In the middle of the night on April 20th, 2010, Charlie Henry's phone rang, Henry worked for a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration team that evaluated coastal environment threats. He wasn't used to getting calls from his job at this hour, but what he heard shocked him wide awake.

A young U.S. Coast Guard officer spoke rapidly into the phone, telling Henry an offshore disaster had just occurred. There was an explosion on Deepwater Horizon, a drilling platform located in the Gulf of Mexico. Henry needed to come in immediately to serve as the science adviser. The officer said the rig was still burning and up to 60 people were missing.

Henry arrived at the Louisiana Coast Guard office to find it in chaos. Photos from the scene trickled into the command post. He stared at images of monstrous flames illuminating the Gulf's surface.

He called his team and instructed them to set up a war room where they could assess ocean and wind currents.

This would help with search and rescue as responders, fish survivors out of the water throughout the night. The number of missing people dropped from 60 to 11. But for Henry, the disaster grew exponentially with every piece of new information.

He had advised on nearly 100 spills before this, including the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill in 1991. Kuwait oil fires, but nothing compared to the calamity that lay before him.

Now, thousands of first responders like Henry, from firefighters to scientists, worked tirelessly for weeks to mitigate the damage. Despite their efforts, the horizon crumbled under the water and oil spewed from an uncapped well for weeks.

Investigations eventually blamed mechanical failure and corporate negligence. But for Henry and his team, it was less like they were responding to an accident.

The scale of the disaster felt more like an attack, but an attack from the home.

Welcome to Conspiracy Theories, a Spotify original from Park Cast every Monday and Wednesday, we dig into the complicated stories behind the world's most controversial events and search for the truth from Carter Roy. And I'm Molly Brandenburg.

And neither of us are conspiracy theorists, but we are open minded, skeptical and curious. Don't get us wrong. Sometimes the official version is the truth, but sometimes it's not.

You can find episodes of conspiracy theories and all other Spotify originals from Park asked for free on Spotify or wherever you listen to podcasts.

This is our second episode on Deepwater Horizon, an offshore drilling rig that exploded in 2010 marking the largest marine oil spill in history. Eleven crew members died immediately, but that was just the beginning. Fishing industries crumbled, oil companies halted, entire ecosystems suffered.

Eventually, federal courts decided the three companies that operated the rig were at fault. The British energy company BP, Transocean and Halliburton had used shortcuts to quicken their production and reduce cost, which led to the disaster. But given the incredible scope of the damage, some think there might have been other forces behind Deepwater Horizons demise.

Conspiracy theorists pounced on the amount of strange coincidences, alleged mechanical failures and long term impact of this catastrophic event. Today, we'll touch on the three main conspiracies that emerged.

Conspiracy theory number one, a vengeful North Korea torpedoed the rig to damage South Korea and the United States, both economically and environmentally.

Conspiracy theory number two, Big Oil intentionally sabotage Deepwater Horizon so a select few could profit through investments in clean up companies and conspiracy theory.

Number three ecoterrorist groups caused the April 2010 explosion in order to create an object lesson in the horrible dangers of drilling. We have all that and more coming up. Stay with us. North Korea is one of the most isolated countries in the world officially called the Democratic People's Republic of Korea or DPRK.

This nation has been the center of global conflict for decades after World War two Soviet forces occupied the northern part of Korea, while the United States asserted its influence over the South America, didn't want to leave the country in the hands of Russia, fearing it would become a communist state. The Soviets stood their ground and in 1948 they helped create North Korea's government. In response, South Korea established the Republic of Korea, which was anticommunism and pro U.S. both North and South Korea claim total ownership of the peninsula.

Then, in 1950, the growing tension between the two countries morphed into the Korean War, which primarily involved America, the Soviet Union and China. After three years of brutal fighting and by some estimates, nearly five million soldier and civilian deaths. The nations involved agreed to an armistice on July 27th, 1953.

This ended the overt battle, but did little to change circumstances between North and South Korea. In fact, a formal peace treaty was never signed.

In the aftermath, North Korea isolated itself, preventing its citizens from traveling. In contrast, South Korea developed its education, economy and culture to become one of the wealthiest countries in the world.

Meanwhile, animosity between North Korea and the United States festered as the isolated communist kingdom developed a powerful military and navy. Then, in 1970, in an effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, the International Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons took effect despite signing the treaty in 1985. North Korea aggressively pursued nuclear technology, wanting to show its strength with the support of the United Nations.

The U.S. imposed economic sanctions and condemned North Korea's government for their militaristic posturing. Tensions between the countries lasted for decades all the way into the new century.

Which brings us to conspiracy theory. Number one, North Korea torpedoed the Deepwater Horizon rig in order to damage South Korea and the United States, both economically and environmentally by mid 2010.

Worldwide news reports had already called the April explosion an accident. The media labeled the culprit as a combination of mechanical failures and human error. But on May 1st, 2010, a post appeared on what does it mean? Dotcom disputing the official story.

The author, writing under the name Salka Fall, discussed a report that was allegedly circulating in high levels of Russian government. This top account said nothing of technological malfunctions or accidents. Instead, it blamed North Korea. The details of the plot began on April 18th, two days before the explosion. That day, a North Korean cargo vessel called De Hong Dan left the port of Havana in Cuba. The ship's destination was ostensibly Venezuela, but it immediately deviated from that course, according to the Russian report.

The vessel sailed north, far from its intended port. It entered the Gulf of Mexico and paused just 130 miles away from Deepwater Horizon.

Here, the cargo vessel launched a mini submarine. The Russian report allegedly suggested that this vessel was manned by one or more members of North Korea's 17th sniper corps or, as some conspiracy theorists call this, elite and mysterious team suicide troops.

On April 20th, 2010, the submarine launched two torpedoes. The underwater incendiaries tore through the water, striking Deepwater Horizon and sparking two explosions. Fire consumed the rig, killing 11 workers instantly and forcing survivors to jump from the platform, according to Salka false summary of the Russian report, the 17th sniper corps was not finished. Two days later, the submarine maneuvered underneath the still burning horizon. The suicide troops self destructed, causing the machine to combust under the unstable oil rig.

This third, apparently undetected explosion was what caused Deepwater Horizon to finally sink underneath the waves.

While the execution of this attack seems a little like Mission Impossible, it's not the first time North Korean submarines have carried out unofficial business. In 1998, a North Korean vessel was discovered in South Korean waters. The sub had been tangled in fishing nets.

The North Korean government claimed that this was an accidental training incident, but the South wasn't sure. And when South Korean tugboats freed the submarine and started to tow it to land, it suddenly sank when South Korea recovered the sub.

The salvage team found nine bodies inside, each with bullets in them. Five sailors had apparently been gunned down and four North Korean special forces were shot in the head.

This was likely done in accordance with North Korean military culture. The elite team on board murdered the crew and killed themselves rather than accept capture.

It definitely supports the possible existence of North Korean suicide troops, the kind that would have carried out an attack on Deepwater Horizon. And in addition to revealing the steps of this operation, Salka Falls blog post assigned a motive with oil gushing into the Gulf of Mexico.

President Obama faced an impossible decision. His first option was to waste months experimenting with different ways to seal a well. This both damaged the American economy and devastated America's shoreline environment, a double win for North Korea.

There was, however, a second solution for the U.S. president. From 1966 to 1981, the Soviet Union reportedly used nuclear power to stop five different gas leaks, one just 400 meters away from the Ukrainian city of Kharkov. By planting the bomb underground, the thermonuclear blast melted all surrounding rocks. The earth sealed and buried the well, successfully tamping the leak in the weeks after the horizon disaster.

This same approach was suggested.

It sounded ludicrous to most American scientists and federal officials, but some experts publicly supported the technique. Former Russian minister of nuclear energy and veteran Soviet physicist Viktor Mikhailovich said BP wasted time for every moment they didn't plant a bomb.

President Obama was running out of options as methods to seal the well failed in quick succession. The call for a nuclear explosion grew louder. Perhaps this tempted the president with a quick and heroic end to an environmental catastrophe.

But there was a catch. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons was scheduled to be reviewed in a conference starting May 3rd, just a few weeks after the disaster.

Should President Obama use nuclear powers? Every nation with drilling capabilities would have an argument to demand the same right. This could unravel international nuclear policy playing directly into the hands of North Korea.

As we covered in the last episode, President Obama did not nuke the leaking oil well.

But even though President Obama didn't take the bait and use a nuclear blast, North Korea still benefited from the disaster. The explosion caused chaos for the U.S. and did indirect damage to South Korea as well. That's because Hyundai Heavy Industries, a South Korean company, manufactured the rig in the first place.

While those aspects may look like a win for North Korea. The actual evidence of a secret mission is thin. For one, there aren't trustworthy reports of day hauling. Dan, the cargo vessel that launched the submarines veering off course. And even if the ship did launch a submarine, North Korean suicide troops are not yet proven to exist.

The lack of a trustworthy source is a huge mark against this theory. However, there's enough precedent in submarine technology and military suicide culture to give North Korea more credit if one nation could pull this off its North Korea. Now, that being said, I give this theory a three out of 10 fair.

And I will admit the timing of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty review provides an argument for motivation. It would have delighted North Korea to throw a wrench in Obama's government. Still, this theory. Undermines the many documented technical issues the Deepwater Horizon crew experienced leading up to the explosion, not to mention the main source for this theory is one blog post by someone with a pen name who claims to have received the report from a mysterious source in the Kremlin. There's absolutely no proof this report exists.

I'm giving it a two out of 10.

For all we know, the answer lies a lot closer to home in North Korea. It's possible the Deepwater Horizon spill was less of an attack and more of an inside job.

Coming up, we'll pivot from exploding submarines and enter the suit and tie world of corporate conspiracy.

Listeners, this month marks 60 years since John F. Kennedy became the 35th president of the United States, ushering his already prominent family into the highest enclaves of political power. But behind their storied successes lies, secrets and scandals so severe, if it were any other lineage, they would have been left in ruin this January. To commemorate this iconic milestone, dig into the dramas of a Real-Life American dynasty in the Spotify original from Cast the Kennedys. This exclusive series from Spotify features your favorite part cast hosts, including me, covering every angle of the Kennedys from shows like Today in True Crime, Conspiracy Theories, Crime Countdown and Others, assassinations and conspiracies, corruption and cover ups, international affairs and extramarital ones to examine all of the Kennedy family's most controversial moments.

All in one place you can binge all 12 episodes of this limited series starting on Tuesday, January 19th. Follow the Kennedys free and exclusively on Spotify. Now back to the story after the explosion of Deepwater Horizon, a blogger by the pen name Salka Fall published a report detailing a covert North Korean mission. Supposedly, the secret operation used submarines and suicide troops to cause an oil leak.

North Korea hope to force America's hand into using nuclear power to stop the spill while there isn't sufficient evidence to support this theory.

What is clear is that U.S. courts placed the blame squarely on companies in charge of the rig. BP, Transocean and Halliburton paid for the disaster via steep financial penalties. But despite spending billions, it's possible these businesses still got off easy compared to the true nature of their crimes.

Which brings us to conspiracy theory. Number two, perhaps these corporations sabotaged the rig so that a select few could profit.

In an ironic twist, Deepwater Horizon wasn't a safety award earlier in the day of the explosion.

Seven years with no major incidents is a huge accomplishment in the complicated workplace of an oil rig. And yet, despite this record, the companies in charge of the horizon spent years eliminating protective measures in the lead up to the disaster.

On the night it happened, a safety device called a blowout preventer malfunctioned when it was needed most. This machine was built with a long series of backup systems, but most of them stalled.

The blowout preventer failure was the largest red flag to many oil industry experts. They couldn't understand how the machine that was built to be prepared for any situation simply didn't work. And the blowout preventer wasn't the only tech that was out of commission that night.

After the explosion, an incident report showed that 26 systems on the rig were in poor condition. Transocean later stated most of these components were minor.

However, it wasn't the 26 broken systems that raised eyebrows. It was the crew interviews. When asked about safety culture, half of the workers said they thought they would face reprisal for reporting hazards on the rig. The crew was afraid to admit to dangerous behavior.

A facade of safety was not unique to BP and Transocean. Halliburton, the company that was contracted to seal the well with cement prior to the disaster, had also cut corners.

A presidential commission investigation found that Halliburton officials knew their seal was unstable, but it failed to flag the issue. Weeks before the incident, three laboratory tests confirmed the cement mixture did not meet industry standards, and yet Halliburton continued pushing the project forward.

On the morning of April 20th, Halliburton finished sealing and testing the well, despite having reason to think otherwise. Company officials told BP the project had gone well and encouraged by this report.

BP sent its own evaluation team home before they could do their own test later that day.

BP executives visited the rig to celebrate seven years with no incident. Witness accounts said they toured the entire rig.

