Speaker 1: Welcome to Criminalia, a production of Shondaland Audio in partnership
Speaker 1: with iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2: This is a story of a Texas oil tycoon, a
Speaker 2: congressman from Idaho, and a financial commodities broker in Oklahoma City,
Speaker 2: and is the story of blackmail, Yes, but it's also
Speaker 2: a story of political corruption and ethics uncovered by that blackmail.
Speaker 2: There's a lot going on here and almost everyone is guilty.
Speaker 2: Welcome to Criminalia. I'm Maria Tremarky.
Speaker 1: And I'm Holly Frye. Let's meet this trio. We're going
Speaker 1: to start with the Texan tycoon. It was estimated that
Speaker 1: Nelson bunker Hunt was worth between eight billion and sixteen
Speaker 1: billion dollars, yes, billion with a B. Hunt was a
Speaker 1: Texas oil company executive who also owned one thousands, drove
Speaker 1: a Cadillac, and lost most of his fortune when he
Speaker 1: and two of his brothers, William, Herbert and Lamar tried
Speaker 1: to corner the market in silver. Quote A billion dollars
Speaker 1: ain't what it used to be, he famously said. After
Speaker 1: the collapse. Early in nineteen eighty one, bunker Hunt received
Speaker 1: a blackmail letter demanding he paid four hundred and forty
Speaker 1: thousand dollars in exchange for the blackmailer's silence about an
Speaker 1: eighty seven thousand dollars bribe that Hunt had arranged for
Speaker 1: Idaho Republican Representative George Hanson in the form of a
Speaker 1: silver futures purchase for his wife, Connie Hanson, but actually
Speaker 1: intended to line the pockets of her politician husband.
Speaker 2: George Hanson served in the United States House of Representatives
Speaker 2: for fourteen years, representing Idaho's second district between nineteen sixty
Speaker 2: five and nineteen sixty nine, and then again from nineteen
Speaker 2: seventy five nineteen eighty five. He was, as reported by
Speaker 2: The New York Times, known for his quote flamboyant's impulsiveness, affability,
Speaker 2: and tireless campaigning. He was also a convicted swindler.
Speaker 1: The third major player in this story is the blackmailer,
Speaker 1: a man named Arthur Greenhill Emmons. The third Arthur was
Speaker 1: an Oklahoma commodity's brokerage employee at the trading firm Mingen
Speaker 1: Company that was where Connie Hanson had made a profit
Speaker 1: of eighty seven thousand dollars speculating in silver in nineteen
Speaker 1: seventy nine. Hunt had recommended the firm to the Hansons
Speaker 1: and Emmons always believed that Hunt set up the silver
Speaker 1: deal as a way of funneling bribe money to George Hanson,
Speaker 1: although he could not prove it.
Speaker 2: Outraged about the blackmail letter, Hunt's first instinct was to
Speaker 2: report it to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Hanson, though
Speaker 2: hearing of the blackmailer's letter, instead insisted it reported to
Speaker 2: the Justice Department as he held political office, and then
Speaker 2: the whole time he was insistent that he was innocent
Speaker 2: of any financial wrongdoing. That led Emmons, worried he'd be
Speaker 2: exposed as a blackmailer by the Department of Justice, to
Speaker 2: send a second letter to Bunker Hunt, asking him to
Speaker 2: just forget about the whole thing. He signed it as
Speaker 2: he had the first letter with the alias Gordon Warner.
Speaker 2: The FBI, which is the department that handles such cases,
Speaker 2: didn't forget about the whole thing and tracked him down,
Speaker 2: and Arthur turned himself in.
Speaker 1: Emmons pleaded guilty to a single count of blackmail for
Speaker 1: trying to demand money and threatening to tell the FBI
Speaker 1: that he discovered Hunt had bribed Representative George Hansen circuitously
Speaker 1: through his wife, Connie Emmon's attorney, James Lyons, refused to
Speaker 1: comment on the case to the press, simply stating that
Speaker 1: his client was quote extremely remorseful. The Washington Post reported
Speaker 1: Slash speculated at the time that Emmon's blackmail attempt was
Speaker 1: likely because Hunt had allegedly caused wild fluctuations in silver
Speaker 1: prices in January of nineteen eighty fluctuations that financially hurt
Speaker 1: a lot of small investors.
