Tangle - Trump's executive orders targeting law firms.

Episode Date: April 1, 2025

Beginning in February, President Donald Trump issued a series of orders targeting law firms that he claims have engaged in “conduct detrimental to critical American interests.” The firms named in the orders — Covington & Burling, Paul Weiss, Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and WilmerHale — have previously represented clients or hired lawyers that opposed Trump and his administration. Several firms have brought lawsuits to challenge the executive actions, while others have sought deals with the White House. 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 ReadTangle.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.Take the survey: What do you think about President Trump’s orders targeting law firms? Let us know here.You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Our Executive Editor and Founder is Isaac Saul. Our Executive Producer is Jon Lall.This podcast was 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, Senior Editor Will Kaback, Hunter Casperson, Kendall White, Bailey Saul, and Audrey Moorehead. Our logo was created by Magdalena Bokowa, Head of Partnerships and Socials.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Now streaming. What do you know about the Happy Face killer? He's my father. It's so good to see you, Missy. Experience the thrilling new series. He said he killed another woman. Inspired by a true life story. If I don't deal with him, he will never leave us alone.

You don't see how the world's saying to you. Anna Lee Ashford and Dennis Quaid star. I am not responsible for what my dad did. It's going how you hoped? Happy Face new series now streaming exclusively on Paramount Plus. With the Fizz loyalty program you get rewarded just for having a mobile plan. You know for texting and stuff and if you're not getting rewards like extra data and dollars off with your mobile plan you're not with Fizz. Switch today conditions

apply details at fizz.ca. From executive producer, Isaac Saul 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. It is April 1st, April Fool's Day, everybody. You're going to be listening this afternoon, so you've probably already been tricked if that's coming for you today.

And we are going to be covering President Donald Trump's executive orders targeting some major law firms in the United States. A pretty big story. Lots of people are ringing the alarm bells. You'll hear my take a little bit. I'm kind of torn about where I'm landing on this. I mean, it's bad.

It's definitely bad, but I guess torn about quite how bad. I'm not really totally sold on that one way or the other. Before we jump into today's show, I want to give you a couple of quick heads up. First of all, we're back in full swing here. So this Friday, we'll have a Friday edition coming out in the newsletter and the podcast. That'll be members only.

So be sure to check that out. Become a Tangle Podcast member if you wanna get that or become a newsletter member. You can do both of those things by going to readtangle.com forward slash membership. A quick reminder that memberships to the podcast get you ad free podcasts. So if you're annoyed by ads in the show, which help support and fund the podcast,

you can give us a subscription and then get rid of those advertisements, which is a good way to address that problem. Also, I want to just remind folks that last week we released a series of really good, interesting interviews on our podcast. a series of really good, interesting interviews on our podcast. In case you missed those, you can go back to last week's episodes. Monday through Thursday, we released them,

including on Thursday, a rerun of the episode I did on Question Everything, where I was interviewed about the work I'm doing with Tangle, with Brian Reed, the guy who used to host Serial. Really proud of how that episode came out. I had nothing to do with producing it, but it was a super compelling, I think, and rewarding listen for anybody who knows about the work that we've been doing. And I thought they did an excellent job sort of telling the story of Tangle.

So I encourage you to go check it out if you haven't yet. All right, with that, I'm going to send it over to John for today's main story and I'll be back for my take. ["Tangle of the Day"] Thanks Isaac and welcome everybody. Here are your quick hits for today. First up, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the transfer of 17 alleged members of the

Tren de Aragua Gang from Guantanamo Bay to El Salvador. All of the individuals had deportation orders or final orders of removal, and their removals were done under traditional removal authority, Title VIII, rather than the Alien Enemies Act. 2. The Israel Defense Forces issued an evacuation warning for Palestinians in the entire Rafah area in the southern Gaza Strip, signaling that the military was preparing to resume its ground operation in the area.

The order is the largest issued by the IDF since its offensive against Hamas resumed in March. 3. The Trump Administration announced a review of roughly $9 billion in federal contracts and grant commitments with Harvard University. The review will primarily assess whether Harvard has failed to protect students from anti-Semitic discrimination on campus. Number four, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on whether charities run by religious groups have to pay unemployment taxes for their workers.

