Pushkin. Hey there, it's Michael Lewis. Before we get to this episode, I want to let you know that you can listen to each episode of Judging Sam The Trial of Sam Bankman Freed ad free by becoming a Pushkin Plus subscriber, and with your subscription you'll also get exclusive access to ad free and early bingeable podcasts like Paul McCartney's new podcast, McCartney A Life and Lyrics, Malcolm Gladwell's Revision Is History, The Happiness Lab from Doctor Lorie Santos,
and tons of other top shows from Pushkin. Sign up an Apple Podcasts or at Pushkin, dot fm, Slash Plus. Welcome to the first episode of Judging Sam, The Trial of Sam Bankman Freed. I'm Michael Lewis. Sam was worth tens of billions of dollars before FTX his cryptocurrency exchange came a part at the seams, and now he's being tried for financial crimes. They could send him to prison for the rest of his life. In this special series, we're following the trial that will decide Sam's fate. We'll
have a reporter in the courtroom each day. We'll have expert interviews and I'll be analyzing it all as someone who knows this story as well as anyone knows the story. I spent a year and a half following Sam while I was reporting and writing a book about him. I was there for the good days, which were astronomically good, and I was there for the catastrophic collapse. While Sam was on house arrest, I visited him often. That's all in my new book about Sam, going Infinite, The Rise
and Fall of a New Tycoon. On today's episode, while we wait for the trial to begin, I'm talking with Pushkins Jacob Weisberg about the book and trying to approach some of the questions you might be asking, like who was this rumpled guy in cargo shorts and limp white socks whose eyes twitch to cross zoom meetings as he played video games on the side. When did I start
sensing that there might be trouble in the penthouse? And how and why did he end up where he is now as the defendant and what could well be the crypto trial of the century. Thanks for joining us.
Hey, Michael, Welcome to your new show.
Pleasure to be here, Jacob.
I've got a lot that I want to ask you about this book. It was so fun to read Michael. For people who haven't read the book yet, this trial is about to start. Tell them who is Sam Bankman Freed.
Born to Stanford professors, law professors, grew up completely isolated, essentially no one could serve as a character reference. Before the age of eighteen, finds his calling on Wall Street as a high frequency trader, discovers he has these gifts
that he didn't know he had. At the same time, discovers this movement effective altruism, devoted to like earning as much money as possible to save as many lives on the planet as you can say, and then goes off on a jag into crypto to make as much money as he can to fulfill this ambition. After he goes into crypto, starts first a hedge fund called Alimeter Research, and then so he has a place to trade that's worthy of his hedge fund, a crypto exchange called FTX.
In very short order, it goes from being nothing to worth forty billion dollars in the eyes of America's venture capitalist, and then it explodes.
I want to ask you a little bit about how you found this story. How did you end up writing a book about Sam Bang and Free.
So it was purely accidental. Two years ago, a friend of mine calls me and says, I have a problem. I'm about to swap three hundred million dollars in shares in my company for shares in this company called FTX. And he says, I've kind of looked into the company. It's fastest growing financial firm I've ever seen. And my problem is, I don't know who this guy is who created FTX. I don't I don't have a read on him, and I've called all Wall Street and no one else
has a read on him. Forbes has listed his net worth of twenty two and a half billion dollars, but he didn't exist a year ago. He kind of came out of nowhere. He said, could you sit down with him and just tell me who he is? You know, you do this for a living. And so a couple of weeks later, Sam Beckmanfried showed up at my office in Berkeley and we went for a long walk. And at the end of the long walk I did two things. I called my friend and I said, sure, swap the shares.
What could go wrong? Weo, yeah, pullips. But I turned to Sam and I said, I've never heard a story like this. I mean, what has happened to you is just extraordinary. I want to watch. Can I be a fly on the wall? And he said yes, And I just moved into his life starting September October of twenty twenty one and watched the ride up and watched the
ride down. But the first year of it really was it was Although the material was fantastic, there was no question there was like the kind of material one would use for a narrative work of narrative nonfiction. I felt very uncomfor starting it unless I knew where it ended, and it was so volatile, I had no idea like where it was going, and so it wasn't until it actually collapsed that I realized that I had the shape of a book, and didn't start writing it until January this year.
