Speaker 1: Pushkin Getting Even is produced by Pushkin Industries. Join Pushkin
Speaker 1: Plus and you'll hear all of our shows ads free
Speaker 1: and get access to exclusive bonus content. Subscribe now in
Speaker 1: Apple Podcasts or at Pushkin Dot fhim as a young
Speaker 1: woman in high school, I was on a bus one
Speaker 1: day and a group of guys from a high school
Speaker 1: called Resurrection, it was a Catholic high school, well on
Speaker 1: the bus and they started singing glory, glory, segregation. They're
Speaker 1: putting all the in word where the white men ought
Speaker 1: to be. And there was another little girl sitting on
Speaker 1: the bus, and that little girl was getting off the
Speaker 1: bus in the back of the bus. And this little
Speaker 1: girl must have been seven or eight years old. As
Speaker 1: she got off the bus, a group of white boys
Speaker 1: took a big book, like a big biology or chemistry
Speaker 1: book and slammed the book into the little girl's face
Speaker 1: and you could see blood. And she was upset and
Speaker 1: she was afraid, and you know, she ran off the
Speaker 1: bus and I, you know, I panicked. I didn't know
Speaker 1: what to do, and I thought I'm next, and I
Speaker 1: couldn't help the little girl. I was really almost paralyzed.
Speaker 1: But I always felt guilty that I didn't do something
Speaker 1: to help that little girl, although realistically there was really
Speaker 1: nothing that I could do, but I always felt in
Speaker 1: life whenever opportunities like that came up that I would
Speaker 1: do the most that I could possibly do. That's Sakarie
Speaker 1: Hardnet talking about growing up in New Orleans. To day,
Speaker 1: she's a civil rights lawyer outside of Washington, d C.
Speaker 1: I wanted to start with that story because it is
Speaker 1: at the center of what Hardnet does now. She defends
Speaker 1: and protects people. She is courageous. Since that day on
Speaker 1: the bus, she has made it her mission to speak
Speaker 1: out when she sees injustice, and one of the people
Speaker 1: she stepped up to defend was me. I'm Anita Hill.
Speaker 1: This is getting even my podcast about equality and what
Speaker 1: it takes to get there. On this show, I'm talking
Speaker 1: with trailblazers, people who are working on improving our imperfect
Speaker 1: world and finding solutions. In my first episode, I spoke
Speaker 1: with journalists and commentator Mark Lamont Hill about my on
Speaker 1: President Biden's historic announcement of a black female Supreme Court nominee.
Speaker 1: In this episode, you're going to hear about another historic
Speaker 1: Supreme Court nomination hearing, one that took place over thirty
Speaker 1: years ago, one in which the public heard my testimony
Speaker 1: and saw the aftermath. This changed the course of my
Speaker 1: life forever. But in this episode, you're not going to
Speaker 1: hear about me. You're going to hear about Sakari Hardnett.
Speaker 1: In the mid nineteen eighties, Hartnett served as the assistant
Speaker 1: to the chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, a
Speaker 1: federal agency in charge of receiving and responding to complaints
Speaker 1: of job discrimination. Hardnet and I never crossed path, but
Speaker 1: we had a boss in common, Clarence Thomas. In nineteen
Speaker 1: ninety one, Hardnett submitted a sworn affidavit to the Senate
Speaker 1: Judiciary Committee outlining Thomas's behavior that she had witnessed at
Speaker 1: the EOC. I had held the same position prior to her.
Speaker 1: She recounted an environment where young black women were being
Speaker 1: inspected and auditioned as sexual objects by Thomas. She added, quote,
Speaker 1: women know when there are sexual dimensions to the attention
Speaker 1: they are receiving, and there was never any doubt about
Speaker 1: that dimension in Clarence Thomas's office. Hardnett was one of
Speaker 1: three witnesses the committee never called to testify, so I
Speaker 1: decided it was time to give her a call. Okay,
Speaker 1: it is recording, Zakari, Can you hear me? Yes? I can. Great.
Speaker 1: I am so glad to be having this conversation with you.
Speaker 1: I have always wanted not only for myself to hear
Speaker 1: what you had to say, but I want the world
Speaker 1: to hear your voice. And I am ever grateful that
Speaker 1: you came forward. And I feel really fortunate to be
Speaker 1: able to provide this platform for you to speak today,
Speaker 1: even though it is thirty years late. Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: This episode is about the importance of the truth and
Speaker 1: the price people pay to talent. Hardnet's commitment to truth
Speaker 1: telling began well before she went to work at the EOC.