The court appeared likely to side with a Catholic charity that brought the case and argued that it should not be required to pay unemployment taxes because its work is motivated by religious beliefs and the state exempts religious groups from the tax. 5. Marine Le Pen, the leader of France's National Rallye Party, was found guilty of embezzlement and barred from running for public office for five years. Le Pen had been considered a leading candidate in France's 2027 presidential election.

Tonight among America's top law firms, a deepening divide. The future of the legal industry is at stake. Major firms now facing a dilemma after President Trump revoked some of their lawyers' security clearances and threatened to cancel the government contracts of companies that work with them. They behave very badly, very wrongly. The president targeting firms employing lawyers who previously investigated him, including Wilmer Hale, for decades the legal home

of former special counsel Robert Mueller. The firm blasting what they say is the president's personal vendetta, retaliation for employing lawyers he dislikes. Beginning in February, President Donald Trump issued a series of orders targeting law firms that he claims have engaged in conduct detrimental to critical American interests. The firms named in the orders, Covington & Burling, Paul Weiss, Perkins Cooey, Jenner & Block, and Wilmer Hale, have previously represented clients or hired lawyers that opposed Trump

and his administration. Several firms have brought lawsuits to challenge the executive orders, while others have sought deals with the White House. On February 25, President Trump issued a memorandum instructing the Attorney General to suspend any active security clearances held by the firm Covington and Burling and directed all federal agencies to review existing contracts with Covington and Burling and directed all federal agencies to review existing contracts with Covington & Burling for potential termination. Trump cited the firm's work with former special counsel Jack Smith, who brought criminal charges

against Trump after his first term as the basis for the order. On March 6, Trump issued an executive order that also suspended security clearances for members of the firm Perkins Cui and called for a review of their federal contracts. Additionally, the order barred the firm's lawyers from entering federal buildings and otherwise engaging with the government. Perkins-Cooey represented Hillary Clinton in her 2016 presidential campaign and partially funded opposition research into then-candidate Trump that led to the publishing of a dossier of unsubstantiated

allegations about his campaign's relationship with Russia. Separately, a March 14th order enacted similar measures against the firm Paul Weiss. Trump cited the firm's relationship to Mark Pomerantz, who worked in the Manhattan District Attorney's Office when it prosecuted Trump for falsifying business records as the basis for the order, as well as its pro-bono work on cases related to the January 6th riot at the U.S. Capitol. On March 25th and 27th, Trump issued similar orders against the firms Jenner Block and Wilmer Hale, respectively.

The president said Jenner Block's hiring of Andrew Weissman, who worked on former special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into the Trump campaign's alleged connections to Russia, was part of a series of activities that undermine justice and the interests of the United States. Trump claimed that Wilmer Hale's employment of Mueller and members of his team demonstrated its efforts to weaponize the prosecutorial power to upend the democratic process and distort justice. In addition to these specific orders, Trump issued a memorandum on March 22nd that threatened similar action against firms and lawyers engaged in frivolous, unreasonable, and vexatious

litigation against the United States, as determined by the Attorney General. The firms targeted by these actions have responded in disparate ways. On March 21st, Trump had announced that the White House had reached a deal with Paul Weiss to restore its federal contracts and employee security clearances in return for acknowledging wrongdoing by its former employer, Pomerant, and committing to $40 million in pro-bono legal services on behalf of the Trump administration in areas focused on veterans' issues, countering anti-Semitism, and fairness in the justice system. Brad Karp, the chairman of Paul Weiss, wrote in a letter to the firm that the order represented

an existential crisis to its future as justification for making the deal. On Friday, Trump announced a similar deal with the firm Skadden, which was reportedly the subject of a forthcoming order that included $100 million in pro-bono work for causes backed by the Trump administration. Conversely, Perkins-Coy, Jenner Block, and Wilmer Hale have sued to challenge the orders, arguing they are unconstitutional, retaliatory actions. On March 12, a federal judge blocked portions of the order targeting Perkins-Coy, saying it would have a chilling effect on firms representing clients or advancing

views unfavorable to the administration. On Friday, two other judges temporarily blocked portions of the orders on Jenner Block and Wilmer Hale, though some aspects, such as the revocation of security clearances, were allowed to remain in place. Today, we'll share arguments from the left and the right on the orders and the response from targeted firms, and then Isaac's tape. We'll be right back after this quick break. Now streaming. What do you know about the Happy Face Killer? He's my father. Watch. have it worth saying to you. Annaleigh Ashford and Dennis Quaid star. I am not responsible for what my dad did.