Speaker 2: Because Emmens cooperated with the government, he was granted immunity
Speaker 2: from prosecution. He received a suspended one year sentence and
Speaker 2: was fined two thousand dollars, but the investigation didn't stop
Speaker 2: with him. It opened questions and authorities began to look
Speaker 2: at the nature of the relationship between the Texas billionaire
Speaker 2: and the politician, and they found a bombshell. Hansen had
Speaker 2: made false statements on his congressional financial disclosure forms, including
Speaker 2: that eighty seven thousand dollars that Emmons noted in his
Speaker 2: blackmail letter to Hunt.
Speaker 1: These disclosure forms were part of the Ethics and Government Act,
Speaker 1: a federal law enacted in nineteen seventy eight, passed in
Speaker 1: the wake of the Nixon Watergate scandal. Under the law,
Speaker 1: all major government officials are required to file annual financial
Speaker 1: disclosure statements of their sources of income. That law remains
Speaker 1: in place today, and it includes one amounts of income,
Speaker 1: gifts and reimbursements, two the identity and approximate value of
Speaker 1: property held and liabilities owed. Three transactions in property, commodities
Speaker 1: and securities, and for financial interests of a spouse or dependent.
Speaker 1: It excludes the reporting of sources of political campaign funds,
Speaker 1: including campaign receipts and expenditures. Campaign reporting falls under a
Speaker 1: separate law.
Speaker 2: Lawyers for Hunt and Hanson took swift action six days
Speaker 2: after the blackmail attempt. Hunt's lawyers had Connie Hansen sign
Speaker 2: notes for each loan in question. The loans they felt
Speaker 2: needed to be clearly listed in Connie's name, and this
Speaker 2: extra step was assurance they were. According to federal prosecutor
Speaker 2: read Winegarden, the real motive for it was that Hunt
Speaker 2: and Hanson quote wanted to get their ducks in a row.
Speaker 1: We're going to take a break here for a word
Speaker 1: from our sponsors, and when we return, we'll talk in
Speaker 1: detail about what Hanson didn't disclose and why he thought
Speaker 1: he didn't have to.
Speaker 2: Welcome back to Criminalia George Hanson was charged for failing
Speaker 2: to comply with the Ethics Act, and he was indicted
Speaker 2: and went to trial. So let's talk about what went
Speaker 2: on in that courtroom.
Speaker 1: George Hanson was indicted by a federal grand jury in
Speaker 1: April of nineteen eighty one and tried on charges that
Speaker 1: he failed to disclose four major financial transactions, including one
Speaker 1: an eighty seven thousand, four hundred seventy five dollars profit
Speaker 1: on the purchase and sale of one hundred twenty five
Speaker 1: silver futures contracts over a two day period in nineteen
Speaker 1: seventy nine. Two A fifty thousand dollars personal loan in
Speaker 1: Connie Hanson's name from a Dallas bank co signed by
Speaker 1: Hunt in nineteen seventy eight. Three, A sixty one thousand,
Speaker 1: five hundred three dollars and forty two cents loan directly
Speaker 1: from Bunker Hunt in nineteen eighty two, Connie Hanson, and
Speaker 1: four personal loans totaling one hundred thirty five thousand dollars
Speaker 1: in nineteen eighty one by individuals in Virginia. Feeling surprisingly
Speaker 1: optimistic about his case, Hanson stated things quote could be
Speaker 1: over before it starts. They were not.
Speaker 2: On the first day of trial, Bunker, Hunt testified that
Speaker 2: he had lent money and given financial advice to Connie Hanson,
Speaker 2: but only after George Hansen had assured him that the
Speaker 2: couple had made separate financial arrangements. He stated he had
Speaker 2: quote some reservations about giving money directly to a politician,
Speaker 2: but that Hanson had convinced him it would be quote
Speaker 2: all right to help Connie make some money.