Speaker 1: My interests in civil rights came from just growing up
Speaker 1: in New Orleans. I grew up in a very volatile
Speaker 1: period in New Orleans and being a black woman, and
Speaker 1: you know, my whole community was black, and I just
Speaker 1: wanted to see some equity there. So early on, I
Speaker 1: teamed up with my friends and we would just stage,
Speaker 1: you know, demonstrations. We'd go to theaters and try to integrate.
Speaker 1: We go to lunch counters and we try to integrate.
Speaker 1: We'd ride the buses and sit in the front of
Speaker 1: the bus to try to integrate. And that really was
Speaker 1: my lifelong experience. So working at the EOC must have
Speaker 1: been like reaching a high point in your career since
Speaker 1: you were interested in civil rights law. Well, actually it
Speaker 1: was very disappointing. When I got to the Commission. I
Speaker 1: worked in the office of reviewing Appeals, and we were
Speaker 1: basically locked in our offices during the day, and we
Speaker 1: were basically not given any training or any support on
Speaker 1: how to prepare or to do the appeals, and we
Speaker 1: were discouraged from deciding an appeal in favor of some
Speaker 1: of the people who filed appeals. So I just felt
Speaker 1: that it was dishonest. So I went to the Chairman's
Speaker 1: office to say thank you for hiring me, but I
Speaker 1: just can't do this job anymore. And at that time
Speaker 1: he says, oh, you don't have to leave, Why don't
Speaker 1: you come and work in my office. So I was poor.
Speaker 1: I didn't have any money, I didn't have any other
Speaker 1: prospects and sights. So I decided to take him up
Speaker 1: on that offer, and I went to Clarence's office. Little
Speaker 1: did I know I was jumping from the skillet directly
Speaker 1: into the fire oh, describe the environment in that office.
Speaker 1: He was like a fox in a henhouse. He would
Speaker 1: approach different females at the Commission. He would talk about
Speaker 1: their bodies, he would talk about people that he was dating.
Speaker 1: He talked about things that I really wasn't particularly interested
Speaker 1: in discussing with him. And he felt that this is
Speaker 1: my personal feeling. He felt that all the black women
Speaker 1: at the Commission were really there at his beck and
Speaker 1: call to say whatever he wanted to say to them,
Speaker 1: to attempt to do whatever he wanted to do, and
Speaker 1: that we would just we and they were just there
Speaker 1: to accept it and not to not to complain about it.
Speaker 1: And I must admit I never saw him interact that
Speaker 1: way with any of the white females at the Commission.
Speaker 1: After a while, I saw, you know, how he interacted
Speaker 1: with me. And on many occasions, I would leave the
Speaker 1: office in the morning and try to not return, just
Speaker 1: to to stay away because I did not want to
Speaker 1: be in that office. And he would call around, you know,
Speaker 1: have people call around to find out where I was,
Speaker 1: for me to go to have coffee with him or
Speaker 1: to just chat with him. So I would try to
Speaker 1: get involved in other activities at the Commission, and it
Speaker 1: got to the point where I just I did not
Speaker 1: want to be in that office anymore, and I asked
Speaker 1: to be transferred out of that office to the General
Speaker 1: Council's office at that time, and I was told by
Speaker 1: the woman who was executive secretary at that time that
Speaker 1: people did not ask to be transferred out of the
Speaker 1: Chairman's office, but I told him that, I guess you know,
Speaker 1: I'm an exception and I don't want to be in
Speaker 1: here anymore. Did you experience something similar to this in
Speaker 1: other professional roles that you had, or was this there's
Speaker 1: something unique about this office? Well. Being a black woman
Speaker 1: in America and a young woman in America, I mean,
Speaker 1: we're often times subjected to what's known now as sexual harassment,
Speaker 1: but it happens on different levels, and sometimes, you know,
Speaker 1: in order to survive, you just to try to shirk
Speaker 1: it off. But in this particular situation, because of the
Speaker 1: way that I felt about civil rights, because I knew
Speaker 1: the importance of that position and the importance of that organization,
Speaker 1: it was really difficult for me to watch Clarence take
Speaker 1: it so cavalierly and the things that I thought were
Speaker 1: important in terms of civil rights and what was happening
Speaker 1: in the nation and our progression as a people, our
Speaker 1: progression as women. I just did not see that happening
Speaker 1: at the Commission at that time. Do you remember when
Speaker 1: you first found out that Thomas was being considered for
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court? Yeah? I do. When Clarence was nominated
Speaker 1: for that position, I was literally shocked because I knew him,
Speaker 1: I knew what he did at the Commission, and I
Speaker 1: could not believe that somebody like Clarence would be considered
Speaker 1: for such an important position. And really, I don't understand
Speaker 1: why I was so naive at that time, because that
Speaker 1: same body as the body that you know of help
Speaker 1: Plessy versus Ferguson, the same body that said that, you know,
Speaker 1: we were not entitled to certain rights as human beings,
Speaker 1: as full human beings. So I remember talking to different
Speaker 1: people and eventually talking to the dean of my law school,
Speaker 1: Edgar Khan, and meeting with Edgar, and you know, saying
Speaker 1: to him, Edgar, something's got to be done about this,
Speaker 1: and really thinking what could be done, because it liked
Speaker 1: it was already etched in stone that that's what was
Speaker 1: going to take place. He would be nominated right the
Speaker 1: president said he was the best qualified man for the job.