Let's go on how you hoped. Happy Face, new series now streaming exclusively on Paramount+. With the Fizz loyalty program, you get rewarded just for having a mobile plan. You know, for texting and stuff. And if you're not getting rewards like extra data and dollars off with your mobile plan, you're not with Fizz. Switch today.

Conditions apply? Details at Fizz.ca. Alright, first up, let's start with what the left is saying. The left is critical of the orders and suggests Trump is not even attempting to disguise his campaign of retribution. Some urge the targeted firms and their competitors to fight back against Trump's attacks. Others note the growing cracks in the U.S. legal system. In Vox, Ian Milhiser called the orders the cockiest thing Trump has done so far.

All nine of the Supreme Court justices are lawyers. All of them have friends and law school classmates in private practice. All of them sit at the apex of a legal system that depends on lawyers to brief judges on the matters those judges must decide," Milheiser wrote. So it's hard to imagine a presidential action that is more likely to antagonize the justices President Donald Trump needs to uphold his agenda, not to mention every other federal judge who isn't already in the tank for MAGA, than a series of executive orders Trump has recently issued. The striking thing about all the law firm executive orders is that it barely even attempts to justify Trump's decision with a legitimate expansion for why these orders are lawful.

The sanctions laid out in these orders, moreover, are extraordinary. They attempt to bar the firm's attorneys and staff from federal buildings and preventing lawyers representing criminal defendants from engaging in plea bargaining with federal prosecutors, Millhiser said. Trump is claiming the power to exterminate multi-billion-dollar businesses with over 1,000 lawyers and as many support staff to punish them for things as innocuous as representing a Democrat in 2016. In MSNBC, Ray Brescia argued, if law firms fight back against Trump's attacks, they'll win.

Clients and lawyers must band together against these blatantly illegal actions by the Trump administration and flip the script. They need not defend their own actions, but rather force government attorneys who may seek to punish the clients of any disfavored law firms to justify such unconstitutional efforts, which will be impossible to do," Rushier wrote. So far, the president has targeted five private law firms and the clients they represent, claiming that his administration will punish those clients who have the temerity to do business with those firms.

Two of these firms, Paul Weiss and Skadden Arps, have capitulated to this pressure, expressing fears that the president's attacks threaten their business model. This fear is certainly real, but if the president can scare clients away from the firms that might take positions against his administration, there will be fewer and fewer lawyers willing to take such stands. And if that happens, our system of rights, protected by law and not dispensed at the fiat of the executive, will crumble," Brescia said. It is in everyone's best interest, even those clients who might fear retaliation from the

Trump administration for retaining disfavored firms, to condemn the president's efforts to attack members of the legal profession simply for playing their essential role in our legal system. These clients should stand by their lawyers, and those lawyers must turn the tables on their opponents." In The Hill, Jay Edelson said, Partisan warfare is pushing the American legal system toward collapse. As a center-left lawyer who has spent his career fighting powerful interests on behalf of everyday people,

I find the current moment deeply alarming. Ironically, despite my skepticism of big law, the first line of defense is going to be these large firms on whom we now must rely to protect both themselves and, by extension, the legal system as a whole from many of the powerful interests it has historically served," Edelson wrote. Yet, conservatives rightly note, these developments didn't emerge spontaneously.

Many of my friends on the left seem unaware of the backdrop that Trump supporters and allies point to in justifying or contextualizing his administration's actions. Conservative judges have faced relentless personal attacks that go beyond legal criticism. I'm not arguing moral equivalents. Trump's recent actions represent a unique threat that is pushing us perilously close to a breaking point. Still, the left's dominance in media

and elite institutions, sometimes focused like sunlight through a magnifying glass, has real-world consequences," Edelson wrote. But passionately advocating against systemic issues or flawed judicial decisions differs fundamentally from personal attacks on judges. Blacklisting lawyers or firms simply for representing clients or causes we oppose politically undermines the adversarial process critical to our legal system.

