Tangle - The war in Ukraine, and the U.S. funding fight.

Episode Date: December 6, 2023

The Ukraine war. On Saturday, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg warned that there could be bad news coming out of Ukraine in the coming weeks, as fears of a stalemate with Russia grow. The comments come at a time when Congress is increasingly divided about whether to continue funding Ukraine's war effort, with Senate Republicans proposing any Ukraine funding be tied to an overhaul of the U.S. immigration system.You can read today's podcast ⁠⁠here⁠⁠, our “Under the Radar” story here, and today’s “Have a nice day” story here. You can also check out our latest video, a look at what a potential second term for Donald Trump could look like, here.Today’s clickables: Correction (0:55), Quick hits (2:09), Today’s story (4:29), Left’s take (8:11), Right’s take (11:00), International takes (13:42), Isaac’s take (16:26), Listener question (21:18), Under the Radar (25:14), Numbers (26:13), Have a nice day (27:20)You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Take the poll. What do you think about continued U.S. military aid to Ukraine? Let us know!Our podcast is written by Isaac Saul and edited and engineered by Jon Lall. 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.--- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/tanglenews/message Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Breaking news happens anywhere, anytime. Police have warned the protesters repeatedly, get back. CBC News brings the story to you as it happens. Hundreds of wildfires are burning. Be the first to know what's going on and what that means for you and for Canadians. This situation has changed very quickly. Helping make sense of the world when it matters most. Stay in the know. CBC News.

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 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 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. 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'm your host, Isaac Saul, and today is Wednesday, December 6th.

This is going to be a tough one today. We're going to do an update on what's going on in Ukraine. I know, you know, there's just a lot of war in the news right now, and it's a bit depressing. It sucks, frankly, but you know what? This stuff is important, and we got to jump in, so we're going to cover it today. Before we do, though, unfortunately, I have to issue a little bit of a correction. It came to our attention that on November 14th, we had an error. I missed this, actually. Our newsletter and our podcast had a Q&A with a reader in which we referred to Representative Dean Phillips as a one-term member of Congress. He's in the middle of his third term right now. I think that happened because we were comparing him to Obama's experience as a one-term senator and then just accidentally called Phillips a one-term representative. Nobody caught it,

I guess, which sucks. And the correction was not found immediately. Obviously, it's been almost a month since then, but we were going through some reader email feedback and we saw it. Somebody caught it and wrote in and we did not see it until now. So wanted to make note of that. That was our 94th correction in Tangle's 225-week history and our first correction since October 26th. We track corrections and place them at the top of the podcast in an effort to maximize transparency with our listeners. All right, with that out of the way, we're going to jump in with some quick hits. First up, Senator Tommy Tuberville, the Republican from Alabama, dropped the bulk of his months-long blockade of military promotions he had launched

in opposition to the Pentagon's abortion policy. More than 400 promotions were swiftly approved. Separately, Rep. Patrick McHenry, the Republican from North Carolina who briefly served as interim House Speaker, is planning to resign from Congress at the end of his term. Number two, Israel's troops are now operating in Gaza's second largest city, Qanunis, in the south. Israel says it widened its ground invasion in order to destroy Hamas's last major stronghold. More than 1.87 million Palestinians, or about 80% of the population in Gaza, have now been displaced. Number three, the United Kingdom approved new measures to limit legal migration, including a raise in the minimum salary threshold for skilled workers after migration levels hit a record in 2022.

Number four, math scores in the United States fell sharply from 2018 to 2022 and continued to lag behind peer nations, according to the first large-scale education assessment since the pandemic. according to the first large-scale education assessment since the pandemic. Number five, Taylor Swift was named Person of the Year by Time magazine. And at number six, a little bonus quick hit, a heads up that the fourth and final Republican primary debate is set for tonight. Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley, Vivek Ramaswamy, and Chris Christie will all participate. The White House is pushing Congress to pass more aid for Ukraine by the end of the year. President Biden is asking lawmakers for nearly one hundred six billion dollars to help Ukraine and Israel. This is an urgent and blunt message from the White House to congressional leaders warning they are out of money and nearly out of time to provide additional aid to Ukraine.