Speaker 1: You had already left the EOC by then, that's correct.
Speaker 1: He had left the EOC to sit on the Court
Speaker 1: of Appeals in Washington, DC, which is considered to be
Speaker 1: one of the entry points to a Supreme Court nomination
Speaker 1: sitting in a DC Court of Appeals. So, given all
Speaker 1: of that that you knew, what did you expect to happen?
Speaker 1: How did you expect that the confirmation hearing was going
Speaker 1: to play out? Well, you know, I had no idea.
Speaker 1: I had no idea. Eventually I began to hear your name,
Speaker 1: you know, I began to hear more about you and
Speaker 1: what was taking place, and I sort of witnessed what
Speaker 1: you were going through with the confirmation hearings, and as
Speaker 1: a result of that, you know, I really became alarmed
Speaker 1: and got in touch with again with my professor Edgar Khan,
Speaker 1: and told him that I felt that I had to
Speaker 1: do something, or that we needed to organize a group
Speaker 1: of people to get together to do something to support you.
Speaker 1: But what we decided to do was to attempt to
Speaker 1: give some credence to what you were saying and to
Speaker 1: let people know that it was not unusual for Clarence
Speaker 1: to act that way with people, and especially black women
Speaker 1: at the Commission. Like I said before, he was like
Speaker 1: a fox in a henhouse, And I wanted to make
Speaker 1: the committee aware of the fact that you were not
Speaker 1: lying to them or making up statements, that this, in
Speaker 1: fact is what was happening at the EOC and that
Speaker 1: you had witnessed it, and that yeah, that I've witnessed
Speaker 1: it firsthand. When we come back, Hardnett and I will
Speaker 1: get into the details of how her statement was handled
Speaker 1: or mishandled. You're listening to getting even my podcast about
Speaker 1: equality and what it takes to get there. I'm Anita
Speaker 1: Help and I'm talking with Sukari Hardnett. She submitted a
Speaker 1: statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee in nineteen ninety one
Speaker 1: outlining Clarence Thomas's behavior that she witnessed while working at
Speaker 1: the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, but she was never given
Speaker 1: an opportunity to testify. So it's out of your hands.
Speaker 1: Now you've written your statement. What did you expect to
Speaker 1: happen with the statement? What would you have liked to
Speaker 1: have happened even well, would I would like to have
Speaker 1: had the opportunity to testify before the committee to let
Speaker 1: them know that what he was saying was absolutely true,
Speaker 1: that your experiences had been my experiences. At the commission,
Speaker 1: Clarence was not the best qualified person for that position.
Speaker 1: There were many many I mean, if they wanted to
Speaker 1: have a black person in that position, there were many, many,
Speaker 1: many black men and women who were far more qualified
Speaker 1: than Clarence and somebody who was suitable to step into
Speaker 1: the quote unquote seat that was held by Thurgood Marshall.
Speaker 1: I was fearful actually that if he got into into
Speaker 1: that position, considering conversations that I've had with him, that
Speaker 1: he would do exactly what he has done through the years.
