tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC January 12, 2022 12:00am-1:00am PST
with a little box that says contribute here. >> tonight, my exclusive interview with doctor anthony fauci. then. >> you want to be on the side of dr. king, or george wallace? do you want to be on the side of john lewis, or bill connor? this is the moment to decide. >> senator cory booker on the presidents rousing call to protect democracy. an academy award winning filmmaker doctor -- don't look up. >> you know how many meetings we've had over the last few years. so boring. >> when all in, starts right now. good evening from new york, i'm chris hayes. during this pandemic, doctor anthony fauci has become a fixation. even obsession on the right, and it is among those who see
him as a punching bag. for the pointy headed public officials who want to tell you how to live your life. even gone so far as to compare him to a dictator and a murderer. >> after two years of nonstop murder -- morphed into a version of vinita mussolini. >> this is what people say to me, he doesn't represent science to them, he represents dr. joseph mengele. the doctor, the naughty doctor, who did experiments on jews in the second world war in concentration camps. >> hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to fund deadly human experiments on puppies. >> doctor fauci is sending puppies to slaughter, basically. >> today, doctor fauci was on capitol hill, testifying on the federal government's response to the omicron variant. as we see a massive spike in cases around the country. and i think, fair to say, a profound sense of frustration, exhaustion with the ongoing
pandemic. now doctor fauci has testified in front of congress many times. and by now, we all expect him to face hostile questions from the public. there is one republican who seems to have a particularly obsession with doctor fauci. senator rand paul of kentucky. every time he comes to testify, senator paul tries to the knockdown over and over again. i think that dr. fauci routinely ignores the science, causes hysteria and creates fear. this is the opposite of what we want as somebody leading our public health effort. doctor fauci, do you still support funding of the nih funding of the lab in wuhan? >> senator paul, with all due respect, you are entirely and completely incorrect >> dr. fauci, i don't expect you today to admit that you improved of nih funding of ghana function research in wuhan. but your repeated denials have --
you won't admit that it is dangerous. for that lack of judgment, i think it is time the resign >> today, in the hearing before the health education committee ransom attacks took a new turn, as he accused doctor fauci of trying to silence other scientists. >> do you really think it is important to use your 420,000 dollar salary to attack scientists that disagree with you. >> the email that you are referring to was an email of dr. collins to me. if you look at the email. >> that he responded to, respond to and set hurry up, i can do. >> i think unusual fashion senator. you are distorting everything about me. >> did you ever object to dr. collins's character action? did you write to him, an esteemed scientist, it would be beneath me. he responded to him, that you would do it. and you immediately got an article in the wire. send it back to him, said i nailed him in the wire.
>> that's not what went on. there you go again. you just do the same thing every hearing. >> okay, before we get into what happened after that. and again, senator paul comes up with all sorts of things he wants to go after fauci on. it will happen today. we are going to play that. take a step back for a second. let's understand. doctor anthony fauci. has been on the receiving end of many attacks. has been around a block a few times. for nearly 40 years, he's been the director of the national institute of allergy and infectious diseases. in fact, that salary that rand paul mentioned. was because he had so much seniority. he's accrued in the federal government pay scale. 40 years. was appointed that rule in 1984 in the early years of the aids epidemic. he was also than the target of some very angry public criticism at the time because dr. fauci had become the public face of the federal government's response to that crisis to that deadly virus. in october of 1988, aids activists at the food and drug
administration headquarters, outside of dr. fauci's office of the national institute of health, protesters chance to, a few fauci. that's a mere, larry kramer, alleging himself, published this open letter to doctor fauci in the village voice. in which he called fauci, an incompetent idiot, and quote a murder. craig told, he was an essential focus of evil in the world. crime attack fauci relentlessly in the media. he called him a pill pushing tool of the medical establishment, insulted his wife, even compared him to adolf ike men. here's the thing. kremer and fauci would eventually become close friends. with fauci telling the new york times, after karen's death in 2020, that they loved each other. but nothing changed overnight. in may of 1990, hundreds of activists descended on the national institutes of health again. watch rainbow colors go.