Speaker 1: Hunt, who described himself on the stand as quote largely
Speaker 1: self employed, testified for more than two hours. Federal prosecutor
Speaker 1: Weingarten questioned him about his dealings with the Hansons and
Speaker 1: if he had dealt only with Connie Hanson as a
Speaker 1: quote way to provide George Hanson money and not get
Speaker 1: yourself in trouble, to which Hunt replied, quote, I wouldn't
Speaker 1: put it that strongly. I was trying to help the
Speaker 1: Hanson family with the problems they had. As to how
Speaker 1: these two men knew each other, Hunt testified that Hanson
Speaker 1: had approached him a few years earlier, in nineteen seventy eight,
Speaker 1: after they had met at a dinner function. Hanson had
Speaker 1: confided that he needed contributions to overcome between three hundred
Speaker 1: thousand and four hundred thousand dollars in debts resulting from
Speaker 1: his congressional campaign, as well as the cost of his
Speaker 1: defense against charges that he had violated federal campaign laws.
Speaker 1: In nineteen seventy five.
Speaker 2: The prosecution discovered that Hanson and his wife had signed
Speaker 2: a financial separation agreement dividing their property, which we mentioned earlier,
Speaker 2: but they also discovered the couple didn't really play by
Speaker 2: those rules. They had continued to keep everything in both
Speaker 2: their names and filed joint tax returns. In addition, lawyers
Speaker 2: for the prosecution traced the loans in question through a
Speaker 2: network of banks to prove Hanson one hundred percent knew
Speaker 2: about transactions in his wife's name and that he had
Speaker 2: benefited from them. Addressing the jury, federal prosecutor James Cole
Speaker 2: stated that Hanson had intentionally hidden transactions by filing false
Speaker 2: statements and that quote, the evidence will show that he
Speaker 2: knew they were a false and he and tended them
Speaker 2: to be false when he filed them. Spoiler alert it did.
Speaker 1: During the trial, it came to light that with a
Speaker 1: bit of sleight of hand, the eighty seven thousand dollars,
Speaker 1: which was actually eighty seven thousand, four hundred seventy five
Speaker 1: dollars profit from the silver contracts had been suspiciously run
Speaker 1: through two banks. Connie testified that the money was used
Speaker 1: to pay off loans, but she could not recall what loans.
Speaker 1: The Hunt backed fifty thousand dollars bank loan was intended
Speaker 1: for Connie to cover a thirty three thousand, eight hundred
Speaker 1: and fifty five dollars loss on a nineteen seventy seven
Speaker 1: soybeans commodities deal, a deal that the Hunt family had
Speaker 1: also lost money in. Connie Hanson, though, failed to repay
Speaker 1: that loan, and when the bank collected from Hunt, her
Speaker 1: co signer, he then sought to get his money back
Speaker 1: with interest, a total of sixty one thousand, five hundred
Speaker 1: three dollars from the Hansons. These loans and the silver contracts,
Speaker 1: they were all in Connie's name, a fact the prosecution
Speaker 1: used to show that Representative Hanson knew exactly what he
Speaker 1: was doing, and that was hiding money.
Speaker 2: Hanson's explanation for the one hundred and thirty five thousand
Speaker 2: dollars loan was that the money, at least in part,
Speaker 2: was for the Association of Concerned Taxpayers, a group that
Speaker 2: promoted his book criticizing the Internal Revenue Service. He later
Speaker 2: explained that he didn't declare it on his nineteen eighty
Speaker 2: two financial disclosure statements because he claimed the money was
Speaker 2: given to an organization he created and headed to promote
Speaker 2: his tax legislation and related book. He had, though, reported
Speaker 2: the interest on his income tax returns, which were filed
Speaker 2: jointly with his wife. John Mead Junior, a former Southern
Speaker 2: Virginia banker who was himself later convicted of embezzlement, testified
Speaker 2: he had lent Hanson fifty thousand dollars on November twenty first,
Speaker 2: nineteen eighty one. Now, this was also part of the
Speaker 2: one hundred and thirty five thousand dollars in question, so
Speaker 2: he meant it while he was trying to rally support
Speaker 2: to convince the United States Army to explore research into
Speaker 2: hydrogen cars. The loan, Meat also stated was intended to
Speaker 2: help Hanson promote a book he was writing about Iran.