Bob Cavnar, an oil industry veteran, would later wonder if one of the executives inadvertently did something on the bridge that neutralized the safety systems. Others wondered if it was intentional sabotage. That's because hours after the tour, the horizon exploded. But let's slow down a bit. There were actual safety factors on the rig that day that clearly aren't the results of a corporate conspiracy. Reports show that supervisors Don Védrine and Bob Kaluza made two key decisions that endangered the crew.

It's true. It seems Kaluza wanted to save as much money and time as he could for BP, and he refused to listen to Transocean employees who argued in favor of following safety guidelines.

Likewise, the DRIN supposedly ignored concerns about pressure building in the drilling pipe, despite abnormal test results.

The supervisor gave his approval to move off the well when BP pled guilty to 14 criminal counts connected to the Deepwater Horizon explosion. The company called these two supervisors out.

They stated that Kaluza and Védrine did not recognize indicators that the well was insecure, which caused the death of 11 men immediately. The pair became the face of the disaster. The public hated them and the courts pounced.

Kaluza and Védrine were charged with several counts of seaman's manslaughter, but these charges were eventually dismissed. Many years later, Kaluza admitted he was confused as to how he received so much blame. He said he felt like a sacrifice, a sacrifice for what he didn't say. But perhaps BP used him and Védrine to distract people from investigating further.

This still feels like a stretch. Besides, all of the companies involved lost billions in claims, fines and cleanup efforts. Why would someone blow up their own rig?

Well, let's take a closer look at some individuals connected with BP who profited in spite of the disaster. Chief executive Tony Hayward cashed in about a third of his holding in the company on March 17th, just over one month before the incident. This kept him from losing more than 500000 dollars when the share price plummeted after the spill.

That is suspicious. But still, Tony Hayward was the only person of power to dispose of his BP shares at such an opportune time.

Regardless, Hayward did handle many aspects of this historic oil spill in a bizarre way. After the explosion, the chief executive found himself thrown into the center of a media frenzy. And instead of offering sympathy for the deceased employees, Hayward complained to reporters that he wanted his life back.

On top of that, he told the media that the environmental impact of the spill would be very modest. He remarked that the amount of oil in the water was, quote, tiny, end quote, in relation to the total size of the Gulf of Mexico. Critics attacked BP for these comments, saying the company was trying to downplay the environmental impact because of Hayward's odd statements, along with the overall concern about public messaging.

BP hired a new spokesperson, the former campaign press aide to the former vice president, Dick Cheney.

The fact that the new spokesperson once worked for Cheney sent a strong signal to critics. At this point, Cheney was already tied to the oil spill. He used to be chief executive of Halliburton, the company whose cement job had failed, contributing to the disaster while he was in office during the 2000s.

Cheney's financial disclosures proved he received nearly two million dollars from Halliburton. This was especially worrisome to critics when the Pentagon tapped Halliburton for a sole source contract to restore and operate Iraqi oil wells. Coincidentally or not, that was just before the 2003 U.S. led invasion of Iraq.

Some critics insisted that Dick Cheney influenced policy in order to benefit an oil company that paid him. And evidence does suggest Halliburton thrived under the Bush administration. This general distrust was further stirred by the Deepwater Horizon incident.

On May 20th, 2010, MSNBC host and political commentator Chris Matthews guest starred on The Tonight Show. When host Jay Leno brought up the oil spill, he jokingly asked Matthews who the lying scum was in the situation. Matthews barely paused before bringing up Halliburton and Cheney.

Well, Chris Matthews cited past examples of Cheney's corruption. He didn't have any evidence the former VP or his old company profited off of Deepwater Horizon. Specifically, however, others did.

Just 11 days before the disaster, Halliburton announced their purchase of an oil field service company called Boots and Coots. This company provided services to mitigate oil spills.

David Anderson, a writer for the inspired Economist, noted the coincidence with apprehension. Boots and coots seemed like the perfect company to own should an oil disaster happen to occur.

Another article on Raw Story connected the acquisition to evidence that Halliburton employees New Horizons cement job was unstable. Instead of reporting the issue, perhaps Halliburton chose to turn a profit by purchasing the very company that would be paid to do disaster cleanup.

This and Halliburton's other corrupt dealings from bribing Nigerian officials for contracts in 2009 to profiting billions under no bid deals during the Iraq war are often synonymous with Cheney. However, there's no evidence the former VP profited from the horizon explosion himself.

True, but we do have the hiring of his former press aide as the new BP spokesperson following Tony Hayward's strange remarks. So the fact remains, a player from Cheney's past came to the rescue. This ties Hayward and all his shady behavior to Cheney, indirectly fair, but it's not a strong tie.

Besides, the only BP executive to sell his shares before the explosion was Tony Hayward. No offense to him, but his constant fumbling over the situation doesn't scream conspiracy mastermind. Still, I can't deny that the timing of BP execs touring the rig was suspicious. Someone in the know could have flipped a switch or otherwise interfered with blowout preventer controls. And Halliburton's role is concerning the fact that they bought a company that profits from oil disasters less than two weeks before the blowup while covering up the cement instability on the horizon is a huge red flag.

Overall, I give the intentional sabotage theory a six out of 10.

I agree we may not clearly see the mastermind behind all of this, but the threads are there. And I do think the tie between Hayward and Cheney is suspicious. The former VP may have profited in ways we just don't know of yet and other oil executives may have to. All in all, I give this theory an eight out of 10.

It's possible, though, that we're looking at the wrong group. Some think the real conspiracy lies not with a circle of corporate suits, but with conspiring environmentalists out to prove a point.

Coming up, we'll explore how environmentalist groups could have wrung some benefit out of history's largest oil spill.

Now back to the story after the BP spill.

Suspicions linger that Halliburton and BP intentionally let the Deepwater Horizon rig destruct. But there's no definitive money trail to the top.

And we should add that while the system is arguably arranged for the same groups that build and secure rigs to profit from their failures, in this case, BP pledged to donate all of the revenue it earned from the sale of recovered oil to Wildlife Restoration Foundation. Four years oil companies would continue to pour money into environmental groups to account for the spill's damage.

Which brings us to our third and final theory. Fanatic environmental groups orchestrated the oil spill to demonstrate how dangerous oil drilling can be. The disaster spurred the government into taking actions that eco organizations had been demanding for years.

A couple of days after Deepwater Horizon explosion, attention focused on efforts to seal the leaking well. This could be why the report of a second seemingly unrelated drilling rig accident in the Gulf of Mexico went largely unnoticed while being towed to a salvage yard in inland shallow water rig capsized in a canal near Morgan City, Louisiana.

While nobody was on board, a small amount of fuel leaked into the ocean.

Mainstream media didn't report much on this second smaller disaster, but forums like Godlike Productions, Dotcom and Free Republic dotcom erupted in concern. One post claimed that the United States was under attack from, quote, oil rig destroyers and, quote, People connected the two incidents in the Gulf and demanded to know who declared war on America's oil industry.

The general sentiment on God like Productions and Free Republic was that the two events constituted a communist plot to destroy the Gulf's ecology, along with big oil itself.

Right wing radio host Rush Limbaugh echoed this theory, giving it a larger platform on his show. Limbaugh appeared to blame the catastrophe on, quote, hardcore environmentalist wackos, end quote.

And he also noted the disaster's strange timing. The burning Deepwater Horizon sank on Earth Day.

Most people don't think of pipe bombs or arson when they think of environmental groups. But Limbaugh didn't spin an image of violent eco groups out of thin air. Radical pro environmental organizations exist and have been executing acts of terrorism for decades.

Ten years before Deepwater Horizon, at around midnight on June 16th, 2000, activists Craig Marshall and Jeffrey Luers parked a borrowed car and made their way across a small town street. They were heading towards Joe Romania Chevrolet car dealership in Eugene, Oregon, sharing a cigarette.

The two young men nervously scoped the scene. They had observed the night watchman for a while and were confident nobody was around in their hands.

Marshall and lures each carried a milk jug filled with fuel and stoppered with sponge wicks. They placed these homemade bombs under two brand new Chevy pickups.

Technically, the two men hatched their plan alone, trying to bring down some gas guzzling monsters, as Marshall later put it. But their actions were in line with similar efforts by two larger organizations Earth Liberation Front and Animal Liberation Front, or RLF.

The origin of such groups dates back to 1960s England. The founder of a Ronnie Lee started out by interrupting fox hunting competitions with noises and other distractions. Then Lee formed a more extreme group known as Band of Mercy, which attacked Hunter's vehicles in 1974.

Lee and his partner were arrested during their attempted raid on the Oxford Laboratory Animal Colonies. They were sentenced to three years in prison, during which Lee became even more radicalized when he was released.

