Summary
The Rule of Law Defense Fund who funded the robocall urging people to march at the Capitol is a fundraising arm for the Republican Attorneys General Association. The January 6 Select Committee is likely to look into members of Congress on their role in inciting the insurrection. Thirty-two percent of Americans believe that Joe Biden won due to voter fraud and 63 percent of Republicans believe that Joe Biden won due to voter fraud. Rupert Murdoch, a climate-denying billionaire starts Fox Weather Channel. Sha`Carri Richardson, the star sprinter, cannot compete in the Tokyo Olympics.
Transcript
JOY REID, MSNBC HOST: Also, it was Republicans who literally voted against funding for the police in the American rescue package.
So, tonight, for pretending that they actually care about the police, when they really don`t, the Republican Party is the absolute worst. And that is tonight`s REIDOUT. "ALL IN WITH CHRIS HAYES" starts now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST (voice over): Tonight on ALL IN.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And we will march to the Capitol building to call on Congress to stop the steal. We are hoping patriots like you will join us to continue to fight to protect the integrity of our elections.
HAYES: Six months later, what we`re learning about the institutional accomplices of the Trump insurrection, the enduring threat that keeps election law experts up at night, and why so many Americans are not letting go of the big lie.
Then, how a climate-denying billionaire is about to do to weather forecasts. What is news outlets have done to democracy.
RUPERT MURDOCH, CHAIRMAN, FOX CORPORATION: We should approach climate change with great skepticism. Climate change has been going on as long as the planet is here.
HAYES: And the absolute outrage of Team USA`s decision to stop Sha`Carri Richardson from running in the Olympics because of marijuana use when ALL IN starts right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES (on camera): Good evening from New York. I`m Chris Hayes just over six months ago on January 5, 2021 -- remember, that was the day of the Georgia run off one day before the sixth -- and untold number of people across this country received this telephone call.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I`m calling for the Rule of Law Defense Fund with an important message. The march to save America is tomorrow in Washington D.C. at the ellipse in President Park, between E Street and Constitution Avenue on the south side of the White House, with doors opening at 7:00 a.m. At 1:00 p.m., we will march to the Capitol building to call on Congress to stop the steal. We are hoping patriots like you will join us to continue to fight to protect the integrity of our elections. For more information, visit marchtosaveamerica.com. This call is paid for and authorized by the Rule of Law Defense Fund.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: March to the Capitol building to stop the steal paid for by marchtosaveamerica.com, Rule of Law Defense Fund. That`s a fundraising arm for guess who, the Republican Attorneys General Association. So, that call urging people to show up the Capitol on January 6th and march to it to stop the steal came from the body that represents top Republican law enforcement officers across the country.
Now, we already know that Republican attorneys general played a huge role in the attempt to overturn the election. They were one of the key movers on that, right? In December, 17 of them banded together signing onto a lawsuit filed by Republican Attorney General of Texas asking the Supreme Court to delay the certification of electors in four battleground states where Donald Trump lost basically saying, we don`t like the way those states ran their election. The Supreme Court refused to hear the case. It was entirely illegally specious.
We know from that call, the Republican attorneys general were part of the vast coalition of forces actively whipping up the frenzy towards violence on January 6, something they still have not had to apologize or account for. It`s like it never happened, that phone call, like it never happened. That`s a major theme as we sit here, six months since the attempted insurrection. While at least 500 people who allegedly participated in the Capitol Riot had been arrested, more or less everyone who put them in that position, who called for them to be there, who organized for them to be there, who paid for them to be there, and brought us towards that moment, all of those people, more or less escaped accountability.
Now, the hope is that some accountability and some more transparency about what happened will be introduced through the no House Select Committee investigating the January 6 attack. The chair of that committee will be joining me in just a moment. Another member of the committee, Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff of California, told my colleague Nicolle Wallace that there are concentric circles of culpability they will be investigating, including potentially members of Congress.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): What was the organization of that event like? And how much forewarning was there of violence among those who are organizing it? How much foreknowledge was there in the White House that this might turn violent? What happened on the day of the insurrection? Why did it take so long to get reinforcements to the Capitol? Was there anyone standing in the way of sending those reinforcements?
So, these are just some of the questions. And I think we`re all determined, those of us that have been pointed so far, to follow the evidence wherever it leads. If it leads to some of our colleagues, it leads to some of our colleagues. But we can`t blind ourselves with reality.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: As it happens, one of Adam`s ships colleagues is marking today`s anniversary by echoing a recent refrain from the former President, asking the question, who killed Ashli Babbitt in a press release. And Republican Congressman Paul Gosar of Arizona, a member of Congress who should be far more famous than he is. He writes "It is unjust to sweep Ashli`s death under the rug by merely saying she was in the wrong place at the wrong time, as so many have. Her life mattered. We did not allow the execution of citizens by street justice in our country."
Babbitt, of course, is the 35-year-old woman who attempted to charge into the Speaker`s lobby, where members of Congress were present at that moment on January 6, with a violent mob breaking down windows, braying for blood at her back. When rioters broke the windows of these doors right there, leading to the lobby which is right outside the house chamber, Ashli Babbitt, and her alone, vaulted through, the first one to go through, though there was a gun drawn in a warning, and she was shot and killed by a Capitol officer that you see there on the other side.
Her death is obviously a horrible tragedy. It never should have happened. She never should have been there. She never should have been in that position. The key question is not who killed her, but who is truly culpable for her death and the deaths of three other Trump supporters that day, and the death of Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick who died the next day.
Many people of course share responsibility, Donald Trump, of course, but also several members of Congress, members of Congress who still serve, who still go to work in that building. There is of course, Mo Brooks of Alabama who went out and rally the crowd, that crowd that was called there by the Republican attorneys general just ahead of the riot. And there`s Lauren Boebert of Colorado who was new to Congress, just a few days into her job, who tweeted on the morning of the sixth "today is 1776."
But again, I want to focus on Congressman Paul Gosar. Part of the reason that things got so hairy inside the Capitol afternoon with the mob, including Ashli Babbitt, getting so close to the people in the presidential line of succession is because the House took longer that day to adjourn the Senate. I only really understood this after I watched that New York Times documentary.
Rioters first broke into the Capitol building at around 2:10 p.m. And the Senate crucially adjourn just minutes later, 2:13. So, three minutes go by and the message is set. You might remember that moment when it happened. I was watching live on air. Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma interrupted mid-sentence, an aide comes in whispers in his ear, and everyone starts moving very quickly. You see that? Everyone gets out.
Now, the House at the same time continued in session for several more key minutes. And part of the reason was because Paul Gosar was still airing his grievances of the big lie on the House floor objecting to the seating electors in his own state.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. PAUL GOSAR (R-AZ): In Arizona, as my attachments make clear, mail-in ballots will altered on the first day of counting as shown in data graphs we provide, and it`s concluded by data analysts. Over 400,000 mail-in ballots were altered, switched from President Trump to Vice President Biden are completely erased from President Trump`s totals.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: There, those are lies. You know that. There`s was not 400,000 votes flipped. Obviously, Congressman Gosar there in the well of the House as the mob is encroaching and coming closer, spewing lies about the election. And his spewing of those lies, in those moments you saw there, delayed everything.
And so, by the time the House finally goes into recess, six minutes after the Senate, 2:19, well, it`s basically too late because the rioters, the violent mob are forcing their way further into the building. And that`s why, unlike the Senate, the members are in the chamber. They put on gas masks. They take off their identifying pins so that they can`t be rounded up and taken to God knows where to do God knows what. They seek shelter in the House chamber with the mob literally trying to bang down the doors outside.
The night before her death, Ashli Babbitt posted a tweet, "Nothing will stop us. They can try and try but the storm is here. It is descending upon dc in less than 24 hours, dark to light." If Ashley Babbitt had been allowed to go through that window that she was vaulting through to, the Speaker`s lobby and the House chamber, she would have been followed by the mob. Think about what might have happened.
Paul Gosar claims to be concerned about Ashli Babbitt`s death, and yet he shares more than a little bit of the moral responsibility for all the events of that day. The situation that led to her death was brought about at least in part by the delay he caused with his recitation of the big lie that the election was stolen on the floor of the United States House of Representatives, on that day when Congress had the solemn duty to simply ratify the people`s choice for president and declare Joe Biden who is the rightful president, the rightful president.
So yes, the question of who does have blood on their hands from that day is actually a pressing one. Part of the reason we need the select committee to investigate.
Congressman Bennie Thompson, Democrat of Mississippi is the chair of the select committee to investigate January 6, and he joins me now.
Congressman, I feel that there`s actually still a lot we don`t know about the deaths of the individuals who died that day. There`s been sporadic reports. We have some reporting on Ashli Babbitt and her death, other individuals, one woman who has declared of methamphetamine overdose, obviously, Brian Sicknik. Will that be one of the focal points of the commission, of the committee?