But right now, there is no clear path forward and the pressure is on. In a letter sent to House and Senate leadership, the Office of Management and Budget Director Shalonda Young wrote, quote, cutting off the flow of U.S. weapons and equipment will kneecap Ukraine on the battlefield, not only putting at risk the gains Ukraine has made, but increasing the likelihood of Russian military victories. On Saturday, NATO Secretary General Jen Stoltenberg warned that there could be bad news coming out of Ukraine in the coming weeks as fears of a stalemate with Russia grow. The comments come at a time when Congress is increasingly divided about whether to continue funding Ukraine's war effort,

with Senate Republicans proposing any Ukraine funding be tied to an overhaul of the U.S. immigration system. The immigration reforms Republicans are asking for largely mirror H.R.2, which passed the House in May without any Democratic votes. It would restart construction of the border wall, mandate more Border Patrol agents, overhaul asylum eligibility, and reestablish the Remain in Mexico policy, among other changes. Former President Donald Trump, the leading candidate in the Republican primary race, has expressed support for a Republican stance. candidate in the Republican primary race has expressed support for a Republican stance. On Monday, the White House said those policies were a non-starter and warned that it could run out of funds to provide weapons to Ukraine if there is no congressional action before the end of the year. Congress has already allocated $111 billion to assist Ukraine, including $67 billion

in military funding, $27 billion in economic assistance, and $10 billion in humanitarian aid. All but 3% of that had been depleted by mid-November, according to Office of Management and Budget Director Shalanda Young. In October, the Biden administration outlined a $106 billion national security funding request that included money for Israel, investments in the Indo-Pacific, and border security measures, but it has not been considered by Congress. Meanwhile, the war rages on. Last week, Russian Major General Vladimir Zavadsky was reportedly killed in Kharkiv in eastern Ukraine, which is still under Russian control. Russia claims to have shot down dozens of Ukrainian drones, while Ukraine has shot down 10 out of 17 Russian attack drones, according to Ukrainian

officials. Ukraine's commander-in-chief, General Valery Zaluzhny, described the war as a stalemate last month, saying only a significant technological breakthrough could change the course of the conflict. Some analysis have taken the change of posture as the signal that Ukraine's counteroffensive from June is now over. Eurasia Group President Ian Bremmer described the counteroffensive as failed in analysis on Monday. Since the counteroffensive began, Ukraine has advanced about 11 miles, according to The Economist's estimates. Zeluzhny expected the army to advance 19 miles per day, but said in interviews that his biggest error was expecting the high number of Russian deaths to be a deterrent for Russia. biggest error was expecting the high number of Russian deaths to be a deterrent for Russia.

That was my mistake, he said. Russia has lost at least 150,000 dead. In any other country, such casualties would have stopped the war. On Monday, Ukraine signaled that it is shifting its military tactics toward a more defensive footing as winter approaches and after analysis of Russia's resource capabilities. President Volodymyr Zelensky also signaled that a fortification of the front lines needed to be accelerated. Since the war began, an estimated 320,000 Russian troops have been killed or injured, according to European and U.S. analysts. A Ukrainian civic group estimates about 30,000 Ukrainian troops have died in the war, though an August report from the New York Times said U.S. officials estimate that number is closer to 70,000, with over 100,000 wounded. Some 10,000 Ukrainian civilians have also died, according to the United Nations, with about half the deaths in the past

three months taking place far behind enemy front lines. Today, we're going to examine some perspectives about the war from the left and the right, as well as a couple from abroad. We'll be right back after this quick commercial break. First up, we'll start with what the left is saying. The left is concerned about the long-term outlook for the war and critical of Republicans for conditioning aid to Ukraine on immigration reforms. Some say the GOP's proposed policies would be destructive, while others say that the party is trying to appease Trump in making these demands. In The Messenger, Beatrice Lopez wrote about the Republican wrecking ball aimed at America's asylum system. There's a Senate bipartisan working group in which Republicans involved are holding Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan aid funding

hostage by demanding extreme permanent changes on immigration policy on the supplemental funding bill. Republican senators appear to be taking a page from the Trump-Miller handbook and pushing for an asylum ban, barriers that would make it nearly impossible to apply for asylum, as well as measures that would block humanitarian and other forms of parole, Lopez said. Democrats in Congress should not be fooled by the false optics that the GOP has created. Instead, Democrats should call Republicans bluff and fight for the resources the Biden administration needs to do their job to secure the border, resource the cities and communities receiving migrants, as well as expand capacities to process those seeking asylum in an orderly manner.