The Michael Lewis I know doesn't like to write about people who were that famous, and doesn't like to write about the stories that everyone else is writing about. When you started on n FTX, it was a lot less of a story than it became, but it was still he was on the radar screen of everybody in the financial world. He was quickly becoming mister crypto. Did you just decide what the hell this is too good to miss?
Yeah? And I also I instantly had such privileged access, and I was seeing so much stuff that wasn't out there that that didn't worry me that much. And the nature of the coverage he was getting was so superficial that whatever book I would write was suffering only flesh wounds. And I was animated by like the original question my friend had asked, like who is this guy? And I didn't feel like anybody was kind of getting him on the page or on the screen, or that there was
a thing to do that nobody was doing. But I was frustrated because because I did have this sense that this is going somewhere, and I don't know where it's going. I mean as late as like in early November of last year, moments before it all implodes, I sat down with a friend who I used as sort of a sounding board for story problems, and I laid it out. I said, Look, this is the character, this is the kind of material that's been incoming. It's an incredible story.
But I'm frustrated. He said, I can see why you're frustrated. You don't have a third act. He said, in a book, you can dance your way out of this, that you can kind of fool the reader into thinking you have an ending. But it's no movie, you know, like you would never be a movie. And he said, you ought to think about that. And two days later FTX collapsed and I said, this is the best movie ever.
But you didn't know what the story was going to be. I mean, with hindsight, I'm sure there's a lot of temptation to think I saw the signs. I saw this coming. You knew something would happen. But at one point, if at any point before the collapse, did you think there's a problem here, something bad's going to happen.
I didn't, you know. Before the collapse, what I could see was chaos, like all the order to the organization was inside Sam's head. There was no organization chart, there was no list of employees. It was just like there had been a history in the place of minor crises, and they'd been in particular an episode that had occurred that I had sort of reported out, and I knew
it was an important part of the story. When he started his hedge fund, it was called Alometer research in Berkeley in twenty eighteen, there was nothing but a group of effective altruists, you know, its people he had recruited who were not money people. Three months in, they've they've raised one hundred and seventy five million dollars from effective altruists and are wheeling and dealing in the crypto markets.
And half the people in the firm realize that they've lost track of all the money, that it's like missing and they don't know where it is is and like literally just gone and and so and so and Sam all he wants to do is trade all day, and he says, and he's saying, let's not let's not waste our time trying to track down the money. It's out there somewhere. Uh, let's let's keep trading. And this results in a collapse basically that they call it the schism.
Half the firm gets up and leaves because they're afraid he's essentially stealing the money and that it's all it's And well, it emerges in the back end of it that he hadn't stolen money, that was in fact just missing and they were able to go find it on a kind of easter egg hunt. Uh, but uh so there were these sort of things that had happened before that you could see that the seeds were there for some problem. But did I know that there was like
this was going to blow up the way it blew up. No, and no one else did either.
And pause for a second, just because it's so important to the story, explain what effective at altruism is.
Because this is a this is a.
Strange it's a motive for making money. You gonna make money to give it away.
It was a movement. It's a movement that grew out of the work of the philosopher Peter Singer, and it was started by several young Oxford philosophers and right after the financial crisis. Oddly. The premise is that you look at philanthropy rather than just willy nilly do good in the world. You analyze it. You try to measure the effects of what you're doing and quantify it and look
at it as a mathematical problem. And the mathematical problem you're trying to solve is, in the end, how do you maximize with your altruism the number of quality life years of human beings? Is that's where they end up.
And so that once it becomes a math problem. It attracts lots of Mathew people, but it pretty quickly collides with the observation that humanity faces various existential risks and artificial intelligence running amock pandemics or climate change or nuclear war, and that these risks risk actually wiping out all future human beings, and that the trillions of people and if there's even a slight probability of that happening, anything you do to reduce that risk ends up saving far more
lives than you could ever save by addressing the problems of people living on the planet today. And so by the time Sam gets to it, it's already moving in that direction, and the effective altruists who gather in Berkeley to create a crypto hedge fund are all in their
minds generating money in order to mitigate existential risk to humanity. Sam, who himself has a two or three year background on Wall Street and trading, has proposed this to a whole bunch of people who have no background in trading, that we're going to gather together, we're going to exploit the inefficiencies in crypto to make billions of dollars to give it away to prevent I don't know the next pandemic or a pandemic that would wipe out all people, and they're all in on this.
