Coronavirus cases TRANSCRIPT: 4/20/20, All in w/ Chris Hayes

Kate Brown, Laurie Garrett, Angelo Carusone, David Wallace-Wells, Dan Dicker


ARI MELBER, MSNBC HOST: – a bit of a response from some of this. But

that`s a product of the work done, not a reason to stop working. I want to

thank both of our doctors and Mr. Raines. I appreciate it. That does it for

me. I will be back here along with Brian Williams in the 7:00 p.m. Eastern

hour tomorrow. But don`t go anywhere, Chris Hayes starts now.


CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST: Good evening from New York. I`m Chris Hayes as we

enter yet another week of staying at home, the Coronavirus pandemic has now

taken the lives of nearly 42,000 Americans. It`s been over a month of

social distancing, six weeks in some places, and so it is extremely

understandable. And I say this as a personal expression of how I feel that

people are eager to get back to some kind of normal.


And while there really is some encouraging news out in New York, where the

one-day death toll fell below 500 for the first time since April 2nd, there

is still a long, long way to go. And yet the President has embarked on

this, I think, quite cynical and calculate a strategy to talk about the

future of the country totally reopen. There`s going to be restaurants that

are crowded and college football stadiums Alabama are going to be full. And

the messages were passed the worst of it already. We`re over the hump.

We`re going to get back to it.


But if you`re thinking in the long term, and it brings me zero joy to say

this, the reality is we are early in the parts of battling pandemic. Today

alone, today, we lost more than 1,300 Americans, the ones we counted. This

remains a four-alarm fire, not time to discuss what kind of redecorating

we`re going to do in the house when it`s all burned through.


And according to the head of the World Health Organization, unless the

world can work together, things are going to get worse before they get






national unity and global solidarity, trust us, the worst is yet ahead of





HAYES: The worst is ahead of us. Even if we`re able to open up in small

ways in the next few weeks, we will have to go back to staying at home if

cases spike. And this desire to look past the present ignores the fact that

there`s a crisis every hour every minute in American life right now.


And look at these headlines. This is just in the last 24 hours. There`s a

state prison in Ohio where 73 percent, 73 percent of inmates have tested

positive. 1,828 confirmed cases among inmates at that one prison alone. We

think it`s the largest cluster in America. Prison advocates have been

talking about this for weeks that this is going to happen.


In New Jersey, there are 425 outbreaks just at nursing homes. In Michigan,

the devastating news of a five-year-old girl succumbing to the virus. There

are just so many stories of the horror and the anguish this virus continues

to inflict on us every single day.




ASHLEY WAY, REGISTERED NURSE, MOUNT SINAI: We ended up getting a patient in

a room that – I mean, she was basically dying. She was very unstable. We

were too worried to move her upstairs because – sorry. We were afraid that

she would die in the hallway.


So they set up – Mount Sinai has Zoom set up to where they can bring in

iPads in the room. And they get the family on the phones to make a phone

call to say their goodbyes over Zoom because we`re not allowed to have any

visitors right now.


So I would say that was probably my (INAUDIBLE) because I`ve never had seen

anything like that ever.




HAYES: That`s the reality of right now. Not a few weeks from now, right

now. And every day we are seeing the federal government`s failures in

addressing massive shortfalls when it comes to testing and personal

protective equipment. We are also hearing more and more stories of how the

federal government and Trump ministration, it`s not just not helping,

actively harming state and local efforts to procure those goods.


On Friday, the New England Journal of Medicine published this remarkable

letter. It`s from a Massachusetts health care executive, a guy by the name

of Dr. Andrew Artenstein, who has been desperate to get personal protective

equipment for his healthcare system. And after seeing a number of deals

fall through, he arranged for a shipment of masks at five times a normal



He said two semi-trailer trucks cleverly marked as food service vehicles to

an industrial warehouse near a small airport to pick them up because he was

worried the feds might try to seize them out from under him. And the plan

was have the trucks take distinct routes away from the warehouse to

minimize the chances that the entire shipment would be commandeered by the



And yet when they got to the warehouse, two Federal Bureau of Investigation

agents arrived, show their badges and started questioning me. No, the

shipment was not headed for resale or the black market. The agents check my

credentials. I tried to convince them the shipment of personal protective

equipment was bound for hospitals.


The FBI eventually allowed the trucks to be loaded up but the doctor later

discovered the Department of Homeland Security was still considering

redirecting the shipment. “Only some quick calls leading to intervention by

our congressional representative prevented its seizure.”


