Original subtitles

Bye.

Welcome to the show, still for just three more weeks, taking place in this

blank void, which I've recently learned is sentient. It's been listening a lot

to me for the last year and a half, so I thought I would give it the floor for a

moment. Void, is there anything you would like to say?

Uh, really?

I can say whatever I want? Yeah, sure. Go ahead. Speak your mind.

Okay. Uh, wow.

Um, oh, I wish Chris Pratt wasn't trying to make the action hero thing stick, you

know? Uh-huh.

It's his career. He can do whatever he wants with it. I mean, I just feel like,

you know, the buff thing, it's not working for me.

Okay, I've got to be honest, I thought you'd be more interesting than this.

Excuse me?

You ask someone on your show and tell them to say whatever they want, they can

say whatever they want, and then you tell them they're not interesting.

Okay. Who does that? What kind of monster does that? That is fair.

You know what? I see why you stopped having guests on in season one.

Moving on. It's been a big... You're not a nice person. Moving on.

It's been a busy week. Tucker Carlson celebrated International Authoritarian

Appreciation Week by doing a road show in Hungary.

OJ Simpson urged people to get vaccinated, putting me in the strange

position of saying, I'm with OJ.

And New York's AG released a devastating report of his investigation into

allegations of sexual harassment by Andrew Cuomo, which, incredibly, he's

trying to ride out, issuing a video in which he tried to deny or downplay the

accusations. I do kiss people on the forehead.

I do kiss people on the cheek.

I do kiss people on the hand.

I do embrace people.

I do hug people.

Men and women.

Okay. But that's not what this is about.

And it's frankly incredible that Cuomo thought releasing an irrelevant montage

of photos would somehow exonerate him. Apparently, a strategy for literally any

crisis is put together a PowerPoint and that's it.

But the rest of the world's attention was dominated this week by the Olympics.

They ended tonight and they provided some incredible moments from the

athletes, but also some controversy from the fact that the games were even

happening in the first place in the middle of a pandemic, to a decision

taken before they began regarding one of the teams involved.

In other Olympic news this morning, Russia is competing under a new name at

these Olympics following their doping scandal.

They'll be competing as the Russian Olympic Committee.

The Russian name, flag and anthem have all been banned if athletes do win any

medals. Yeah, though the Russian name isn't really banned if they're competing

as the Russian Olympic Committee, is it? It's like saying a monster like Harvey

Weinstein has absolutely no affiliation with the Weinstein Company.

I don't know about that. The name there really does imply otherwise.

This new designation is due to the fact that Russia was technically banned for

operating a years-long state-sponsored doping scheme.

And this isn't the first time they've been sanctioned. In Pyeongchang in 2018,

Russian athletes had to compete under this neutral banner instead of their

flag. But before Tokyo, the punishment was downgraded and they were allowed to

compete as the Russian Olympic Committee with uniforms that clearly bear more

than the passing resemblance to the Russian flag.

We all know what is going on there in the... in the same way that calling this

a red plumber Halloween costume isn't fooling anyone.

And while winning Russian athletes didn't get to hear their national anthem

on the medal stand, they did get this.

Yeah, they got Tchaikovsky.

That is more Russian than the Russian national anthem.

In fact, there is no sound more quintessentially Russian aside from

maybe an old man weeping uncontrollably while eating a potato.

If anything, it seems Russia embraced the ROC designation during these games

with the official at Russia Twitter account even running a campaign using

the hashtag WeWillRockYou. And you don't get to use rock as a fun, sassy name.

That was supposed to be your punishment.

It's like if Hannibal Lecter started tweeting, hashtag muzzle me, daddy.

No! You eat people. You don't get to reclaim the muzzle.

The thing is, these designations were put in place for a reason, but that

reason is not something the ROC has been eager to acknowledge.

After a US swimmer initially suggested his race was probably not clean, the

ROC, whose athlete had won that race, responded aggressively.

The Russian Olympic Committee have responded via a strongly worded

statement on Twitter, which says, in part, how unnerving our victories are

for some. Yes, we are here at the Olympics absolutely right, whether

people like it or not.

Wow. That is a hard pushback. And the ROC was very much not done calling the

complaint, English language propaganda, oozing verbal sweat in the Tokyo heat,

which is undeniably poetic.