Speaker 1: Defense layer Stephen Braga argued the government's evidence was immaterial
Speaker 1: to the charges and that it failed to prove Hanson
Speaker 1: was calling the shots for his wife's financial dealings. Another
Speaker 1: of Hanson's attorneys, Nathan Lewin called the congressman a quote
Speaker 1: man of limited means who had quote an enormous personal
Speaker 1: debt of nearly four hundred thousand dollars and that he
Speaker 1: was in a quote terrible financial bind. He argued that
Speaker 1: Hanson wasn't trying to hide anything and highlighted that it
Speaker 1: was on an attorney's advice that he and his wife
Speaker 1: had drawn up an agreement to separate their finances. When
Speaker 1: Hanson filed the disclosure statements, Lewyn explained, quote he thought
Speaker 1: those loans had been the property of missus Hanson, and
Speaker 1: we're therefore not reportable on the forms.
Speaker 2: So on that we're going to take a break for
Speaker 2: a word from our sponsors. When we're back, we'll talk
Speaker 2: more about Hanson's trial.
Speaker 1: Welcome back to Criminalia. Guilty not guilty, Let's find out.
Speaker 2: As we talked about earlier in the show, the Ethics
Speaker 2: and Government Act requires Congressmen and other high ranking government
Speaker 2: officials to file annual reports disclosing their income and other
Speaker 2: financial transactions. Hanson's attorneys claimed his omissions from the Ethics
Speaker 2: Disclosure Statements were not a willful violation of any law
Speaker 2: because Congress did not intend to use those statements for anything,
Speaker 2: but the jury didn't buy that. A United State's District
Speaker 2: Court jury, which was sequestered in a local motel during
Speaker 2: the trial, deliberated for three and a half hours and
Speaker 2: found the congressman guilty on all four counts.
Speaker 1: Hanson was the first public official to be tried for
Speaker 1: violating the Ethics and Government Act, and if he was convicted,
Speaker 1: he was facing a maximum of five years in prison
Speaker 1: and a ten thousand dollars fine for each charge. He
Speaker 1: was found guilty of four counts of filing false financial
Speaker 1: disclosure statements.
Speaker 2: In June of nineteen eighty four, United States District Court
Speaker 2: Judge Joyce Hens Green sentenced Hansen to serve five to
Speaker 2: fifteen months in prison and find him forty thousand dollars
Speaker 2: for filing false financial disclosure forms to Congress in direct
Speaker 2: violation of the nineteen seventy eight Ethics in Government Act.
Speaker 2: Hanson could have been reprimanded, censured, or expelled from office,
Speaker 2: and Green told him that she based his quote deterrence,
Speaker 2: setting an example, punishment, rehabilitation, and justice. At his sentencing,
Speaker 2: Hanson stated, quote, there was no theft, no scandalous stuffing
Speaker 2: of money, into a politician's pocket. There was no kick
Speaker 2: back from the staff or misuse of public funds. There
Speaker 2: was no active drunkenness, no act of violence, no accident
Speaker 2: leaving someone dead or injured. Hanson's lawyer, Lewin stated to
Speaker 2: the press that he planned on filing for a new
Speaker 2: trial on grounds that quote errors were made in the proceedings.
Speaker 1: After his trial, Hanson accused the Justice Department of singling
Speaker 1: him out for prosecution because he had criticized their department,
Speaker 1: as he had the Internal Revenue Service. In a letter
Speaker 1: to the House Standards of Official Conduct Committee, Hanson accused
Speaker 1: Special Counsel Stanley Brand, who conducted the ethics investigation, of
Speaker 1: having a quote direct conflict of interest, and wrote, quote
Speaker 1: confidence in the non partisan deliberations of your committee has
Speaker 1: been destroyed. Hanson also stated in his letter that Brand,
Speaker 1: who was general counsel for the House of Representatives before
Speaker 1: he entered private practice, was on retainer to the Democratic
Speaker 1: Congressional Campaign Committee during the investigation, and that was a conflict.
Speaker 1: Brand did work for the campaign on quote a limited matter,
Speaker 1: but he had disclosed that to the Ethics panel, and
Speaker 1: it was a non issue.