Lee founded RLF, an even more militant group that spread to the United States in the late 70s in the U.S., RLF initially focused on freeing animals from research facilities, but their tactics quickly morphed into property damage, mostly through arson.

Even then, the group's policy was to never hurt a living creature. However, that seemed to be changing by 2002, when RLF members frequently threatened individuals they perceived as having connections to animal research.

Around this time, the Earth Liberation Front, a separate organization, was formed to protect the environment. In addition to animals, ILF claimed responsibility for burning down ski resorts, SUV dealerships and setting explosive devices around private homes.

Despite their promises to not harm others, Elf and Alf seem to allow attacks to grow out of hand. After all, Alf's founder, Ronnie Lee, wrote that animal liberation is a fierce struggle that demands commitment. He warned of injuries and possible deaths on both sides.

The ELF and Alf Circle is a close knit group of people who know and trust each other. But the community is so mysterious that many activists who plant firebombs are rarely doing so via direct orders.

According to FBI reports. The Elf and ALF, along with others similarly focused groups, have carried out more than 100 criminal acts in the U.S. since 1976. So Rush Limbaugh's suggestion that eco terrorists were responsible for the explosion on Deepwater Horizon wasn't impossible.

Limbaugh also suggested a motive on Earth Day when the rig sank. A carbon tax bill was supposed to be announced in the U.S. Senate. According to Limbaugh, fanatic eco groups hated the bill because it supposedly allowed more offshore drilling via loopholes.

After the horizon's destruction, supporters of the carbon tax bill scattered, the Guardian reported that Democrats hope to instead pass an energy bill focused on the liability of companies for oil spills.

For environmentalist groups, this would have been the perfect outcome. Not to mention after the disaster, the Obama administration chastised the oil industry and put a moratorium on all new offshore drilling.

Many environmental advocacy groups, including Defenders of Wildlife, Gulf Restoration Network and Save the Manatee Club, sued BP for harming and killing endangered species.

The media showed video clips of pelicans unable to fly, covered in a thick, brown goo and children playing on beaches smeared with tar. The general public was outraged by these images in a terrible sort of irony. The disaster was better for the environmental message than years of praise following the incident.

President Obama's speech to the nation called America's relationship with the oil industry an addiction. He vowed to steer the country away from fossil fuels and toward clean energy. Environmentalist organizations, fanatic or not, finally began to see the change they had demanded for years.

However, compared to our other theories about Deepwater Horizon, there's no evidence that suggest radical environmentalist groups ever touched the rig. The argument lies solely in motivation. Therefore, I give this theory a one out of 10.

While an attack on the horizon would break precedent for fanatic environmental groups, it could have been the next stage of escalation in their tactics. After all, the FBI was concerned about growing tension and violence from these organizations at the time. So I'm giving this ecoterrorism theory a slightly higher two out of 10.

Regardless of the cause, 10 years after the disaster, scientists are still trying to determine its environmental impact. The spill impacted fishing communities, oil industries and ecosystems, not to mention the families of 11 crew members that all died on the doomed rig.

Today, Halliburton, BP and Transocean continue to operate. Many of the drilling restrictions created by the Obama administration have since been reversed, leaving the door open for cutting corners, intentional or otherwise.

Matley Ashley is a researcher at the Center for American Progress. He studied the oil and gas industry after this BP spill and summed it up like this since Deepwater Horizon. We've taken two steps forward and one step back.

Thanks for tuning into conspiracy theories will be back next week with a new episode, you can find all episodes of conspiracy theories and all other Spotify originals from podcast for free on Spotify.

Until then, remember, the truth isn't always the best story, and the official story isn't always the truth.

Conspiracy Theories is a Spotify original from podcast. It is executive produced by Max Cutler Sound, designed by Dick Schroder with production assistance by Ron Shapiro, Carly Madden and Travis Clark. This episode of Conspiracy Theories was written by Kit Fitzgerald with writing assistance by Nicks Ward and Ali Wicker, Fact checking by Bennett Logan and research by Bradley Klein. Conspiracy theory stars Molly Brandenberg and Carter Roy.

Fact, fiction, fame, discover the real story behind one of history's most formidable families in the Spotify original from Park Cast the Kennedys. Remember, you can binge all 12 episodes starting on Tuesday, January 19th. Listen free and exclusively on Spotify.