Oozing verbal sweat in the Tokyo heat. Sounds less like Russian tough talk and

more like a line from A Streetcar Named Desire 2, Blanche Goes East.

It's pretty clear... that making Russia compete under the supposedly neutral

flag and uniforms when neither the flag nor the uniforms were neutral means that

this punishment wasn't really a punishment at all.

So let's try and learn from this. And next time this problem arises, let's

make sure banned countries have a much clearer asterisk on their participation.

So instead of an obviously flagged themed tracksuit, let's put them in a

Shrek themed sweatshirt paired with shit emoji slippers and a lobster hat.

Something like this. See? Now that is a neutral look right there.

Good luck guessing what nation that athlete's competing for from that

outfit. And when their athletes win gold, don't give them something...

inspires national pride like Tchaikovsky. Instead, play something

awful that is guaranteed to stick in your head and remind you that something

objectionable has happened. May I suggest this?

Now,

I know

that's harsh, but let's agree, it is the ultimate deterrent. And now, this.

And now, the electrifying small talk of San Antonio's Daytime with Kimberly and

Esteban.

Daytime with Kimberly and Esteban starts now.

Good morning, friends. Welcome to Daytime. It's Monday. It is Monday.

Holla! For reals. Welcome to Daytime. It is Wednesday, February 10th, you guys.

Hello. How was your weekend?

It was good.

Busy, but good.

Okay. How are you? I'm good. I am good. How about yourself? Good.

Doing good. How are you?

I'm good. Chilling. Good.

Good to hear. Another day.

What is up?

I don't know. Have you ever wondered how smart your dog is?

Like. Yeah.

They're airing movies. Yeah. Movies that you can't necessarily see at the

theater. Motion pictures and stuff. Yeah. We are ready. We are in the

spirit. Yep. We are. This is one of my favorite shows that we do every single

year.

I think it's fun.

Good morning. How are you doing? Good. Doing good.

Yeah? Doing real good.

All right. How are you doing?

Good. Not a lot has changed since yesterday, so still doing good. Twilight

zone. Yep. Good morning.

How are you doing? Other than just really good. Again, good.

Cool. Cool.

Moving on. Our main story tonight concerns a public health crisis that's

exposed the failure of American institutions.

No, not that one.

Not that one either.

That's a good point, but not actually this time. Yep, there it is, the opioid

epidemic. And if you're thinking, hold on, didn't you already do a show about

this? You're wrong. We've actually done two of them. But we thought it would be

worth doing a third installment tonight anyway, for a couple of reasons. First,

it's an epidemic that's still very much raging, exacerbated by both the pandemic

and illicit fentanyl, to the point that, last year, nearly 70,000 people died

from opioid overdoses. That is the highest annual death toll ever.

And second, you may have seen a bunch of headlines recently about trials and

settlements taking place around the country. There have been so many of

them, it can genuinely be hard to keep track.

But we want to focus on just one company tonight, Purdue Pharma. whose rollout of

OxyContin arguably fueled the opioid crisis.

We have talked about their relentless push to sell OxyContin before, but more

material has come out in the last couple of years, including this spectacular

glimpse into a 1997 motivational sales meeting for the company's drug reps.

That was Purdue's VP of sales performing an Oxy-themed cover of Shout.

And that has got to be one of the most upsetting decisions from the late 90s

right up there with give every lonely child an electronic imaginary friend

that will immediately die and let's set every sitcom in New York City and make

sure the Twin Towers are prominently featured in the transition shots. Really

reminds people they're there.

Purdue Pharma is owned by the Sackler family. And in recent years, Purdue and

the Sacklers have found themselves being investigated by the DOJ and facing

thousands of lawsuits filed by state and local governments, Native American

tribes, hospitals, and individuals.

And they have spent years working with an army of lawyers attempting to

negotiate their way out of all of it, which resulted in two major resolutions,

including this big news from last October.

It's being hailed by the federal government as a major victory against a

company whose drug, OxyContin, is part of the public health crisis of opioid

addiction that has led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans.

The maker of OxyContin admitted to defrauding regulators and paying illegal

kickbacks to doctors.

It's true, Purdue has pled guilty to multiple felonies. And it is weird to

hear news that sounds so genuinely good.

It'd be really nice to get more of that once in a while, like no once in a

century weather events for the next few hours, or billionaire goes to space and

dies there.

You know, something heartwarming.

That guilty plea was actually part of a much larger plan that we'll get into

later, involving the company also filing for bankruptcy... and just this past

March, submitting a reorganization plan that would end Sackler ownership. And

the thing is, this might all sound like a major victory, that the Sacklers are

finally experiencing significant consequences.

But unfortunately, that could not be farther from the truth. So tonight, with

the bankruptcies confirmation hearing scheduled to begin later this week...

Let's talk about the Sackler family, how hard they've been fighting to defend

their name, the details of the deal that they're attempting to strike, and why

the whole thing is a bunch of bullshit.

And let's start with a basic question.

Who are... The Sacklers. Well, the Sacklers are the descendants of three

brothers, Arthur, Raymond, and Mortimer, who in 1952 bought the company that

would eventually become Purdue Pharma. And while Arthur's branch of the family

sold their stake decades ago before OxyContin was developed, the heirs of

Raymond and Mortimer both benefited from, and in some cases, actively

managed Purdue's boom years of selling opioids.

Many Sacklers either worked at the company or served on its board.

And at the Massachusetts A- points out some of them were pretty hands-on. They

were in the boardroom. They owned the company.

We have emails and memos that show the direct control that they exercised over

sales and marketing.

One of the Sackler family members went so far as to want to get in the car with

Purdue sales reps and drive around to visit doctors' offices.

It's true.

And doing a drug rep ride-along is about as hands-on as you can get. And quick

side note there, just spare a thought for the sales rep in question. Because

sure, they too contributed to the overprescription of America and probably

led to their own local mini epidemic.

But nobody, not even Hitler, should have to sit in a car with their boss and talk

about what exactly?

The weather? And then when you run out of things to say about it, do what? Sit

in silence?

And then say, actually, I could go for a bathroom break right now and have him

say, I'm fine, but feel free to stop.

And then what? You stop, and he waits in the car?

And then when you get back, he looks inconvenienced? I would sooner throw

myself out of the car in the middle of the freeway.

Now, the man responsible for that ride-along was Richard Sackler, who was

actually president of the company for years.

And yet, interestingly, it is hard to find images of him other than that one.

In fact, while the Sacklers have relished slapping their family name on

institutions, as individuals, they have tried to stay out of the spotlight.

When Richard Sackler gave a deposition in 2015, Perdue fought hard to keep it

private. That is why, in our last piece, we had a bunch of actors play him to

convey important things, like the fact that he'd said, I don't know, more than

a hundred times.

Now, thankfully, that deposition has since been released, so you can finally

watch the man in action.

How much money has Purdue Frederick or Purdue Pharma made off the sale of

OxyContin? I don't know. I don't know. I don't know the answer. I don't know. I

don't know.

But... I just don't know.

Admit it. The guy just oozes charisma.

Although, honestly, having actually seen it, I think I prefer the version that we

made. How much money has Purdue Frederick or Purdue Pharma made off the

sale of OxyContin? I don't know.

I don't know. I don't know. I don't know.

I don't know. How many Purdue entities are there? I don't know.

Yep, that is just objectively better.

Now, while Richard was the most involved, he was not alone.

his cousin Kathy Sackler was an officer of the company for years and even

claimed in emails that developing OxyContin was her idea.

Although, despite that fact, when Kathy was called before Congress last year and

asked to apologize for her role in the opioid crisis, she didn't exactly do

that. I have tried to figure out, was... Is there anything that I could have done

differently knowing what I knew then, not what I know now?

And...

I have to say, I can't, there's nothing that I can find that I would have done

differently. Okay.

First, that is definitely not an apology, Cathy. And second, come on.

Nearly a year into a pandemic, that is just an unacceptable at-home setup.

Put your laptop on a couple of books, upgrade your router, and while you're at

it, one-click a ring light. So, Cathy, that's books, router, ring light. It's

the little Zoom tricks that we've all learned that'll help you look your best

as you absolve yourself of responsibility for a massive public

health crisis.

But the Sacklers haven't just been appearing at congressional hearings.

Some have been trying hard to rehabilitate their image and even paint

themselves as victims.

Take David Sackler. He's Richard's son and a former board member himself.

He gave an interview to Vanity Fair featuring this portrait, which, by the

way, looks like it should be a poster for natural family planning in a

Christian health clinic.

And in it, he complained, For

a

start, everyone knows that is not how four-year-olds talk.

You're missing eight ums, 15 and, and, ands, three times they're completely out

of breath for no reason, and five complete trail-offs. I call bullshit on

that whole fake anecdote.

But that is just the beginning.

David's branch of the family... was also involved in the launch of a pro-Sackler

website that aims to correct the record called judgeforyourselves.info, which is

shocking for a number of reasons. First, because billionaires, for some reason,

chose not to splurge for the dot-com, but also because of just how petty the

website is.

It features a list of outlets that mistakenly used the brand's name

OxyContin when they meant the generic Oxycodone, including a college

newspaper. and over seven hours of video presentations in which a

catastrophically uncharismatic lawyer attempts to disprove every legal

argument ever made against the Sacklers and Perdue. This terrible website of

self-serving nonsense has been promoted by, among others, Joss Sackler. That is

David's wife, and you may remember her from her failure to face the camera in

Vanity Fair.

Now, even though Joss isn't directly involved in the family business, she

actually talks more publicly than most... She has a clothing line called

LBV, or Le Bulldog Vigneron, which translates to The Winemaking Bulldogs,

and is an offshoot of her members-only wine and social club.

Joss was also once interviewed for Town and Country, which she complained about

how unfairly the press treats both her and her family, noting that a previous

article wouldn't refer to her as Dr.

Joss Sackler, despite her telling them she had a PhD in linguistics, and going

on to say they're going to regret fucking with a linguist. And that is one

hell of a claim, Joss, because nobody is intimidated by linguists.

You're basically an English major who wasted more time. I'll fuck with a

linguist all day long. I'll show you. How do you make two proper nouns into a

double negative?

Joss and David.

Boom. Linguist fucked with.

So, to recap, it is pretty clear some sacklers have been working extremely

hard to try and engender public sympathy, but the real battle the

family's been fighting... has been a legal one. And that is what I want to

spend the rest of this piece talking about. Because while the details of what

the Sacklers are doing are incredibly complicated, the end result is both

simple and absolutely infuriating. And let's start with that deal you heard

about earlier, where Purdue pled guilty to three felonies. It sounded like some

good news, but there are some major asterisks there.

Because while the company pled guilty to those charges... No individuals did, and

certainly no Sacklers, and that alone is a big deal to them. In fact, just watch

as Cathy jumped to remind everyone of that fact during their congressional

hearing. The Sackler family, through Purdue, has three felony convictions,

but no one's in jail, and it has its billions still. Excuse me, the Sackler

family doesn't have a felony conviction.

Purdue Pharma has a felony conviction.

I'm an individual person.

Okay, hold on. I do get the point that she is making there, but the fact is,

Purdue is made up of individual people who control it.

Think of Purdue like Lamb Chop.

If Lamb Chop threatened to kill the president on live TV, Lamb Chop wouldn't

get in trouble or go to prison. Shari Lewis would. Why? Because Lamb Chop is a

puppet who does whatever the fuck Shari Lewis tells Lamb Chop to do.

Now, the Sacklers might argue that Purdue was controlled by many people,

including non-family members, and that while they're not facing criminal

charges, they are still facing consequences.

But here is the thing.

Are they?

Are they really?

And that brings us back to the bankruptcy that I mentioned earlier,

because the bankruptcy deal that Purdue has proposed is the vehicle through

which the Sacklers are likely to escape any true accountability.

Very basically, Purdue was buried in thousands of lawsuits, and rather than

fighting them all separately, the company filed for bankruptcy,

negotiating to resolve all of its debts in one place.

This proposed deal requires, among other things, the Sackler's relinquished

ownership of Purdue, which will be turned into a public benefit company

whose profits will go toward fighting the opioid epidemic.

Now, the company claims the bankruptcy will deliver more than $10 billion in

value, but a few things about that. First...

The Sacklers themselves are only contributing around 4.3 billion to that

settlement, which I know does sound like a lot until you learn the family has

assets of around 11 billion, which is a massive amount of money. But I guess

that is what happens when your company makes an addictive product and pushes

its employees to...

I just saw that ten minutes ago, and somehow, it's gotten even worse.

Now, also, you might want to know, regarding the Sackler family's net

worth, a fair amount of it was built up in a very particular period.

Because from 2008 to 2017, even as the opioid epidemic was kicking into high

gear, more than $10 billion was transferred out of the company for the

benefit of the family. Now, the Sacklers...

The DOJ did not fiercely maintain that those transfers were proper, but the DOJ

alleged that they were made to hinder future creditors. In other words, to get

the money out of the company so that the Sacklers could protect it. And they

found some pretty damning evidence, particularly from David Sackler.

who seemed to directly express fears over lawsuits taking the family money

back in 2007, writing in an email, And

David, buddy, don't send that kind of

thing over email.

I mean, don't send it in the mail-mail, don't speak it, don't think it, and

ideally, don't receive an upbringing that would plant the thought in your

mind, but bare minimum, keep it out of the permanent legal record.

And if you're thinking, well, okay, so they transferred money... to the family,

but people can still pursue claims against the Sacklers directly, right?

Well, no.

Because here is the really insidious part.

While there are approximately 400 civil suits that do name the Sacklers

themselves, the family is insisting that they will only agree to this settlement

if they get what is called a non-consensual third-party release.

And this thing is bullshit.

Because if they get it... All current lawsuits against the Sacklers evaporate,

and no future lawsuits can be filed, meaning that the Sacklers, who didn't

file for personal bankruptcy themselves, remember, are basically off the hook.

And if it sounds weird to you that a company can declare bankruptcy, and then

a bunch of individuals get shielded from liability, that's because it is.

It's really fucking weird.

In fact, some bankruptcy courts don't allow these third-party releases at all,

but Purdue...

very carefully chose one that they knew probably would.

A few months before filing for bankruptcy, Purdue changed one of its

official corporate addresses to one in White Plains, New York, at which it's

never conducted business, and where there is only one bankruptcy judge who,

completely coincidentally, has supported third-party releases in the past, which

is all a pretty obvious tactic, isn't it? It's not like they moved to White

Plains for any other reason. If you look up... Things to do in White Plains. The

first result you get, and this is true, is a TripAdvisor page recommending a

helicopter tour of New York City, which is just incredible.

Come visit White Plains, where you can immediately leave and go look at

somewhere more interesting to live.

And the Sackler's third party release is comprehensive, stating that the released

parties shall be conclusively, absolutely, unconditionally,

irrevocably, fully, finally, forever, and permanently released from any and

all claims of any kind from the beginning of time.

And this is the list...

of every person and entity they want covered. It contains over 200 companies

and 200 more trusts where the Sacklers have tucked their money away.

This release is ludicrously broad, which is probably why the AGs of nine states

and D.C. are still objecting to it. And two branches of the D.O.J.

have said it violates the U.S. Constitution and specifically violates

due process because it deprives individuals of an opportunity to be

heard. And yet, incredibly, despite all of this, it is widely assumed that this

whole deal is going to go ahead.

And while it sounds completely terrible to me, I will say at least one person

thinks that it's actually a very good thing, although I will say that one

person is Purdue's current chairman.

This is a milestone in public health history. Never before have you seen this

amount of money, $10 million, being devoted to opioid abatement. And it's

only available through this plan.

assuming we can get it approved.

And I think when people think about it, they will come around to the notion,

well, I might have liked something slightly different, but this is

certainly a lot better than going into endless, costly litigation that may end

up with no proceeds going to anybody.

Okay, no.

I might have liked something different, but this is better than nothing. It's

what you say when your dad insists on having dinner at Chili's, not when

you're talking about the fate of a company that poisoned a generation.

which, incidentally, is, I believe, Chile's current slogan.

And here is the thing.

That man is not even entirely wrong.

The longer these lawsuits drag on, the more money will get wasted in court, and

an increasingly large percentage of it will go to lawyers rather than victims,

because right now, under this settlement, claimants could receive

payments from $3,500 to $48,000, which, yes, feels...

is wildly insufficient, but some families are reluctantly willing to take

what they can get.

Although I will say others, like this woman, whose son became addicted to

opioids after being prescribed OxyContin as a high school student, are furious

that this is what it's come to.

We want our voices heard, not interpreted by the court like they

have been.

I don't want somebody saying that I love... I'm so happy with the

settlement. as I hear at practically every hearing.

I'm a mom. I'm not happy with any of this.