Speaker 2: Federal Prosecutor Winegarden stated that Hanson quote took great care
Speaker 2: to hide very suspicious and potentially embarrassing transactions. In his
Speaker 2: closing arguments addressing the jury, he stated that Hanson was
Speaker 2: using his wife as a quote front for concealing his
Speaker 2: financial dealings with Bunker Hunt. Winegarden called the financial separation
Speaker 2: agreement quote phony and something that Hanson's used to avoid
Speaker 2: the legal requirements of the Ethics Act, yet not when
Speaker 2: it came to time to pay their taxes. He also
Speaker 2: argued that Hanson's actions quote, when exposed to the fresh air,
Speaker 2: emit an odor that can be picked up all the
Speaker 2: way from Pocatello. It was not an odor of spring flowers,
Speaker 2: but the stench of political corruption. Hanson, he continued, quote,
Speaker 2: went to great lengths to hide that stench from his
Speaker 2: colleagues on the hill, the press, and from the good
Speaker 2: people of Idaho.
Speaker 1: Defense attorney Lewin, who strongly believed that Wingarten brought the
Speaker 1: indictment against Hanson for quote personal ambition, said after the
Speaker 1: verdict that the impending appeal would cover a quote whole
Speaker 1: range of issues involved in what he called quote an injustice.
Speaker 1: Lewin also stated that he believed that jury sequestration had
Speaker 1: led to quote an unfair verdict. Hanson stated that he
Speaker 1: didn't blame the jury for that, but that the quote
Speaker 1: smokescreen made by the Justice Department obscured the facts for
Speaker 1: the jury. I consider myself innocence. Prosecutors Weingarten and Cole
Speaker 1: stated they were quote satisfied justice was done.
Speaker 2: So despite all this, Hanson ran for reelection that year
Speaker 2: while appealing his conviction, and he lost only by one
Speaker 2: hundred and sixty seven votes. Instead of serving in public office,
Speaker 2: he served a year in federal prison. Actually he served
Speaker 2: six months and then another six months for violating his parole.
Speaker 2: In nineteen ninety five, after many appeals, the charges against
Speaker 2: him were dismissed by the Supreme Court. This wasn't Hanson's
Speaker 2: first time in the courtroom, though, he was convicted in
Speaker 2: nineteen seventy five of election law violations, and it also
Speaker 2: wasn't his last. He was subsequently convicted in an entirely
Speaker 2: different case on forty five counts of bank fraud, for
Speaker 2: which he was incarcerated for forty months. In nineteen ninety two,
Speaker 2: Hanson was also convicted and incarcerated on charges of defrauding
Speaker 2: too Idaho banks and two hundred people in a thirty
Speaker 2: million dollar investment scheme. In true Hanson form, he denied
Speaker 2: he'd done anything wrong and claimed the accusations against him
Speaker 2: were nothing more than a government vendetta, which we've heard
Speaker 2: a couple other times from him.
Speaker 1: Who Hanson, do you want to have a sip of
Speaker 1: something yummy to wash the taste of all of this
Speaker 1: out of our mouths?
Speaker 2: Yes? I do?
Speaker 1: Okay. This one was actually tricky for me to think about,
Speaker 1: because I was like, how do I want to approach this.
Speaker 1: I thought about a few different things. I looked at,
Speaker 1: like lists of crops in Texas, of things we might
Speaker 1: include the usual stuff that I.
Speaker 2: Do, right, what goes on in Idaho? Kind of do
Speaker 2: something with potato?
Speaker 1: Yeah, don't worry, there's going to be a potato, but
Speaker 1: it's optional. And then it occurred to me like what
Speaker 1: kind of drinks were people drinking in the seventies when
Speaker 1: this actual criminal activity was going on? And what popped
Speaker 1: into my mind was the Harvey wallbank.
Speaker 2: Oh, I haven't heard thought of this drink in a
Speaker 2: long time.
Speaker 1: Here's the thing about a Harvey wallbanger. I think if
Speaker 1: you're you know, I remember when we are of an
Speaker 1: age where we heard about it as kids. And I
Speaker 1: don't know about you, but to me it sounded like
Speaker 1: a badass what a name, right, That's a masculine hard drink.
Speaker 2: And actually don't think I've ever had one.