There should be no permanent changes to our immigration system in the 11th hour of supplemental talks. This is not good governance or politically smart for Democrats less than a year out from the November 2024 election. In the Washington Post, Greg Sargent argued that Trump is wrecking hopes for a reasonable Ukraine deal. Biden has asked Congress to provide tens of billions of dollars in aid to Ukraine and Israel and an additional $14 billion to buttress the southern border with new law enforcement agents, expanded detention, and other increased security measures. But Republicans won't agree to that latter request, or the Ukraine aid, without substantial changes to immigration policy as well, Sargent wrote. Republicans should support much of what's in Biden's initial request for

border security funding, which could reduce the window for migrants to exploit the system and prompt faster removals for those who don't qualify. Trump's loud broadcasting of plans for an extraordinarily cruel immigration crackdown if he is elected president again appears to be rendering Republicans even less open to compromise without him being in the room. Hence, their slapdash demands for cuts to legal immigration and other radical measures, which seems to cast a bout for some way to satiate the former president's taste for draconian nativist savagery. The bottom line, Senate Republicans are demanding that Democrats add numerous extreme concessions to a package that already gives Republicans many border security measures they ordinarily support

in exchange for Ukraine aid that many already back anyway. All right, that is it for what the left is saying, which brings us to what the right is saying. The right questions President Biden's leadership on Ukraine and suggests he has not met the moment. Some say Democrats should make a deal with Republicans on immigration in order to secure further aid to Ukraine, while others say a shift in approach will be necessary in the war. The New York Post editorial board said Biden needs to make the case for Ukraine before it's too late. From the beginning of the offensive, Biden failed to give the Ukrainians the equipment they needed to push back Vladimir Putin faster and decisively. He and his apparatchiks cowed by the Russian dictator's nuclear threats. But at home, he also failed to use his bully pulpit to make the case for helping Ukraine

to the American people. At this 11th hour, it's still not too late, if it were not for politics. He can still wrangle the votes for Ukraine aid, but now he'll need to compromise by offering the GOP real changes on asylum law, closing the loopholes he's exploited to waive millions of illegal immigrants into the interior, the board said. Biden doesn't like that deal and is refusing to do it. But if he believes what he himself says about the urgency of helping Ukraine, it's his duty to make it. Just as his failure to rapidly supply Kiev with air power and other advanced weapons has hamstrung the now-stalled counteroffensive, Biden's refusal to spend his own political capital in the domestic debate

has empowered Putin, convincing him he only has to wait until the West tires of backing Ukraine. In American Greatness, Fred Fleets wrote, The floor is falling out from under Biden's Ukraine policy. Regardless of whether President Biden and his congressional allies succeed in getting Congress to pass a new military aid package for Ukraine, with his media allies throwing in the towel and Congress increasingly resistant to sending weapons to a war that has become a stalemate, it will become more and more obvious next year that President Biden's Ukraine policy is not sustainable, Fleet said. Instead of providing weapons to Ukraine for as long as it takes, the U.S. should pursue ways to help Ukraine win the peace by pressing for a

ceasefire and beginning efforts with its allies to massively arm Ukraine to protect and fortify its current borders and rebuild the country. The Ukrainian government, its supporters, and the Biden administration will resist such a policy shift because they are clinging to the faint hope that Ukraine can still win the war and expel Russia from all of its territory. This is a fantasy. Acknowledging this will enable the U.S. and its allies to work toward the best possible post-war arrangement for Ukraine that ends the killing and enables Ukraine to emerge as a strong democracy with a vibrant economy. All right, that is it for The Left and the Right are saying. We're going to take a look at a couple international voices now. Some say the U.S. and other Western democracies need to maintain their support for Ukraine in the war, while others propose that