And I know hundreds of moms that aren't either in families.

Exactly. For some families of victims, the opportunity to have their voices

heard is priceless. Which is to say, a fuck of a lot more than $48,000.

Some have even called into court, only to be told it wasn't the right forum.

One woman... called into the bankruptcy hearing and said, I lost my brother

tragically at the tip of the epidemic in 2012.

I would like to speak in memory of my brother.

To which the judge replied, I hold hearings on what is scheduled before me.

I don't think that this is the proper forum to do this. And the thing is, he

is right, but this also may be the last forum these families have to be heard.

Look, it might well be true.

that this is the best deal we can get under our current system, but the fact

that that's the case doesn't speak well to this deal, or indeed, the system

itself. And if you're thinking, well, the Sacklers are paying so much already,

what more do you want?

I'm not sure.

that is the right way to think about this. Because I would argue that when

your family's company recklessly sold a product as damaging as OxyContin, the

question might not be, how many billions is it right for you to pay?

It's, how many billions is it right for you to keep?

And I would argue, no billions.

And I'm afraid it somehow gets one step worse. Because the way this settlement

is structured, it's actually hurting the Sacklers even less than you might think.

That... $4.3 billion that they've agreed to pay is spread out over nine years,

with the largest payments coming toward the end of that period, which means they

could make that money up in interest and investments and never have to touch the

principal. In fact, when the Sacklers are done paying in 2030, they will

probably be richer than they are today.

So, I guess the answer to, we're rich for how long, is, oh, don't worry,

forever, David, because it seems that's how the fucking system works.

Unfortunately... When it comes to accountability for the Sacklers, this is

probably it.

Because while technically, they could still be criminally charged, nobody

expects that to happen. And it is just infuriating that things are set to end

so comfortably for a family that has made so much at the expense of so many.

Although I will say there is one tiny positive here, and that is that Purdue

and the Sacklers have always heavily valued secrecy. But this deal requires

the creation of an online public repository that will eventually contain

30 million documents, including deposition videos and the Sacklers

company's emails, which is undeniably a good thing. But even with that, let's

admit, we're not getting anything approaching justice here.

And the Sacklers, in sparing no expense, seem to have successfully bought their

way out of this problem.

Well, not no expense, because again, despite spending millions on lawyers and

even creating a website filled with legal propaganda, they still somehow

couldn't scrape up the $2,500 required to buy the dot-com for it. And the

reason I happen to know exactly how much it cost is because that is how much we

spent to buy it. It is true, we bought judgeforyourselves.com. And I know...

that it does absolutely nothing to even the scales here, but it does give me the

tiniest bit of comfort to imagine that it might irritate the Sacklers a bit to

know that when people go to that site in the future, this is what they're going

to see.

Hi, it's me, the real Richard Sackler.

Welcome to the premier source of information on the Sackler family that

you can find on the Internet.

It's called judgeforyourselves.com.

But you gotta get... The dot com.

What kind of fucking idiot would set up an important website

and not buy the dot com?

I don't know.

I don't know.

Anyway, if you want the truth, you've come to the right place.

So click around, okay? Get a sense of what my terrible family has done.

And, you know, maybe we'll throw in some makeup tidbits.

I don't know, maybe, uh, how to make a great pesto chicken.

Anyway, there's some great buttons that you press around, and, uh, you'll get

there somehow. Anyway, best of luck to you, all right?

Bye-bye.

Thank you, Richard Sackler.

This new website lets you judge for yourselves whether the Sacklers got off

too easy, which they absolutely did.

On it, you can see Richard Sackler's full deposition, all of our episodes

about the opioid crisis, and there is even a link that will eventually direct

you to the document repository the moment it is launched. Also, because the

families of those impacted by the Sacklers haven't always been heard,

there are some excerpts on the website of what some of them wanted to say. All

of this will be up as long as we own the domain. And this is at least something.

that the Sacklers cannot throw their dirty money at and make go away.

Which is not to say that it isn't for sale at all, Sackler family. It is

available for a price.

Let's say... $10 billion.

That's our show. Thank you so much for watching. We'll see you next week. Good

night.

Hey. It's me again.

Richard Sackler.

Listen, the documents aren't out yet.

I wish they were, but they're not, all right? What are you gonna do?

You know, keep checking back, all right?

Bye-bye!