Speaker 1: Do you know what actually happened to the statement after
Speaker 1: you handed it over, Well, I knew that it reached
Speaker 1: the Senate Judiciary Committee because they said that, you know,
Speaker 1: another woman has come out. So I knew that the
Speaker 1: committee had the statement, and I knew that there was
Speaker 1: a possibility that they would call me, and I was prepared.
Speaker 1: I felt that I was prepared at that time to
Speaker 1: answer whatever questions they might have had. Probably not as
Speaker 1: artfully and skillfully and with such poise as you did,
Speaker 1: but definitely. I felt that I could give them whatever
Speaker 1: information they wanted to support your position. So what if
Speaker 1: any communications did you have with the Senate Judiciary Committee,
Speaker 1: None with the staffers or none? Though you were not
Speaker 1: told anything about your statement per se until you were
Speaker 1: told that you were not going to be testifying. No,
Speaker 1: I was never told that I would not be testifying. Oh. No,
Speaker 1: one from the committee, not the staff members on the committee,
Speaker 1: ever got in touch with me. I mean, the most
Speaker 1: I heard was what I saw on television, And after
Speaker 1: a while I stopped looking at the proceedings because I
Speaker 1: thought it was just a sham. And as a black woman,
Speaker 1: it was very difficult for me to sit down and
Speaker 1: see what they were trying to do to you. But
Speaker 1: I think because of your poise, and I think I
Speaker 1: saw your family there, because of your family support and
Speaker 1: just an inner calmness that you seem to have, I
Speaker 1: think carried you through and prevented them from succeeding. Were
Speaker 1: you still watching the hearings when Biden bang down the
Speaker 1: gavel and closed them out. No. At that point I
Speaker 1: knew what the writing on the wall was. I mean,
Speaker 1: I knew that they were going to confirm Thomas and
Speaker 1: you know that was my fear, and they did. And
Speaker 1: look where we are now, look at the composition of
Speaker 1: the court. Like I said, I was very naive then,
Speaker 1: and I thought that, you know, only certain learned people
Speaker 1: who had a sense of justice and righteousness should hold
Speaker 1: those positions. But I have subsequently learned that that is
Speaker 1: not the case. And the sad thing about that is
Speaker 1: that I'm not the only one who has noticed that
Speaker 1: that these are the things that erode at our democratic system.
Speaker 1: You know, our system is based upon us agreeing to
Speaker 1: believe in certain things and to live by certain rules.
Speaker 1: And when those rules are broken down, when people are
Speaker 1: put in a position where they don't trust that the
Speaker 1: system will work the way that they've been told it's
Speaker 1: going to work or it should work, then that's when
Speaker 1: you start to have problems. And I think the thing
Speaker 1: that has made America the country that it is is
Speaker 1: not so much because it was so righteous from the beginning,
Speaker 1: but because we have struggled as a nation to get
Speaker 1: to the point where we try to become a more
Speaker 1: perfect union. So ultimately, your statement was put into the record,
Speaker 1: which is of course not the same as being asked
Speaker 1: to testify, not being allowed to testify. I guess let
Speaker 1: me ask it. Let me just ask it. Why do
Speaker 1: you think the Senate Judiciary Committee didn't either subpoena you
Speaker 1: or call you to testify. You know, I have no idea.
Speaker 1: I think pretty much it was decided that Clarence would
Speaker 1: be placed in that position. I don't know if the
Speaker 1: Democratic white males on the committee felt that their hands
Speaker 1: were sort of tied and they were attacking a black man.
Speaker 1: Clarence used all of the language. I mean, I could
Speaker 1: not believe a high tech lynching, I thought to myself,
Speaker 1: or a high tech tom But at any rate, it's
Speaker 1: almost like they were afraid or intimidated and just sort
Speaker 1: of sugarcoated everything when it came to Clarence Thomas, and
Speaker 1: it was very difficult for me to look at it
Speaker 1: then and then almost thirty years later, I couldn't watch
Speaker 1: the Kavanaugh hearings because it was reliving to me. The
Speaker 1: whole situation with the Thomas hearing and Miss Ford's testimony
Speaker 1: was as compelling as your testimony was. You know, I
Speaker 1: have been welcoming the chance to talk with you and
Speaker 1: to hear from you, and for the people who would
Speaker 1: have wanted to hear from you thirty years ago. Can
Speaker 1: hear what you had to say. I think one of
Speaker 1: the greatest disservices of the nineteen ninety one hearing was
Speaker 1: the failure to call you to testify. I think it
Speaker 1: was done as a way to slight and dismiss the
Speaker 1: value of the voices of black women. It was a
Speaker 1: way to avoid hearing the truth that the committee may
Speaker 1: or may not have been willing to deal with as
Speaker 1: the truth. I think it was disrespectful, and I just
Speaker 1: wanted to be a part of revealing that our truths
Speaker 1: have merit and they should be listened to and taken
Speaker 1: into account in the way the world is shaped. When
Speaker 1: we talk about fairness and equality, we can't have it
Speaker 1: unless we are listening to the people who have suffered
Speaker 1: from inequality. And so in part, we're asking what if?