This is the reality of now. This is what the people on the frontlines are

dealing with. It`s why Illinois governor J.B. Pritzker arranged secret

flights from China to bring millions of masks and gloves to his state. Why

Governor Larry Hogan of Maryland and his wife embarked on what he called

the confident project to get coronavirus tests from South Korea. Governors,

as well as hospitals and healthcare systems, are actually having to keep

the feds from finding out what they`re getting for fear will get hijacked.


And here`s the thing, these tests and this protective equipment that

hospital execs and governors are trying to acquire, it`s not just stuff we

need for a short period of time during a surge of use like ventilators,

right, which are needed when a city or localities overwhelmed by a health

care system. No. These things, tests, personal protective equipment, they

have to be a huge part of our lives the foreseeable future if we want to

get this nation back to something that looks approximately like normal.


Here with me now, one of the governors who`s been fighting to get

protective equipment for her state, Democratic Governor Kate Brown of

Oregon. Governor, can you talk – I mean, you in Oregon and Washington, I

think there`s been a lot of press about the job that you`ve done there. A

place That looked like it could have had a really, really severe early

outbreak. Because of the strong steps, I think, taken by yourself and

Governor Inslee and others local leaders, it has not been what we see in

New York.


And yet now as you sort of envision the future, talk about what you need,

what your state needs, if you`re going to start thinking about some sort of



GOV. KATE BROWN (D-OR): Thank you, Chris. I really appreciate the question.

In Oregon, we took early and aggressive measures to protect our people,

measures to socially distance and close down parts of the economy. And as a

result, we`re starting to bend the curve, but we are not getting the

supplies and testing equipment that we need.


States that did not take aggressive action are getting more help from the

federal government. So for those states that did the right thing and made

really, really difficult choices, it feels very punitive.


HAYES: The President has said and insisted multiple times and insisted

again today that there`s adequate testing, that governors like yourself

literally just don`t understand what`s going on, that you haven`t read the

proper documentation, that you don`t know where the labs are, and that

essentially you`re just complaining without understanding that actually

there are plenty of tests for you. Is that true?


BROWN: Dr. Birx, Deborah Birx told us today that Oregon is one of a handful

of states that has the lowing – lowest testing capacity in the entire

country. So even by their own information, they know we don`t have the test

that we need.


And we are very interested in reopening. We have rural communities that

have shuttered their businesses to protect their people. And we want to get

these small businesses up and running. But we need both additional personal

protective equipment and we need additional testing capacity. That`s what

the very – that`s what the federal government told us this morning.


HAYES: Have you found yourself in competition or in these kinds of crazy

situations in trying to acquire PPE, particularly, as people talk about,

you know, some kind of reopening, there`s going to be a lot of that needed,

right? I mean, places that didn`t used to have personal protective

equipment, obviously, if they`re, you know, running a grocery store, all

kinds of venues are going to have to need it now to protect their workers.

And that`s going to have to be secured somehow. Like, how are you finding

that process?


BROWN: Absolutely. We`re all in this together. And I`ve been really clear.

We`ve been working hard to collect PPE from around the state. Generous

dentist`s office, medical clinics have donated their personal protective

equipment, masks, gloves and gowns so that we could use them where it`s

most needed on the front lines in Oregon.


We have been working to conserve our PPE. But we`re also working to both

produce it and to procure it. We have a team that`s very aggressive both

working with national and international companies to get us the supplies

that we need.


And what I love most is the creativity and ingenuity of Oregon companies,

big companies like Nike and Intel working to produce personal protective

equipment. And then little companies like the Renewal Workshop Project in

Cascade Locks, working to create PPE. We even have our adults in custody in

the Department of Corrections making masks.


All of this is a collective effort. We`re going to need it obviously in the

ground – on the ground here in Oregon. But if we have enough here, then

we`ll be able to send it to other states and then maybe to other countries.

This is truly a global challenge. And we all have to work together to solve

these problems.


HAYES: Final question to you. You have entered into this kind of pact with

California and Washington to coordinate kind of phased reopening or ending

the strictest part of lockdowns. And it strikes me, there`s news out of

Georgia today, Brian Kemp is lifting restrictions on places like nail

salons and bowling alleys and gyms.


As a governor, you know, if you`re – if you have a neighboring state that

were to do that, what would that mean for you given the fact that the virus

has no idea which state line it is in at a given time?


BROWN: That`s absolutely right. This virus knows no state boundaries, and

it knows no international boundaries. And that`s why I texted my colleague

Governor Newsome and Governor Inslee early on to say, can we coordinate and

align our work around opening up our states? We have a shared framework.

It`s going to be individual steps for our states.


