Speaker 1: O ye lugar a in Agosto, the mill noveci yai
Speaker 1: we progrimes petroleo in Las Carters in de la de
Speaker 1: las Suga.
Speaker 2: This is Luis Janza. He moved to the Oriente area
Speaker 2: of the Ecuadorian Amazon, on the eastern side of the
Speaker 2: country in the seventies. He says, when he stopped off
Speaker 2: the bus in Lago Agrio, the largest city in the
Speaker 2: area at the time, the streets were literally filled with oil,
Speaker 2: that there was oil running down them. He stepped onto
Speaker 2: a street of oil.
Speaker 3: There is a societ and yomama, there's a there's a
Speaker 3: demos mia siemprevis negras yeh Principio Nosavilla kravis Negras.
Speaker 2: Jansa says growing up he would see big black clouds
Speaker 2: in the distance nubis Negras. He didn't know what those
Speaker 2: clouds were from, but he found out later that they
Speaker 2: were from the oil refineries in the area. Later he
Speaker 2: would see pits of oil and wastewater in various parts
Speaker 2: of the Amazon as well. All of that, the oil streets,
Speaker 2: the black clouds, the pits. Who created those and whose
Speaker 2: responsibility it is to clean them up? That's what's at
Speaker 2: the center of a lawsuit that started in nineteen ninety
Speaker 2: three against one company, Texaco. That suit has lasted through
Speaker 2: an acquisition. Chevron acquired Texco in two thousand and Multiple
Speaker 2: trials and settlements in appeal aspects of this case have
Speaker 2: been heard in courtrooms in Ecuador, New York, Canada, Argentina,
Speaker 2: and the Hague. An American lawyer Stephen Donziger you met
Speaker 2: last time, is on house arrest and facing prison time
Speaker 2: for his role in the case. Yansa is still working
Speaker 2: on aspects of the case on the ground in Ecuador
Speaker 2: and in various other courts around the world, and various
Speaker 2: indigenous groups are just trying to figure out how they're
Speaker 2: going to clean this stuff up and get access to
Speaker 2: clean water. This is Drilled Season five, La Lucha Lahundla,
Speaker 2: Episode two, The Colonizers. Today, we're going to go all
Speaker 2: the way back and look at how that oil got
Speaker 2: onto those streets in the first place. That story coming
Speaker 2: right up after this quick break from today's sponsor, Missing
Speaker 2: America is the story of what happens when the United
Speaker 2: States under Trump abdicates our role as an example for
Speaker 2: the world. Ben Rhodes, who served as the deputy national
Speaker 2: Security advisor to President Obama, hosts the show and speaks
Speaker 2: to inspiring leaders and activists who are fighting to take
Speaker 2: up the slack in America's absence in a world where nationalism, authoritarianism,
Speaker 2: and disinformation have taken hold like never before. This week,
Speaker 2: Ben talks to several climate activists, including former Australian Prime
Speaker 2: Minister Kevin Rudd, to ask can the biggest threat to
Speaker 2: the entire world bring the entire world together? In their
Speaker 2: penultimate episode, Be examines the enormous obstacles to confronting climate
Speaker 2: change and how progressives in other countries have made headway.
Speaker 2: Missing America is a nine part limited podcast series from Media.
Speaker 2: Find it on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen
Speaker 2: to your shows.
Speaker 4: Hello, I'm Kyle Thomas. I've just been reading about Simon Believer. Believer,
Speaker 4: the great patriot of Latin America, fought for the freedom
Speaker 4: of not just one country, but for the freedom of
Speaker 4: six Spanish colonies in Latin America. For centuries.
Speaker 5: In their poor and remote villages, most of the people
Speaker 5: lived quiet lives, close to the soil. Then in the
Speaker 5: early nineteen twenties something happened which changed forever. The life
Speaker 5: of the Venezuelan people oil.