Yeah, So your character Sam Bankman Freed tells you I have a motivation. My motivation is effective altruism. It's to make as much money as possible and use it as efficiently as possible to better humanity.
Not to save humanity, to save.
Humanity even more. Did you buy that? Did you think, Okay, that's that's pretty interesting, it's pretty unusual and that's what he's trying to do, or did you think there might be a different or more complicated motivation.
Well, in the first place, when he collides with the effect of altrue as a movement, when he is a junior in college and is swept up in it, it's all sincere and he becomes he becomes a proselytizer for this movement. His identity is all wrapped up in being the most important person in this movement, and he had a sense of himself being special because of this movement. So when he says I'm doing it for this reason, he thinks that's true. He's not. He's not just saying that,
but to try to trick you. So I bought it to that extent, and it was really interesting. I mean, I had had in the past collided with some of the early people who had who had heard the siren song, people who might have ended up being I don't know, math teachers in high school are doctors. Had instead thought, well, I need to earn to give because I buy this argument, and I'm going to go to Wall Street to give the money away. So I had met the kind of
people before, and it was kind of refreshing. Right, There is a certain sense to it. If someone's going to be earning this money, might as well be someone who's going to do something good with it, rather than someone who's going to build themselves a bigger swimming pool. And I was charmed by his single mindedness. I thought that was interesting. But mixed up in it all, of course, is a sense of ambition that he wanted to think of himself as an important person, and this was a
mechanism for thinking of himself as an important person. He liked sort of like living his life by argument. You could change Sam bankman Fried's mind. It didn't happen very often, but when it happened to happen by argument, and he would just buy. He would do things that were very uncomfortable for him simply because he heard an argument that persuaded him when he was in college a year the
argument about animal suffering and veganism. And this guy really liked his chicken, you know, and he stopped eating meat on a dime because he bought the argument. And it was miserable, but he did it, so he was capable of that kind of action.
He still world's most unhealthy looking vegan.
Right, Oh my god, you think vegan means healthy vegans means a truckload of crappy snacks. If you leave him in a prison with only a vending machine d from he's fine because that's kind of what he eats anyway.
So how did your view of him evolve during the period you were working on the book? And you spent all this time with him, You spend all the time with his family, You spend time with all these people of the company. I mean, this is the cast of characters we're going to meet at the trial, and a number of these people are now testifying against him on behalf of the government. Did your understanding of him change while you were working on it?
What accreed it. Over time was just a sense of how peculiar he was. The longer I was there, the depth of his oddness just increased. I give you an example. In the first trip we took together, I went to the Super Bowl with him. I went to Los Angeles for a bunch of parties and meetings in the super Bowl, and we were in a hotel together, and he went into his room and I went in my room, and I thought, well, he's just like normal people living in
his hotel room. It was two trips later when I realized that what he would do is check into the hotel room and never stay there because he was uncomfortable sleeping alone. And he would find someone's sofa that he knew to sleep on, or sometimes crawl into some some colleagues hotel room to sleep on their sofa rather than in his own room. That kind of thing happened over and over where like he just Oh my god, I thought, I knew how unusual, odd peculiar he was, and he
just gets there's just there's something. There's another door I need to open here. I tell you another thing. This is going to sound very peculiar. I became kind of awed by how almost incapable he was of lying to me, of just that that everything he said would check out. Now, what he would do is not answer things I asked in very crafty way. Sometimes I would ask something and he'd give me answer to a slightly different question. But I over time I came to be able to rely
on him more than I did in the beginning. First, with the things he were telling me, I thought were preposterous, that this can't be true, that can't be true, And it all checked out, and it kept checking out. You know,
there were things that weren't immediately apparent. That the more I was there struck me as just kind of I mean, just peculiar and shocking the fact that the way he had almost systematically removed anybody over about the age of thirty two from his life, that the way he had come to kind of disdain any kind of grown up supervision and grown up methods that he disdains the wrong word. He would start, So, you think you start a company,
and you've never run a company, you never run anything. Basically, you would think you, I don't know, take a management class, read a book. And he kind of flipped through a few things and decided this is all bullshit, and you're just gonna have to make it up as I go along. And to get yourself in a position where you have an almost five hundred person company and nobody knows where they are in the company because there's no org chart and he doesn't like titles and there's not even a
list of employees. That kind of stuff just that you stumble upon. That the lack of order, because he didn't have much respect for the way people had conventionally ordered things that you know, I would run into versions of that. One last thing that his attitude towards risk. He had an appetite for risk that at first I thought was
kind of funny. And then you know, he's like you're in a game of chicken, and then you realize you don't want to be playing chicken against this person because he actually will do the things that most people won't do. Watch out, because he will actually do it. Like, you know, he says he's going to go spend a billion dollars to buy that, and you think, no, he's just saying that, No, we actually will go do it. But it was just this took a while for me to appreciate who he was.
