going forward, right? We're always going to have conflicts. We're always going to have debates over these individual circumstances. But I think as a country, we are better

Starting point is 00:18:20 off when we have a government that, you know, would rather have sunlight than shadows when it comes to situations like this. I have one last question and I'll let you go just about, I guess that line for the self-defense question. One of the things that I saw that was pretty interesting was a reenactment of the situation where a foster is approaching Perry's car and he's holding the rifle at kind of this downward angle and has not raised it, which was part of the defense that Perry put forward, but could have just fired with the rifle at the angle it was at and still shot through the car door and killed Perry, which I think raises an interesting question about, you know, when is Perry's life in danger? What needs to happen in order for him to feel that way? I'm wondering if you could talk a little bit about

Starting point is 00:19:10 where that line might be in a case like this and what Perry could have proved in court that would have, you know, exonerated him and protected him under Texas's, you know, right to stand your ground laws. Yeah. You know, it's tough because I always hesitate to comment too specifically on cases just because I wasn't in the courtroom. I haven't read all the briefs. Right. And so I think you and I are both probably fairly ignorant of all of the facts in this case. Right. Because we're I've spent maybe two hours researching this as opposed to the months of investigation that the police went through and the attorneys on both sides of these cases. This was a difficult situation without a doubt. Right.

Starting point is 00:19:52 You can make the case that, as I said, both of these individuals were exercising their segment rights. Was Daniel Perry a legitimate fear of his life when a guy with a rifle approached his vehicle? The jury said no, right? But the police, homicide investigator who looked at this case said, yeah, that it was reasonable for Perry to believe that his life was in danger. Until I could actually read all of these witness statements, until I could look at all of the evidence, I can't give an informed opinion. And I know that that's frustrating because in the media, we're expected to give uninformed opinions all the time, right? But this is quite literally a matter of life or death. So that's why I'm not trying to dodge

Starting point is 00:20:34 your question, but it's why I'm sticking to my position that we need more information so that we can have informed conversations. We can have discussions knowing more of the facts around this case. And until then... Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime,

Starting point is 00:21:03 Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages 6 months and older,

Starting point is 00:21:36 and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at FluCelvax.ca. You know, I'm just going to stick with my call for the Pardon and Parole Board to release the results of their investigation, as well as, you know, for the DA. I think, honestly, Garza needs to explain what evidence was not presented to the grand jury and why that evidence that might have exonerated Perry was not presented to the grand jury. Well, it's a tough position to argue against. Very fair-minded. I appreciate where you've landed on this one and appreciate you coming

Starting point is 00:22:13 on the show. If folks want to keep up with your work or writing, where's the best place for them to do that? Yeah, just check out BeringArms.com. You can find the Bering Arms Cam and Company podcast on YouTube and Spotify and all the major podcast platforms as well. Awesome. Cam Edwards, thanks so much for the time, man. I appreciate it. Yeah, you bet. Thanks, Isaac. All right, that is it for what the right is saying, which brings us to what the left is saying. The left is outraged by the pardon, calling it meritless and disturbing. Some say the decision undermines confidence in the rule of law. Others suggest the pardon legitimizes political violence.

Starting point is 00:22:55 The San Antonio Express News editorial board wrote, With pardon of murderer, Abbott shows all lives don't matter to him. Abbott cited Texas's Stand Your Ground law, which allows people to avoid criminal prosecution if they respond to threats when they are in a place where they have the right to be. But that doesn't apply if a person provokes a threat, which is what prosecutors and witnesses said Perry did. Jurors agreed, the board said. Beyond this, in several social media posts, Perry had expressed his desire to harm Black Lives Matter protesters. This message speaks to the character of the man Abbott believes was worthy of a pardon and wronged by the criminal justice system.

Starting point is 00:23:33 If Lady Justice is supposed to be blind, and she's not, can anyone imagine a scenario in which Abbott would have pardoned Foster had he shot and killed Perry? Of course not, the board wrote. had he shot and killed Perry? Of course not, the board wrote. How tragically ironic that the murder of a Black Lives Matter protester, who was white, illustrates that all lives don't matter for Abbott, that they don't have equal meaning. Apparently, the value of a life is situational and dependent on how it aligns with political ideology. This is who Greg Abbott is. This is his character. These are his values. In the American Prospect, Hassan Ali Kanu called the pardon an attack on multiracial democracy. The decision represents official government sanctioning of deadly violence against people advocating against white supremacy, a phenomenon with a long history that stretches back to the