Speaker 2: As you can hear in these vintage oil industry promotional films,
Speaker 2: oil companies didn't see themselves as colin Colonialism was something
Speaker 2: Spaniards did American companies they brought freedom. Oil Colonialism was
Speaker 2: deeply intertwined with religion, and the situation in Latin America
Speaker 2: was no different. Missionaries throughout the continent were often funded
Speaker 2: by oilmen, most intensely from the nineteen twenties through the
Speaker 2: nineteen sixties, and it wasn't purely cynicism. Men like Lyman
Speaker 2: Stewart and John D. Rockefeller were extremely devout Christians who
Speaker 2: believed God had ordained them to find oil and prosper
Speaker 2: from it. Darren Dochuk, a history professor at the University
Speaker 2: of Notre Dame, has written several fascinating books on this subject.
Speaker 6: Not all oilmen are developed Christian, but many of them are.
Speaker 2: Dochuk says, there's a long history of missionaries and oilmen partnering,
Speaker 2: and it was no different in the Amazon.
Speaker 6: These missionaries are pushing into the jungles of the Amazon.
Speaker 6: It's no accident that they are coming in direct contact
Speaker 6: with petroleum geologists and they are going to collaborate, they
Speaker 6: are going to partner in terms of the flow of information.
Speaker 2: These partnerships weren't just bringing religion to the supposedly godless
Speaker 2: primitive people of the Amazon and opening up new land
Speaker 2: for oil exploration. They were also exporting American style democracy
Speaker 2: throughout the world.
Speaker 6: Of course, this is all premise on the assumption of
Speaker 6: a superiority of the modern Christian who, as ambassador of
Speaker 6: the American Way, privileges their knowledge and their expertise and
Speaker 6: sees it as again a God given way for them
Speaker 6: to help uplift the world, and that has deeply, of course,
Speaker 6: racist undertones.
Speaker 2: As the Cold War began in the late nineteen forties
Speaker 2: and continued until nineteen ninety one, churches and oilman teamed
Speaker 2: up again against a common enemy, Communism.
Speaker 6: This pursuit of black gold is going to be all
Speaker 6: the more intensified against the backdrop of the Cold War
Speaker 6: and the fight with communism, in the fear that Latin
Speaker 6: America might lose itself to the great secular communist threat
Speaker 6: of the Soviet Union, So oil and the pursuit of
Speaker 6: souls is going to become all the more important.
Speaker 2: At that point, people began exploring for oil and Ecuador
Speaker 2: in the nineteen twenties, but it wasn't until the nineteen sixties,
Speaker 2: and then once again oilmen and missionaries teamed up to
Speaker 2: explore deep into the jungle. In the nineteen eighties, Judith Kimberling,
Speaker 2: an environmental lawyer from Alabama, was drawn to Ecuador by
Speaker 2: that timeless desire of environmentalists everywhere. She wanted to save
Speaker 2: the rainforests. When she arrived, kimberly learned about the exact
Speaker 2: partnership between oil and religion that Dotuck describes.
Speaker 7: What of the groups the Bia, they had no contact
Speaker 7: with the outside world until nineteen seventy.
Speaker 2: The Biwayeti are a subgroup of a larger tribe called
Speaker 2: the Wadani, who lived throughout the Amazon in Ecuador.
Speaker 7: They were subjected to a program of forced contact because
Speaker 7: after Texco discovered commercial quantities of oil and Lago Agrio,
Speaker 7: the company knew that it would want to expand its
Speaker 7: operations into Warani territory.
Speaker 2: Lago Agrio is the name of the first well Texaco
Speaker 2: drilled in Ecuador in the great tradition of American companies
Speaker 2: exploring overseas. Texaco named that well and the town it
Speaker 2: built up around it after its own history. Lago Agrio
Speaker 2: means Sour Lake, and back when Texico was just the
Speaker 2: Texas Oil Company, it first struck black gold in the
Speaker 2: tiny sundown town of Sour Lake, Texas. Thirty years later
Speaker 2: Lago Agrio would be the center of this big legal
Speaker 2: case we've been talking about. But in the nineteen seventies
Speaker 2: there was still more exploring to do. That's where the
Speaker 2: missionaries came into it.