we're skeleton masks. carried signs it's a red tape kills us. they even put a fake doctor fauci had on the spike. there. all of this to say. anthony fauci is no stranger to public criticism. he is a big boy. it is something that comes with the territory. something he has had to live with as a public official. something that all public officials have to. that we live in a democracy is. two years ago, doctor fauci and his family started receiving security protection armed security detail. as a result of increasing online attacks. those attacks only got worse with the pandemics and the rights obsession. today on capitol hill took a different turn. doctor fauci is shared a specific and terrifying story of one of those very real threats. after senator rand paul relentlessly attacked him. >> what happens when he gets out and accuses me of things that are completely untrue. is that all of the sudden, that candles the crazies out there.
and i have life, threats upon my life. harassment of my family. and my children. with obscene phone calls because people are lying about me. now, i guess you could say, that is the way echoes, i can take the hit. well, it makes a difference. because some of you may know, just about three or four weeks ago, december 21st. a person was arrested, who was on their way from sacramento, to washington d.c. at a speed stop in iowa. and they asked the police. the police asked where he was going. and he was going to washington d.c. to kill dr. fauci. and they found in his car an ar-15 and multiple magazines of ammunition. because he thinks that maybe i am killing people. >> so as i mentioned before, this is been an ongoing pattern.
and it is not just dr. fauci. there is a lot of people, that once they get into the scopes of the right-wing machine, they have a security problem. doctor fauci, as you see, chief among them. every time that fauci comes bill for the senate health committee. ron paul goes after him. often about a different thing each time. does prompt a question, why is senator paul doing this over and over again? in a hostile and performative manner. well, doctor fauci has figured it out. i was seen as a theory. shared his answer with the committee today. >> i asked myself, why would senator want to do this? ? go to rand paul website. you see, fire doctor fauci, with a little box that says contribute here. you can do $5, $10, $20. $100. so you are making a catastrophic epidemic for your political gain. >> you might think that might instill some shame in toronto. but no. just hours after hearing
concluded, paul fired sending this email. literally fundraising after doctor fauci. calling him a today's hearing. joining me now, the man who's been on the receiving end of these attacks. who's been undeterred, doctor anthony fauci director of the national institute of -- doctor fauci, let's take a step back and talk about your career in public life and your career at the locus of these different policy issues. having to deal with high stakes pandemics, epidemics and diseases. i was sort of amazed as we were going through the footage today, senior head on a spike outside of a protest. i did know that it had gotten to that point. is this sort of how it goes, or is there something different now in the nature of our politics and the nature of attacks on you that are different than what you have experienced before in public life? >> it is entirely different chris.
back in the activist days, the federal government was not early on including activists, particularly gay activists, those who are at risk for, or those who had been living with hiv. in the kinds of discussions for clinical trials and the rigidity of the regulatory process. they made a really good point. they were fundamentally good people who were not lying. they were reacting, trying to gain attention. very theatrical about. if you look at that film, most of those people, many of them now, are my closest friends. they are fundamentally people of high integrity, who don't lie, who are trying to get the federal government to do things that quite frankly the federal government was slow in doing. and as the face of the federal government, the way that they
got attention, which was pretty good activists ploy, it's exceeded. was to be very iconoclast ick, to be very provocative and very theatrical. and they got my attention. i sat down and listen to them. what they said made absolute sense. and major changes. they were dignified people. i said many of them are my closest friends right now. but we are having now, is that right lies. that clearly are in the realm of politics. that thing i showed at the hearing is very true. we were having a hearing today, chris, that was a tough hearing. they were tough questions that were asked on both sides of the aisle. the democrats clearly, but was not a piece of cake. they were asking very good questions about what the
administration was doing. and the republicans themselves, led by senator burr, we're asking questions that were important. mitt romney, collins, tuberville, including senator moran. they are asking tough questions but. senator paul was doing, was not even getting anybody a chance to make any explanation. nothing productive, constructive. totally ad hominem. before the get-go, before you could get a word out of your mouth. that is entirely different than the aids activists from the 19 80s. it is fundamentally different. >> you shared the story, i had read reports about the individual who was arrested with weapons, saying that they are on there waiting towards you. senator paul gave an interview saying that is ridiculous, that has nothing to do with me. you cannot hold people accountable for what some violent disordered person is doing.
it is irresponsible to pay me with that brush. have you experience threat like this before? or a security situation like this before in your public life, given that you've had a career as long as you have? >> no. absolutely not. in all of the situations that we were in, it was trying to get attention to sit down and be able to talk. there was no threats. i went down to the aids activist hub in greenwich village. in the gay and lesbian community center. to talk about, with the same people that we're putting my head on a steak, just to get my attention and i got my attention when i went and spoke to them. i felt completely safe in that environment. because they were fundamental people who were struggling to get the attention of the government. what you saw the hearing today was pure ad hominem. and i called him out. because that is exactly what he
is doing. he is raising money. vote here, paid for by rand paul. fire fauci, he is killing you, he's murdering people, he's doing this and by the way, don't hear, click this box. if that isn't absolutely proof of what is going on here, i mean, you can't miss that when chris. >> i want to play another moment today that happened with senator marshall. who seemed very focused on your public financial disclosures, which are required by law and filed. and there was an exchange over them, where he seemed to think that they weren't accessible and they are. you can get them here. he was that exchange, take a listen. >> yes or no, would you be willing to submit to congress and the public a financial disclosure that includes your past and current investments, after all your colleague, dr. walensky and every member of
congress summits a financial disclosure that includes their investments. >> i don't understand why you are asking me that question. my financial disclosure is public knowledge and has been so for the last 37 years or so, 35 years. it is totally accessible to you if you want it. for the public. >> is it accessible for the public? >> you are totally incorrect. >> senator marshall, dr. fauci has answered you. but it is public information and he is happy to give it to you if you asked. >> senator moran. >> didn't sound like you at the end there doctor fauci. you seemed a little frustrated with that line of inquiry. >> you know, chris, it is just an example again. he was implying if you listen to the entire dialogue, that in my position, responsible for drug trials and having so-called inside knowledge of what's drug works in which trump doesn't work, that maybe i was making investments. sort of like ahead of the game
here. he was totally implying that. and he made the statement that we cannot get your financial statement. it was stunning to me that a united states senator doesn't realize that my financial statement is public knowledge. it's like, where have you been? i want to ask a final question about where we find ourselves. you talked about the omicron wave today, there's one big question, it's a worry i have. we looked at south africa, we saw the curve. we saw a pretty big divergence between cases and hospitalizations. we saw that in denmark, which was the frontline of omicron. we saw that in the uk. even in a very vaccinated place, like new york city, we have seen hospitalizations go. up we are not seeing that gap between hospitalization and
cases in the same way we've seen in other places, and i wonder how much that worries you. what is your theory for why that is? day >> it's complicated, chris. if you look at our cases, there really is, if you look at the difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, the charts are really rather profound, particularly between vaccinated and boosted individuals, where you see the overwhelming majority of people who are in the hospital and dying. it is true that this virus has a phenomenal degree of transmissibility. the transmissibility means a lot of people are going to get infected. i believe you are going to see -- already starting to see that, when you talk anecdotally to the hospitals, they're seeing a lot of people who are getting infected, but it appears that the seriousness of it is less. i think once we get through --
since it's a big country, and there's different regions, with different levels of vaccinations, different levels of what we call percentage of already affected individuals, that i believe you're going to see exactly what we've seen in south africa. that you're going to see a big gap, where this virus, even though it's highly infectious, for the most part, will not be as severe. but, when quantitatively, you get so many people infected, even if the relative proportion of people who are hospitalized is less than with delta, when you have such a volume of people infected, you're going to get a lot of serious disease, which is the reason why we now have something like 145,000 hospitalizations, 1600 deaths, and over a korte -- three quarters of 1 million cases, in one day. we can't take this lightly. >> doctor anthony fauci, thank you so much for making time tonight. >> thank you for having me.
>> we got a big show for you tonight. as a fighter of the voting rights bill comes to a head, new jersey senator cory booker is here. president biden's ultimatum, call the vote or change a filibuster. how soon until we see action. plus, show you the big, short anchorman, and -- on his new breakthrough hit movie, don't look up. he joins me live, just ahead. stick around, you don't want to miss it. ahead remember the three ps. what are the three ps? the three ps of life insurance on a fixed budget miss it. are price, price, and price. a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 54, what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price?
also $9.95 a month. i just turned 80, what's my price? $9.95 a month for you too. if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the #1 most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. it has an affordable rate starting at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed. and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate lock so your rate can never go up for any reason. so call now for free information and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. and it's yours free just for calling. so call now for free information. earlier today, president joe
biden and vice president, kamala harris, travel to atlanta georgia, a day after georgia had its big weight of the college football championship. as a big part of their voting rights push. they -- the quipped of gun monitor king. her wife curtis got came, as well as the children and their families. they visited the ebenezer baptist church working with pastor, and of course, that's the same church were george and senator, who's election a years ago, help spur the states new voting restrictions, has been senior pastor for almost 17 years. the trip in culminated with a speech where biden made his most vocal call yet, for filibuster reform. a move that would -- to pass the senate by simple majority. some thinly veiled criticism at the democratic senators, who are now standing in the way.
>> i support changing the senate rules, whichever way they need to be changed, to prevent a minority of senators from blocking action on voting rights. when it comes to protecting majority rule in america, the majority should rule in the united states senate. i ask every elected official in america, how do you want to be remembered? a consequential moments in history, they present a choice. do you want to be on the side of dr. king or george wallace? do you want to be on the side of john lewis or bull connor? do you want to be on the side of abraham lincoln or jefferson davis? this is the moment to decide. to defend our elections. to defend our democracy. >> after supporting the filibuster for many years, democratic senator cory booker from new jersey, came out against it last march. for the sake of our vulnerable populations, for the sake of
america doing big things again, the filibuster has to be reformed. he is a cosponsor of the for the people act, as well as the john lewis voting rights act. the two pieces of voted in legislation that biden advocated for. he joins me now. senator, your reaction to today and the speech today. will kind of effect do you think the president stepping into this has? >> first of all, i think the president recognizes were added inflection point in our democracy. you have this wave of voter suppression laws that are being passed now. sourced by the big, lie that somehow trump's highest administration to -- somehow we need to get these voting laws to fix something that's not broken. really what they're doing is suppressing the votes of young people, native americans, minorities, disabled folks and more. i think joe biden had to go, out i think he gave a
tremendous, full-throated endorsement. does it have an effect, look, you know this as well as i do, this is a personality issue. this is about of a lot of individual senators, and decisions that they have to make. i think in many ways, joe biden is a respected guy in the senate. this is where he came from. i'm hoping it makes a difference. >> i guess, everyone is trying the best they can on this and also build back better. it's got a very thin majority, you need all 50 votes to do anything -- whether to change the rules of the voting rights legislation, or pass build back better, the math is the math. i'm not missing something, right? sinema and manchin say they won't vote to change the filibuster rules, and that is currently the position unless something changes. >> an important distinction. build back better, there are arguments over the base bill. you're talking about two voting bills that had 50 democratic senators on board with them. and, senators saying, yeah,
there are problematic things with the laws that are being passed out, that will make it more difficult for some populations to vote. we are all in agreement with that. the question now is, what do we do with the filibuster? i think that's what the grind of the conversations we've been having, over these last few weeks, are. such as, can we figure out a carve out, is there a way to modify the rule? the idea for most of us, this is the sacrosanct, most important right of a democracy. the voting of the people. we need to make sure that we find a way to get this done. >> when you came out -- there has been progress on this, or at least migration, among democrats. back when i was 12 -- when i was covering u.s. senators, they tended not to want to change the filibuster. part of the reason, it does give each individual senator
more power. in a mathematical sense, there's fewer of you that need to get to get to the block stuff. what was your migration, and it does seem like there's been a lot of movement in the column of we need to do something. >> i'll be honest, i was one of the people that was really afraid. i saw mitch mcconnell, paul ryan, donald trump, trifecta, if there is no filibuster, i can only imagine what they would have done. i was really worried about the most vulnerable populations in america, which is really so many americans. what they would've done on the fundamental right of a woman to control her body, for example. i had a lot of those fears and concerns. i migrated quickly. the history of the filibuster, it's not part of our history, it's not in the constitution. this is something that really flared up to stop civil rights legislation. to stop the rights of minorities. the fact that the law has been
changed the -- filibuster rule, excuse me, has been changed. in the 80s, the 70s, it. will change in 2013. mitch mcconnell change to get supreme court justices. they're the final thing that really pushed me was the fact of how many things were not getting done in this body. the overwhelming majority of americans believe it. take common sense background checks, think roe v. wade, that somehow we are in a nation where are the things that we agree on aren't getting. dunn voters, knowing, that if we get that alignment, of mcconnell, bryan, and trump, they will be more aware that there are more consequences if we don't engage. i moved along, way and i'm hoping -- i love to see the wisdom of so my colleagues who moved as well. >> that was what was striking to me about watching joe biden give this speech. this is a person who is very much a creature of the united states senate. one of the longest serving
senators we've had, and i think if you asked him recently -- he is somebody who is very molded in adapt sows norms. it is striking to see him making this call from the lectern, as a president, towards former body. >> look, the filibuster in a long period -- was used on average one time it was really invoked-ing, it wasn't invoked in supreme court justices it wasn't invoked in a lot of major pieces of legislation. it began to be abused especially with mitch mcconnell, really taking the filibuster to a whole new level under barack obama. to say that joe biden's change, the real change you need to point to is the way the modern republican party picked up the filibuster and so abuse it to the point where many of us are saying this is ridiculous, we're stopping some fundamental progress in our country.
we need to refit this filibuster. >> senator cory booker, good to have you on tonight, thanks a lot >> thank you, happy new year. >> don't go anywhere, my reporter with filmmaker amok. this new netflix phenomena, don't look up just ahead. you do not want to miss. don't look up just ahead you do not want to miss.
it's also temperature balancing so i stay cool. and it senses my movement and automatically adjusts to help keep me comfortable all night. sleep number takes care of the science so i can focus on other things. the sleep number 360 smart bed is on sale now. only from sleep number. >> tonight the committee everyone needs health insurance. covered california is making sure more people can get it. new federal funding of $3 billion is available to help more californians get covered. julie and bob are paying $700 less every month. dee now gets comprehensive coverage with no monthly premium. and the novarros are paying under $100 per month. check coveredca.com to see your new lower price. covered california. this way to health insurance. enrollment ends january 31st.
investigating january 6th insurrection made a number of big moves. we learned that they issued three new subpoenas, asking for testimony and documents from two advisers, which donald trump junior. as well as a staffer who helped draft the speech that donald trump delivered on january 6th at the ellipse. that's one where he said we are going to march down to the capitol. now, today, the committee chair, congressman benny thompson said that they also want to hear from rudy giuliani. not ruling out a subpoena to compel testimony around the events surrounding capitol hill.
thompson also said that the committee is examining their authority to issue subpoenas for fellow members of congress. and if those subpoenas would be enforceable, after republican congressman jim jordan of ohio said that he would not cooperate with the requests to sit in for an interview. as the committee contends with republican resistance in congress, they are also in contact with former vice president mike pence. new york times reports that the committee has been in touch with pence's lawyers since last summer. has been gauging his willingness to speak with investigators. pence has grown increasingly illusions with following voluntarily cooperating. seeing the committee's consideration of criminal referrals for donald trump. that's designed for hurting public chances for control. even with all of that instruction, the committee seems to be moving forward towards laying out the facts and building a case. in plain negotiations, federal prosecutors, people who work at
the department justice, recently began asking defense lawyers for some of those charged in the insurrection, who are paying out. if their clients would admit in sworn statements that they swarmed the capitol believing that trump wanted them to stop pants from certifying the election. chairman thompson told reporters, the committee would be tomorrow. as the committee continues to move forward with the investigation portion of their inquiry, we also know that they are preparing for the possibility of televised primetime hearings. there is a lot going on. right now, there are of course, working against the clock with the midterm elections and the very strong possibility of a republican takeover at congress. looming large, in less than ten months. g large, in less than te months
it's time for our lowest prices of the season on the sleep number 360 smart bed. what if i sleep hot? ...or cold? no problem, the sleep number 360 smart bed is temperature balancing so you both sleep just right. and it senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both effortlessly comfortable. so, you can really promise better sleep? yes! you'll know exactly how well you slept, night after night. we take care of the science. all you have to do is sleep. and now, save up to $1,000 on sleep number 360 smart beds. >> this is not real.
common. >> good for you. >> it's headed directly towards earth. >> this comment is what we call a planet killer. >> at this exact moment, i say we sit tight and assess. >> sit tight and assess? >> sit tight? >> sit tight, then assess. sit tight part comes first. and you have the digestive, that's the assessment period. >> that's part of the trailer for one of the most successful films in netflix history. since it debuted on a streaming platform on christmas eve, don't look up has been viewed millions of times. like most movies those days, become part of the cultural conversation. movie is a satire. a bang on the head allegory for climate change. here's the premise. there is a giant comet that is on course to destroyers. and in a few short weeks it will impact the planet. ending all life as we know it. when two astronomers, played by leonardo capital and jennifer lawrence tried to sound the alarm of the impending intimate i'm again. they are met with a resounding
shrug. take this scene, where they attempt to warn the president. played by mail streep, on their discovery. >> mile high tsunami's, handing out all across the globe. if this comment makes impact, it will have the impact of of a billion hiroshima bombs. there will be magnitude ten or 11 earthquakes. i'm just trying to articulate the science. >> it's like so stressful. i'm trying to listen. >> i don't think you understand the gravity of the situation. >> the politicians are too worried about sounding like alarmist. what is worse, they are lobbying by bismarck next to not stop the comment. because there is a tech billionaire, and big donor, who is more interested in the economic opportunities that might present. mining the minerals on it. as one character puts a quite hilariously, were for the jobs that the column is going to provide. sounds familiar. not just politicians are capable of dealing with human catastrophe.
when our heroes took their pitch to the media, this is how that goes. >> i'm sorry, are we not being clear. we are trying to tell you that the entire planet is about to be debunked destroyed. >> justin we do around here. keep the bad news light helps the medicine go down >> maybe the destruction of the entire planet, isn't supposed to be fun. maybe it is supposed to be terrifying. and unsettling. >> please, don't do that. >> and you should stay up all night, every night, crying. when we are all 100% going to die. >> overall, the movie paints a portion of humanities inaction when it comes to libel catastrophes. the movie is really punching through the cultural zeitgeist. just in time for the annual
reminder of the actual world's biggest threat right now. the non allegorical catastrophe we are facing. last year was the fifth hottest on record. the last seven years have been the hottest seven years on record. for the sixth year in a row, ocean temperatures were the hottest on record. according to -- the oceans of absorbed the heat equivalent to souvenir hiroshima atomic bombs, dead in ending the second, 24 hours a, day 365 days a year. that's the climate reality that don't look up forces us to look at. the man behind our remarkable film, anna mckay, joins me live, next. live, next
a planet killer. >> that is correct. >> so how certain is this? >> 100% certainty of impact. >> please, don't say 100%. >> could we just call a potentially significant event? >> but it isn't potentially going to happen, it is going to happen. >> exactly. 99. 7 8% to be exact. >> okay, so it's not 100 percent. >> don't look up debuted on netflix two and a half weeks ago. has become the second most
watched films in that streaming channels history. lots of people love it, some people hate it. but everybody seems to be talking about it. joining me now is the filmmaker behind it. director adam mackay. adam, it is very hard to get movies to breakthrough into cultural conversations these days. for 1 million different reasons, some of which i think you satirizing the film. are you surprised, gratified, glad to see how much conversation this movie has kicked off? >> our whole team, we were blown away by the world reaction of this. you know, the movie was always predicated on the idea that we are living in very anxious, uncertain times. and to see hundreds of millions of people respond to that, i've never experienced anything like it. in my entire experience and i've made a lot of movies on a
lot of tv shows. so yeah, it has been pretty incredible. >> talk to me about the allegory. i know our mutual friend and you were talking about this and he said that it is like a comet is going to hit earth. why the allegory? how did you think through trying to tell a compelling story and in a fictional world about climate? >> the whole idea was, i tried to write about four or five different movies. and each one had their limitations. there were some that were dramatic, dystopian, there were others that were clever. with kind of a twilight zone twist. it just came from an off handed conversation that i had with david zero to. where he said, it's like armageddon. and the asteroid is going to
hit, and no one cares. and i just said, that is the movie. what i liked about it, it's a big idea. it's not a super small niche-y, clever idea. it's something we can all really to. i loved that it was funny. i thought from my experience in doing comedy for years, but i've noticed is, when three, four, 500 people are together. and they are laughing, there is a high bar of truth. it is very hard to get people to laugh when something is false. if you want to do a joke where the joke is billionaires are taxed too much. well, good luck with that. because they are really not. i thought that ultimately the reality of the calm going to hit earth, clearly as a metaphor for climate change, and a bunch of other realities like income inequality, corruption in our government,