REP. BENNIE THOMPSON (D-MS): Well, we will look at everything, Chris. Thank you for having me, by the way. One of the things we`re tasked with is looking at all the circumstances, and the facts surrounding January 6. Everything is on the table. We`ll look at it. We`ve not been given any real guidepost beyond that. I think it`s important to see who was complicit on what went on on January 6, whether there were outside forces, inside forces. We will look at all of them.
We will look at the information that`s already been collected by the various committees. But also, we will look at other information that we`ve not had access to, telephoning information, other thing. So, what we have to do is hire the best professional staff that`s available. We will do our work. We will not rush the task of the work. We will interview everyone that the facts lead to.
(INAUDIBLE) we want to talk to a members of Capitol Police, Chris. We`ve talked to the brass of the Capitol Police, but we`ve not talked to the rank and file people who fought those insurrectionists that day, and in my opinion, save the lives of a lot of Americans in the process. We need to hear from them.
So, we will start the process. We won`t rush it. And we will look at every situation possible to get to the facts. Just what you talked about a few minutes ago, some of this, there`s news comes out every day. So, clearly, it`s in our best interest with this Select Committee to get to --
HAYES: I think we might be losing --
THOMPSON: -- driven by the facts and circumstances that we --
HAYES: I think we got you back, Congressman. You flickered out for a moment on the internet connection. I`m going to proceed as if we do have you back. I wanted to display a tweet from one of your colleagues as Adam Schiff said that the question of culpability of your colleagues is one of the questions at issue here. And I`m just talking about Paul Gosar who was speaking on the floors, you know, reciting these lies in those crucial six minutes. I don`t think there`s any evidence he knew that of course. It`s sort of a grand irony.
But that morning, I think he tweeted this. Biden should concede. I want his concession on my desk tomorrow morning. Don`t make me come over there. And then he hashtags stop the steal and he tags one of the people who is the organizers of the entire event. And I feel like there hasn`t been a sort of sufficient inquiry to what his role was just in organizing the entire thing.
You know what, I think the congressman`s internet is out. So, let`s take a break. We`ll see if we can get it back. Stick right here. Congressman Bennie Thompson on the flip. If not, a lots more on the show. Don`t go anywhere.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: All right back with me on the phone is Congressman Bennie Thompson, Democrat of Mississippi, Chair of the Select Committee to investigate January 6. Congressman, I just read you that tweet. Let me read it again because you may not have heard me as the connection was blinking out. But it`s your colleague Paul Gosar on January 6 saying Biden should concede. I want his concession on my desk tomorrow morning. Don`t make me come over there with a shot of the crowd. That crowd would eventually storm the Capitol, at least in the aggregate, hashtag stop the steal 2021 and tagging one of the organizers.
And I just -- I feel like actually for wherever the chips fall, do you feel like you actually understand the role that members of Congress may have played in organizing this entire event?
THOMPSON: Chris, I know that there have been a number of comments made like what Congressman Gosar tweeted. Our investigation will look at any and all of the facts. And if there are members of Congress who were complicit in what went on on January 6, our investigation will bring it out. That`s why we will have the best investigators possible to look at it, to see whether or not the White House was involved or any other institution or government involved because this should not have taken place.
In a democracy, you can`t settle your differences by an insurrection. Democracy is a settled at the ballot box, not by an insurrection is mob- like we had on the sixth. So, our obligation as members of this Select Committee is to look at the facts and circumstances that brought about January 6, and call it just like we see it.
HAYES: I also wonder about the role of the Department of Justice. Of course, there are criminal cases being pursued. There`s over 500 arrests. There`s some speculation that number ultimately might be up to 800. That`s an estimate of how many people actually pass through that building. And those prosecutions are all being pursued out of -- out of one prosecutor`s office in the District of Columbia, underneath Department of Justice. And I wonder how much -- what you expect as a level of cooperation from the DOJ, from the Attorney General in sharing information with your committee?
THOMPSON: Well, to the extent that we won`t interfere with the prosecution of those individuals, we expect to have conversations in a classified setting or whatever, to get access to certain information. But again, we`re not trying to interfere. But there are certain information that -- and the committee will deem necessary to conduct our business.
We need to know, for instance, who did the FBI talk to. Did a talk to DOD? Did they talk to the Metropolitan Police? Who in fact was part of the communication circle on or before January 6? We think there was some breakdowns in that system. So, we will have to look at the whole thing, not just who committed something, but there are some intelligence failures that occurred on January 6.