Speaker 7: And the Warni who lived in those areas had no
Speaker 7: contact with the outside world. They were Fearce warriers and
Speaker 7: great hunters, and so the company collaborated with US missionaries
Speaker 7: to subject the Warani to a forced contact.
Speaker 2: Kimberly wanted to see for herself what was happening in
Speaker 2: the Ecuadorian Amazon, and when she first got to Quito,
Speaker 2: she met an American oil consultant who repeated something she'd
Speaker 2: read back home.
Speaker 8: I had read that there was some oil development in Ecuador,
Speaker 8: but I had read in this literature that oil extraction,
Speaker 8: oil drilling, expiration, and production does not harm the rainforest.
Speaker 7: That the only harm is caused by road construction, that
Speaker 7: oil companies have to build roads in order to lay
Speaker 7: their pipelines. And that road construction by the oil industry
Speaker 7: Leacity Fares station and there's never there's no other. I
Speaker 7: had read that without thinking about it, and then after
Speaker 7: I got to Quito, I met a consultant for an
Speaker 7: oil company who said the same thing to me, and
Speaker 7: somehow when he said it, it just didn't sound right.
Speaker 2: That consultant gave Kimerling a copy of his company's environmental
Speaker 2: management practices and its plans for further drilling in the Amazon.
Speaker 2: She took it to a group called Company I, an
Speaker 2: organization that represents fifteen hundred communities in the Amazon.
Speaker 7: An environmental management plan for Block sixteen, which is in
Speaker 7: a really important areas of Yasuni National Park and also
Speaker 7: the territory of the Warani nation. You know, they looked
Speaker 7: at it and they asked me if they could see it,
Speaker 7: if they could copy it, and I said, of course.
Speaker 7: And I think that what made an impression on them
Speaker 7: was that I was the first person who had ever
Speaker 7: shared information with him.
Speaker 2: Confany I asked her to come back, and then they
Speaker 2: asked her, Okay, so you want to help. What exactly
Speaker 2: do you want to do? She said, she wanted to
Speaker 2: go out and see what the oil companies were really
Speaker 2: doing in the rainforest.
Speaker 7: So I went with company I. They took me out
Speaker 7: they and they took me to Coca, which is an
Speaker 7: oil boom town, and they introduced me to the local
Speaker 7: federation and I met with the with the leaders there,
Speaker 7: and I told them about, you know, what I had
Speaker 7: heard about oil extraction. And I asked them, you know,
Speaker 7: I said, I have some doubts.
Speaker 8: Is it true?
Speaker 7: Is their contamination? And they looked at each other, they
Speaker 7: looked at me. They had never heard that word before.
Speaker 7: They did not know what it meant. And so when
Speaker 7: I explained what the word contamination meant, they understood immediately
Speaker 7: and they began to tell me about the oil operations,
Speaker 7: the routine waste, the spills, and then they took mend
Speaker 7: so that I could see for myself. And so I
Speaker 7: still remember the first waste pit that I saw, the
Speaker 7: first abandoned waste pit that I saw. It was at
Speaker 7: an exploratory well site, and the company had just dug
Speaker 7: a hole in the ground, dumped their toxic drilling waste,
Speaker 7: and then abandoned it in the rainforest. And when you
Speaker 7: abandon toxic waste in the rainforests, some of it seats
Speaker 7: into the ground. You also get a lot of rain,
Speaker 7: so it overflows into the surrounding areas. And I was
Speaker 7: appalled because when I was a lawyer in New York City,
Speaker 7: I had worked on the Love Canal litigation. I had
Speaker 7: worked for the New York State Attorney General's Office suing
Speaker 7: Occidental Petroleum Company, an Occidental chemical company to recover the
Speaker 7: monies that New York State had spent to buy out
Speaker 7: people's homes and contain the contamination at Love Canal. And
Speaker 7: I thought that we had learned in this country from
Speaker 7: Love Canal that you can't just dig a hole in
Speaker 7: the ground, dump your toxic waste and walk away. But
Speaker 7: that is exactly what Texico was doing.
