Tangle - The Matt Gaetz ethics report

Episode Date: November 21, 2024

On Wednesday, a bipartisan House ethics panel investigating sexual misconduct claims against former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) voted not to release its report. The panel was scheduled to meet last week to discuss making the report public but changed course after Gaetz resigned from Congress following President-elect Trump announcing him as his pick for attorney general. The Ethics Committee customarily does not release a report if a member leaves office (with some exceptions). Gaetz has denied all wrongdoing. Ad-free podcasts are here!Many listeners have been asking for an ad-free version of this podcast that they could subscribe to — and we finally launched it. You can go to tanglemedia.supercast.com to sign up!You can read today's podcast⁠ ⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠, our “Under the Radar” story ⁠here and today’s “Have a nice day” story ⁠here⁠.We are hiring!In the last month or so, the rapid growth of our readership has accelerated a planned expansion of our team. We are hiring for:Assistant to the editor. We are also looking for a highly organized individual dedicated to Tangle's mission who has a passion for multimedia and politics. This person will be working directly with Tangle's executive editor Isaac Saul out of Tangle HQ in Philadelphia, with a start date in February-March. Job listing here.Take the survey: Do you think the Ethics Committee should release its report? Let us know!You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Our podcast is written by Isaac Saul and edited and engineered by Dewey Thomas. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75. Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Will Kaback, Bailey Saul, Sean Brady, and produced in conjunction with Tangle’s social media manager Magdalena Bokowa, who also created our logo. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Oh, that coffee smells good. Can you pass me the sugar when you're finished? Whoa, whoa, whoa, what are you doing? That's salt, not sugar. Let's get you another coffee. Feeling distracted? You're not alone. Many Canadians are finding it hard to focus

with mortgage payments on their minds. If you're struggling with your payments, speak to your bank. The earlier they understand your situation, the more options and relief measures could be available to you. Learn more at Canada.ca slash it pays to know. A message from the Government of Canada.

From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening. And welcome to the Tangle podcast, the place we get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking, and a little bit of my take. I am your host, Isaac Saul. And on today's episode, we're going gonna be talking about Matt Gaetz's appointment to be attorney general and the ethics report that is now being wrestled over in Congress. Before we do that though, two quick announcements.

First of all, we won. We won the Shorty Impact Award in the news and media category. And we didn't just win the award that the Shorty Impact Award in the news and media category. And we didn't just win the award that the Shorty committee chooses, we won the audience award as well, which means that we got out voted, which means that we got more votes than anybody else

from the people who voted online. So thank you all for participating that. I know many of you guys who listen to the podcast or read the newsletter or follow us on social media actually went and voted. Really appreciate it. This is a huge moment for us. The Shorty Impact Awards are basically

the most prestigious awards in digital media. And we haven't really gotten this recognition from an organization like this at the national level yet. So it's awesome, Took a lot of work. We're super pumped about it. We're going to celebrate and enjoy it. But also wanted to thank all you guys for supporting us and helping us get here.

And especially those of you who voted because it made a huge difference. Also wanted to give you guys a heads up to keep an eye out for a podcast tomorrow, a members only podcast tomorrow on Super PACs and Money in Politics. I'm gonna be sitting down with David O'Brien, the Policy Director at Represent Us,

which is a nonpartisan organization which advocates for reforms to address the corruption and ineffectiveness in government. David is an expert on Super PACs and Money in Politics. This is one of the most common questions we get from readers, how do Super PACs work? How much impact do they actually have? Can we get this money out of the most common questions we get from readers. How do Super PACs work? How much impact do they actually have? Can we get this money out of the system?

And we're going to have a podcast and a conversation tomorrow about all of that stuff. A reminder, those Friday edition podcasts are for Tangle members only. So you got to go to tanglemedia.supercast.com to get your membership. All right. With that out of the way, I'm going to pass it over to John for today's main pod, and I'll be back for my take.

Thanks, Isaac. And welcome, everybody. Here are your quick hits for today. First up Doctors Without Borders said it would halt operation in Haiti's Porte du Prince in response to escalating violence and threats against its workers. The organization is one of the primary health care providers in Haiti. Number 2. Jose Ibera, an unauthorized migrant from Venezuela who entered the US in 2022, was found guilty of murdering Lakin Riley, a Georgia student, and sentenced to life in prison without the

possibility of parole. Number 3. The United States Embassy in Kiev, Ukraine closed and ordered its employees to shelter in place after receiving intelligence that a major Russian aerial attack could be imminent. The embassy has since resumed operations. 4. House Speaker Mike Johnson announced a rule for the Capitol that individuals must use bathrooms that correspond to their biological sex.

The policy will also apply to bathrooms in house office buildings, changing rooms, and locker rooms. And number five, President-elect Donald Trump chose former acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker to serve as U.S. ambassador to NATO. -♪ The New York Times obtaining a new document from federal investigators. This document details the trail of payments from Matt Gaetz, Trump's choice for attorney general to numerous women, including some who testified that Gaetz was paying them for

sex. Before we begin, we have some breaking news. Matt Gaetz announced he was withdrawing his nomination for attorney general at 1224 PM Eastern time, shortly after the newsletter was published and after the podcast was recorded. You can read his announcement with a link in today's episode description. On Wednesday, a bipartisan House ethics panel investigating sexual misconduct claims against former representative Matt Gaetz voted not to release its report. The panel was scheduled to meet last week to discuss making the report public, but changed course after Gaetz resigned from Congress following President-elect Trump announcing

him as his pick for attorney general. The ethics committee customarily does not release a report if a member leaves office, with some exceptions. Gaetz has denied all wrongdoing. High level presidential appointments need at least 50 votes in the Senate to be confirmed with the vice president's vote to break a tie in the chamber if it's deadlocked. Republicans are set to have a 53 to 47 majority

in the chamber in 2025. The Ethics Committee voted on three different proposals in their closed door meeting about the report, to release it in its current form, to release only the exhibits associated with the report, and to complete the report and vote on releasing it at a later date. The two first measures failed, but the third passed with bipartisan support. Representative Susan Wild, the top Democrat on the committee, said the group will meet on December 5th to take up the matter again. In response to the Ethics Committee's decision, Representative Sean Castan announced a privileged resolution to compel a full House vote on forcing the panel to immediately release its report.

A privileged resolution bypasses committee consideration and brings a vote to the House floor without leadership's approval. The House goes on Thanksgiving recess today, so Castan's resolution won't get a vote until they return. In 2021, the Department of Justice began investigating Gates for his potential role in the sex trafficking of a 17-year-old girl, but concluded its investigation in 2023 by declining to bring charges. During the investigation, a Florida businessman pleaded guilty to wire fraud after attempting to extort Gates' father in return for a presidential pardon on the potential charges facing the

younger Gates. On Wednesday, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin and other committee Democrats wrote to FBI Director Christopher Wray to request the full evidentiary file in that case as they consider Gates's nomination. Wray has yet to respond to the request. On Wednesday, the New York Times reported that federal investigators had established a trail of payments from Gates, usually through an intermediary, to women who testified that they had been paid for sex.

The Times' reporting was based on a leaked document that shows a series of Venmo payments totaling thousands of dollars between Gates and a wide network of friends and associates, including the women who testified against him. Additionally, an unauthorized person gained access to a file containing confidential testimony from women who have made allegations against Gates in a civil case. The file reportedly contains unredacted depositions from a woman who alleged Gates had sex with her

when she was 17, and a second woman who says she witnessed the encounter. Many Republican senators have declined to say whether they'll support Gates' nomination, while President-elect Trump and his allies have stood firm behind the pick. On Wednesday, Vice President-elect J.D. Vance accompanied Gates to the Capitol to rally support among GOP senators. Senate Democrats, meanwhile, have indicated that they will uniformly oppose the nomination. Today, we'll share arguments from the left and the right about the Ethics

Committee's decision and Gates' nomination, and then Isaac's take. We'll be right back after this quick break. Oh, that coffee smells good. Can you pass me the sugar when you're finished? Whoa, whoa, whoa, what are you doing? That's salt, not sugar. Let's get you another coffee. Feeling distracted? You're not alone.

Many Canadians are finding it hard to focus with mortgage payments on their minds. If you're struggling with your payments, speak to your bank. The earlier they understand your situation, the more options and relief measures could be available to you. Learn more at Canada.ca slash it pays to know. start with what the left is saying. The left criticizes the committee's decision while noting that the group has released reports about former members before. Some frame the nomination fight as a test of Trump's influence. Others suggest the main reasons to oppose Gates are not the sexual misconduct allegations. The Washington Post editorial board argued

the ethics report shouldn't be a secret. The committee, which meets again next month, needs to release the material well before the Senate considers Mr. Gates' nomination for attorney general. In fact, suppressing the report would conflict with the committee's tradition of releasing findings even after lawmakers resign, when doing so is in the public interest.