Speaker 1: And a big part of the what if is what
Speaker 1: if all of the information that was available in nineteen
Speaker 1: ninety one, that information that you provided, that the other
Speaker 1: witnesses have provided, that some of the experts had developed
Speaker 1: and were ready to testify to what if that had
Speaker 1: been made public? Do you think that the public conversation
Speaker 1: might be different today because you've talked about where we
Speaker 1: are today, and you talked about Christine Bozzie Ford in
Speaker 1: twenty eighteen. Could that hearing have been different had the
Speaker 1: nineteen ninety one hearing been different? You know, Anita, I
Speaker 1: don't know. But what I do know is that you
Speaker 1: give people information and you let them decide. You don't
Speaker 1: withhold information and then say, well, look at the conclusion
Speaker 1: that they came to. And we as a nation were
Speaker 1: denied that opportunity to hear all the facts, to weigh
Speaker 1: the facts, and to come to the conclusion, whatever conclusion
Speaker 1: we chose to come to now and the Kavanaugh hearings,
Speaker 1: they were given the facts, and I think we have
Speaker 1: a responsibility to give people the facts, to give them
Speaker 1: the truth, and not make believe facts the things that
Speaker 1: we make up, but to give them the truth and
Speaker 1: then they can decide. And if they take the facts
Speaker 1: and they misuse them, then it's on them. If they
Speaker 1: take the facts and they cover them up and they
Speaker 1: hide it, then it's on them. But we have a
Speaker 1: responsibility to give people the facts and to give them
Speaker 1: true facts and let them decide at that point what
Speaker 1: to do with those facts. In retrospect. Given the way
Speaker 1: the things played out with your statement, would you do
Speaker 1: it differently today? Without question, I would do the same thing.
Speaker 1: I have no reservations, no doubts, not one. I would
Speaker 1: do the same thing because what you said and what
Speaker 1: you did was the truth, and I wanted to support
Speaker 1: the truth. And I think even more so in this
Speaker 1: period in our country, we understand how important it is
Speaker 1: to have the facts and to have true facts, and
Speaker 1: so I would do it. I would do the exact
Speaker 1: same thing all over again. Do you think that there
Speaker 1: are other people who were intimidated I'm coming forward by
Speaker 1: the behavior of the committee. Well, I think afterwards I
Speaker 1: talked to people. I remember one friend said to me
Speaker 1: that another friend had called and said about me. What
Speaker 1: was she thinking? Why would she do something like that?
Speaker 1: It never occurred to me that the consequences would be
Speaker 1: what they have. Then. I have not been able to
Speaker 1: basically get a job with an organization, with a law firm.
Speaker 1: I went into private practice because that was the only
Speaker 1: option that I had. I've been, you know, pretty much blacklisted.
Speaker 1: Not that there was a concerted effort to blacklist me,
Speaker 1: but if anybody knew that I'd testified or given support
Speaker 1: to you, they basically did not want to have my
Speaker 1: name on their letterhead. Has the experience that you had
Speaker 1: in nineteen ninety one shaped how you think about fighting
Speaker 1: for justice and truth for the people that you represent. Definitely.
Speaker 1: You know, there's a saying that was used on the
Speaker 1: continent for many, many years, and I believe in that
Speaker 1: the struggle continues, and it's just made me even more
Speaker 1: determined to struggle and to support just causes that I
Speaker 1: believe in that will be my fight for the rest
Speaker 1: of my life. It has not curtailed my determination, it
Speaker 1: has not hindered it in any way. It's really just
Speaker 1: made me even more determined to continue to do what
Speaker 1: I do, to fight for what I believe in and
Speaker 1: what I know is the right thing to do. The
Speaker 1: way the senators and the media handled the hearing didn't
Speaker 1: just impact hardnet in me, and it wasn't just that
Speaker 1: they failed to call her to testify. All of it
Speaker 1: had a ripple effect on millions of people who were
Speaker 1: watching at home, some of them deciding for themselves if
Speaker 1: they would speak up about sexual harassment that they had
Speaker 1: experienced or witness I've received thousands of letters. I still
Speaker 1: received letters from people telling me about sexual harassment that
Speaker 1: has altered their life, and I can't help wondering why
Speaker 1: they still have to pay such a high price for
Speaker 1: telling the truth, for doing the right thing. So the
Speaker 1: struggle does continue, Yes it does. I do have one question,
Speaker 1: in particular, why did you name your program Getting Even Well?