We need to make sure that we fix those intelligence failures, so they never happen again. Why does the DOD operate separately from other institutions of government as it relates to January 6. We have to fix all that. Why does the mayor of the District of Columbia of which the United States Capitol, and is it in an important position to protect the citizens of that area? So, there are a lot of things that we have to go to. We hope and expect cooperation from every branch of government as we put through getting to this report.
HAYES: All right, Congressman Bennie Thompson who will be chairing that select committee, thank you so much for joining us tonight.
THOMPSON: Thank you for having me.
HAYES: We know Donald Trump tried to pressure elected officials in Georgia to overturn the election, right? We all heard the audio of him telling the Republican Secretary of State to find just enough votes. This is a quote. "I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state." He really didn`t say that, that specifically.
But the pressure campaign was not just in Georgia. A new report by the Arizona Republic shows that Trump tried to speak directly to the chair of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors in the weeks after the election. And again, there are tapes. This is state Republican chair Kelli Ward, nicknamed Chemtrail Kelli by Mitch McConnell, calling supervisor Clint Hickman on behalf of Trump.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KELLI WARD, CHAIR, ARIZONA REPUBLICAN PARTY: Hey, Clint, it`s Kelli Ward. I just talked to President Trump and he would like me to talk to you and also see if he needs to give you a call to discuss what`s happening on the ground in Maricopa. Give me a call back when you can. Thanks. Bye.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Rudy Giuliani also left a voicemail for Hickman. Then, on the night of January 3, the day Trump`s call with Georgia`s Secretary State was published. The man in charge of the Maricopa election -- Maricopa County election got this voicemail.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hello, sir. This is the White House operator. I was calling to let you know that the President is available to take your call if you`re free. If you could please give us a call back, sir, that`d be great. You have a good evening.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Trump has never stopped that pressure campaign. It was a multi- pronged effort that included pressuring on elected officials storming the Capitol, and now passing restrictive state laws to try again next time. The idea that Republicans can overturn an election is a real threat. Law professor and election expert Rick Hasen says, this is not an absurd hypothetical. "Given what we saw Trump actually do in 2020, these things are now within the realm of possibility and need to be legislated against and organized against so we have a fair election process going forward."
And Rick Hasen, he`s professor of law and political science at UC Irvine, founder and editor of the Indispensable Election Law Blog and joins me now.
Rick, I read your quotes in that great piece by my colleague Benjy Sarlin, and I think that we all agree that there`s sort of -- there are tears of concern about democratic access in the country from you know, voter suppression and whether people get to the ballo.T and the sort of ultimate most terrifying crisis is the crisis you talk about, an overturned election.
How have you come to think about that and what are these new revelations from the Arizona Republic contribute to how you think about it?
RICK HASEN, LAW PROFESSOR, U.C. IRVINE: Great to be with you. Happy anniversary, I guess we would say. This is just a crazy moment in American history that we`ve gone through a storming of the Capitol, we`ve gone through an attempt to try to overturn the results of the election led by the president, and yet we have one political party that`s not only in denial, but it`s also in a position where in order to show fidelity to the party`s leader, Donald Trump, you have to mimic the lie that the election was stolen and you have to push legislation and other rules that are going to make it easier to mess with vote counting next time.
So, I`m really concerned. This is -- and it`s really hard to explain. This is different from the usual concerns about gerrymandering which, you know, we talk about all the time drawing district lines in ways that help one party or another. This is worse than voter suppression where states pass laws that you can give voters water while they`re waiting online to vote. This is really about something so basic to a democracy, that the vote is going to be fairly counted.
And, you know, you put together what happened in Arizona with what happened in Georgia with also, you didn`t mention it now, but I know you`ve covered it before, the pressure on legislative leaders in Michigan and Wisconsin to call their legislators into session, and to try to overturn the will of the people there. It was an attempt to overturn the results of the election. And the concern, as one of my colleagues put it in that same article by Benjy, is what if it was a rehearsal for 2024? So, I can`t overstate how concerned I am about our democracy at this moment.
HAYES: There`s a lot of implications of this. I mean, one I guess is the problem to me is that when you think about legislative fixes, right, the political problem is prior to the legislative fix, which is to say, if one- half of the two parties has a leader who`s committed to attempting this again, it`s going to be hard to build consensus for technical fixes that would make it harder for this to happen. You see what I`m saying?
HASEN: Right. So, I think the key here is, there are a number of Senate Republicans, some of whom are going to be gone because they`re retiring after the next election, who care about things like, can we have paper ballots required in every federal elections as a piece of paper that can be countered by a court or an independent body? Are we going to fix the electoral counteract, the rules for how Congress counts the votes. You don`t have these frivolous objections and the ability to throw the whole election and to cast based on nothing but lies.
You know, are you going to have rules about chain of custody about how states have to handle balance? I think that there`s a moment here, put aside H.R.1, put aside all the concerns about voter suppression, these are so important. But I think that you could potentially get to 60 votes on the question of -- in the Senate, which you would need to get any legislation through, on the narrow question of election subversion. Can we make sure that the winner of the election is actually declared the winner. If we can`t have consensus about that, what kind of democracy do we have right now?
HAYES: You just mentioned something that`s wheezy and technical, but I feel like is actually one of the most important takeaways. The reason that we are talking about January 6 is because that`s a specific day in the very byzantine process by which electors are counted. And part of that`s in the Constitution, and then part of that is in the Electoral Count Act, which if I`m not mistaken, was passed and signed into law after the contested election of 1876, which was a debacle in many ways it led to the end of reconstruction, etcetera, etcetera.
That act -- I mean, is it right that like, we`re still riding around American presidential democracy in the 1870, post 1876 Electoral Count Act, which has been demonstrated in the past year to be a ticking time bomb.
HASEN: There are provisions of that act that I have read multiple times, I have no idea what they mean. And you know, I`ve been studying this stuff for a while. Just imagine what that`s like in the hands of politicians who want to throw an election, or in the hands of judges who want to read it in a particular way.
This is not a 21st century act. And again, we can bracket concerns about the Electoral College, and we can argue about whether the Electoral College is fair or not, but if we`re going to have an electoral college, we need to have rules that assure that that`s the candidate who wins in the states get those electoral college votes counted for that candidate.
HAYES: Right.
HASEN: It`s kind of the most basic point of democracy and yet here we are worried that that might not happen the next time around.
HAYES: Rick Hasen who has been a really important voice on this, we`re going to stay on this. And I want to come back to Electoral Count Act at greater length at some point. Thank you for your time tonight.
HASEN: Thank you.
HAYES: Ahead, six months after January 6, why do the majority of Republican voters, the people out there in the country still believe the election was stolen still? Why Trump`s big lie is here to stay, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: The problem America faces right now is summed up in two numbers. The first number is 32 percent. That is the percentage of Americans who wrongly believe that Joe Biden is only in office because of widespread voter fraud and that Donald Trump really won the 2020 election. Now, you look at that number, that`s a significant minority, but it is a minority nonetheless, less than a third of people. In a democracy, a 32 percent faction is not going to win a ton of elections generally.
But that brings us the second number, which is 63 percent. Fully 63 percent of Republicans, and those that are Republican-leaning believe the election was stolen. And that coalition controls half or more than half of the government from the states, to Congress, and the Senate. That`s the fundamental issue here, right, underneath Trump and the right-wing media, there`s a faction of Americans who are wedded to an anti-democratic delusion and whose numbers can be leveraged into control the entire mechanism of the state if things break the right way.
This piece of The Daily Beast today caught my eye examining why six months after the insurrection we still won`t admit why so many people believe the big lie. The author David Rothkopf, CEO of Rothkopf Group joins us tonight, along with Lilliana Mason, associate research professor at Johns Hopkins University, author of Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity.
David, first lay out what your case is for why we won`t talk about the root cause or what the root causes here of the persistence of this belief.
DAVID ROTHKOPF, CEO, ROTHKOPF GROUP: Well, the reality is that we are taught to not critically challenge core ideas from childhood. Don`t question your parents, don`t question your teachers, don`t question your church, don`t question your school, you know, take things on faith, whether it`s a religious belief or a belief about the country or you know, other elements of ideology. And if you don`t have critical thinking built into people early, then they become gullible.
Americans are fed lies in the cradle onward. Hollywood sells lies, Madison Avenue sells lies, politicians lie, and we are sold big lies about the nature of the universe. We are sold big lies about the way society ought to work. And so, the result is, by the time people get to election age, that you know, accepting lies is kind of baked in the cake.
And as pointed out in Lilliana`s book, and I know you`ll get to it, you know, these lies become interwoven with people`s identity. And once, you know, it becomes part of your identity, you can`t admit you`re wrong because you`re denying who you actually are.