But I am working hard to coordinate with our business community, for

example, our restaurants, and our personal services, our hair salons, to

get their advice about how we do this, and protect their clients and their

customers from the virus.


And it`s great to be doing this from a regional perspective. And we`re all

in this together. We need to be making shared sacrifices, and we need to be

sharing best practices.


HAYES: All right, Governor Kate Brown of Oregon, thank you for taking a bit

of time with us tonight. I really appreciate it.


BROWN: Thank you. Take good care. Be safe.


HAYES: I`m trying. I want to turn now to one of the best science journals

in the country, Laurie Garrett Pulitzer Prize Winner, columnist for Foreign

Policy, who has been tracking and covering this virus at the beginning. She

joins me now by phone. Laurie, I want to start with this idea of like where

we are in this trajectory. And I genuinely hate coming on the show, to say

to people like we`re a long way away, there`s a long way to go. But I do

worry that a gap has opened up between the expectations being set by the

White House and by some political leadership and what public health experts

and epidemiologists are saying about where we are in this.



apologies for not being on camera, and happy to be back with you. Yes, we

have a very long way to go. And you know, everybody`s event horizon that

they`re looking at right now is just, when can I get out of my apartment?

When can I go to a football game? But the event horizon that`s real in

terms of this virus is two years, three years, way down the road.


And look at what`s happening now in China. A whole second giant epidemic is

emerging in the far north near the Russian border. We see a resurgence of

virus, after everything proper was done in Singapore, in Japan. We have to

be very, very careful how we approach all this and understand that we can`t

simply test our way out of this pandemic.


We`ll never have enough test kits. Nobody is using them properly. Many are

inadequate in terms of their design and function. And honestly, we need

smart testing and nobody`s really talking about that.


HAYES: Well, I want to follow up on that I – if there`s any basket that I

think we are all tempted to put our eggs in, it is the testing basket, the

tests are way out of the crisis. So it`s somewhat deflating to hear you say

the sentence, we can`t test our way out of this. So please explain.


GARRETT: Well, first of all, a lot of employers who contacted me and they

think that literally they Going to be able to test all of their employees

say, you know, a million workers spread out over 12 countries and know

who`s infected and let the ones that aren`t infected come back to work.


But they have to understand you test them Monday, but they`ll be infected

on Thursday. So are you going to test every single employee every single

day? Similarly, kids going back to school? Are you going to test every

single school child every single day? Where are those tests kits going to

come from? Who`s going to manufacture them? And who`s going to do quality

control and regulate to make sure they really are what they claim to be as

test chips.


What we need to be doing is a smart testing, really guided by scientific

principles where we target – we ask the right policy question and come up

with a way to answer the question with appropriate targeting.


So for example, let`s say you run a big automobile plant in Detroit, and

you want to know, can I – is it safe for me to let my workers back. We`re

not going to be able to test every single worker today, but you might be

able to set up a cohort of a representative sampling of your workforce and

test them on a regular basis. And similarly, school trips. You might be

able to say, what`s the rate in 12-year-olds in New Orleans today?


HAYES: That`s a great – a great point. And it sort of contrasts a little

bit with this, the news out of Georgia today, right? So the idea of like,

this has to be very thought through, there has to be the sort of

procedures. You know, Brian Kemp, Georgia governor today lifting some

restrictions, including things like nail salons, massage therapists,

bowling alleys, which seems to me like I don`t know, that seems like going

to be tough to do that in a safe way.


And then on top of that, which I find so bizarre and strange is then

issuing these guidelines about how you have to reopen. But it`s unclear

that the two mesh together like, can you safely social distance as a

massage therapist? I don`t – it doesn`t appear so. It just feels like

people are going to be left in the lurch with no actual clear indication of

what`s safe and what`s not if governments go about it this way.


GARRETT: One of the things I`m worried about, Chris, is that we`re headed

towards the sort of marketplace approach to risk assessment. So that, oh,

you open up – you say, OK, we can open up massage parlors, and leave it to

the customer. Customers would be aware. You walk up to the door, you know,

tap gently on the door and ask, have you guys been tested? And they say,

oh, yes, sure, sure we`ve been tested. We`re all clear of virus. Come on in

and let me give you a massage.


And you can – you could almost see that everybody`s supposed to just vote

with their feet, and their checkbooks deciding is this safe or not safe.

And that`s just not the way to go about this business. We have to be

thinking also about, you know, you just had the governor talking about the

competition between states and between large cities over who can buy what

test kits and driving the prices up.


