I’m Isaac Saul, and this is Tangle: an independent, nonpartisan, subscriber-supported politics newsletter that summarizes the best arguments from across the political spectrum on the news of the day — then “my take.”
Are you new here? Get free emails to your inbox daily. Would you rather listen? You can find our podcast here.
Every day in Tangle, we do our best to present a wide range of views on U.S. political news.
In each edition, I give "my take" as a way to share my own perspective on those topics. I never intend to be the authoritative, final voice on any issue — though of course sometimes I feel more strongly than others. Rather, I think of it as an act of transparency for me as the author of Tangle to share my own views, and as an opportunity to try to offer a unique and fresh perspective that may not exist elsewhere.
Of course, if you spend a year writing every single day, you are bound to get a lot of things right and a lot of things wrong. One of the things I loathe most about the media generally — really one of the reasons I created Tangle — is that outlets too often let their pundits fire off hot takes with zero accountability. This lack of accountability extends beyond media spaces and pervades society, from the halls of Congress to executives at our biggest corporations.
So, in my small attempt to live my values, I like to dedicate the first Friday edition of every new year to grading some of my previous writing. Here’s our process: About two months ago, I told my team to start looking through our archives and flag instances where we took a strong position on a defining story in the past year. I also sorted through reader criticisms, feedback, and suggestions about articles to revisit.
Then, we went back to evaluate that writing and settled on a grade for how we did.
We published over 200 newsletters last year, so we don’t grade every single one. Instead, we focused on newsletters covering the biggest stories of 2024 — those that garnered the most public attention and reader feedback.
Interestingly, this year is shaping up to be one of my “best” years yet. Every year, the annual review has revealed many failures and blind spots — with a healthy mix of A’s, B’s, C’s, D’s, and F’s — and this year was no exception. However, on the biggest issues, I was pleasantly surprised to see some of my best grades since we started these reviews. I think there are a few reasons for this: One, my growing team (more people criticizing my work internally before it goes public) has drastically improved my writing and pushed me to consider more points of view. Two, my own growth as a writer and thinker — a product of doing this job for five years and learning from my mistakes. And three, the fact that we dedicated an entire edition to three things I got wrong this summer (the Samuel Alito story, the Biden special counsel report, and Mike Johnson as Speaker of the House), all of which we won’t waste space on re-hashing here. We’ll call that a gentlemen’s curve.
Below, I'm going to share with you key excerpts from my writing, a brief "reflection," and then a grade on the A-to-F scale (that my editors and I have agreed on). A lot of this, obviously, is subjective. So as always, we welcome your feedback. At the end, I'll briefly revisit my 19 predictions about the future we published in 2021.
Since we couldn’t fit all the editions we thought we should review in one newsletter, we’ll be releasing a Part 2 later today, so keep an eye out for it in your inbox.
You can find our previous annual reviews of our work here: Review of 2021, Review of 2022, Review of 2023.
With that, let’s jump in…
Trump wins Iowa caucuses
One of the first political events of 2024 was Trump’s dominant victory in January’s Iowa caucuses. At the time, plenty of people were still clinging to the belief that Trump might not be the Republican nominee. Here is part of what we wrote:
Even with Nikki Haley closing the gap, there’s little reason to think New Hampshire’s primary will be any different — nor will any of those that follow… Yes, there’s plenty of time between now and the Republican National Convention in July — but just as the networks were ready to call Iowa immediately, we’re ready to call the entire race now. We’ve seen enough: Donald Trump will be the Republican nominee.
Reflection: It’s funny to imagine this was something that needed to be said at the time. I’d been writing since August 2023 that Trump was all but assured the nomination, though these first results finally brought the reality home. Reading this edition again, my views aged quite well, though I don’t think this result was all that hard to see.
Grade: A
ICJ’s genocide ruling
Israel’s war in Gaza continues to be one of the most controversial, lightning-rod issues I’ve ever written about. I can’t possibly sum up my views here; we’ve published more articles about this story than anything else (except the 2024 election) over the last two years. On the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling, I said this:
Israel is not committing genocide in Gaza. There are several basic reasons I feel this way: Armies that commit genocide don't tend to delay their ground invasions and warn civilians to flee. They don't typically treat the wounded from the other side, even when the wounded were just attacking them. In Israel's case, they also wouldn't put their own soldiers on the front lines of a harrowing ground invasion in an urban war when they could just levy an air bombardment if all they cared about was killing Palestinians. Finally, while Israel (and Egypt) have done far less to allow international aid into Gaza than I'd prefer, militaries committing genocide also don't usually do things like open corridors for aid groups, which Israel has done.
Reflection: It’s been nearly a year since I wrote this. The most important thing I need to say right now is that I have a lot more to say about this, and will be expanding on all these thoughts in the future. But at risk of opening a can of worms I can’t close, I’ll say this for now:
My horror at the continuation of the war, now in its 15th month, has really only mounted. In August, I asked Tangle readers to grapple with what was really happening on the ground. As a Zionist, coping with this reality has been harrowing; and it breaks my heart to write this, but the year since this edition has provided more evidence that Israel’s actions do meet the definition of genocide.
The enemy — Hamas — is by Israel’s own telling greatly diminished. Yet the bombings continue. Over three hundred people have already been killed in the first week of this year, including dozens of children. Airstrikes across Gaza on Wednesday killed at least 22 people, including one on a tent encampment that killed women and children. While the story has mostly faded to background noise here in the U.S., the lack of aid persists, and the displacement and death of Gazans continues.
It’s not just that my personal feelings are shifting, either. In December, for the first time, Amnesty International declared Israel was committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. Their report is genuinely nauseating. That same month, Human Rights Watch also issued a new report detailing emerging evidence of acts of genocide that included depriving the Gazan population of water. On the last day of 2024, the United Nations Human Rights office issued a critical report about Israel’s destruction of hospitals in Gaza, which went largely ignored. This week, Ireland joined South Africa’s charge of genocide against Israel before the International Court of Justice.
I know a lot of pro-Israel friends, family members, and readers view these organizations as biased against Israel (there are criticisms of Amnesty worth reading). As you can see from my writing above, I did not agree with the many people who declared genocide in the early months of this war. Yet the combined evidence these aid groups, international organizations, and journalists present, however biased you may think the packaging is, is difficult to dispute.
In December and January, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz published two devastating reports; one included IDF soldiers discussing how there were “no civilians” and the lawless killing of noncombatants, and the other detailed Brig. Gen. Yehuda Vach’s bloodlust that has contributed to the deaths of both Gazans and Israeli soldiers. Even Israel's hawkish former defense minister Moshe Yaalon is now accusing Netanyahu of “ethnic cleansing.”
Many readers will cancel their subscriptions or write furiously in response to this reflection. I’m happy to hear your feedback, and again, I plan to take more time to write about this issue (and potential solutions) appropriately in the future. But I operate on evidence, and have pledged to change my mind when new evidence presents itself. The last year has provided plenty, however hard a pill it is for me to swallow, and I continue to implore you all to grapple with the reality of what is happening on the ground. Once again, all my worst fears are coming true.
Grade: D
SCOTUS will hear Trump's immunity case
This was the landmark Supreme Court case of the year. Here’s what I wrote when the Supreme Court decided to take it up:
