Speaker 1: In the summer of nineteen ninety seven, a rare moment
of bipartisanship between Democratic President Bill Clinton and Republican Speaker
of the House of Representatives Nut Gingrich became the foundation
of suspicion that would span for decades. Follow Me down
the rabbit Hole about the Balanced Budget Act. Hello, friends,
and welcome back to the rabbit Hole. I'm your host Stanny,
and today we are talking about the Balance Budget Act
of nineteen ninety seven. Thank you Kelly for requesting this episode.
If you, guys, would like to request an episode, or
you want a shout out for requesting an episode, go
to Stay Skeptical dot com. You can also go to
my Instagram and submit your requests through the link in
the bio. And of course, before we get started, I
love to thank our sponsors, so thank you Wise Gold
for sponsoring my podcast. Guys, if you want Golden Silver
delivered straight to your front door for as little as
fifty dollars a month, go to rabbit Hole dot gold
right now. The Balance Budget Act of nineteen ninety seven
was an omnibus legislative package designed to balance the federal
budget by two thousand and two. It was to result
in one hundred and sixty billion dollars in spending reductions
between nineteen ninety eight and two thousand and two. After
taking into account an increase in spending on welfare and
children's healthcare, the savings totaled one hundred and twenty seven billion.
Medicare taking the blunt of the cuts at one hundred
and twelve billion dollars. They reduced the Medicare spending by
reducing payments to health service providers. The Balance Budget Act
of nineteen ninety seven represented not just a legislative victory,
but an unusual convergence, Clinton's third way centrism meeting Gingrich's
revolutionary conservatism on common ground. While market it as a
triumph of physical responsibility, the BBA acted as the economic
dial that per eminently set the American safety net on
a path toward privatization. Beneath the facade of saving Medicare,
the Act implemented complex formulas and structural handovers that signaled
the end of representative democracy in fiscal matters in the
beginning of a technocratic uniparty era by moving the levers
of economic power out of the reach of the ballot
box and into the hands of algorithmic automatic stabilizers. The
BBA ensured that the fundamental direction of the American economy
would remain untouched by future elections. The big question is
what made Clinton and gingrich political enemies suddenly align so
perfectly on such drastic changes on Medicare, Medicaid, and welfare.
Many skeptics started questioning whether it was really a compromise
or just a consensus around a shared agenda that neither
party wanted to openly acknowledge. Did the Balanced Budget mask
a deliberate plan to dismantle the social safety net piece
by peace, using fiscal responsibility as political cover. The suspicions
on this act were fair. The BBA of ninety seven
cut nearly four hundred billion dollars from projected federal spending
over five years, with the bulk coming from healthcare programs
serving the elderly, disabled, and poor. Hospitals and healthcare advocates
warned it would cripple the system by imposing unprecedented restrictions
on state Medicaid programs, all this while simultaneously delivering ninety
five billion dollars in tax cuts, a detail that seemed
to contradict the justification of social spending reductions serving the
public health infrastructure while feeding capital markets is the hallmark
of managed competition. The uncharacteristic bipartisan harmony that made BBA
possible became evidence of an elite agreement on policies that
would harm ordinary Americans while benefiting the wealthy. The Balanced
Budget Act achieved its stated goal with astounding efficiency. By
nineteen ninety eight, Just one year after it was passed,
the federal government recorded its first budget surplus in nearly
three decades. The national debt began to decline so much
that by the year two thousand, the Congressional Budget Office
projected a surplus stretching into the foreseeable future. But this
success came at a price many Americans didn't fully understand
until years later. The BBA fundamentally restructured how the federal
government paid for health care for seniors and people with
low incomes. It created the Medicare Plus Choice program, encouraging
beneficiaries to leave traditional Medicare for private insurance plans. It
cut payments to hospitals, nursing homes, and home health agencies.
It also gave states unprecedented power to restrict Medicaid eligibility
and benefits through waivers that would have been unthinkable in
the past. The BBA embedded into federal health care programs
and a series of automatic payment reductions were essentially mechanisms
designed to cut spending regardless of actual health care costs,
patient needs, or demographic changes. The sustainable growth rate or
SGR formula for physician payments, for instance, created a scenario
where doctors would face annual payment cuts unless Congress intervened.
Many observers who followed the Act believed this design wasn't accidental,
but actually intentional. The theory of a planned collapse was
the most common topic, suggesting that the bba's architects knew
these payment formulas were completely unsustainable. The SGR formula was
a mathematical trap that tied physician reimbursement to the growth
of the GDP if healthcare spending grew faster than the economy,
and inevitability given the aging baby boomer demographic. The law
legally mandated automatic, drastic cuts to doctor pay. Section four
zero zero one of the Act was the legal gateway
to adverse selection. Proponents claimed it offered choice, but the
economic reality was the creation of an adverse selection loop
by design. Medicare Plus Choice incentivized private plans to use
sophisticated data to cherry pick healthy, aging senior citizens. This
left the chronically ill and expensive patients in traditional medicare,
which lacked the marketing budget to compete. By siphoning off
the healthiest beneficiaries, the BBA ensured that the government's risk
pool would become increasingly expensive. This created a statistical mirage.
Traditional Medicare appeared bloated and insufficient compared to private plans,
providing the political ammunition needed to argue for further cuts
or total privatization years later. It was definitely a self
fulfilling prophecy of government failure. The evidence suggested that the
bba's spending cuts were front loaded and aggressive, while the
revenue projections relied on optimistic economic assumptions. The BBA was
architected so that over sixty percent of the healthcare cuts
would take effect in the first two years. This wasn't
a transition, It was a shock and all campaign against
the public health infrastructure. Between two thousand and two and
twenty fifteen, the SGR created a permanent state of crisis
because the cuts were so severe they threatened to shut
down the medical system. This forced a ritualized congressional doc fix,
a patch that had to be passed seventeen times over
thirteen years. This was the uniparty in its purest form.
By requiring repeated congressional patches, the healthcare payment mechanisms were
designed to fail. What is even more suspicious is that
the same politicians who championed the BBA later pointed to
the unsustainable costs of Medicare and Medicaid as reasons to
fundamentally restructure or eliminate the program's problems they helped to create.
In reality, this created a lucrative lobbying industrial complex. Every year,
medical association and insurance giants had to descend on DC
to beg for a fix, ensuring that the uniparty leadership
maintained a constant flow of campaign contributions and hidden influence.
The BBA shifted the fundamental mindset of federal health care.
It shifted the government away from a defined benefit model
in which the government guarantees specific care, to a defined
contribution mindset in which the government provides a fixed payment
to a private entity. This shifted the financial risk from
the federal treasury onto individual seniors and public infrastructure. The
famous harmony we talked about before between the parties over
the Balance Budget Act didn't actually start that way. It
began as a confrontation, so apparently. In the fall of
nineteen ninety four, New Gingrich orchestrated one of the most
dramatic political upheavals in modern American history. Ging Gridge and
more than three hundred Publican candidates signed the Contract with America,
a ten point legislative agenda that promised to revolution ustionized
federal governance. This contract pledged term limits for legislators, a
balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, welfare reform, tax cuts,
and a fundamental re examination of federal power. The strategy worked,
and in the November nineteen ninety four midterm elections, Republicans
captured control of the House of Representatives for the first
time in forty years, gaining fifty four seats in what
political analysts call a Republican revolution. It is said to
have been one of the most influential midterms in American history.
They also seized the Senate, giving the GOP complete control
of Congress. Gingrich became Speaker of the House and immediately
positioned himself not as a legislative partner to President Clinton,
but as the co equal power center, possibly even the
dominant force in American politics. The Trojan Horse theory holds
that before nineteen ninety seven, Medicare was a straightforward government program,
but Medicare plus choice in the BBA wasn't about choice.
It was a wealth transfer mechanism. The conspiracy suggests an
elite agreement to funnel trillions of taxpayer dollars into the
hands of private insurance CEOs. The structural hollowing out of
the safety net went deeper than just Medicare, According to
the CQ Almanac's records on the one hundred and fifth Congress,
the BBA also targeted Medicaid by removing the federal government's
role as a watchdog. For the first time, states were
granted the power to force people experiencing poverty into private
managed care programs without seeking a federal waiver, a move
that fundamentally ended the government's direct responsibility for the quality
of care. Before nineteen ninety seven, the Department of Health
and Human Services the HHS acted as a shield for
the vulnerable. The BBA stripped away that shield, turning millions
of citizens into a captive market for private managed care
organizations or MCOs. Simultaneously, the Acts slash funding for tavaching hospitals,
the very institutions that served as the last line of
defense for the indignant. By slashing graduate medical education and
indirect medical education payments, the Act placed a financial stranglehold
on institutions that trained future doctors and care for the indignant.
At first, these cuts were massive, causing immediate financial distress
for the very institutions that served as the last line
of defense for the uninsured. By hitting the system with
massive immediate cuts before hospitals could adjust, the BBA purposely
triggered a wave of bankruptcies and fire sales. This allowed
the private hospital conglomerates to buy up public assets at
pennies on the dollar. This tactic forced independent and public
hospitals to consolidate into massive corporate conglomerates like HCA and Kaiser,
feeding the global corporate state. These weren't random fiscal trims.
They were a coordinated effort to dismantle the public infant
structure of health and replace it with a system of
managed competition where the only winners were the corporate conglomerates
and the technocratic elite. Who managed the transition. The BBA
didn't just cut it created the State Children's Health Insurance Program,
also known as CHIP. CHIP provided nearly twenty four billion
dollars to states, but allowed them to use it for
private insurance rather than expanding Medicaid. To sell the BBA
to the public, the architects included the creation of CHIP
in the Social dial. This was marketed as a humanitarian
expansion for the safety net. However, in the Economic Dial,
the CQ Almanac reveals that CHIP was designed to give
states the flexibility to bypass traditional government programs, further entrenching
the role of private insurance companies as the gatekeepers of
care for people experiencing poverty. One of the most radical
changes in the CQ source is the removal of the
federal waiver requirement for Medicaid. Before nineteen ninety seven, states
had to obtain federal permission from HHS to require Medicaid
recipients to enroll in private managed care programs. The BBA
removed this requirement. The core of the nineteen ninety seven
handout was the deregulation of Medicaid. Before the BBA, the
federal government acted as a shield, requiring states to prove
that private managed care wouldn't harm beneficiaries, the BBA stripped
US away, allowing states to mandate private enrollment without federal approval.
This effectively ended the era of federal accountability and turned
millions of the most vulnerable citizens into a captive market
for private MCOs. In nineteen ninety seven, home health care
was the fastest growing Medicare benefit, allowing seniors to age
with dignity in their own homes, which most people prefer.
The BBA implemented the Interim Payment Systems, or the IPS,
which was so hard on the program that it caused
nearly four thousand home health agencies to shut down almost overnight.
This wasn't an accident. By destroying the home care option,
the BBA four seniors into institutionalized, corporate run nursing homes,
facilities that were coincidentally becoming major investment vehicles for the
private equity firms emerging from the nineteen ninety six King
City Third Way meetings. While the BBA was saving the
budget by cutting home health visits for the elderly and
simultaneously slashed the capital gains tax from twenty eight percent
to twenty percent. This is the ultimate uniparty mic drop.
The law effectively taxed the health of people with low
incomes to subsidize the investment portfolios of the elite. This
was the first time in American history that a major
deficit reduction bill included a massive tax giveaway to the
investor class, providing that the balanced budget was actually just
rebranding of the massive wealth transfer upward, they wanted more money.
Typical cuts to hospitals, specifically teaching hospitals that train the
next generation of doctors were among the most aggressive, which
literally makes no sense. That's how you keep making money
is that you have more doctors. The BBA cut graduate
medical education payments and indirect medical education adjustments. The bba's
design included a strike at the very foundation of the
medical system. By slashing GME payments, the act placed a
financial stranglehold on the institutions that serve the uninsured and
trained future physicians. Evidence from Congressional Budget Office Projections or
CBO at the time indicates that the architects of the
BBA knew these cuts would disproportionately bankrupt rural hospitals as well,
since rural hospitals rely more heavily on Medicare and Medicaid
than urban centers. The flat cuts were designed to fail
in the heartland. This served the global corporate state's goal
of urban consolidation, forcing populars out of independent rural settings
and into managed urban environments where their service consumption could
be more easily tracked and taxed by technocratic elite. And
in fact, now approximately eighty percent of US counties, home
to over one hundred and twenty million people, are considered
healthcare deserts. These areas lack adequate access to or infrastructure
for essential services like primary and care hospitals or pharmacies.
Nearly sixty percent of the counties have more than one
type of healthcare desert. The CBO's nineteen ninety seven projections
also contained a dark reality for Middle America. Because rural
hospitals typically rely on Medicare and Medicaid for up to
seventy percent of their total revenue, compared to like the
thirty or forty percent in urban private hospitals, the flat
rate cuts in the BBA were mathematically guaranteed to hit
rural areas two to three times harder. By March nineteen
ninety nine, just two years into the act, Medicare spending
grew even slower than the CBO's original drastic projections, under
shooting by another eighty four billion dollars. This accidental overperformance
of the cuts accelerated the bankruptcy of rural health care,
clearing the way for the urban consolidation required by the
global corporate state. According to the CBO's August nineteen ninety
seven analysis, the one hundred and twelve billion dollars in
medicare savings served as the primary engine for funding the
ninety five billion dollars in net tax cuts. This wasn't
a balanced budget, it was a rebalanced society. The federal
government acted as a wealth stripper, taking money that was
contractually promised to seniors for health care and transferring it
to those who earn income through asset speculation rather than labor.
The CQ Almanac notes these cuts weren't just about saving money.
They were front loaded to create immediate financial distress, forcing
public hospitals to consolidate or adapt corporate business models to survive,
an essential step in the transition to the global corporate state.
Now we've mentioned the global corporate state several times. Let's
get into what that actually means. The global corporate state
involves multinational corporations that absorb public services such as healthcare
and infrastructure for profit. It's always for something, right, profit, power, sex,
you name it. That's what they're after. This one for
profit and also probably for power. Central and global banks
manage the flow of debt and set the fiscal rules
for nation states, typically in international forums such as the
World Economic Forum, the Council of Foreign Relations, and the
Builderberg Group. The uniparty are local managers who implement the
global mandate while pretending to fight each other on television.
It's literally all a show. In June nineteen ninety six,
the Builderberg Group met in King City, Ontario. While the
attendees lists are kept pretty tight, the nineteen ninety six
meeting is offen cited by researchers as the moment the
Third Way was globalized. Researchers of the global corporate state
point to the meeting as the briefing for the managed
transition of the Western economy. The goal was to pivot
the US from a manufacturing based social democracy to a
debt servicing service economy. Newt Gingrich's presence in these globalist
circles because he's literally a member of the Council Foreign
Relations and has attended high level international forums. Is often
used as evidence that his revolution was controlled opposition. The
theory is that he was coached to create the conflict
the nineteen ninety five government shutdown to make the eventual compromise,
which was the BBA, look like a hard won victory
for the people when it was actually planned all along.
This managed compromise effectively erased the distinction between the two
major parties, creating a uniparty technocracy that answered to King
City and Davos rather than Main Street. The third Way
wasn't a middle ground, it was a bypass by removing
the public's ability to vote on the fundamental structure of
the social safety net, locking it instead to automatic formula
and secret contracts. The BBA signaled the end of the
representative democracy in fiscal matters. The political theater of the
Gingrich Clinton rivalry was merely the breadcrumb, trail and circus
show designed to distract us from the quiet surrender of sovereignty.
The prime example of this theater was the nineteen ninety
seven campaign finance probe, which dominated headlines for allegations of
illegal Chinese influence in the nineteen ninety six election, which
sounds a lot like the twenty sixteen election. By November
of nineteen ninety six, the Republicans were convinced of the
Chinese Communist government's influence on the US elections. Newt Gingrich
promised the probe into the democratic scandal with China would
be bigger than Watergate. This political confrontation between Gingridge and
Clinton led to the longest government shut down in history
up to that point. Gingridg decided to compromise, though many
House Republicans disagreed, but the compromise was all staged. The
shutdown was all staged. It was all just a game.
While it appeared to be a high stakes battle for accountability,
the investigation ultimately fizzled without major consequences for either party.
This lack of an outcome suggests that the probe was
not a search for the truth, but a scripted performance
intended to keep the public's focus on a partisan scandal.
At the same time, the bba's economic dial was being
permanently set behind the scenes. To understand the uniparty through
the lens of the nineteen ninety seven BBA, we have
to look past the televised arguments and into the structural
reality of what was surrendered. Pretty much the clash of
Titan's Theater put on by Clinton and gingridg was not
ever real. It was just a coordinated handover of American
democratic sovereignty to a technocratic elite. In a functioning democracy,
voters expect that switching parties will change the direction of
the country. However, the BBA turned the American political system
into a two dial machine. So in the social dial,
the left versus right politicians fight loudly over cultural issues,
flags and rhetoric to keep the public divided and engaged.
It's a great show, it's a great game. In the
economic dial, the managed corps, the fundamental movement of money
and the privatization of the commons, and the servicing of
global debt remained on a fixed, irreversible track regardless of
who wins the election. It doesn't matter who you vote for.
What is really crazy about the bba's structural detail is
that it used a legislative mechanism called contractual hard coding.
By shifting beneficiaries into private Medicare plus choice plans. The
government entered into multi year contracts with insurance giants. These
contracts contained intringement clauses that made it legally and financially
ruinous for future Congresses to return to public only models.
The BBA didn't just change the law, it sold the
deed to the safety net, making any future repeal a
breach of contract against the global corporate state. The Third
Way was marketed as a common sense centrism, but in
reality it was the implementation of a globalized corporate mandate.
Managed competition was the buzzword of the nineteen nineties. It
meant the government would use its power to pick winners,
mainly large insurance conglomerates and hospital systems, and force the
public into their arms. Before nineteen ninety seven, there was
still a lingering belief that the government had a direct
responsibility to provide a safety net. After nineteen ninety seven,
both parties agreed that the government's only rule was to
be a customer for private corporations. And I actually read
in a book recently that that's how fascism starts. The
historic government shut down of nineteen ninety five nineteen ninety
six serves as an origin story for the uniparty's Third
Way takeover. Gingrich played a major role by pushing a
radical divide between Democrats and Republicans. When Clinton fought back,
it led to the shutdown that scared the public. Scared
the public so bad that they agreed to this budget.
By creating the government shutdown crisis, the two parties were
forced on purpose, like they did this on purpose, into
a compromise that the public would have otherwise rejected. This
made the gutting of the social Safety Net appear to
be an act of heroic bipartisanship rather than a calculated
wealth transfer. They orchestrated the shutdown that way everyone would
be so excited and championed them when they came to
an agreement. In the uniparty model, conflict is a tool
for consensus. You cannot move a population toward a global
corporate state in a straight line. He must swing them
back and forth between two extremes, the right and the left,
until they are exhausted enough to accept the pre written
middle ground, like what happened with the shutdown. Ultimately, the
same year the American Safety Net was being hollowed out
by the BBA, the legislative branch was occupied with a
fizzling investigation that ultimately protected the political elite from the
very sovereignty they were signing away. Among these elites were
people like Democrat Robert Rubin, Clinton's Treasury secretary and a
former Goldman Sachs co chair who was the bridge between
Wall Street and the BBA. His philosophy of fiscal discipline
was essentially a mandate to lower interest rates to fuel
corporate growth at the expense of social spending. Ruben later
moved to City Group, a global bank that benefited a
ton from the financial deregulation that followed the bba's fiscal
responsibility era. Ruben was paid over one hundred and twenty
million dollars over the next decade. This Rubinomics era provided
a fiscal cover for the eventual repeal of Glass Stiegel,
further merging the interests of global banks with the federal
government on the Republican side. Newt Gingrich didn't retire to
a quiet life either. He became a high paid consultant
and strategic advisor for major healthcare and tech interests. Well,
isn't that interesting? He literally handed over the whole country.
He is a long standing member of the Council of
Foreign Relations, the globalist hub that many people point to
as a true source of uniparty policy. To truly understand
that this was not just a left versus right issue,
but a globally managed transition, we can look at other
places that implemented nearly identical third way scripts around that
exact same time. Around May of nineteen ninety seven, just
months before Clinton and Gingrich signed the BBA, Tony Blair
became Prime Minister of the UK. He rebranded his party
as New Labor, which was the Britain twin of Clinton's
Third Way. Blair implemented the Private Finance Initiative PFI. Like
Medicare plus Choice, PFI used private contracts to build public infrastructure.
It moved debt off balance sheet to make the budget
look balance while actually saddling the National Health Service NHS
with high interest debt that costs ten times the actual
construction price. It looked like the government was balancing the
budget because it moved the debt onto the books of
private corporations. In reality, it was a massive wealth transfer
that piled on decades of high interest payments to private
banks and developers. In the late nineties, Germany also followed
this model. Under Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, he introduced the new middle,
Schroder introduced the Heart's for reforms. These were the German
version of the bba's welfare and healthcare cuts. Just like
in the US, these reforms were so conservative that the
traditional right wing parties couldn't have passed them without causing
a revolution. It took a left wing leader to betray
his own labor base to satisfy the global economic mandate,
proving that the social dial of party identity is irrelevant
when the economic dial is being turned by global interests. So,
of course all this is just speculation, just a conspiracy, obviously,
but is it though? Let's talk about the congressional record.