Well, guess what, who`s really losing in that. Who`s really losing is poor

countries all over the world. All over the world, they`re being outbid by

Americans. And India has already protested that they had placed an order

with a Chinese testing company, and some Americans swooped in and bought

the whole order up.


We could end up looking like the big bad bullies on the international

stage, you know, stealing test supplies and reagents and so on that are

needed all over the world in order to satisfy some kind of his false sense

of security at this end. We need smart testing. And there`s been a lot of

good proposals. One in Massachusetts, there`s a new plan from David Bloom

out of Harvard. There`s several different groups that have come up with

strategic plans, strategic Plans, that means less actual tests that get you

better policy guidance answers.


HAYES: That is a – it seems like a very smart way to go. Laurie Garrett,

always so illuminating to talk to you. Thank you for all your great

reporting and taking time tonight.


GARRETT: Thank you, Chris.


HAYES: Next scenes from the very small but very vocal groups that have

gathered over the weekend protesting those stay at home orders. A dangerous

move spurred on to the propaganda network for the White House.




HAYES: Before we show you pictures of the small but loud, deeply unnerving,

and dangerous chorus of people calling for Americans to throw themselves on

the sacrificial altar of the virus in the name of a good Donald Trump

economy and liberty, it`s worth noting this polling out of Michigan, which

has been the site of some of these protests particularly targeted the



After weeks of attacks, getting called everything from a tyrant to a Nazi,

governor Gretchen Whitmer`s approval rating in Michigan of her handling of

the coronavirus is considerably higher than the President`s.


And yet a familiar marriage between Trump T.V. propaganda, wealthy right-

wing interests, and a base that runs on resentment have created this

phenomenon we`ve all seen, which again is small and absolute numbers, but

really one of the most disturbing I have seen in my time covering public

life, I got to say.


People huddled together in cities throughout the country today on the steps

of the Capitol in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, I suppose, I guess, putting

their bodies where their mouths are, so to speak. Yesterday in Denver,

Colorado, this is what happened when a nurse stood at an intersection to

block protesters to remind people of the human toll of all this.




UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is a free country. Land of the free. Go to China

if you want communism. Go to China.




HAYES: Go to China. The entire phenomenon seems reverse-engineered to solve

a very obvious political problem, which is this. The country right now is

going through literally unprecedented economic devastation and misery and

mass death at a scale that`s impossible to contemplate. While the

conservative basis beloved leader is at the helm of all of it. So there`s

got to be someone else to blame.


For more on this phenomenon and the President`s propaganda arm that

encourages, I`m joined by Angelo Carusone, president of Media Matters of

America. You know, Angelo, this seems to be three ingredients here, which

is that there are actual people who were actually upset and I saw a guy

interviewed in Michigan about not being able to buy fertilizer.


And I have to say, like, I am sympathetic to people being frustrated and

upset about where everyone is at right now. Like it is genuinely

frustrating and upsetting that you know, people can`t do the normal things.

So there`s that. There`s a sort of normal kind of right-wing interest. And

then there`s to me – it just seems to me that the Trump T.V. aspect of

this is a largest. Like, how much did they gone all-in on these protests?



in. I mean, in the last week they`ve given it – there`s been 87 individual

segments discussing, promoting, advocating for this protest. None of them

are they criticizing them? Just a little bit of comparison. If you look at

the coverage that Fox News gave the Michigan event. That was more than a

coverage way more than the coverage that they gave to the Women`s March in

2017. Just that one small event, right, got more coverage from Fox News

than the entire Women`s March.


HAYES: It`s striking to me also – it is the case that the folks at Fox

News itself, like they aren`t coming to the building, they`re socially

distancing. They all have remote cameras. Like they`re – the people that

run the network from the business and H.R. side, don`t seem to think like

it`s fine for everyone just to get together and let`s go at it.


CARUSONE: That`s right. And I actually think that`s a good point. Because

it`s true from corporate policy in terms of their practices, they`re not

violating the social distancing. But what`s really interesting because I

think that this is a good illustration of the feedback loop between Fox and

the larger right-wing ecosystem and these individuals. Because, you know,

most of these Facebook events, we tracked, you know, more than 75 of them

across the country. It started popping up on April 10th.


So the question is what was happening in right-wing media before April

10th. And some of the most highly trafficked videos on the ninth and in the

few days before, but on the ninth in particular, was Tucker Carlson, and

other Fox News segments calling for an end to the national lockdown, making

an impassioned plea about liberty.


And it`s an important point because one of the things that took place in

those few days before you started to see these events beginning to pop up

was that Fox News stopped making the argument that they were still saying

it, but originally they were saying some, we have to be willing to

sacrifice grandma and grandpa for the sake of the economy.


But they made a switch. And you know, starting on April 7th, April 8th,

April 9th, they started saying that it`s not about the economy, it`s about

liberty and freedom. And that`s why we need to end these national

lockdowns. And immediately after is when you started to see these things

popping up.


And look, some people get the message, right. It`s not just these

astroturfing kind of groups or these national level groups are putting in,

some of these events are being run by elected officials. In Maine, the

leading organizer up there is a sitting congressman. In Michigan, it`s a

state – it was a state representative and an advisory member to Women for

Trump that were really the leaders in the vanguards of these events.


So they sort of saw that opportunity right where Fox sort of creates a

demand, then you go out there and satisfy it, and Fox in turn rewards you

by bringing you on, just like they did with the sheriffs. You know, if you

were a sheriff and you announced that you were not going to have to find

people or punish people for violating these, you know, the orders of the

state, Fox would invite you want to celebrate you, right. So that`s what

they did. They create a demand, and then they`re able to satisfy it and

reward it, promote it, and amplify it.


HAYES: There this – Judge Pirro on Fox the other night had this – she had

a long monologue ranting about this. But there`s one part that stuck out to

me that I want to play for you. Take a listen.




JEANINE PIRRO, HOST, FOX NEWS CHANNEL: We want to go back to work, feed our

families. And as a governor sit there and pontificate, we are the ones

experiencing the reality that forever percentage drop in employment, there

are five to 10,000 deaths occurring.




HAYES: First of all, you`re at work. You don`t have to go back to work.

You`re – literally, your show is – that`s your work and you`re at a

remote camera. But also, I just thought this was interesting. As the

governor sit there and pontificate, they had found – I mean, the problem

here, right is like, how do you do a tea party, but it`s Donald Trump in

the White House, right?


How do you capture this kind of sense that people have that things are

amiss and awry and bad, but you`ve got down from the White House? And here

is the answer. The governors. The governors, the category of the governors,

they`re the ones to blame. And we`ve seen the president essentially work

hand in hand – hand in glove with that as a kind of national strategy for

actually battling the virus.


CARUSONE: That`s right. And I think you bring up a very good point there

because that`s exactly a big piece of this, is that you know, originally it

was he was going to be the decision-maker with respect to ending these

lockdowns right, but immediately retreated from that position.


And it was a very important thing when he started to shift because he said,

I`m authorizing the governors to make the decision. And that`s when Fox

News started to really aggressively begin to push for this idea that it was

time to end national lockdowns. And in particular, and this is where it`s

important, where the misinformation becomes fuel for these calls in these



So one of the things you heard on fox news that was not true, right, you

start to outsource it is that in Michigan, they banned the sale of the

American flag. They said that a bunch of times on Fox. That was repeated

over and over again.


And it sounds like, wow, maybe Michigan has gone too far? You know, you`re

not even able to buy a good old fashioned American flag there. And that`s

the point is that you create this demand. You fuel it with misinformation

which allows for you to then attack the governors for over stepping, right?

And these individuals are getting back out there to sort of correct things

and balance things out, right.


They`re only responding to the most unreasonable restrictions that don`t

seem to make any sense, but they actually under score another issue which

is that these governors, who all disproportionately happen to be Democrats,

right, or opposed to Trump, are bad.


HAYES: Yeah. Angelo Carusone thank down so much for running through that. I

really appreciate it.


CARUSONE: Thank you.


HAYES: Next, a shocking development today as oil prices plunge below zero

dollars going into negative – negative – hitting the lowest price in

history. Expert oil trader Dan Dicker is here to

explain what this all means after this.




HAYES: It was just a week ago that President Donald Trump was bragging

about his efforts to increase oil prices by working on a deal between his

good buddies, the strong man who is the head of Russia and the strong man

who is the head of Saudi Arabia.


Well, Wall Street Journal editorial praised the president for his bold

leadership saving U.S. shale producers. That was a week ago. Today, one

week later, U.S. oil prices plunged into negative territory. The price

settled at, get this, negative 37 dollars per barrel, which is down 305

percent, meaning people would pay you today to take their oil off their



It is actually the first time in the history of oil markets this happened.

What exactly does it mean? Why did it happen? What happens next? For all

that, we go to one of our favorite independent oil traders, energy market

experts, Dan Dicker, who is the founder and host of the interactive webinar

The Energy Word, among other things.


And Dan, I had one of my lifelong buddies say, literally text me, I got to

hear from Dan Dicker today about the negative oil prices. So, here you are.

Why did oil go negative today? What happened?