This is clearly one of those times," the board wrote. Consider Representative Donald Buzz Lukens, who had sex with a 16-year-old on November 6, 1988, two nights before he won re-election. He resigned three months before the end of his term. Committee members voted to release their findings anyway. When lawmakers resign amid an ethics scandal, they often slink out of public life. In this case, Mr. Gates wants to become the nation's chief law enforcement officer and potentially run for governor of Florida in 2026, the board said. The committee should at least allow senators of both parties to review the report behind closed

doors. If senators are denied even this degree of access, they should invite the witnesses who spoke to the ethics committee investigators to testify publicly during Mr. Gates's confirmation hearings. In CNN, Steven Collinson called Gates's nomination a test of strength for Trump. Trump is creating a show of force that will help define his new term as he tries to leverage Matt Gaetz into the Attorney General's office. as he tries to leverage Matt Gaetz into the Attorney General's office. The President-elect has been calling senators to press them to confirm his pick early next year, CNN reported Monday. Even as counter-pressure grows from GOP senators who want to see a House Ethics Committee report into Gaetz's past conduct, including over an alleged sexual liaison with a minor,

that he has denied, Collinson wrote. The escalating drama is posing a critical question. How far will Trump go in trying to force Republican senators to back his choice, even though some have deep reservations about Gates' character and qualifications for the job? If Trump sticks with this pick, Republican senators feeling the MAGA movement's pressure could be forced to defend Gates for weeks. That could land them in a tricky spot. Despite the threat that senators could face primaries if they break with the president-elect, votes for a compromise nominee could also haunt those

seeking re-election in statewide races in 2026, Collinson said. The president-elect's unorthodox pick means that Trump may soon approach the point where it will cost him more political capital to fold on Gates than to keep trying to get him installed, whatever it takes. In Slate, Frank Bowman wrote about the danger of making the Matt Gates nomination about sexual misconduct. I understand the attraction of the sex angle. It's simple, it's salacious. Everybody loves the sex story. Also, so the theory in some Democratic circles presumably goes, it would give Senate Republicans

terrified of denying Trump an easy excuse to vote against Gates. He's a pervert, a sexual predator, and maybe a criminal. And we certainly can't have somebody like that as Attorney General," Bowman said. Nonetheless, I think the obsessive focus on Gates's alleged sexual misconduct is a mistake, both for the media and, in due course, for senatorial opponents of the nomination. and, in due course, for senatorial opponents of the nomination. A confirmation fight focused on sex and the contestable memories of vulnerable young women would too easily be distorted by Trump, Gates, and the right-wing media into just another example of the detestable liberals trying to smear a patriot, Bowman wrote. More importantly, Gates as attorney general would be a disaster,

not because he allegedly had sex with a 17-year-old. The real issue is that regardless of his alleged sexual misconduct, he is stupefyingly unqualified for the job and his confirmation would present an immediate danger both to the rule of law and though they may not see it yet to Republicans themselves. All right, that is it for what the left is saying, which brings us to what the right is saying.

The right is mixed on the committee's decision, but say that the Senate is entitled to see the report. Some say Gates must be defended against efforts to derail his nomination. Others suggest it is in the public interest to release the full report. The Wall Street Journal editorial board said the Senate has every right to demand the ethics report. For understandable reasons, the norm is that such ethics inquiries are closed quietly if lawmakers step down, but Mr. Gates abruptly quit Congress last week mere hours after Mr.

Trump announced his nomination for AG. The committee was reportedly dazed from releasing its investigation. It's one thing to keep sordid details private when a lawmaker accused of misbehavior is chastened enough to resign and go back to private life. This looks more like an effort to dodge accountability by getting a promotion. Mr. Gates has denied wrongdoing

and he deserves due process like everyone else. The Justice Department investigated but didn't bring criminal charges, the board wrote. The Attorney General is the nation's highest law enforcement official, responsible for making tough calls on federal cases, and ideally looking credible doing it. The president is free to nominate whoever has his trust, but then the state's constitutional role in confirmation

is to ensure that the AG's office is ultimately filled by someone who deserves the country's trust. In the Federalist, Margot Cleveland argued, Republicans must defend Matt Gaetz to end the use of salacious lies as a political weapon. Before marrying in 2021, former representative Matt Gaetz was known to be a braggadocious libertine. No conservative wants to defend such behavior, and so many on the right are remaining silent as Gaetz is accused of also engaging in criminal conduct, paying prostitutes, and having sex with a minor, Cleveland said.