HAYES: So, the other last point -- this is something that I struggle with and I -- and I`m not sure, Lilliana, that we have good measuring tools for this. But I sometimes wonder when you see a, you know, a polling that says 32 percent believe that Trump won, do they actually believe that or is that a way that they express some kind of part of their identity? And are those even distinguishable? I mean, is there a way you could sort of, you know, test it through monetization, say, like, you know, bet $10,000 on the, you know, the disprove ability of this thesis. Would you come up with the same number? Is there any way to tease those two things apart?
LILLIANA MASON, ASSOCIATE RESEARCH PROFESSOR, JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: Yes, that`s -- I mean, that`s a -- that is a big problem with asking these kinds of survey questions is that there is something called expressive responding where people just say the thing that they think makes their team look the best. So, some people are doing that. And there have been, you know, studies that have tried to make people more worried about being correct than getting their team to win. But it`s a little difficult to tell with these kind of numbers.
On the other hand, there are definitely some people who are -- who are being sincere when they say this. It`s not, you know, 32 percent of Americans are all just lying because they think it makes the Republican Party look great. There`s certainly real believers in there. And so, I think those are the people that we need to really think about and worry about when we`re talking about this sort of like, existential lie type of issue.
HAYES: Yes. So, how do you -- how does your research help us think about the persistence of that belief?
MASON: Right. So, people will accept information based on a variety of motivations, and one of them is identity protective. So, they`re protecting their own groups status, they`re protecting their own groups, you know, either sense of victory or loss. But you know, as David was saying, there`s all these other identities that are now looped together with partisanship, including really potent ones like race and religion.
And that means that when there is a loss, an electoral loss, that implicates all of these other crucial central identities that people hold, like their racial identity, and it makes them not just feel like a loser in terms of their party, but also a loser in terms of their entire racial group or their entire religious group. And that makes those losses much more dire, and much more threatening. And therefore people will look harder for information that makes it seem like they are still the winners even though the world is saying they`re not.
HAYES: Well, and that`s -- I mean, that`s the irony here, right? Like, David, your -- what you just said, right, when you talked about the lies that are sold, could have been verbatim something that I`ve read on a QAnon thread or has been said to me by someone who believes that the election was stolen, right? They`re -- what they are saying is that like the establishment, the mainstream media, like all these voices are lying to you, and you sheep are taking it.
But in the end, even though we all have the same cognitive biases, you know, across the political spectrum, so much of this comes down to what the structures of trust are, and if you`re trusting the right people, and the problem is that if you`re trusting Donald Trump, and own, and Paul Gosar, like you`re just trusting the wrong people. That feels like the fundamental bedrock we hit.
ROTHKOPF: It is the fundamental bedrock we hit. And what`s changed, because people have believed nonsense since the dawn of time, right? People have believed demigods since the dawn of time. But what has changed since we now live in a world of what I call echo-systems, not ecosystems, but that you know, where people hear the same thing over and over and over and they go from Fox to QAnon, to OAN, to Facebook, and everybody they know is passing along articles that believe the same thing.
And so, it becomes possible to live in a world that is a little bit like a middle-aged, you know, village in the Middle Ages where you never encounter anybody with a different idea. You never encounter anybody who says challenge this idea. And once you`re there, you know, that`s how the Dark Ages happened, right? That`s where we are. There are communities in this world that believe utter nonsense.
You know, you talk about a third of Americans believing that Trump won this election even though there`s not a scintilla of evidence of that. About half that number, 17 percent believe in vampires.
HAYES: Yes. Well, I don`t know if the vampires are costlier belief or not. I think -- I think I would switch those numbers if I have the ability. David Rothkopf and Lilliana Mason, thank you so much for joining us tonight.
ROTHKOPF: Pleasure.
HAYES: Coming up, no one has benefited more from spreading election conspiracy theories than Fox News. And now, they`re looking to get into the weather business. That`s right, Fox weather is here and that`s next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: If you were to say to me, Chris, who is the absolute last person in the world who anyone should trust to run a weather -- run or weather channel, I would be hard-pressed to think someone worse than Rupert Murdoch, the owner of Fox News. But that is exactly what Murdoch plans to do with the Fox Weather Channel, a 24-hour streaming channel later this year.
Undoubtedly, Rupert Murdoch will try to do for the world`s climate what he`s done for American democracy, deny it, undermine it, lead it to the brink of destruction. It`s not like it would be something new for them.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GREG GUTFELD, HOST, FOX NEWS CHANNEL: If you want to make electric cars the choice for Americans, you don`t try to hit him with guilt in virtue signaling and tying it to a climate crisis that does not exist.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This unholy alliance between the unions, which other traditional base and the radical environmentalist who are demanding that we change every aspect of our lives and undercut our economy so that we can fight the weather.