Starting point is 00:24:20 Ku Klux Klan's extrajudicial and unprosecuted lynchings, and which has always also targeted white allies of racial equality movements, Canu said. Abbott overturned a jury verdict that determined Perry had not fired his gun legally, even under Texas's shoot-first self-defense regime, and without any new findings or fact or new analysis that calls the verdict into question. Texas governors have traditionally issued pardons only for decades-old non-violent convictions, typically after an individual has served their time and demonstrated their rehabilitation and value to the community. But in Perry's case, Abbott took the unprecedented step of requesting review himself before Perry had a chance to appeal the verdict and even preempting the judge's sentence, Canoe wrote. Abbott's pardoning of Perry is yet another thumbs up from the GOP to extremists that our national

Starting point is 00:25:10 security apparatus has identified as the most persistent and legal threat to the country. In MSNBC, Frank Figliuzzi said the pardon sends a chilling message. Perry wasn't set free because DNA analysis determined he was innocent, nor was there some legal technicality successfully raised on an appeal. Rather, Perry was pardoned by Texas Governor Greg Abbott as Abbott promised to do the day after the jury issued its verdict, Figliuzzi wrote. Witnesses say they never saw Foster raise his firearm at Perry, yet those details mattered neither to Abbott nor his pardon board. This wasn't about Foster's skin color, just as it wasn't about a legally accepted self-defense claim.

Starting point is 00:25:51 For both Perry and Abbott, this murder and subsequent pardon were about Foster's cause, Black Lives Matter, and whom Foster chose to associate with, Figliuzzi said. The governor setting Perry free suggests that in Texas, it's open season on protesters whose cause isn't approved by the governor. Texans are known for valuing at least two things, their freedoms and their guns. Yet with this pardon, Texans should wonder whether their constitutional right to peacefully protest and to lawfully carry a weapon depends on what they're protesting and who's carrying the gun. All right, let's head over to Isaac for his take. All right, that is it for what the left and the right are saying, and I appreciate Cam Edwards coming on the show today.

Starting point is 00:26:42 I'm just going to start my take by giving Daniel Perry, the now pardoned shooter, the most charitable read that I can. He went to this protest. Whether he was looking for a fight or not, some news outlets reported that he was actually driving Uber the night he arrived there, though he did not have a passenger in his car. He found himself in the thick of marching protesters. Perry, already aware that protests had devolved into riots and violence in several cities, was suddenly surrounded. One of the protesters, Foster, was carrying an AK-47 and wearing a bandana that covered his face. This alone could make any person feel threatened, and whether Foster actually pointed his weapon

Starting point is 00:27:23 at Perry, as his lawyers contended, is not something we have any hard evidence for or against. Footage of the shooting certainly does not clear that question up. Perhaps Foster didn't raise his weapon but made a movement that looked like it. That alone could give Perry some level of justification for his actions. In researching this story, I came across a reenactment of the indictment that showed the same Model AK-47 that Foster had shooting the same ammo through the same type of car door from a quote-unquote low-level position, 18 inches from the car. Unsurprisingly, the bullets ripped through the door, demonstrating the threat Perry could conceivably have faced if Foster wanted to harm him without raising the rifle. My charitable read ends there. What we got from

Starting point is 00:28:06 witness testimony at the trial was near unanimous consensus that Foster did not raise his weapon and that Perry did not have cause to shoot him under Texas's stand-your-ground laws. Further, Perry seemed intent on looking for trouble. He drove to the protests despite not wanting to participate in them. His Google searches made it clear he had been researching where protests were happening, and he repeatedly told his friends that he desired some kind of violent confrontation with protesters. Perhaps most importantly, though, is that the jury examined video of the altercation, police body camera footage after the incident, interview footage of Perry in the Austin Police Headquarters interrogation room, 3D renderings of Foster's proximity to Perry's car, 911 calls, cell phone records, witness video,

Starting point is 00:28:50 photos, and more. And then they decided, unanimously, that Perry could not claim self-defense under Texas law and was guilty. To put it more plainly, a jury of Perry's peers had all the relevant facts to make a determination in this case, and they came to the conclusion that he was guilty. All of this, of course, is on top of the information found on Perry's phone during the trial that has since become public, which painted a picture of a person who loathed Black Lives Matter protesters and was looking for an opening to engage with them. Pardons are a smart tool in our justice system, and they can be helpful when the proper use of the law produces an unjust outcome. Perhaps the release of a video showing a new angle of the altercation could have