The claims against Gates are but another information operation, however, mirroring the ones that previously targeted Donald Trump and Brett Kavanaugh, and this pattern will continue unabated unless Americans unflinchingly condemn the tactic, no matter the target. Why then is anyone giving credence to the accusations against Gates, especially given the FBI, after thoroughly investigating the matter for two years, decided not to charge Gates, Cleveland wrote.

Now the media and some senators are pressuring the House Ethics Committee to release their report on the investigation into Gates. Whether that happens or not, though, there will surely be leaks designed to doom Gates' nomination as Attorney General. While some on the right may prefer not to defend the former playboy, the only way to end the growing use of salacious lies as a political weapon is to condemn the information operation, prosecute those responsible, and ostracize the members of the media responsible for advancing the hoax. In MSNBC, former representative Charlie Dent wrote,

"'I've served on the House Ethics Committee. Here's why it should release its report.'" While the Ethics Committee technically loses jurisdiction over members after their service has ended, there's nothing in the House rules that prohibits the committee from disclosing investigative information and reports about departed members, Dent said.

"'Having served on the House Ethics Committee for eight years and as chairman for two, I'm very familiar with the mentality of committee members who are serious and fair-minded about their duties. No one enjoys serving in this capacity to cast judgment on one's colleagues. It's the congressional equivalent of serving in the Internal Affairs Division within the police department,

but this is a job that must be done. In life, there are rules, and there are exceptions to rules. Internal Affairs Division within the police department, but this is a job that must be done. In life, there are rules, and there are exceptions to rules. In this case, there are compelling reasons to release the Gates Report. Precedent is well established, and the American people should know and understand how it would affect Gates' ability to carry out the duties as the country's top law enforcement officer, Den wrote. If the Ethics Committee declines to release the report, a member of Congress is likely

to go to the floor and move for its immediate release, forcing a vote by the entire House. Given Gates's unpopularity among his are saying, which brings us to my take. First, let me just start by saying that Matt Gaetz has not been proven guilty of anything. Biden's Department of Justice investigated him for 18 months before declining to bring charges due to concerns about witness credibility. The key witness in the government's case, Joel Greenberg, is currently serving an 11-year sentence after taking a plea deal to cooperate on the DOJ's investigation into Gaetz. If you want to know how unreliable Greenberg is,

consider that he has already been accused of taking a bribe in exchange for smearing other Republicans in Florida. But there is an ocean of difference between not bringing charges and no reason to be concerned. For starters, remember that the DOJ not pressing charges is also not proof of innocence. It just means that they don't think they'd be able to land a conviction.

Best we can tell that's largely because of witness credibility. Just like conservatives didn't accept that line of thinking when it was applied to President Biden, the Senate shouldn't accept that line of thinking now. Second, while Greenberg might not be credible enough to give indictable testimony in court, the paper trail still paints an ugly picture. Gates sent $10,000 in Venmo payments to two women who claimed the money was for sex, according to documents obtained by the New York Times. And in 2017, Greenberg, who was known to have sex and drug parties with underage girls present, sent Venmo transactions totaling nearly $5,000 to a woman

who worked as a DC intern in 2018 and said she dated Gates during her senior year in college. Even if the Justice Department decided it wasn't going to bring charges, this is all kind... Even if the Justice Department decided it wasn't going to bring charges, this is all the kind of stuff that invites questions, that an ethics report would supposedly help answer. And it is exactly why I hope the Ethics Committee

eventually chooses to release their report. Yes, the House Ethics Committee report would supposedly help answer. And it is exactly why I hope the ethics committee eventually chooses to release their report. Yes, the house ethics committee typically doesn't release reports about members of Congress after they resign. I'm not suggesting that they should. And I agree with speaker Mike Johnson's point that doing so would open a serious Pandora's box. I'm also mostly glad that the committee voted

not to release its incomplete findings on Wednesday, instead opting to formally complete the report, pushing their decision to release it until their next meeting on December 5th. Still, the report should come out before Gates is confirmed as the chief law enforcement officer in the land. While the ethics committee doesn't typically release its findings into members after they leave Congress, this case is anything but typical. In fact, deciding to do so would be in line with exceptions they've made in the past. In 2006, the committee released its finding on an investigation to former representative Mark Foley,

the Republican from Florida, for allegedly sending sexually suggestive messages to House pages after he resigned. In 1987, it released its report on former representative Bill Boehner, the Democrat from Tennessee, after he resigned. And in 1990, it released its report on former representative Bill Boehner, the Democrat from Tennessee, after he resigned. And in 1990, it released its report on former representative Donald E. Buzz Lukens, the Republican from Ohio, on the day he resigned.