DAN DICKER, INDEPENDENT OIL TRADER: Well, basically what you have is you

had the Coronavirus, which had killed demand. So, a third of demand has

come out of the global market, but of course, a third of supply hasn`t come

out of the global market despite the great deal that President Trump had

managed to put together for 10 million barrels. So, 30 million barrels of

oil is the surplus that we have right now, but 10 million barrels is what

is cut. So there is 20 extra million barrels just sloshing around with no

place to go. All the storage is filled up, and when all the storage is

filled up, there is nobody who wants the oil. In fact, you have got to pay

people to take it away, and that`s what you saw today in the spot markets

in crude.


HAYES: Right. So I read that like these are futures contracts that close on

May and when the contract closes, like you got to deliver the oil and

actually a specific place, this is West Texas crude. So it`s got to go to

Oklahoma. So there is actually like a bottleneck. Like you just don`t –

there is not the space to like off load all this oil.


DICKER: Right. The futures market, as you know, is a financial system, so,

you know, money changes hands, but when we get to this end of time when the

contract is actually due, we have got to turn this into real physical oil

and that changes the game entirely and you need to have people who actually

take it or going to deliver it. And right now, nobody will take it.


HAYES: So what does this mean? I mean, what are the sort of reverberations?

I`ve heard, well OK, this is just the end of May contracts are looking so

dicey, but then there will be future contracts after that, and it is going

to – it will come back up, but oil is just going to be crushed for the

foreseeable future, right? What does that mean more generally?


DICKER: Yeah, you know, I kind of look at oil as a canary in the coal mine

here, Chris, and thinking about it as if – you know, people are being

entirely too optimistic what COVID-19 is going to do to the global economy

in the long term, not in the short term.


I mean, you can protest all you want and you can, you know, say to liberate

Minnesota, but

the truth is no matter what you try to do in restarting the economy, nobody

is going to a restaurant as much as going to see a baseball game or a

concert or a hundred other things that would indicate a normal global

economy going forward.


So oil may be the canary in a coal mine. There may be repercussions through

places we haven`t even seen yet that are going to keep the economies

cratered, not just oil, you know, for a long, long time until we have, you

know, a vaccine. And that could be a year, a year, a year-and-a-half away.


I think that what this is telling me, at least, is that, you know, we`ve

been far too optimistic about how this is going to play out in the long-

term economically. And I think oil is telling you a

story how bad things are still going to get going forward.


HAYES: So you think this is – you think the oil market might be correctly

pricing in the level of future economic activity right now? Like, the

signal – if there is a signal here that`s other than sort of market panic,

which again, sometimes markets panic and they don`t necessarily send you

some intelligence signal about the future, but you`re saying to the extent

there is an intelligence signal about the future, a sort of forward

predictive price that`s happening here, it`s this market saying this is

going to be awhile, demand is going to be down for awhile.


DICKER: It did it in 2007. Oil started crashing well before the financial

crisis hit in 2008. I mean, it has been known to be an indicator.


Think about automobiles for example, Chris. I mean, if you have 20 percent

unemployment and, you know, automobiles, you know, millions, 15, 20 million

of them are leases, how many of those leases will get thrown back at the

banks? And what will the banks going to do with all these cars? And cars

prices are going to crater. And nobody is going to be able to sell a car.

Nobody in this country wants to buy a car. There is going to be tremendous

pressure on banks that have all of these loans basically that they are

getting back with cars that have very little value. They are going to see

cars go down the way crude did closer to zero.


And this, you know, reverberates in a thousand different ways where we

could call any commodity, not just oil, as being a victim of this virus and

the cratering going on in the global economy.


So I just don`t believe that we`ve seen anywhere near the worst of all of

this. And I think oil is telling that story right now.


HAYES: All right. Dan Dicker, always great to have you on explaining these

things, thanks a lot.


Coming up, the danger of broadcasting President Trump`s daily briefings

uninterrupted and the searing attack ad released by the Biden campaign.

That is just ahead.




HAYES: I have said on this program, many people have said, in fact, the

airing of the presidents` daily propaganda sessions can often be dangerous

to public health. That`s really my main concern with them separate from any

political benefits or political costs they might happen to have.


Though, it is notable several days ago some people close to the president

were telling The New York Times that they find the unhinged ranting and

bullying and performance of narcissism not great politically, quote, “the

White House was handing Mr. Biden ammunition each night by sending the

president out to the cameras.”


And interestingly enough, that view was echoed by Joe Biden`s digital

director yesterday on Twitter, quote, “don`t know when people on here are

like don`t air these press conferences when they are doing more work for us

than any ad buy could.”