Speaker 1: No, it tastes like a creamsicle like. It tastes like
Speaker 1: a creamsicle. It's not like a shot of whiskey and
Speaker 1: a punch in the eye. It's like literally, it tastes
Speaker 1: like magic. But it has its own interesting history because
Speaker 1: it was actually a really popular drink in the seventies
Speaker 1: because it was promoted by the McKesson Imports company to
Speaker 1: try to get attention on the liquor they were on
Speaker 1: the liqueur they were importing, which is Galliano, of which
Speaker 1: I am a fan Galliano. If you haven't had it before,
Speaker 1: I've probably talked about it in recipes. Sometimes people will
Speaker 1: refer to it as a vanilla liquor I probably have.
Speaker 1: That's a little misleading because it also has notes of
Speaker 1: annis and some other like citrus tones. There's a little
Speaker 1: smoky note to it. It's its own interesting thing, and
Speaker 1: their original one. They came up with this. It had
Speaker 1: like a cartoon character that went with it, who was
Speaker 1: like a surfer named Harvey Wallbanger, not at all like
Speaker 1: the dudes in this story. Their original recipe for a
Speaker 1: Harvey Wallbanger, and it's like a variation on a screwdriver. Okay,
Speaker 1: six ounces of orange juice, one ounce of vodka, stir
Speaker 1: with ice, splash in a half ounce of Galliano. So
Speaker 1: I thought, how can we take this drink that was
Speaker 1: very popular then and make it something different and a
Speaker 1: little interesting and maybe even a little silly and also
Speaker 1: very yummy, because that just sounded right. So for ours,
Speaker 1: here's what we're doing. We're keeping the vodka, but we're
Speaker 1: bumping it up to an ounce and a half. And
Speaker 1: this is where I'm gonna make my case in case
Speaker 1: anyone out there has not had a potato vodka, because
Speaker 1: now it's the time. I love potato vodka. It's very smooth.
Speaker 1: By the way, vodka can be made out of almost anything.
Speaker 1: There are actually arguments in among countries about the laws.
Speaker 1: There was a big argument in the EU about what
Speaker 1: could and cannot be considered vodka some years back. But really,
Speaker 1: if you have like a sugar and something starchy, and
Speaker 1: you can ferment those, you can make a vodka. But
Speaker 1: a potato vodka is really like smooth and delicious. They're
Speaker 1: not hard to find. There's several brands that are really good.
Speaker 1: Most liquor stores carry them. If you can't find it
Speaker 1: on the regular shelf, as the person that works at
Speaker 1: your liquor store, sometimes it's on like that little narrow
Speaker 1: shelf where they put like what they consider the higher
Speaker 1: end vodkas.
Speaker 2: That's a good point, yeah, but it's.
Speaker 1: Usually not that expensive. Try potato vodka if you haven't.
Speaker 1: It's amazing. So an ounce and a half of vodka,
Speaker 1: a half ounce of Galiano. Look, if you can't find Galliano,
Speaker 1: get a vanilla liqueur. It won't be quite the same,
Speaker 1: but you can do it. And then you're gonna add
Speaker 1: an ounce of pineapple juice. And I know they wanted
Speaker 1: their stirred, but I like to shake this because the
Speaker 1: liqueur and the juice, it just makes it all smooth
Speaker 1: out together. And then you're gonna shake that with ice,
Speaker 1: strain it over fresh ice in a highball glass. And
Speaker 1: then we're not doing orange juice, but what we are
Speaker 1: gonna do is orange soda. This makes this the silliest,
Speaker 1: tastiest drink. I will confess a thing. I made this
Speaker 1: twice this morning. I did not drink two cocktails before
Speaker 1: we came in. I didn't have to make it twice
Speaker 1: the first time. Often I'll look for a low sugar soda. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I got one of the fancy pantsy unicorn orange sodas
Speaker 1: that has low sugar and prebiotics in it.
Speaker 2: Wow.
Speaker 1: It was fine, but it wasn't what I was after.
Speaker 2: Do you want the soda from our childhood?