Speaker 1: Because I think what we have talked about for many
Speaker 1: years is opportunity, and what we're looking for is outcomes.
Speaker 1: We want results. I wanted us to think about equality
Speaker 1: and equity in a new way, not just in terms
Speaker 1: of opportunity, but also in terms of outcomes, measurable outcomes
Speaker 1: in the way that people live every day. So that's
Speaker 1: why it's Getting Even I think that's my only question.
Speaker 1: I just I just want to say that I hope
Speaker 1: you continue on the path that you have chosen, and
Speaker 1: if at any point I can be of any assistance,
Speaker 1: please let me know. But I'm very proud of you,
Speaker 1: and you've made a tremendous sacrifice, tremendous sacrifice, and I'm
Speaker 1: glad that you did. And if you're ever in Washington,
Speaker 1: we should have lunch. Yes, we'll find a place close
Speaker 1: to the Supreme Court. Okay, sit down and have lunch together. Okay,
Speaker 1: take care. Thank you. I will always be grateful to
Speaker 1: Sakari Hartnet for taking an enormous risk to help me.
Speaker 1: We will never know the price she paid for simply
Speaker 1: coming forward to tell the truth. If only one of
Speaker 1: the senators had stepped up and demanded that she be
Speaker 1: called to testify, that she be heard, if they had
Speaker 1: someone deciding whether to speak out against sexual harassment, they'd witness,
Speaker 1: might have had the courage to follow her example. We
Speaker 1: can't redo nineteen ninety one, but I'm hopeful that others
Speaker 1: like me will see Hartnett as their model for how
Speaker 1: to be brave in the face of injustice. On the
Speaker 1: next episode of Getting Even, I'll be talking with Susan
Speaker 1: Della Ross. She was the only member of my nineteen
Speaker 1: ninety one legal team with experience in sexual harassment law.
Speaker 1: We'll be discussing what went on behind the scenes. There
Speaker 1: was very clear evidence the media never reported on afterwards.
Speaker 1: They shut it down once he was confirmed, so the
Speaker 1: general public has never come to learn exactly what the
Speaker 1: evidence was that corroborated everything you said. Getting Even is
Speaker 1: a production of Pushkin Industries and is written and hosted
Speaker 1: by me Anita Hill. It is produced by Molaboard and
Speaker 1: Brittany Brown. Our editor is Sarah Kramer, our engineer is
Speaker 1: Amanda kay Wang, and our showrunner is Sasha Matthias. Louis
Speaker 1: Gara composed original music for the show. Special thanks to
Speaker 1: Vicki Merrick for voice coaching and Eve Abrahams for recording
Speaker 1: this episode. Our executive producers are Mia Lobell and Lee
Speaker 1: tal Mallad. Our director of Development is Justine Lang. At
Speaker 1: Pushkin thanks to Heather Fane, Carly Migliori, Jason Gambrel, Julia Barden,
Speaker 1: John Schnarz, and Jacob Weisberg. You can find me on
Speaker 1: Twitter at Anita Hill and on Facebook at Anita Hill.
Speaker 1: You can find Pushkin on all social platforms at pushkin Pods,
Speaker 1: and you can sign up for our newsletter at pushkin
Speaker 1: dot Fm. If you love this show and others from
Speaker 1: Pushkin Industries, consider subscribing to Pushkin Plus. Subscribe to Pushkin
Speaker 1: Plus and you can hear Getting Even and other Pushkin
Speaker 1: shows add free and receive exclusive bonus episodes. Sign up
Speaker 1: on the Getting Even show page in Apple Podcasts or
Speaker 1: at pushkin dot fm. To find more Pushkin podcasts. Listen
Speaker 1: on the iHeartRadio, app, Apple podcasts, or wherever you like
Speaker 1: to listen.