Of course, President Trump does not see it that way.


So, now the Biden campaign is trying to use everything he said to their





ANNOUNCER: The buck stops here. Harry Truman said it. It means no excuses.

It means taking responsibility, the ultimate responsibility for the biggest

decisions in the world. Every great president has lived up to it, but

Donald Trump…


TRUMP: No, I don`t take responsibility at all.


First after all, governors a supposed to be doing a lot of this work.


We`re a back-up. We`re not an ordering clerk, we`re a back-up.


ANNOUNCER: Donald trump thought the job was about tweets and rallies and

big parades. He never thought he`d have to protect nearly 330 million

Americans, so he didn`t.




HAYES: I mean, what we are seeing is just a real-time example of just an

unbelievable failure to lead. And it`s not just about this crisis, it`s

also about the biggest one we face when all of this is over. We`re going to

talk about that next.




HAYES: From the beginning of this Coronavirus crisis, the obvious parallels

to the climate crisis have just been impossible to ignore. I keep thinking

about them, particularly as the pandemic plays out like an intensely sped

up acute version of the climate crisis, the same warnings, the same

disinformation, and no nothingness, the same tragic consequences, the same

failure to act.


Two aspects, in particular, have been haunting me. One is the invisibility

of the problem in a very literal sense. And the president has even taken to

calling the virus the invisible enemy, which is a happy bit propaganda, but

based on a kernel of truth we can`t see the Coronavirus, like you can`t the

carbon in the air. And it is hard to mobilize people around things you

can`t see. In the case of both the Coronavirus and carbon pollution, the

absence of spectacle is an obstacle to rallying people.


The second thing that is so maddening is that both the climate crisis and a

global pandemic did not come out of nowhere. They are not unlikely things

that might happen in the future we should plan for, no, according to

experts, they are certainties. Here is Bill Gates back in 2015.




BILL GATES, MICROSOFT FOUNDER: Today the greatest risk of global

catastrophe doesn`t look like this; instead, it looks like this. If

anything kills over 10 million people in the next few decades, it`s most

likely to be a highly infectious virus rather than a war, but we`ve

actually invested very little in a system to stop an epidemic. We`re not

ready for the next epidemic.




HAYES: Like Bill Gates, everyone who knows anything about global health and

virology, and transmission, has been screaming for years about exactly this

moment that we`re in, that it is not if, it`s when. And that is also

exactly what climate experts have been saying. And they have been called

into question, and they`ve been ignored, and they`ve been bullied, but

they`re saying the exact same thing as health experts did about a pandemic.

It`s coming. And yet here we are standing on the tracks watching the train

barrel toward us and refusing to get out of the way.


So I want to talk to a writer who has written about both of these issues,

David Wallace-Wells, deputy editor and climate columnist for New York

Magazine, his latest book was about the climate crisis, now he is covering

the Coronavirus pandemic, basically full-time, and he joins me now.


And David, I wonder how much you`ve been thinking about these parallels.



to avoid, as you point out. And there are a lot more than the ones you have

just said, although those may be the most obvious ones. You know, the truth

is the lessons of the Coronavirus and climate crisis are quite similar,

too, in the sense that they remind us that we don`t live outside of nature

no matter where we are, no matter who we are, no matter what country we

live in or how rich we are, we still live subject to the laws of nature and

occasionally subject to its brutality.


And they also teach us that all of these crises, crises of this scale, are

much better when we get a handle on them really early. Studies out of China

show that if they acted three weeks earlier they could have avoided 95

percent of all of the spread of the Coronavirus through the country,

possibly preventing its spread throughout the world. And a new bit of

research this week shows that in New York, if we had taken action two weeks

earlier we could have prevented 90 percent of all deaths.


They also open up a whole new – the Coronavirus opens up a whole new

spectrum of political possibility that a lot of climate activists are

becoming quite excited about for some good reasons and for some complicated

reasons. But the truth is when you look out at the climate right now, it is

hard not to be moved by the expression of global solidarity and fellow

feeling that is demonstrated by a literally hemisphere-wide, quarantine

that is being engaged in willingly by billions of people, I mean part out

of concern for their own health but out of concern for the health of those

around them.


And considering that is really the ultimate project and challenge facing us

with climate change, how can we make everybody care more about our

collective fate? You can look at thin credible tragedy and horror with some



The question is whether we can sustain that kind of feeling through a year

or more of quite exhausting struggle, expensive public spending, and all of

the pain and suffering that we`re going to be witnessing, and come out on

the other side still with some political capital and some literal capital

to make the kind of investments in green infrastructure and power that we

need to.