Speaker 9: A US company was doing in the Amazon rainforest in
Speaker 9: Ecuador in the you know, I went there in nineteen
Speaker 9: eighty nine and they were still doing it.
Speaker 2: Then, This practice digging unlined open air waste pits, filling
Speaker 2: them and just leaving them behind, and the dumping of
Speaker 2: oil into rivers what we heard Hostino talk about in
Speaker 2: the last episode. These are the original issues at the
Speaker 2: center of this decades long case that Chevron ultimately inherited
Speaker 2: from Texico, and that the Ecuadorians are still trying to
Speaker 2: settle today. No one really denies that this was done.
Speaker 2: It's more a question of who did what and whose
Speaker 2: job it is to clean it up. We actually found
Speaker 2: a petroleum geologist who worked in Ecuador in the mid
Speaker 2: nineties who told us what he saw there. Tim Lagonegro
Speaker 2: thirty six years in the patroleymy industry.
Speaker 10: I've worked or lived in about seventy different countries. I
Speaker 10: lived ten years in Latin America, eight in Brazil, two
Speaker 10: in Ecuador. Going there, I did see these these oil
Speaker 10: roads where they the crude oil was. It seemed like
Speaker 10: it was deliberately spilled. I don't know how it happened,
Speaker 10: but it seemed like it was also almost wat deep,
Speaker 10: and it was lush, lush jungle out there.
Speaker 2: An issue in this case is not whether this happened
Speaker 2: or even whether Texaco was involved, it's whether they were
Speaker 2: responsible for more cleanup than they actually did. Texicos and
Speaker 2: now Chevron's arguments in this case boiled down to two things. First,
Speaker 2: Texico cleaned up with the government said it had to,
Speaker 2: and second that any remaining issues were the res responsibility
Speaker 2: of the state run oil company Petro Ecuador. The plaintiffs say, basically,
Speaker 2: we don't care who owned what percentage of this partnership.
Speaker 2: It was Texico that was operating everything. Texico showed the
Speaker 2: Ecuadorians what to do, Texico showed Petro Ecuador what to do,
Speaker 2: and they're responsible. My co reporter on this series, Karen Savage,
Speaker 2: asked lag Negro about that.
Speaker 11: So Texico real lies in now chevrun on what they
Speaker 11: call the settlement agreement that was signed I think it
Speaker 11: was in ninety eight where they say they cleaned up
Speaker 11: thirty seven percent of the unlined waste pits because they
Speaker 11: said that's the percentage of their share of the consortium.
Speaker 11: Is that a normal kind of thing where they would
Speaker 11: only clean up whatever their share is and then leave
Speaker 11: the rest for Petro Ecuador.
Speaker 10: I think that's an outlandish statement because what happens is
Speaker 10: the major runs everything. No, I don't want to say
Speaker 10: they're like, you know, imperialists or whatever, but they definitely
Speaker 10: go in there with this big boy attitude a lot
Speaker 10: with these broad shoulders, and they're there to do the operations,
Speaker 10: to operate it, and usually the national oil company it's
Speaker 10: just an observer. They really don't get their hands on
Speaker 10: the operation. So I think that's an outlandish deception there,
Speaker 10: really and truly and don't believe that for a second.
Speaker 10: Number one, you would never put wastewater in an unlined pit.
Speaker 10: Never everyone knows that's toxic water. Putting that into a rainforest,
Speaker 10: that is an outlandishly bold faced drilling one oh one error,
Speaker 10: very extremely wrong, extremely dangerous. Doesn't app seven percent. I
Speaker 10: think that's an outlandish deception really that it doesn't work
Speaker 10: that way.