DAN BONGINO, CONTRIBUTOR, FOX NEWS CHANNEL: Acting like the world is going to blow up in 12 years because we`re emitting natural -- cows or farting somewhere is the dumbest thing I`ve ever heard.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You know what greenhouse gas emissions are? You ever drive by the road and you see a greenhouse in the winter and flowers are growing and tomatoes are growing, it`s called the atmosphere. Commit to eliminating carbon pollution. Carbon dioxide is not pollution. We don`t get oxygen but for giving carbon dioxide to plants.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Rupert Murdoch and his media conglomerate has been crucially important to climate denial across the entire English-speaking world, on three continents. After Australia was devastated by wildfires that burned 46 million acres in 2019 and 2020, that country`s former prime minister called Murdoch out for his part in the disaster.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MALCOLM TURNBULL, FORMER PRIME MINISTER, AUSTRALIA: The reality is, News Corp and Murdoch have done enormous damage to Western democracy and in particular to the United States and Australia, and in particular, on the subject of global warming.
The campaign on climate denial is just staggering and has done enormous damage to the world, to the -- you know, to the global need to address global warming.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: In fact, Murdoch`s News Corp, which is among the largest media companies in Australia was found to be part of another wave of misinformation. An independent study there found online bots and trolls exaggerating the role of arson in the fires, at the same time that article in his newspaper, The Australian, making similar assertions, became the most popular offering on the newspapers Web site.
It`s really not a stretch to say Rupert Murdoch`s media empire right up there with the world`s fossil fuel companies, stopped us from taking action on climate change sooner, continues to block us. And we`re now dealing with the fallout. The month of June has record -- had record-setting heat. It was the hottest on record and Boston. Salt Lake City, Utah had its hottest day ever. Palm Springs, California tied its record for hottest day ever at 123 degrees. That does not even include the crazy temperatures we saw in the Pacific Northwest that reached well over 100 degrees, and the hottest day ever in the history of Canada, in a town that was burned to a crisp literally to the ground just a day after so it has set the record.
But it was not just North America, no, no, no. Meteorologist Scott Duncan shared this heat map of Scandinavia showing a Norwegian town far above the Arctic Circle measuring over 34 degrees Celsius, or more than 93 degrees Fahrenheit, the highest temperature ever recorded at that latitude.
So, one can only imagine how Weather Channel practicing climate change denial would approach these stories. How would they explain the insane heat in Portland and Seattle? What shades of blue they used to describe the temperature in Scandinavia right now? Where they attempt to create a new reality where the world is not really getting hotter.
You know, there is of course something comforter -- comforting about that specific delusion, a world that`s not getting hotter, but that`s not the world we live in. The world we live in is getting hotter. The world we live in is being ravaged by that heat. That heat will cause incalculable human misery. And that misery is thanks in large part to Rupert Murdoch and his life`s work. Murdoch is 90 now so he will not be here to see all of what he put into motion. But I truly hope that none of us ever forget what he has done.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: Sha`Carri Richardson, the U.S. women`s track star is not going to Tokyo Olympics. That`s official today. The U.S. Track and Field announcing that she will not compete in the four by 100 relay. Richardson, of course, lit the track on fire in the trial. She won the women`s 100 meter dash. She then tested positive for the use of marijuana. She was apologetic and suspended by the U.S. track and field Association.
But there was a possibility for completing in the Olympic relay because that event competition was outside the window of her suspension. But instead today, the U.S. track and field saying while U.S. Track and Field fully agrees the merit of the World Anti-Doping Agency rules related to THC should be reevaluated, it would be detrimental to the integrity of the U.S. Olympic team trials track and field if U.S. ATF amended his policies falling competition only weeks before the Olympic Games. All U.S. ATF athletes are equally aware of and must adhere to the current anti-doping code. And our credibility as the national governing body would be lost if rules were only enforced under certain circumstances.
Joining me now, former NBA player Etan Thomas, author of We Matter: Athletes and Activism, who has some very strong feelings about this. Etan, I`ve been following this story and I think that the mass opinion I saw is like this is insane. This woman is obviously an incredible athlete. Marijuana is either legalized or decriminalized in tons of states. You can use it recreationally. These laws are outdated.
But to get the final blow today, I just found myself feeling this like visceral rage at the decision. How are you feeling?