Yeah, I mean, reading the book Weird doesn't begin to do justice to it. This is someone who is a very hard time relating to people, said very few friends, is much more at home in the world of numbers and data. I mean, nothing about him is like anyone else we would see in a position running a company
and dealing with other human beings. Right, So, if he's a kind of genius but he's not good at running a company because he can't deal with people, why doesn't he get someone else to run the company and he can do what he's good at.
So I don't think he knew he wasn't good at running a company. I think he thought basically, people shouldn't need to be managed, and so it was their problem as a practical matter. What ends up happening is the messy business of managing people gets subcontracted to people who've got a little bit of emotional intelligence, including his own psychiatrist who he brings in to be the corporate psychiatrist, who ends up dealing with a lot of the messy problems.
So what happens is his organization. After Sam's insistence that he really should be the one in charge, the organization adaptsed to it in various bizarre ways.
They had like a chief mental health officer.
No titles in the company, but yes, effectively they did. You know, I think that in almost any other era it would have occurred to no one to put Sam bankmanfreed in the financial markets, but would happened in the financial markets over the last fifteen years where they become automated and run by people who were really good with math and computers and who were not being filtered for
their social skills or lack thereof. And his aptitude with a certain aspect of markets led him to be in this very odd position of running a company when he's almost singularly incapable of running a company, and he could at some things, but the whole human thing and quite light in my relationship, I dug into his childhood and I could not believe how isolated it was, like just know, it was beyond I mean, it isn't just he didn't have close friends, like he had nobody, and that he
really just kind of lived on his own and was sorting out the world all by himself. How many people do you know when you say to them, could you give me the names of two or three people who could describe for me how you were up to the age of eighteen, looks at you and says, there's nobody you know. You know, this is had to be somebody, right, there are people who had written in college recommendations. He'd gone to school with a bunch of people. He'd you know,
had parents and a brother. There had to be somebody who would actually be able to it's some character reference, right, There was none. He said that he had all kinds of problems and relating to other people and in particularly communicating his inner state to other people, like any kind of interaction he had had with other people was a calculated exercise. It was something he had to had to
calibrate in order for it to work. The idea that such a person was running a four hundred and fifty person company, I mean, that was odd.
After I finished reading, you asked me how I felt about him, and I think my reaction was, I feel really sorry for this guy because he had such an isolated and seemed like fundamentally unhappy childhood, had so much trouble dealing with people. And then he constructed this world, which is sort of an abstract world that worked for him, but it catastrophically and quickly fell apart.
There is a feeling to him that there was this brief moment where he was able to impose on the real world an abstract notion of the way the world might work or should work, and the real world sort of mimicked his mental model for a brief period, and it all worked, but the mental model was missing all kinds of stuff that actually is in the real world, and the real world finally kind of took.
Over, And both the EA and the crypto contribute to that. I mean, crypto is utopianism about money and finance.
You know, it's Another important part of his story is his indifference to sort of crypto religion. That he saw crypto purely as a mechanism for making money for effective altruism. He wasn't particularly interested in crypto.
The biggest person in crypto was not a crypto true believer, just the opposite.
He was very wary of the crypto religionists, and he knew he couldn't say what he thought because it would get him in trouble with his market. But he was he was there to use it. He wasn't there because he thought it was going to change the world as we knew it. He knew that had some capacity to do some things, but it wasn't that big a deal. There was an inefficient market. That's what drew him into it in the first place. Yeah, I asked you what you thought of him, because you know, you write a
book and you never know this is it. I think this is a This is maybe the most powerful case of this in my literary career. I've always known since my first book that you never know what a reader is going to read that You write what you write, You tell a story. The story inevitably has holes the reader walks into and sort of makes it its own or interprets it them. It's the way they want to interpret it, but you never know what that's going to
be until the book comes out. I feel more about this book that way than I've felt with any book that I don't know how people are going to react to Sam Bankman Freed when they see who he really is, whether they're going to feel sorry for him, whether they're going to be rooting for him, whether they're going to
hate him. I don't have a great sense. Everybody's trying to figure out who he is, and they are all these kind of snap judgments being rendered on the way up and on the way down, and I just felt like I did feel that this is a problem just generally, that the radical thing to do here was do with whole judgment, to not impose whatever judgment I might have on the reader. Let the reader make his or her own judgment. We'll be right back, Welcome back to judging Sam. The trial of Sam bankman Freed.