Speaker 2: Kimberlin gives the example of the Trans Ecuadorian Pipeline, a
Speaker 2: three hundred and thirteen mile pipeline that runs from the
Speaker 2: Amazon up over the Andes and to the Pacific Ocean.
Speaker 2: It was initially built by Texico in nineteen seventy two.
Speaker 7: This pipeline that during the time it was operated by Texico,
Speaker 7: this pipeline alone had spilled more oil than the Exxon
Speaker 7: Valdis And this doesn't count the secondary pipelines, the flow lines.
Speaker 7: I mean, most of the spills that occurred during Texico's
Speaker 7: operations weren't even recorded. And there's actually a was a
Speaker 7: directive from Texico in the US to the office in
Speaker 7: Keito telling them not to record those spills, basically unless
Speaker 7: they had to.
Speaker 2: Both Texico and Chevron have admitted that Texaco was the
Speaker 2: operator of the partnership, in other words, setting up oil fields, refineries,
Speaker 2: and pipelines and running them from the beginning in nineteen
Speaker 2: sixty four into at least nineteen ninety. They were still
Speaker 2: in charge when Kimberling made her initial Save the Rainforest trip.
Speaker 2: That experience prompted Kimberling to write the book Amazon Crude,
Speaker 2: which introduced Americans to what was happening in the Ecuadorian Amazon,
Speaker 2: including Cristobal Bonifas, an Ecuadorian who had immigrated to America
Speaker 2: and was practicing law there. When he read about what
Speaker 2: was happening back home, Bonifas convinced his son, who had
Speaker 2: just graduated from law school, to go on a fact
Speaker 2: finding mission with him and see if they might build
Speaker 2: a case. His son brought his law school pal, a
Speaker 2: young Stephen Donziger, the attorney we met last time.
Speaker 12: I was invited by a former law school classmate of
Speaker 12: mine and his father, his father from Ecuador, but was
Speaker 12: practicing law in Massachusetts, to go on with them on
Speaker 12: a trip to Ecuador to do an investigation of what
Speaker 12: they described as a massive pollution problem. Caused by Texaco.
Speaker 2: In nineteen ninety three, Fast filed suit against Texaco on
Speaker 2: behalf of a group of indigenous tribes. Here he is
Speaker 2: at a press conference about the case in New York.
Speaker 2: What happened with Texico didn't have to be that way,
Speaker 2: he says. He goes on to say more or less
Speaker 2: exactly what Tim lagoon Neegro, the petroleum engineer we heard
Speaker 2: from earlier said. Lago Negro worked throughout South America, the US,
Speaker 2: and Africa as an engineer for Baker Hughes, an oil
Speaker 2: field services company. He said that plenty of oil companies
Speaker 2: were drilling responsibly at the time, that the pollution in
Speaker 2: Ecuador was really over the top.
Speaker 10: It was almost like a war on the environment.
Speaker 12: That's what it seemed like.
Speaker 2: Texico argued that it had cleaned up what it was
Speaker 2: responsible for. The company also argued that New York, where
Speaker 2: the suit was filed, had no jurisdiction over what had
Speaker 2: happened in Ecuador. For almost a decade, the plaintiffs, led
Speaker 2: by Bonifas, fought to keep the suit in New York.
Speaker 2: That's at least in part because at the time, Ecuador's
Speaker 2: government was almost entirely in the pocket of the oil companies,
Speaker 2: whose profits were helping the country develop and modernize. In fact,
Speaker 2: the government even filed amikus breeze backing Texaco. In this case,
Speaker 2: they asked the judge to dismiss the case, saying it
Speaker 2: would harm Ecuador's own oil industry and its relationship with
Speaker 2: the US. In an internal Texico memo from nineteen ninety four,
Speaker 2: doctor Rodrigo Perez, one of the company's representatives in Ecuador,
Speaker 2: is reporting back on a meeting with the President of
Speaker 2: Ecuador and various ministers and the executives of various oil companies.