Remember, the point of the ethics committee isn't to prosecute our elected representatives. The point is to hold members of Congress responsible for their actions in front of their peers. That's not the same as calling on the FBI to publicly release their findings. It's just to say that I want to see the output of two years of investigation. So did the alleged victims in this case, by the way, who probably won't have to be dragged through the mud of a public confirmation hearing if this report comes out.

One way or another, I believe this information is going to see the light of day. We've already gotten reports that a hacker has gained access to the unredacted witness testimony. As a journalist, I'm typically supportive of leaks. I want to get all the information I can get my hands on. In this case though, I'd prefer that information came out in a responsible and orderly manner from this committee,

rather than through an unscrupulous hacker who may dox innocent people or mishandle the information. All of this obviously puts Gates's nomination in jeopardy. If Republicans lose four votes in the Senate, the nomination is sunk. Mark-Wayne Mullen, the Republican from Oklahoma, is at best a maybe. Senator Lisa Murkowski, the Republican from Alaska, called Gates not a serious nomination. And Susan Collins, the Republican from Maine, said she was, quote unquote, shocked at the nomination. Add in the Republican senators, Gates is publicly insulted, like James Lankford from Oklahoma,

Tom Tillis from North Carolina, and Mitch McConnell from Kentucky. And it's easy to understand why the senators themselves are skeptical he'll get through. That's even before the ethics report comes out. In fact, it's really hard to understand why President Trump is continuing to push Gates forward at all. But as I said last week, I don why President Trump is continuing to push Gates forward at all. But as I said last week, I don't think Trump is playing 4D chess. He's going to push the boundaries

and try to get whatever he wants, including Gates for attorney general. I think Trump is clearly looking for a loyalist at the top of the justice department, which makes sense given his relationship with the department over the last eight years. But that person doesn't have to be Gates. There are plenty of other people ready and willing

and capable of carrying out the GOP agenda for the DOJ who are more qualified and have much less baggage than he does. So the Ethics Committee releasing their report benefits the public. We get more information about someone who could be the country's top law enforcement official. It benefits the Senate, who would have to vote

on whether to confirm him. And it benefits Republicans,, who would have to vote on whether to confirm him, and it benefits Republicans, who could use the report to decide whether it may be best to instead focus on less problematic appointments. I hope the ethics committee will see it the same way. We'll be right back after this quick break. We'll be right back after this quick break. I'm hiring, but where can I find potential candidates?

Hundreds of thousands of Canadians with disabilities are ready and eager to work. Help create an inclusive workplace that benefits everyone. Find the tools and resources to help you hire persons with disabilities at Canada.ca slash right here. A message from the Government of Canada. All right, that is it for my take, which brings us to your questions answered. This one's from Eric in Holly Springs, North Carolina. Eric asks, what do you think of Charlie Kirk? Most of the things I've seen from him are YouTube shorts titled Charlie Kirk owns woke college kid or Charlie Kirk gets owned.

So many clips I see of him are either him posting up at a college campus or taking massive Q and A from an audience. He definitely has his biases and disrespectful moments, but most of the videos I see of him are either him posting up at a college campus or taking massive Q and A from an audience. He definitely has his biases and disrespectful moments, but most of the videos I see are him trying to calmly, respectfully articulate his point of view and giving kudos to others that do the same. I got to respect anyone who just opens a mic to the masses, not knowing what he's going to get.

Okay, so I have two kind of overarching feelings here. One, like you, I very much respect the hustle. And two, personally, I just find his brand of entertainment politics pretty annoying. Kirk is a smart guy who I think is far more influential than a lot of people understand. If I could point to a single person who is turning young college-age Americans onto Trumpism

that isn't named Donald Trump, it'd probably be Charlie Kirk. I think his campus visits and the Charlie Kirk owns a college student genre of videos are effective because they prove how little a lot of people know about politics, despite being very confident they are well-educated on the topic.