HAYES: Well, that point of international solidarity I think is a really

important one, because it is something about the climate movement I always

find very inspiring and moving, you know, on days of these sort of

international global climate action, you will see like here are school

children in Nigeria and here are activists in Pakistan, and here are folks

in Seoul, South Korea, and here are people in Moscow, and here are people

in New York City, and it`s like right, we all got the same climate. We all

got the same thing we got to deal with. And you`re seeing that in this

pandemic, the same sort of moving feeling when you see health care workers

and you see nurses or you see people banging on pots and pans in all of

these countries around the world, very distant places, very different

people, and very different situations. And again, the thing we have to beat

is the same thing, and we all have to work together to beat it.


And in that way, this period also feels a bit like a test, right, like the

level of global coordination, in a short acute period, where there is some

political capital, because it is so pressing, as a kind of dry run for what

we need to do in a bigger scale afterwards.


WALLACE-WELLS: And we`ve accomplished honestly so much. I mean, in many

countries of the world, I would say, most countries of the world, we failed

to take seriously the Coronavirus crisis at the speed we needed to. And

yet, just in the space of just a few months, we`ve engineered a, as you

say, a kind of coordinated – although, not literally coordinated – global

response in which all of the nations of the northern hemisphere and many in

the global south, have basically up-ended all forms of life, all economic

activity, all social activity in their countries for the sake of self



It is amazing all of the things that we used to take for granted as

permanent, unmovable features of modern life, the way the economy worked

the unlimited ways our government could move quickly to protect us. All of

these things that we took for granted as unchangeable have been proven to

be quite changeable in just the timespan of just a few months when we

recognized just how big the crisis that we are facing really is.


We haven`t yet got there with climate change in part because it is still,

despite those inspiring marches, just, you know, just a small group of

people who really believe that this crisis is as urgent as the scientists

tell us it is, and we need many more people to feel that way.


With Corona – with COVID, almost everyone is as scared as they possibly

could be. And as a result we`re seeing top-down, but in other ways

voluntary efforts to basically change how we live on the planet, you know,

on a dime, and in quite dramatic ways, which you know honestly I find kind

of breath-taking.


HAYES: That`s a great – that`s a really great point, right? The suspension

of normalcy and the speed with which it has happened and the sort of

horizon of possibility, which is both sort of devastating and brutal,

because people are losing their jobs and people are going to food banks and

people are sick and all of that, but also the idea that you can coordinate

a remarkable amount. I mean half of the world`s population, all almost on a

dime, in a sense, right, in a few weeks, you have half the world`s

population, suddenly abruptly ending every single daily ritual, and daily

life as normalcy.


And also, the political possibilities, I mean we should note there is this

sort of, you know, you have the way that CO2 goes up, the way that

Coronavirus spreads through population, like those two graphs that we have

like both look unnervingly similar, and both sort of create this kind of

urgency to act quickly.


But there`s also the fact that like the political, the kind of political

frontier, the possible, how are we going to pay for it is this question

that haunted the questions of the Green New Deal. Now, it`s like

$2.2 trillion, out the door, in a few weeks.


WALLACE-WELLS: Yes, a few months ago, if you were to ask the average

American, would the country be willing to go into a total economic

shutdown, reduce its economic output by as much as 30 percent, impose 30

percent unemployment on itself, in order to save 1 to 2 percent of the

population, most Americans would have told you that was impossible. It

would have been an indictment of the country that it wasn`t – that they

did think it was impossible, but they would have told you that it was

really hard to imagine. And now here we are just in the space of a few

months and we have done exactly that.


And not only that, we`ve seen Republican senators proposing something like

UBI. We`ve seen talk about the government claiming some ownership stake in

airlines in exchange for bailouts. These are things that used to be so far

outside the Overton Window of political possibility that nobody ever talked

about it as imaginable. And now they`re very much at the center of our

political conversation.


We need to take that expanded horizon and apply it to climate change,

because we need many more things to happen that are enclosed within our

existing sense of what is possible. We need to expand that horizon on

climate, as aggressively as we have with COVID-19.


HAYES: It`s a great point. And this segment, which I didn`t necessarily

think would leave me feeling leavened and inspired has done that. We`re

going to keep talking about these parallels throughout the week this week.

David Wallace-Wells, thank you very much.


WALLACE-WELLS: Thanks for having me.


HAYES: That is ALL IN for this evening. “THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW” starts

right now. Good evening, Rachel.







Copyright 2020 ASC Services II Media, LLC.  All materials herein are

protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced,

distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the

prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter

or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the