Speaker 1: Then? Yeah, I had to go back and get the
Speaker 1: SODA's of our childhood. There are a few different very
Speaker 1: yummy orange sodas that, depending on where you lived, might
Speaker 1: have been your jam. And that that's perfect. This is
Speaker 1: one that literally tastes like it just is that moment
Speaker 1: in Ratituey. Yeah, when anton Ego remembers being a kid,
Speaker 1: it took me right back to like being a kid
Speaker 1: on my skates.
Speaker 2: I know exactly what you're talking about.
Speaker 1: Go into the pool. I was like, I'm gonna skate
Speaker 1: down to the pool and then I'm gonna swim, and
Speaker 1: then I'm gonna put my skates back on and go home.
Speaker 1: It was like that, and I like that it brought
Speaker 1: about that sense of innocence when we have been talking
Speaker 1: about nothing but corruption. It's like the antidote to this time.
Speaker 2: I was just about to say that it's a nice.
Speaker 1: Pairing to make this a mocktail is easyspie. We are
Speaker 1: gonna say sometimes we'll do a bump up and be like,
Speaker 1: just use more juice. Don't in this case because it's
Speaker 1: already really sweet. So you will still use your ounce
Speaker 1: of pineapple juice. When I mentioned top it off with
Speaker 1: orange soda, I put about four ounces on mine. You
Speaker 1: can up or down that depending on your taste, but
Speaker 1: I did about four ounces. And instead of the vodka,
Speaker 1: I would just use like a sparkling water or a
Speaker 1: seltzer if you have it, And obviously you're not gonna
Speaker 1: shake that because your shaker will pop. Don't do that.
Speaker 1: And then instead of galiano, I would skip that completely,
Speaker 1: and I would add a couple drops of vanilla extract.
Speaker 1: I wouldn't do a vanilla syrup here because you already
Speaker 1: have a lot of sweet stuff going on and that's
Speaker 1: just going to make it cloying. So that again the
Speaker 1: mocktail is an ounce and a half of sparkling water
Speaker 1: or seltzer, a couple drops of vanilla liquor, an ounce
Speaker 1: of pineapple juice, and then four ounces at your discretion
Speaker 1: of orange soda total. So still very yummy. It's still
Speaker 1: going to make you feel like you're in a younger time.
Speaker 1: It also like, let's be clear, these things were happening
Speaker 1: when I was at the age that I was putting
Speaker 1: on my roller skates and running around town and wanted
Speaker 1: to go swimming and be innocent. It's all tied into
Speaker 1: my psyche in terms of we all need a break,
Speaker 1: and this is a drink that gives you a break.
Speaker 1: Every once in a while. You need a ridiculous drink
Speaker 1: that is sweet and is based on the soda as
Speaker 1: you grew up with when you were a kid. It's true,
Speaker 1: there's something so fun about it and you can't help
Speaker 1: but giggle. It's not like the kind of thing you're
Speaker 1: gonna savor with friends inand bar. It's exactly what you
Speaker 1: need sometimes. Stick a straw in that thing and have
Speaker 1: your moment travel back in time to innocence, and then
Speaker 1: all that sugar will give you the energy to fight
Speaker 1: the corrupt people in our lives today.
Speaker 2: Exactly. I think we all know I'm not the biggest,
Speaker 2: like sweet person. This is so childhood for me that
Speaker 2: I that doesn't even matter.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's just fun. It's just fun. And we are
Speaker 1: calling this one the Fraudster because it's almost it doesn't
Speaker 1: even feel like you're drinking a cocktail even though there's
Speaker 1: a vodka and Gollano.
Speaker 2: In it, so just having some orange soda.
Speaker 1: It feels fake. It references the many frauds of Hansen,
Speaker 1: so hopefully puts a smile on your face. We certainly
Speaker 1: get smiles on our faces knowing that you have spent
Speaker 1: this time with us, and we hope you will come
Speaker 1: back next week. We're going to talk a little bit
Speaker 1: more about blackmail, but we're nearing the end of the
Speaker 1: season and then we'll roll into something brand new. We
Speaker 1: will see you right back here next week on Criminalia.
Speaker 1: Criminalia is a production of Shondaland Audio in partnership with iHeartRadio.
Speaker 1: For more podcasts from Shondaland Audio, please visit the iHeartRadio app,
Speaker 1: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.