That, and he is genuinely good at defending Trump's politics and making the case in a way younger voters might find appealing. At the same time, Kirk is part of this brand of political debate that I personally find grating. People like Ben Shapiro popularized this on the right. Go to a heavily liberal place, find people who don't know as much as you, challenge them to debate and then embarrass them. On the left, you see it in the form of Daily Show man on the street bits or TikTokers like Dean Withers. I just don't really like this style, mostly because it sets up unfair fights

between partially informed enthusiasts and fast talking media professionals saying half truths and looking to score points on camera, who then move on before anyone really learns anything. That's to say, do I like Kirk? Not really. As with a lot of YouTubers on the left and right, I find his shtick a little bit off putting,

but do I think he's smart, influential, doing the right thing to get the outcome he wants, which is turning more college kids red? Yes, definitely. All right, that is it for your questions answered. I'm gonna send it back to John for the rest of the pod. And again, we'll be back here tomorrow with our interview on super PACs and money in politics. And don't forget, if you want that, you got

to go to tanglemedia.supercast.com. See you then. Peace. Thanks Isaac. Here's your under the radar story for today, folks. A new report by the International Atomic Energy Agency found that Iran has significantly increased its store of uranium, enriched up to 60 percent, since the group's last report in August. The country's overall enriched uranium stockpile is 6,604.4 kilograms, an increase of 852.6 kilograms from August. IAEA Director Rafael Mariano Grossi, who visited Iran in October

to survey its nuclear program, said Iran's stockpile gives it the capacity to make several nuclear bombs. While Iran maintains that its nuclear program is intended only for peaceful purposes, the rapid growth of its uranium stockpiles has heightened concerns about the program in the international community amid ongoing war in the Middle East. The Associated Press has this story and there's a link in today's episode description. Alright next up is our numbers section. The number of fact-gathering investigations started or continued by the committee during the 117th Congress is 72.

The number of investigative matters resolved by the committee during the 117th Congress is 72. The number of investigative matters resolved by the committee during the 117th Congress is six. The number of investigative subcommittees impaneled by the committee during the 117th Congress is three. They involved Delegate Michael San Nicolas, Representative Jeff Fortenberry, and Representative Madison Cawthorn. The number of fact-gathering investigations started or continued by the committee during the 116th Congress from 2019 to 2021 was 50. The number of investigative matters resolved by the committee during the 116th Congress was 25.

The number of investigative subcommittees impaneled by the committee during the 116th Congress was 6. They involved Representative Chris Collins, Representative Matt Gaetz, Representative Duncan Hunter, Delegate Michael San-Nicholas, Representative David Schweickart, and Representative Steve Watkins. The percentage of U.S. adults with a favorable view of former Representative Matt Gaetz is 29%, according to a Yahoo News Ugov survey released last week. And the percentage of U.S. adults with an unfavorable view of Gates is 37%. And last but not least, our Have a Nice Day story.

More than 21,700 cases of measles were reported in Brazil in 2019. Reacting to this, Brazil's Ministry of Health worked with state and local health professionals to create a detailed vaccination plan and train rapid response teams. By 2022, the last case of endemic measles had been recorded in Brazil, and by 2023, the nation's measles vaccination rate had stood at 87%. Earlier this month, Dr. Harbos Barbosa, the director of the Pan-American Health Organization, and Luís Inácio Lula da Silva, the president of Brazil, announced that the country was officially free of measles.

The Pan American Health Organization has this story and there's a link in today's episode description. All right, everybody, that's it for today's episode. As always, if you'd like to support our work, please go to readtangle.com and sign up for a membership. You can also go to tanglemedia.supercast.com and sign up for a premium podcast membership, which gets you ad free daily podcasts, Friday edition, Sunday editions, bonus content, interviews, and so much more.

We've got an interview lined up for tomorrow's Friday edition, and Isaac and Ari will be here for the Sunday podcast. I will return next week. For the rest of the crew, this is John Law signing off. Have a fantastic weekend, y'all. Peace. Our podcast is written by me, Isaac Saul, and edited and engineered by Dink Thomas. Our script is edited by Ari Weitzman,

Will K. Back, Kelly Saul, and Sean Brady. The logo for our podcast was made by Magdalena Bukova, who is also our social media manager. The music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75. And if you're looking for more from Tangle, please go check out our website at reedtangle.com. That's reedtangle.com. The faster money and data move, the further your business can go to a seamless digital future for Canadians.

Let's go faster forward together in Life Interact. Are you sure you parked over here? Do you see it anywhere? I think it's back this way. Come on. Hey, you're going the wrong way. Feeling distracted? You're not alone. Whether renting, considering buying a home or renewing a mortgage, many Canadians are finding it hard to focus with housing costs on their minds. For free tools and resources to help you manage your home finances and clear your

head, visit Canada.ca slash it pays to know. A message from the Government of Canada.