Alright that is it for what the left is saying, which brings us to what the right is saying. The right is mixed on the orders, though many say the firms brought this backlash on themselves. Some suggest that Trump retains the upper hand even as his orders face legal challenges. Others say the orders are wronged on principle alone. The New York Post editorial board said, bring the hammer down on Perkins Coie and every other player in the Russiagate scandal. President Donald Trump has ordered the suspension of security clearances for employees at Perkins

Huey, the shady Dem super firm whose lawyers played a key role in setting up the Steele dossier and undermining the results of the 2016 election. This is long overdue, as is the termination of federal contracts with the firm, the board wrote. Trump haters in the American intel community and the Justice Department then used this garbage to justify probes of Trump with allegations fed anonymously to our disinformation-loving leftist media, who duly trumpeted it to create a Trump-crippling Washington frenzy. This was an attempted coup, albeit a bloodless one. He failed to remove the sitting president, but it did massively hamper his agenda during his first term. And Perkins-Coy has no business being anywhere near government info that requires any type of clearance to access, the board said.

It's yet another reminder of how the powerful spent most of the past decade conspiring against the people and why Trump's whole-of-government effort to reform the FBI and fight back against the wider intelligence community are justified and necessary. In Red State, Strife wrote about the firms that have decided to make peace with Trump. Perkins, Cooey, Wilmer, Hale, and Jenner and Block have all sued to obtain partial temporary restraining orders. I would submit that they have achieved counterproductive and ephemeral victories for the sake of the

resistance, Strife said. The bottom line is that law is a business and businesses require clients. No matter what any court rules, Trump has the power to set the rules around granting security clearances and access to classified information. Some of the targeted law firms seem to have had on-site sensitive compartmented information facilities, which would have required federal staff to manage them. Federal agencies can legitimately refuse to contract with any of these firms for services because they are neither cheap nor uniquely qualified to do any work.

Companies with business before the federal government might rightfully assume that being represented by a proscribed law firm is not a great tactical move. They might also assume that hiring a law firm currently battling the administration in court might cause them more problems than it is worth, Strife said. When Paul Weiss folded like a cheap suit, its chairman, Brad Karp, emailed the law firm. In it, he spelled out why Paul Weiss and now Skadden Arps settled, and why the firms engaged in performative legal challenges will also settle.

At least for the next four years, these huge law firms will not be the focal point for lawfare against the administration and people associated with President Trump. In National Review, Andrew C. McCarthy argued Trump's executive order targeting Perkins Cooey must be condemned. I'd prefer to ignore the executive order because the Democrats and their base supporters now expressing outrage over it are hypocrites. But the point isn't to reform what can't be reformed. It's to do what's right for its own sake and, if you're lucky, to convince the

Convincible that we can trust each other to do the right thing, regardless of which side has done the wrong thing," McCarthy said. The defamatory hardball played by Trump's political opponents was appalling. Trump is right to believe that it should have been covered and adjudged a scandal of Watergate dimension rather than casually set aside by the media once the allegations were shown to be a smear. Trump is stubbornly wrong, however, in refusing to accept that the payback he gets—extraordinary payback, but the only legitimate payback—is his stunning political comeback.

The Democrats suffered thunderous defeat, in large part because the public saw these and other lawfare abuses as scandalous, McCarthy wrote. Revenge for a more fit man would be to revel in winning the presidency against all odds and try to be a good president for everyone, thus proving his critics wrong. Trump, by contrast, seems determined to prove his critics right by exploiting the awesome might of the presidency to destroy his enemies, just as they over to Isaac for his take. Alright, that is it for what the left and the right are saying, which brings us to my take. So, let me start here.

Three democratic societies, they rest on several key principles. One of which is that everyone is entitled to representation in our legal system. Lawyers should not have to worry about being punished by the government for taking up particular clients. Similarly, a private citizen shouldn't have to worry about seeking counsel from a specific firm because they worry that firm may be on the government's naughty list. President Trump's actions here, for obvious reasons, put these principles at risk. The President is making little effort to disguise these actions as anything but a revenge tour

against lawyers and prosecutors who targeted him in the Mueller investigation during the 2016 campaign over January 6 or through the Stormy Daniels case. If he is targeting specific law firms for taking up work he deems offensive and they are bending the knee, then one can presume that in the immediate future, these same firms will resist taking up specific clients that they fear might anger the president.