Speaker 2: This seems to be a fairly regular occurrence. The last
Speaker 2: monthly meeting of the representatives of the oil companies was
Speaker 2: organized by City Investing and took place on Saturday, September
Speaker 2: third in the town of Bahia, where President Aaran Balin
Speaker 2: owns a beach house that reads, we flew down in
Speaker 2: Petro Ecuador's airplane. Keep in mind this is nineteen ninety four,
Speaker 2: so two years after Texico has officially left Ecuador, but
Speaker 2: the company is still pretty cozy with the government there.
Speaker 2: When he gets to a section titled ecological problems, Perez writes,
Speaker 2: quote the companies express their deep concern with what is
Speaker 2: happening to Texaco. President Duran stated that the environmental issue
Speaker 2: is being brought up by all lending agencies such as
Speaker 2: the World Bank et cetera, which are conditioning their loans
Speaker 2: to sound and firm environmental policies. With regard to the
Speaker 2: Texico problem, he indicates that they are in the process
Speaker 2: of being resolved through direct negotiation between the government and Texico.
Speaker 2: The minister also said that he had met with the
Speaker 2: leaders of the indigenous groups who have told him that
Speaker 2: they are not interested in the lawsuits against Texaco, but
Speaker 2: rather desired to have direct conversations with the company. The
Speaker 2: president finally said that he received several letters from ecological
Speaker 2: organizations from all over the world asking him to cancel
Speaker 2: all contracts with foreign oil and mining companies, which he
Speaker 2: will obviously never do. Okay, So the oil companies are
Speaker 2: all meeting with the president during his beach vacation, and
Speaker 2: he and the environment minister are telling them, don't worry,
Speaker 2: we'll sort all of these environmental issues out for you.
Speaker 2: But also, hey, we're kind of going out on a
Speaker 2: limb here with these banks and environmental organizations, so don't
Speaker 2: forget the favor. It's all right there in black and white.
Speaker 2: This is something that comes up in this case a lot,
Speaker 2: the corruption of the Ecuadorian government for years. The plaintiff
Speaker 2: said they wouldn't get a fair trial in Ecuador because
Speaker 2: of it. Then Chevron said they wouldn't get a fair trial.
Speaker 2: But Chevron also points to agreements the government made with
Speaker 2: Texaco around this time as both valid and binding, particularly
Speaker 2: a document in which the Republic of Ecuador signed off
Speaker 2: on Texico's cleanup efforts in the country. That agreement was
Speaker 2: signed in nineteen ninety eight. In various videos defending themselves
Speaker 2: and in a written statement to us, Chevron is careful
Speaker 2: with the language they use around this. They always say
Speaker 2: the cleanup was done according to the government's requirements.
Speaker 13: Before leaving, Texaco spent forty million dollars and worked with
Speaker 13: independent environmental experts to clean up its share of well sides.
Speaker 13: The whole process was overseen and verified by the Ecuadorian government.
Speaker 5: Texico spent forty million dollars cleaning up its agreed upon
Speaker 5: share of production sites, getting a complete release from the
Speaker 5: Ecuadorian government and local communities.
Speaker 7: An independent panel of experts found that Texico's remediation here
Speaker 7: had followed Ecuadorian government requirements.
Speaker 2: It was the Ecuadorian government's cozy relationship with the oil
Speaker 2: industry that made Bone and the Equadorian plaintiffs fight so
Speaker 2: hard for so long to keep their case in the US,
Speaker 2: especially given that Texico was an American company. Here's Donziger again,
Speaker 2: Given that.