As with any financial catastrophe, they're real victims here. How bad should we feel for them? Are crypto speculators or they're kind of real people who lost their life savings who have a really really good reason to be super angry at Sam bankmintrude.
Well, let me give you just my sense of who they are. In the first place, most of them are not Americans. I mean most of the Americans weren't allowed to trade on FTX International, and the vast majority of the millions of accounts that they opened were outside of the United States. Next, when you look at the list I got ahold of the list of the fifty biggest creditors, it was a lot of institutional money. So you had the top thirty creditors, or most of them are like
high frequency traders. But no doubt there are lots of little people who thought this is the most trustworthy crypto exchange, and they put their savings on them. And interestingly, and I think this is like a really relevant point, among those people were the employees of FTX, the people who were most all in. If you want to find the person who lost everything, just go down the list employees at FTX.
There's at the trial we're going to see in part a classic drama of loyalty and betrayal. The people at the company who are closest to him are now betraying each other, trying to cop please make deals with the government. Caroline Ellison, who ran Alameda, who was romantically involved with him, Ryan Salem, and Gary Wang, these people who are the closest people to him at FTX are now presumably judging him very negatively. What happened to that web of personal relationships.
Why is everyone who was with him now against him?
It's a great question. It's unclear to me exactly what everybody's going to say. I'm in an odd position, and in a position that neither the defense attorneys nor the prosecutors are in, and then I've interviewed everybody. Yeah, you know, the prosecutors haven't talked to Sam Magunfried, and the defense people aren't able to talk to the shot or Gary
or Caroline or other witnesses. And even after the collapse, I've had access to both sides, not everybody on the prosecutor side, but people who I know were the prosecutors intend to bring and who the prosecutors think are going to get up and say X or why. I know. I know that even some of those people, if you put a gun to their head and said like, did he do it? Might say no. However, on the inside the Four Principles, Sam and the first three people to
turn against him, Gary Wang, Mishad Singing, Caroline Ellison. The minute it all collapsed, there was a several beat sort of drama that unfolded. First was, willis get someone to buy us? This is not that big a problem. Second, Oh, we got to quickly find all this money that is, we don't know where it is, which is reminiscent of what had happened three four years earlier at Alameda. And third was we can't get the money in time. Flee and they all and everybody you know, they're all basically
twenty nine years old. They all ran to their parents.
I remember you calling me from the Bahamas and saying, it's like there's a hurricane coming. Everyone's left. Sam's still here, his parents are here. I'm still here. And it's like people like ran out of their hotel rooms and didn't close the door.
They grabbed. There were seventy company cars. They drove them to the airport and left him in the parking lot with the keys, oh you know, the engine still running kind of thing. And everybody's afraid they were going to get arrested wherever they were. And I mean, I can't remember the last Has there ever been a financial crisis where all the perpetrators ran to their Paris home. I don't think that's what they do. Did Michael Milkin run
to his parents home? I don't think so. Right, So they all ran to their parents home, and all of a sudden, for the first time, the grown ups are involved, the parents. They're going turning to their parents. What do we do now?
In this pre trial period, I've wanted to say to Sam Bankman, free too. I've never met. Stop digging, keeps talking to the press, kept going on social media, kept talking to you, which I don't know how much of the problem that was, but he somehow couldn't take what would seem like the obvious lawyer's advice when you're going to go on trial. Why is that? Is he naive? Hubristic? Is there a strategy there, like it is going to be fought partly in the court of public opinion and
he has to get his side out. Why did he get himself in additional trouble.