It's easy to imagine a situation where the Trump administration targets a private US citizen, that citizen seeks out counsel from one of these major firms, only to find that their options for representation are limited because the firms fear reprisal from Trump. This is, quite obviously, dangerous. The entire affair also feels somewhat nonsensical. Take one

illustrative example, Trump's order targeting the law firm Paul Weiss. The order is based in part on the firm's employment of attorney Mark Pomerantz. In 2021, Pomerantz left the firm to work as an unpaid special counsel in Alvin Bragg's pursuit of Trump. I was a regular critic of Bragg's case against Trump, which used a novel and flimsy legal theory to try to take down a former president. I certainly understand why Trump may hold a grudge against Pomerance who didn't just pursue him in the courts, but also through the media and whose pro bono work

for the Manhattan district attorney raised all kinds of ethical questions. Yet Pomerance left Paul Weiss in order to go work for BRAG. Trump is now punishing an entire firm of thousands of lawyers and employees in part to get payback on a single lawyer. National Review's Dan McLaughlin made a reasonable case that sanctioning Pomerance would have been a fair pursuit, but going after the entire law firm is unfair and overkill.

The plainly retributive nature of Trump's actions has also prompted a confounding response from some on the left. One notable development is that a lot of people on the left are playing directly into Trump's framing of these firms as somehow on their team. But as Ankhish Khandouri, a columnist at Politico who worked at Paul Weiss noted, that really isn't the case. Khandouri points out that, one, these firms are hardly paragons of progressivism or liberal ideals. They are major corporate organizations trying to maximize profits and find wealthy corporate clients to defend.

They are bending the knee because their profits are threatened. It's not that complicated. Two, the pro bono work these firms do for liberal causes is a tiny fraction of their operation and Trump does seem to be targeting them in part because of their work on immigration cases. And three, elite law firms generally try to avoid appearing politically ideological because it's bad for business. And several of these larger firms have lawyers who have worked in the first Trump administration.

Kudori's closing thoughts were also surprisingly nonchalant about the entire affair. Like me, he expressed worries about what it means in a democratic society when lawyers fear reprisal from the government for serving certain clients. But he also closed by saying this, quote, the firms that we are talking about, particularly the ones that settled with Trump, are some of the most successful firms in the world and they work for a very small segment of American society. Most people and even most businesses cannot afford the rates that these firms charge. So they go to local practitioners or smaller firms for their occasional legal needs. In that sense, the practical fallout might be relatively modest."

I think this is basically right. It is hard, if not impossible, to measure how this targeting will impact the decisions of law firms across the country, but the immediate and practical threat of these firms promising pro bono work as part of a pseudo settlement with Trump is less about who will or won't get representation and more about the symbolism of these powerful firms caving to the president in the face of pressure we all should hope they'd resist. That part is equal parts frightening and disappointing. But like a lot of what Trump is doing through executive action right now, it likely isn't lasting or all that impactful.

Three firms have already sued to challenge the orders against them and they were granted some temporary relief while the cases play out. In other words, the resistance to Trump's actions is building and we may have seen this campaign hit its peak. So yes, while he may have gotten some temporary wins here, it seems just as likely that he could have just antagonized these firms and even the Supreme Court in a way that undermines his administration in the long term. We'll be right back after this quick break. Now streaming. What do you know about the happy face killer?

He's my father. It's so good to see you missing. Experience the thrilling new series. He said he killed another woman. Inspired by a true life story. If I don't deal with him, he will never leave us alone. You don't see how the births seemed to you. Annali Ashford and Dennis Quaid star.

I am not responsible for what my dad did. The score and how you hoped. Happy Face, new series now streaming exclusively on Paramount+. With the Fizz loyalty program, you get rewarded just for having a mobile plan. You know, for texting and stuff. And if you're not getting rewards like extra data

and dollars off with your mobile plan, you're not with Fizz. Switch today. Conditions apply, details at Fizz.ca. All right. That is it for my take, which brings us to your questions answered. This one's from Anne in Fort Collins, Colorado. Anne said, can you expound on the possible benefits to Russia if Trump signs a mineral rights deal with Ukraine? So the conventional read of the US reaching a mineral rights deal with Ukraine is that

it is an outcome Russia would not want. Instead, the US having a material interest in Ukraine would act as a deterrent on any future Russian aggression because the US would have an incentive to maintain peace in order to protect its assets. It would not apply any benefit to Russia other than being a softer U.S. commitment to Ukraine relative to other potential compacts, pledging to share intelligence or weaponry or supporting Ukraine's NATO membership, which would pledge U.S. military support, along with Canada and much of Europe, to defend Ukraine's borders. That is the conventional read, and it's the read that I subscribe to, and it's the one

that we put forward in our edition on the Middle Rights Deal and Tangle from a few weeks ago. However, there is an alternative read that I suppose is worth exploring. It is possible that Putin wants the terms of that deal to be laid out so that Russia can simply outbid Ukraine. Then Putin can tell Trump that as a means of securing peace in the war, Russia will give the US access to rare earth minerals in Russia and in the disputed territories, implying of course that the US would be granted rights in Ukraine's eastern territories by