Speaker 14: The ecuador legal system seemed completely incapable of standing up
Speaker 14: to the powerful Texico and then Chevron corporation, it didn't
Speaker 14: exactly engender a whole lot of confidence that a lawsuit
Speaker 14: in Equator could be successful, which is exactly why Texico
Speaker 14: and then Chevron was so desperate to have the case
Speaker 14: litigated down at Ecuador. They were so desperate that they agreed,
Speaker 14: as a condition of the removal of the case to Ecuador,
Speaker 14: they accepted jurisdiction of the Ecuadorian courts as an American company.
Speaker 14: Very very significant victory for our side, and they also
Speaker 14: agreed to pay any adverse judgment that might come out
Speaker 14: of Ecuador if they were to lose the case, subject
Speaker 14: to certain conditions.
Speaker 2: At this point, Donziger was becoming increasingly involved in the case.
Speaker 2: It was unusual for an American company to agree to
Speaker 2: conditions like these, but maybe less so when you consider
Speaker 2: how friendly the Equadorian government had always been to oil companies.
Speaker 14: They thought they could engineer a dismissal because of their
Speaker 14: political influence. You know, they saw what we saw, which was,
Speaker 14: you know, we saw a court system that for decades
Speaker 14: hadn't issued even one ruling against Texaco, even though the
Speaker 14: pollution was all over the place. I think they theorized
Speaker 14: that we would either give up, that is, the law
Speaker 14: firm or lawyers in the US who were financing the case,
Speaker 14: which is quit because it'd be such a hassle to
Speaker 14: start litigating in a foreign jurisdiction where none of us
Speaker 14: were lawyers, none of us were members of the bar.
Speaker 14: We would have to get a local legal team pay them.
Speaker 14: The inconvenience factor rose significantly, and.
Speaker 2: They knew that still the concessions Texico had made and
Speaker 2: that Chevron accepted too, gave the plaintiffs enough of a
Speaker 2: reason to keep going.
Speaker 14: Having gotten those two concessions, which are huge because oftentimes
Speaker 14: companies will then you know, the case will be removed
Speaker 14: to another country, and these big companies like Texico just
Speaker 14: won't show up, or they'll show up and say, hey,
Speaker 14: this has to be dismissed because you lacked jurisdiction in
Speaker 14: this case. That was not going to be an issue
Speaker 14: for us. So the upshot is we decided to go
Speaker 14: continue the case in Ecuador, which began what I call
Speaker 14: really phase two of this battle.
Speaker 2: Next time on Drilled, the case kicks off in Ecuador
Speaker 2: and the surprising election of a wildly popular socialist president
Speaker 2: changes the maths entirely.
Speaker 9: Youa file prea Aliana Fay.
Speaker 2: Drilled is an original production of the Critical Frequency podcast Network.
Speaker 2: It's reported and produced by me Amy Westerbelt. My co
Speaker 2: reporter on this season is Karen Savage. Our editor is
Speaker 2: Julia Ritchie. Mixing and mastering by Mark Busch. Additional reporting
Speaker 2: from Emily Gertz. Additional production help from Sarah Ventry. Original
Speaker 2: score was composed by b Beeman. Matt Fleming created our
Speaker 2: beautiful artwork for this season. Our fact checker is wood
Speaker 2: On Yon, Our First Amendment attorney is James Wheaton, and
Speaker 2: the First Amendment Project Maggie Taylor is our marketing director.
Speaker 2: You can find supplenll stories, documents, photos and interviews on
Speaker 2: our website at drillednews dot com. If you're a Patreon subscriber.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Your membership is paying for this podcast right now.
Speaker 2: Patreon subscribers get access to an ad free podcast feed,
Speaker 2: and we're working on getting you more perks for your membership,
Speaker 2: including early access to episodes for this season. If you
Speaker 2: don't want to wait a whole week for the next episode,
Speaker 2: consider becoming a member at patreon dot com slash DRILLT.
Speaker 2: That's it for this time, Thanks for listening, and we'll
Speaker 2: see you soon.