When the Bahamas police came to arrest him. He was in Gary Wang's bathroom trying to send in his testimony to Congress. He was trying to speak to the American people even as they hauled him away in chains. So I think there's several things going on at once. I think, for a start, if you or I were in this situation, we'd be terrified, and we'd be looking for an expert to help us. We'd be looking to the lawyer to tell us what to do. I think that's what most
people in this situation would do. Sam's whole life has been looking at the experts, finding the morning and trying to figure out the expertise for himself, sometimes with great success, to not actually trust what some experts saying instead, rethink it for yourself. It was really smart to not less to his superiors at Jane Street who were telling him you're not gonna make as much money and crypto as
you wouldn't Jane Street. The markets are thinner, whatever they were saying, and just ignore that and did it anyway. So he starts with like, I don't listen to lawyers, which is funny because his parents are both lawyers.
Right right, Well, they may have something you do it.
It may have something to do with it. So the second thing is add to this total conviction that he is innocent. Now you have to imagine he really thinks he's innocent. Yeah, all right, you got it. You've got to believe that whether you believe he's innocent or not,
you've got to believe he believes he's innocent. Okay. Third is he's aware that what's going on out there is a narrative war, and there is one narrative being told, and the narratives is relentlessly negative towards him, and then that maybe he can change the narrative if he's out there and actually speaking. It's a story war. There are two stories. Get cold. The defense is going to tell one story. The prosecutor is going to tell another story.
Each side is going to manipulate the facts in certain ways. Each side is going to leave stuff out that they shouldn't leave out, that you can't leave out if you can tell this story honestly. So each side is going to be telling essentially a slightly false story, and then the jury's going to decide whose story is better judging. Sam will be right back. Welcome back. So we're back with one last thing. And so, Jacob, you we have had this conversation. Is there anything else you'd like to
ask me? Well?
Sure, give us the insider's guide to the trial. What's the thing people should be looking for that you're looking for that they might not know about otherwise.
One of the three key witnesses, Gary Wang, does not speak. He actually, when you actually try to talk to her and interview him, he just stares at you. I've never had this experience with a potential source. People sat next to him for months and gotten out a word out of him. I want to see what happens when he's put on a witness stand.
So not a great interview, not a great witness.
It may be the most unusual moment in a court room in American history?
Can he win a trial? I mean, the baseline is the government wins most of the cases it brings. The odds are stacked against him, but he's not taking a plea. He's taking his chances. But even if there were a hung jury in the first trial, they could try them again, and they're holding back other charges and it could be tried other places. I mean, is there any outcome for Sam Bankman freed other than basically spending years and years, if not the rest of his life in prison.
Last year I saw these stats not long ago. Last year there were like seventy thousand criminal cases brought by the federal government and the rate of acquittal was less than half of one percent.
So there are worse than I thought, worse.
Than you thought. No, it is the odds are so stacked against you if the Feds bring an actual criminal case against you. If you're asking what my intuitive judgment is about Sam's the likely Sam is acquitted, I think the if you went on too the betting markets, you probably get if you wanted to bet he's gonna get off. I think you get like ninety to one odds. I think that's about what the betting markets were the last
time I looked. I'd certainly take those odds. I might even take like thirty to one, but I don't think i'd take better than that or worse than that. The odds are really stacked against him. I think his chances are better than the markets think.
Huh, I do?
I do. I think that better than the markets think, but I don't think they're great.
It's a very Sam Bankman freed way to addalyze make the bet and ether or bitcoin.
Yeah.
Yeah, Michael, it's really fun talking to you, and I'm really glad to be able to tee up this podcast with you. Can't wait to see what happens next.
Tomorrow I'll sit down with producer and reporter Lydia Jean Kott, and former prosecutor Rebecca Mermelstein, now a defense attorney to talk about the charges against Sam and how his lawyers might defend him. Then, Lydia, Gene and I will give you a first hand report of what happened on trial day one. Join us. This episode of Judging Sam was hosted by me, Michael Lewis. Lydia Gencott is our court reporter Katherine Girardeau and Nisha Venken produced this show. Sophie
Crane is our editor. Our music was composed by Matthias Bossi and John Evans of stell Wagons. Symphonet Judging Sam is a production of Pushkin Industries. Got a question or comment for me, There's a website for that atr podcast dot com. That's atr podcast dot com. To find more Pushkin podcasts, listen on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or
wherever you listen to your podcasts. If you'd like to access bonus episodes and listen ad free, don't forget to sign up for a Pushkin Plus subscription at pushkin dot fm, slash plus, or on our Apple show page