that a lot of people could really identify with. that but i never dreamed that the response would be overwhelming. it's been incredible. >> there's two parts about this that i think are interesting to zoom in. on one, is the dread that you are talking about. trying to find a way through the dread, around the dred, which is, in some, ways the story of the movie. when she says we're all going to die and living with that. part of the problem, part of the difficulty of truly internalizing wet is bearing down on us in, the climate, is precisely like a natural human allergy to contemplating that. which, i think you do a really good job of capturing that in the film, across all players. when they say, it's not just the media types, or the political types, everybody rebels a little bit in contemplating the end of the
earth. >> yeah, the story is so big. well we're confronting right now with the end of the livable climate, and we're in the middle of it, right now, make no mistake about it. it challenges the imagination, and in fairness to everybody who is resistant to it, or things that were over buoying it or things that is just like y2k, this is real and it's happening now. until four years ago, i was in the group of people that were like, oh, that's an issue. it's only because iran headlong into david wallace wells's book, uninhabitable earth, which i highly recommend. or the ipcc reports from the un, that i finally got that chill in my bones and, i understood what the climate scientists were feeling, and why they're so emotional, and why they're so frustrated. we really are looking at the
biggest story and threat to life in human history. and yet, i'm not going to lie, i'm way too invested in jennifer lopez and ben affleck hitting it off, and then finally finding happiness. >> i'm also rooting for them. i find it truly and genuinely delightful. that relates, because -- one of the things that i think is really sophisticated and funny about the film, is that the first part of it is getting attention. you are not offline have discuss the difficulties of covering climate, how undercover climate is. i agree on that. but the first part of the movie, well if we can get attention, then we can do it. people just have to know that the comment is coming, that will do something. that's the first hero quest, and then they get the attention,
and that doesn't solve it, which leads to a second heroes quest. but that second part is also very profound. the warning goes, out the comment is up there, and in the way the culture in politics process that information makes it very hard to act on. >> yeah, we're in a very strange place right now, where we have all this new tech, blossoming. but, it's also a profit ties, they make money off of engagement, misunderstanding. our media makes a lot of money off of us not comprehending in dealing with some of the truths. by the way, i see it is not from some holier than how, spot you're obviously somebody i know one respect, and there's a lot of great journalists who are covering climate change, who are doing really great work. the truth is, the system is so bizarre lead cranked up right
now, that i just don't know if we have that room to really take in a true this complex as the collapse of the livable climate, which is happening. make no mistake about it. you saw in kentucky, colorado. the crazy record high temperatures up in alaska that were just off the charts. i just read a story the other day, where they said, according to new models, computer models, that in eight years, 50% of our days will be one out of 100-year heat event. i read this article and i'm like, where is that? why am i not hearing that in my media? but, i understand. it stuff is so crazy right now, or in such chaos of change, that to drop down down on people and then go to commercial for subway, or a new
for tundra -- how does that even make sense? >> i think the other part of it, two, is for the people that do -- the common is coming, and we have to get together and stop it, but, you said this thing the other day on twitter, which i agree with. there really is in the sense of all hands on deck about this in the way there has to be. that means across the spectrum, we have to be shutting down coal, we have to be creating crazy moon shots to do carbon capture tech. a lot of things we need to try, all at once, and the full spectrum reveals that were nowhere near close to that. >> the emotional bandwidth we need to be living in right now. this is me as a non scientist, who's heard about this, so i'm sure i'm only get about 10% of it.
it's somewhere between the cuban missile crisis and the initial bombing of london. we are at, like, don't use aerosol cans, because of the whole an ozone, or y2k. we're nowhere near the reality of it. clearly, we are all failing. by the way, if you notice in the movie, we take shots at a hollywood, which includes me. we take shots at everyone, across the board. we are failing in a tremendous way to convey these truths. and it may simply me a matter of our format is wrong. we may need to do three times longer segments before commercial breaks. our movies may need to be four times longer. i don't know. but, the goal between the reality and how we are perceiving is massive, and very
disturbing. >> adam mackay, it's a great movie, you should check it out if you have. and thank you so much. >> thank you, chris. always a pleasure. >> that is all in on tuesday night, the rachel maddow show starts now. good evening rachel. evening, chris, thank you, my friend, much appreciated. thanks for joining us this hour. we've got a lot going on tonight. after president biden's big voting rights speech in georgia, and all the fallout from that. we'll talk to a senator who was there at the speech, and has a bit of an inside track on whether or not the senate is actually going to deliver on what vice president harris and president biden called for today. this is a senator who has been with the president all day. she's going to be joining us live in just a few minutes, after she touches back down in d.c. on the air force one flight back from georgia. very much looking forward to that conversation. we're also going to be speaking with one of the leading voting rights activists in the country,