targeting Russia's financial assets would be an effective way to influence the outcome of the war, while others proposed that targeting Russia's financial assets would be an effective way to influence the outcome of the war while the stalemate drags on. In National Review, Poland's Secretary of State Stanislaw Zarin said, the West must hold strong in its support for Ukraine. The growing emphasis on negotiations and a frozen front may benefit Russia in many ways. It gives it a chance to press for the lifting of sanctions and for further actions to increase the potential for aggression. At the same time, Moscow will be able to appease the West with the prospect of quote-unquote ending the war, which will be received with relief by many, Zarin said. At the same time, the intelligence on the Kremlin's strategic plans leaves no room for doubt. Russia has

embarked on an imperial course intended to stretch over many years and is consistently seeking to expand its aggressive military capabilities. The bottom line is that the Kremlin plans to change the world order, especially in terms of security, and the conquest of Ukraine is a first step in that plan. If the West abandoned Ukraine now, it would be further exposing NATO to Russian aggression in the years to come. Instead, in order to avert the danger from Russia, NATO and the EU must hold strong in their support for Ukraine and continuing developing their military capabilities. Breaking news happens anywhere, anytime.

Police have warned the protesters repeatedly, get back. CBC News brings the story to you as it happens. Hundreds of wildfires are burning. Be the first to know what's going on and what that means for you and for Canadians. This situation has changed very quickly. Helping make sense of the world when it matters most. Stay in the know.

CBC News. of the world when it matters most. Stay in the know. CBC News. 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 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.

In Newsweek, Kira Rudik, a member of the Ukrainian parliament, outlined how the bad guys in Russia can face justice in the war. Let's be honest, it is increasingly difficult for Ukraine to cope with the challenges of the war, support the army and the economy, and find the money for reconstruction. According to the latest calculations by the UN and the World Bank, the government of Ukraine needs more than $400 billion for reconstruction, Rudik said. At the moment, support for Ukraine from the EU has reached more than $92 billion. These are the funds of European taxpayers.

The frozen Russian assets are five times that amount. We do not understand why the process of confiscation of Russian assets is taking so long and why there is still no clear political decision regarding the transfer of those funds to Ukraine. These funds can be used not only for the reconstruction of our war-damaged country, but also for compensating the budgets of those countries that have been helping Ukraine, Rudig said. Not only Ukrainians, but also citizens of other countries that are waiting for this breakthrough, especially before various countries hold elections in 2024. During the political campaigns, the voices of populists will sound louder and louder, and effective points are needed to silence them. All right, that is it for what the left, right, and some international voices are saying,

which brings us to my take. So, this is a horrifying reality. The word stalemate is the last thing you want to read, both for the sake of the Ukrainian people and for avoiding protracted U.S. involvement in this war. If this story ends with hundreds of billions spent on defending Ukraine, only for it to lose the war or grind to a stalemate, it will become harder and harder for those who advocate defending Ukraine, like me, to stand up to the critics. I continue to believe that of all the recent battles the U.S. has involved itself in, this one is the most just, if such a word can be used for a thing that describes hundreds of thousands of people being killed. But it is hard to deny the reality of

where we are. Ukraine's counteroffensive has effectively failed, and the winter months loom. Just as it did last year, a long winter in the trenches plays to Russia's advantage, and you can expect the continued bombardment of Ukrainian infrastructure. That means heating, electricity, and other necessities for civilians and military alike. No matter what, Ukrainians are going to continue to fight for their survival, and European allies appear willing to continue to support them. Continued U.S. support is the big question. From an American funding perspective, it feels as if we've driven halfway down a dangerous road and now find ourselves stuck right in the middle, with the choice to either barrel forward and try to get out the other end, or to cut bait, turn around, and return to safety. Barreling forward is a high

risk, high reward scenario. Ukraine winning the war stabilizes Europe and probably acts as a deterrent against future Russian aggression. In the long run, it may even be the most cost-effective move. On the other hand, dumping $100 billion into this war while watching a stalemate ensue would be devastating for Americans' morale. It's hard to overstate how much angst it'd create to see that money go to a failed defense of Ukraine while our schools and cities and heartland all languish. The worst outcome of all would be investing all this funding and time into Ukraine only for Russia to prevail. That would not just create a more dangerous world, but would also do generational damage to trust in America's