Starting point is 00:29:30 proved good cause to free Perry. Maybe an exonerating piece of evidence getting dismissed at trial on some technical grounds could have provided good reason to pardon him. Or what if the law changed in Texas and under some new framework for self-defense, Perry would have been innocent? In any of those hypotheticals, a pardon could be more appropriate. But Abbott promising to pardon Perry immediately after the trial and before he was sentenced, then following through on that promise before he even appealed the verdict, is not how this tool is supposed to work. Abbott had used his pardon authority sparingly up until this point, but in Perry's case, he pushed it to its absolute limit. And while the parole board authorized the pardon, Abbott handpicked that board, and their decision seemed preordained. I can't shake the sense that,

Starting point is 00:30:16 as many on the left have argued, this entire ordeal boils down to the cause Foster represented and Abbott's desire to placate conservative media and potentially local police who wanted to send a message to Black Lives Matter protesters. Finally, let me just add one more thing. I really appreciated Cam Edwards' perspective in Bearing Arms. Edwards is a staunch Second Amendment supporter who spoke to me on this podcast today, and he takes an honest look at the case despite his biases, and I think he comes to the right conclusions podcast today, and he takes an honest look at the case despite his biases, and I think he comes to the right conclusions. One, there were two people exercising their right to carry a firearm, and one ended up dead. This was not some slam-dunk self-defense case.

Starting point is 00:30:56 Two, neither the governor nor the parole board explain what details or evidence made them change their position, which is troubling. And three, that lack of information is only going to make this situation worse. I agree with all of those points. Unless the parole board or Abbott presents new evidence or information we don't have, I'm going to stick with the conclusion of the jurors. I also think it's worth saying that this entire ordeal is the predictable outcome when we have civilians walking around the streets with AK-47s and handguns at tense and heated political protests like this. I know there isn't anything we can do about that explicitly given they're just exercising their Second Amendment rights, but it is a problem. And from where I'm sitting, the case played out like this. A man killed someone, faced a fair trial and jury, got convicted convicted and is now being bailed out by a governor

Starting point is 00:31:45 who wants to score political points. Abbott or the parole board could change my mind, but they've chosen not to. Rather than produce any evidence, framework, or details that might have been missed by the jury or judge, they've simply told us that they looked in great detail at this case and determined a pardon is appropriate. Nothing about that process should sit right, and it doesn't with me. We'll be right back after this quick break. All right, that is it for my take, which brings us to your questions answered. This one's from Alicia in Dayton, Ohio. Alicia said, does Tangle currently use AI to generate or edit any of its texts? Would you ever use it? And if so, would you disclose that how you're using it to your readers? What is your opinion on news outlets using AI to write articles along with the biases or

Starting point is 00:32:41 inaccuracies AI can introduce? Is this a net detriment or gain to journalism? All right, Alicia, these are great questions. I'm going to try and take them in order, and I think I can keep my answers short and sweet. Have we generated text with AI? No, we do not use ChatGPT or any AI generative language tool at all. And if we did, then yes, we would certainly cite it or disclose it. Would we ever use it, and if so, would we disclose it? If it's generative, then we certainly would. For example, for a video we did where we tried to build the perfect president based on demographics and historical trends, we used ChatGPT to help generate the name. We also tried using DALI for

Starting point is 00:33:21 image generation, then decided it was cheaper, faster, and ultimately better to use public domain images instead. These are all experiments, but we're generally open to exploring generative AI tools if they can save us time and money and produce something of quality, and when we do, we're sure to let readers and listeners and viewers know. My opinion on AI writing news articles? Maybe if you asked it to just regurgitate facts from an article the AP already wrote, it would end up being fine. But covering something new, presenting a political debate, I think it's pretty awful.

Starting point is 00:33:53 And I've tried. Go ask ChatGPT to read a few Tangle articles and then answer some silly debate like, does 1 plus 1 equal 2 or were dinosaurs real in the style of Tangle? And see how it does. It's just really, really bad at it. So no, I don't see AI as a harbinger of doom for journalism, at least not until the next technical leap. There are some use cases Google is exploring that could seriously harm news organizations by diverting search traffic to AI-generated responses, but that is very different from AI models stealing jobs from writers. Natural language processing models are extremely sophisticated word association

Starting point is 00:34:31 engines, but that's all they can be right now. They don't actually understand the world at all. Google has already implemented AI answers to its search, and from what I've seen so far, it's been wrong basically half the time. That is not a great hit rate. So anything I'd ask an AI to write, I'd have to thoroughly double check against my understanding of how things actually are, at which point it would be faster if I just wrote it myself. To wrap that up, let me just be clear here. I think AI tools can be helpful as creative assistants, and I think they can do some genuinely incredible and highly productive things. I just don't think covering news is one of those things. Summarizing, maybe, but that's it. I'm not worried they're going to steal my job, and I don't think AI can be or will ever be better at