The nineteen ninety seven debate was split into two bills,
HR two zero one five, the Balance Budget Act and
HR two zero one four, the Taxpayer Relief Act. Because
they were debated simultaneously, a few legislators caught the shell
game in real time on the House floor. Then Representative
Bernie Sanders, and independent from Vermont, was one of the
loudest critics, famously calling the argument a quote Robin Hood
in reverse. He said, quote at the time when we
are told we must cut Medicare by one hundred and
fifteen billion, dollars. It is an absolute outrage that we
are at the same time giving ninety five billion dollars
in tax breaks, the vast majority of which go to
the wealthiest one percent end quote. Sanders confirms that the
transfer wasn't a hidden side effect, it was the known
intended goal. The savings from the health of the elderly
were laundered through the Treasury and handed directly to the
investor class as a capital gains bounty. Something we found
super interesting is that in the Senate, Paul Wellstone, a
Democrat from Minnesota, warned that the BBA was a quote
betrayal of the social contract. He noted that the tax
cuts were front loaded for the wealthy, while the Medicare
protections were vague and unenforceable. Wellstone identified the economic dial perfectly,
arguing the bill permanently weakened the government's ability to protect
the poor while hardcoding the benefits for Wall Street. He
also noted that the capital gains cut would bleed the
Treasury of the very funds needed to sustain the baby
boomer's future healthcare needs. If Paul Wellstone's name sounds familiar
to you, it's probably because you heard it before in
the Crisis Actors episode, So George Zen, a decoy guy
from Charlie Kirk's assassination, was credited with the Republican win
in Minnesota. Just five years later, when Paul Wellstone was
running for office again. So Wellstone has obviously just shaken
up the political sphere in Minnesota. He's not fully agreeing
with what they're doing. Well, then he became a target.
So Wellstone was targeted by the National Republican Party as
the Keystone race in the GOP's quest to regain the
Senate majority. It was this statement that motivated George Zen,
who quote packed his bag and was off to Minnesota
from Utah, volunteering to pound signs and lawns, hang up
banners and stand on the corner with a vote for
Norm sign while whistling Yankee Doodle end quote if they
wanted him to. This was quoted from the Desert News.
It goes on to say, quote, who'd have thought a
month later that Wellstone would be killed in a tragic
plane crash while campaigning, that former Vice President Walter Mondale
would jump in to try to save the seat for
the Democrats, that the Democrats would turn Wellstone's funeral service
into a campaign rally, and that Norm Coleman, the guy
George then campaign for, would win anyway. End quote coincidence. No,
not around here, guys. Furthermore, the Congressional Budget Office's August
nineteen ninety seven report provides the final smoking gun. Here.
It projected one hundred and fifteen billion dollars in Medicare
savings and seven billion dollars in Medicaid savings over five years.
At the same time, the Taxpayer Relief Act was projected
to cost the Treasury ninety five billion dollars in revenue,
primarily through the capital gain slash and the creation of
the back door roth IRA. The symmetry is undeniable. The
Uniparty calculated that the amount they could politically strip from
the safety net was, onmost exactly equal to the amount
their donors demanded in tax relief. Isn't that interesting? To
pass the BBA, the Uniparty used a trick called sunset clauses.
They claimed the tax cuts would expire, but the Medicare
structural changes such as Medicare plus Choice would remain permanent.
This was the ultimate lock in. They knew that once
the private insurance infrastructures was built, no future Congress would
have the courage to dismantle it. The tax cuts were
the bait in the trap. The permanent hollowing out of
the safety net was the trap itself. This is why,
decades later, we still have a private market medicare system,
while the temporary tax cuts for the wealthy have been
renewed and expanded every administration. Since. Nothing is ever what
it seems. It's all a show. It's all just a game.
Our health, our world doesn't matter to them. How can
they manipulate it for themselves. I don't even have a
question for you guys this week. I've been asking questions lately,
and I don't have one. So until next week, my friends,
stay skeptical and I'll see then. Hey friends. The rabbit
Hole is an independent podcast written, hosted, and produced by
me Danny Mercy. Special thanks to Lindsay for research and writing.
If you love the podcast, please leave us a five
star rating and review wherever you're listening. Follow us on
social media at rabbit dot Hole podcast, and visit our
website at stayskeptical dot com for everything else.