military decision makers. And yet, leaving Ukraine behind now just feels unfathomable to me. I don't know how anyone can look at the two sides of that war and feel any kind of moral ambiguity about it or not see the threat Putin poses to the West. Even if we sink a huge amount of funding into a losing war, we still have an opportunity at the very least to help Ukraine and its people retain their statehood and be free of an authoritarian rule. Comparing what we've spent in dollars to what Ukraine has spent in lives, it feels like the obviously right thing to do, especially if Europe continues to send aid too. As to how to get there, well, I think Democrats need to meet Republicans at the negotiating table. I understand why so many people think pairing immigration reform with Ukraine funding is a

conniving move, but I happen to think it is smart. It is tactical. And given the current migrant crisis and breakdown of our immigration system, it is also appropriately timed. How many chances has Congress had to overhaul our immigration system in the last 20 years and done absolutely nothing? Republicans see an opening here, and Democrats should too. Think about it this way. Biden is already offering billions of dollars in southern border funding, new law enforcement, and more detention of migrants who cross the border illegally, all things Republicans want. Should Republicans expect to get a border wall and kill asylum laws when they barely have a majority in the House or in

the minority in the Senate and don't have a Republican president? No, of course not. But pushing for some needed reforms to our asylum system, which is clearly overwhelmed and broken, makes political and logistical sense. We saw Remain in Mexico work as an effective deterrent to illegal immigration, though any return to that policy would need to avoid the humanitarian issues that came with it. Parts of H.R. 2, the Republican-led Secure the Border Act, would be popular with the public, and Republicans and Democrats should each be ready to give ground on some positions and meet on those points. Instead, negotiations are apparently devolving into shouting matches, not encouraging or surprising, but totally disappointing.

There is a real opportunity here to do two good things. Continue to show support for a sovereign nation defending itself from an authoritarian anti-democratic aggressor, and finally wade into the difficult task of overhauling our broken and chaotic immigration system. If only we had some leaders ready to take both of those issues on at the same time. on at the same time. 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 Bruce in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Bruce said, this election seems to be more about the personalities and age of the candidates than any I can remember in the past. Issues are important, but they seem to be minor compared to the individuals themselves. Am I just forgetting past elections?

So I actually think this is one of those instances of recency bias. Going back to the Bush-Gore election of 2000, every election has prominently featured some version of candidate personality as one of its central narratives. In answering this question, I thought it would be informative and a little enjoyable to go back and remember the central candidate narratives of all those past elections, starting in 2016 to avoid some redundancy. So, 2016 Trump vs. Clinton. Trump was fully reinventing the Republican brand at the time, throwing haymakers at establishment candidates like Clinton and trying to be a voice for everyone with grievances at a political system that still seemed to be

getting off scot-free for Iraq and the housing crisis of 2008. For her part, Clinton was selling herself as experienced and realistic, framing Trump as not just inexperienced but brash, self-serving, and even existentially dangerous. In 2012, we had Obama vs. Romney. The bloom was off the rose a bit with the Obama brand, so to speak, but he was still a youthful and moderately liberal candidate who would generate a lot of support among young voters. liberal candidate who would generate a lot of support among young voters. From the Democrats' position, Romney was a pro-business candidate who could draw the ire of the Occupy Wall Street wing of the party. For Republicans, Romney was a smart moderate, an earnest religious conservative who also showed he could govern liberal Massachusetts, while Obama was a failed president too green to handle the economy and face global crises abroad. In 2008, we had Obama versus McCain, and I'll admit to looking back at this election pretty fondly as one with two

candidates that actually had genuine respect for each other. For the right, McCain was the war hero, the maverick, against the junior senator from Illinois who's too naive for the presidency. For the left, Obama was the candidate of hope and change against the old warhorse senator who had caved to the right flank of his party by running with Sarah Palin on the ticket. In 2004, we had Bush v. Kerry. Both Bush elections were very personality-driven, and the narratives for Bush in 2004 were all dominated by 9-11. The incumbent Bush was riding a huge boost in popularity for being commander-in-chief during wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, wars which the left hammered him on for starting. In terms of