Starting point is 00:35:14 communicating human thoughts, feelings, and reflections than me and my colleagues. I even asked ChatGPT recently to proofread Tangle articles, thinking that it would be a potentially useful way to use the tool. It gave me eight tips on an article we had published, and every single one of them was either wrong or totally useless. I actually shared a screenshot of that in today's newsletter. If anybody's interested, you can find it on our website. So that's basically where I stand. I appreciate the question. And if you have something you want to get answered in the newsletter, you can reach out and write to me by writing to Isaac, I-S-A-A-C at readtangle.com. All right, that is it for today's My Take and Reader question. I'm going to send it back to John for the rest of the pod. We'll have something up in our Sunday podcast, but as always, we are off for Memorial Day on Monday, so we'll see you guys Tuesday. Have a good one.

Starting point is 00:36:10 Thanks, Isaac. And here is your under the radar story for today, folks. Rising fast food prices could be key to persistent unhappiness with the economy under President Biden. Fast food restaurants have had some of the sharpest price hikes during the Biden administration, rising more than grocery bills or gas prices. In 2020, Biden won with the help of a coalition of working class voters, many of whom often rely on cheap, quick, fast food throughout their week. Now, with average fast food prices up 31%, hourly earnings have risen only 25% for those workers,

Starting point is 00:36:41 polls show Biden is losing or splitting lower-income voters. Axios has this story, and there's a link in today's episode description. All right, next up is our numbers section. The number of days Daniel Perry spent in prison before his pardon was 372. The approximate distance in miles from Perry's military station at Fort Hood to Austin, where the shooting took place, is 70. The number of hours the jury deliberated before finding Perry guilty of murder was 17. The total number of pardons issued by Governor Greg Abbott between 2021 and 2023 was 13. The share of the vote won by Travis County District Attorney Jose Garza in the county's Democratic primary in March 2024 was 67%.

Starting point is 00:37:29 The percentage of Americans who support stand-your-ground laws allowing people in a public place to kill or injure a perceived attacker is 58%, according to a May 2023 NPR PBS NewsHour Marist poll. The percentage of Republicans who support stand-your-ground laws is 81%, and the percentage of Democrats who do not support stand-your-ground laws is 60%. All right, and last but not least, our Have a Nice Day story. Researchers working with Oxford Population Health in the United Kingdom have identified proteins in blood

Starting point is 00:38:05 that could indicate cancer more than seven years in advance. Two studies funded by Cancer Research UK have found 618 proteins linked to 19 types of the disease, including bowel, prostate, and breast cancers. Discoveries from this research are the crucial first step towards offering preventative therapies, which is the ultimate route for giving people longer, better lives free from the fear of cancer. So Dr. Ian

Starting point is 00:38:28 Fowkes, Executive Director of Research and Innovation at Cancer Research UK. Sky News 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 want to support our work, you can go to readtangle.com and sign up for a membership. A quick reminder, we have our YouTube video up. It is the Penn Campus protest video where Isaac and Will got some coverage and talked to some protesters and counter-protesters. It's a very interesting video to watch

Starting point is 00:38:59 and gain some perspectives and see what was actually happening on the ground just 12 hours before police showed up. And as Isaac mentioned, if you want to keep up with Friday editions, best thing to do is sign up for a membership so you can get all of our paywalled material. And going forward, that's going to include some very special interviews, videos, and much more. We are off on Monday for Memorial Day, so we will talk to you again on Tuesday. For Isaac and the rest of the team, hope you have an absolutely fabulous weekend. Enjoy it, everybody. Talk to you again on Tuesday. For Isaac and the rest of the team, hope you have an absolutely fabulous weekend. Enjoy it, everybody.

Starting point is 00:39:26 Talk to you soon. Peace. Our podcast is written by me, Isaac Saul, and edited and engineered by John Wall. The script is edited by our managing editor, Ari Weitzman, Will Kabak, Bailey Saul, and Sean Brady. The logo for our podcast was designed by Magdalena Bokova, who is also our social media manager. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet75. And if you're looking for more from Tangle, please go to

Starting point is 00:39:56 readtangle.com and check out our website. We'll see you next time. trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages 6 months and older, and it may be available for free in your province.

Starting point is 00:41:01 Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at FluCellVax.ca.

Tangle - Texas Governor pardons man who killed BLM protester.

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.