Russia if the US agrees they are Russia's to control. To put it simply, if the US gets rights in Ukrainian territory, it would be a significant check to Russia. If Putin leverages those discussions to his benefit, it could go the other way in a hurry. Either way, with Trump's famously hard to read foreign policy postures, the peace talks now underway are of course worth keeping a close eye on. Alright, that is it for today's listener question. I'm going to send it back to John for the rest of the pod and I'll see you guys tomorrow.

Have a good one. Peace. Thanks, Isaac. Here's your Under the Radar story for today, folks. On Monday, President Trump signed an executive order to address price gouging and other anti-competitive ticket resale practices for live events. The order directs the Federal Trade Commission to more strictly enforce existing laws covering the use of bots by ticket scalpers to buy large quantities of tickets to popular

events and then resell them at huge markups. Trump also asked the FTC to submit recommendations for additional regulation or legislation to protect consumers within 180 days. The action follows similar efforts by the Biden Justice Department to address allegedly monopolistic behavior by ticket brokers in the concert and entertainment industries. The Wall Street Journal has this story and there's a link in today's episode description. Alright, next up is our numbers section. The law firm, Paul Weiss's approximate revenue in 2024 is $2.6 billion according to Law 360.

The approximate value of pro bono work done by Paul Weiss annually is $130 million, according to Chairman Brad Karp. The value of the pro bono work Paul Weiss agreed to provide to causes supported by the Trump administration is $40 million. The number of associates at U.S. law firms who have signed an open letter condemning the Trump administration's executive orders targeting law firms as of April 1st is 1,775. The ranks of Paul Weiss, Covington & Burling, Wilmer Hale, and Perkins Coie, four of the firms targeted by Trump's executive orders, among the largest U.S. law firms by annual

revenue respectively, are 27, 35, 38, and 52, according to AmLaw. And the rank by revenue of Skadden, the firm that recently announced a deal with the Trump administration for $100 million in pro-bono work, is 6. And last but not least, our Have a Nice Day story. A non-profit called Force Blue brings together veterans and marine conservation missions. The organization comprises special operations forces veterans who are retrained and deployed on diverse marine missions, which include replanting coral, conducting shipwreck surveys, and laying recycled oyster shells to protect bays.

The organization helps reintegrate veterans into civilian life through mission therapy Providing community structure and purpose for the retired volunteers in the military We were weapons of mass destruction, but now through force blue We are weapons of mass construction Air Force veteran Brian Gebo said Nice news has this story and there's a link in today's episode description Alright everybody that is it for today's episode. As always, if you'd like to support our work, please go to readtangle.com where you can sign up for a newsletter membership, podcast membership, or a

bundled membership that gets you a discount on both. We'll be right back here tomorrow for Isaac and the rest of the crew. This is John Law signing off. Have a great day, y'all. Peace. Our podcast is written by me, Isaac Saul and edited and engineered by Duke Thomas. Our script is edited by Ari Weitzman, Will Kavak, Gellysault and Sean Brady. The

logo for our podcast was made by Magdalena Bikova, 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. ["Happy Face Killer"] Now streaming. What do you know about the Happy Face killer?

He's my father. It's so good to see you, Missy. Experience the thrilling new series. He said he killed another woman. Inspired by a true life story. If I don't deal with him, he will never leave us alone. You don't see how the births sang to you. Annali Ashford and Dennis Quaid star.

I am not responsible for what my dad did. This going how you hoped? Happy Face, new series now streaming exclusively on Paramount+. With the Fizz loyalty program, you get rewarded just for having a mobile plan. You know, for texting and stuff. And if you're not getting rewards like extra data

and dollars off with your mobile plan, you're not with Fizz. Switch today. Conditions apply, details at fizz.ca.