ETAN THOMAS, FORMER NBA PLAYER: I mean, I feel disappointed. You know, it`s interesting, you said that you hear a lot of, you know, people saying how ridiculous it is, I kind of hear a lot of the opposite. I hear a lot of people saying, you know, the rules are the rules, she broke the rules. You know, nevermind what happened to her personally, the rules are the rules.
It`s interesting, because a lot of those same people who are the rules are the rules crowd are the same people who had so much trouble following the health guidelines during a national pandemic to be able to just wear a mask. It`s really interesting that that happens. But you know, there`s a lack of compassion that is -- that is happening right now.
And, you know, to understand what she was dealing with -- and people say, well, you have to take her personal situation out of it? Well, I don`t think you do. You know, she just lost her mother. I mean, you know, you can tell even during the race, she ran them to the -- to the crowd and fell into her grandmother`s arms. I mean, this type of situation should make you reevaluate if this rule should even be a rule in the first place.
And what she did, you know, before the her trials, before her race, didn`t in no way shape or fashion, help her win, you know -- you know, run that 10.6, you know -- you know, time that she that she ran. It was not a performance enhancer. It didn`t assist her in anyway, and it has to be evaluated. But this -- the situation that happens like this, hopefully, the Olympic Committee will then start looking at it and start to reevaluate to see if this should even be the rule in the first place.
HAYES: Yes, there`s -- it`s a good point. I mean, there`s -- this line stuck out to me in the in the Track and Field statement is when they call it the current anti-doping code. And it`s like, OK, right. Invoking that term -- and I understand that, you know, there`s more banned substances than just six substances that are performance-enhancing. But when you use that term, it`s like, she wasn`t cheating, she was using a recreational drug that`s no more dangerous on the whole than alcohol, probably less dangerous, honestly.
She says, to cope with the awful, you know, grief of her mother`s loss. Like, just she`s in a completely different category, just rubbed me the wrong way to read that word in that context.
THOMAS: Definitely. I mean, it doesn`t apply to this situation. And when you`re -- when you`re looking at the different things that she could have done in this situation -- and everybody speaks to a bigger topic of being able to view athletes as humans. And the fact is, a lot of times, nobody cares. Nobody cares what you`re going through. Nobody cares what you`re dealing with. You know, if you`re Naomi Osaka and you`re having all this depression and anxiety, nobody cares. You`re just supposed to just, you know, talk to the media, that`s your job, and that`s what you have to do.
And that`s the part where hopefully, this is another situation where people can see that athletes or human. Athletes deal with tragedy and still have to perform at an optimal level. So, you know, that`s one of the things that kind of -- you know, when I was seeing all of the comments on social media, and a lot of the comments, I got to tell you, they honestly surprised me. A lot of thee talking heads and, you know, in the sports world, when they were covering this subject, it really surprised me because, you know, they talked about athletes as if they were robots. You know, they`re not supposed to have any type of feeling and none of your feelings matter.
And, you know, hopefully, this can allow people to see that there`s something wrong with that type of mentality.
HAYES: I want to just quickly play -- Richardson was on the "TODAY SHOW" on Friday where she talked about this. I found it really powerful. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SHA`CARRI RICHARDSON, ATHLETE: As much as I`m disappointed, I know that when I step on that track I don`t just represent myself. I represent a community that has shown me great support, great love. And to you all, (INAUDIBLE) I apologize for the fact that I didn`t know how to control my emotions, or deal with my emotions.
I`ll just say, don`t judge me because I am human. I`m you. I just happen to run a little faster.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: I like that line, I am human. It also strikes me here that more broadly, whether it`s U.S. Track and Field or the IOC or wherever, like, as the status of marijuana changes in both a social and legal sense, all these leagues and all of these athletic bodies are going to have to update the rules.
THOMAS: Oh, yes. Well, they`ll have to. I mean, you know, it`s the -- it`s the contradiction of it especially here in the states where you have opioids being passed out like candy in the NFL for decades, and nobody having a problem with it. In the NBA as well, you know, in different professional leagues, you know, but then you`ll have something like proven medicinal purposes with cannabis and it`ll just be frowned upon.
But that -- those are two of the much bigger topic, you know, and as far as the way that it`s criminalized in society. I mean, so many -- so many people right now, you know, for nonviolent crimes end in jail for a nickel bag of weed is ridiculous. So, it`s a reflection of the bigger problem in the society.
HAYES: Etan Thomas, thank you so much for joining us tonight. I appreciate it.
THOMAS: Thank you for having me.
HAYES: That is ALL IN on this Tuesday night. "THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW" starts right now. Good evening, Rachel.