personality, he was panned as being in the pocket of his vice president, Dick Cheney, on foreign policy and not being terribly bright. Conversely, his opponent John Kerry could muster little more than being a wooden protest vote, whom the Bush campaign successfully labeled as a flip-flopper. He ran on his record of being a veteran, which the now infamous Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign smeared. And then, in the year 2000, we had Bush v. Gore. This election was as personality-driven as any election that's occurred since. Depending on your point of view, George W. Bush was either the product of nepotism who was too dumb and inexperienced to handle the job of And I mentioned all this not to say that those elections were all about personality or that this one isn't about personality at all, just to say that the presidential elections have always been a mix of both personality and policy for as long as I can remember. As much as people like me want to

believe policy matters and voters think deeply about issues and tradition is revered and our system is a shining beacon of democracy, sometimes elections are basically akin to picking a prom queen. All right, that is it for our reader question today, which brings us to our under-the-radar section. Yesterday, CVS announced major changes to the way it's going to price prescription drugs that is expected to add transparency and predictability to its model. The plan comes after increased scrutiny from lawmakers and industry upstarts who have challenged the complex formulas the pharmacy chain uses to set prices. CVS will now adopt a cost-plus model already used by some of its rivals, which means prices will be the sum of how much CVS pays to acquire the drug

plus a small markup and fee. Notably, CVS owns the health insurance company Aetna. Last month, Cigna-owned Express Scripts adopted the same model. While some onlookers hope this will reduce the cost of drugs, most are in wait-and-see mode, and CVS itself has warned that adopting the model might increase the cost of some drugs. Axios has the story, and there's a link to it in today's episode description. drugs. Axios has the story and there's a link to it in today's episode description. All right, next up is our numbers section. The number of days since Russia invaded Ukraine is now 650. The number of refugees that has been recorded globally from Ukraine since the start of the war is 6.3 million. The percentage of Americans who said they supported continued aid to Ukraine in the October 2023 poll was 63%. The percentage

who said they supported continued aid to Ukraine in July of 2022 was 72%. The percentage of U.S. adults who said they are extremely or very concerned about Russia's influence around the world in November of 2023 was 50%, and the percentage of U.S. adults who said they are extremely or very concerned about illegal immigration was 46%. The amount of U.S. aid appropriated for Ukraine that has been spent in the U.S. to build new weapons or to replace weapons sent to Ukraine from U.S. stockpiles is $68 billion. The United States' rank in total financial commitments to Ukraine among all countries who have sent aid is number one. The United States' rank in total financial commitments to Ukraine among all countries who have sent aid is number one. The United States' rank in financial commitments to Ukraine as a percentage of their GDP is

16th. All right, and last but not least, our have a nice day section. Britain's so-called loneliest sheep, who was stuck at the foot of a remote cliff in Scotland for two years, has been rescued, according to a group of farmers who made it their mission to save her. The sheep, whose name is Fiona, has become something of a local celebrity after being discovered in 2021 on the shore at the base of a cliff in Brora, Scotland, by kayaker Julian Turner. Her photo showed Fiona's dire predicament, surrounded by steep rock on one side and water on the other. In October of this year, Turner told the Northern Times she had spotted Fiona,

who was unable to move from her spot, several times since 2021. Then, one Saturday, a nearby organizer of a farming Facebook group had an exciting update for followers. He and four other men were able to bring Fiona up the slope and the cliff, finally putting an end to her seclusion. The Uplift has a story, and there's a link to it in today's episode description. All right, everybody, that is it for today's podcast. As always, if you want to support our work, please go to readtangle.com and consider becoming a member don't forget we mentioned yesterday we've got a new video up on our youtube channel trump his second act what does donald trump 2.0 look like we did a whole video on it and you can go check it out on our channel right now we'll be

right back here same time tomorrow have Have a good one. 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 retangle.com and check out our website. We'll see you next time. 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 FluCelvax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. Thank you.