Bill Simmons, Sean Fennessy, and Chris Ryan revisit Steven Soderbergh’s Contagion in the context of the 2020 coronavirus outbreak, focusing on how uncannily the film captures modern pandemic anxiety through its early depiction of transmission, public panic, and everyday hygiene behaviors. They discuss Soderbergh’s stylistic choices—fast global structure, grounded realism, and withholding “day one” until the end—as well as the unusually stacked cast and the decision to play the material completely straight rather than as a star-driven hero narrative. The conversation digs into the movie’s research-based approach to epidemiology and vaccine development, and how its portrayal of institutions and global cooperation now feels both plausible and more fragile than it did in 2011. They also highli...

Unidentified, militarized officers confronting protesters in Washington, D.C., highlight how sprawling and opaque federal law enforcement has become, especially as agencies have expanded steadily since 9/11 with limited public oversight. Attorney General William Barr was able to rapidly assemble thousands of personnel by drawing from the capital’s dense patchwork of federal police forces and specialized agencies, some of which have been granted enhanced surveillance roles. The federal government employs more than 132,000 civilian law enforcement officers across roughly 80 agencies, many outside the well-known “brand name” departments, alongside sizable military investigative and policing arms and even vaguely labeled security forces like the CIA’s protective service. This fragmented system...

The hosts break down the Republican National Convention’s messaging and production, noting a split between speakers who lean into Trump’s grievance politics and others who deliver more traditional Republican themes aimed at suburban voters, along with a debate over whether tactics like using the White House for convention content (and potential Hatch Act violations) matter to actual voters. They then explore what they call the 2020 election’s central paradox: polls show a steady Biden lead, yet the mechanics of voting and counting—especially mail ballots, litigation, and delayed results—could make the outcome unusually uncertain and contested. The conversation turns to the shootings and unrest in Kenosha and how ongoing protests, looting, and armed civilian presence are shaping public opin...

The hosts discuss fears that the Trump campaign could contest or undermine election results in key swing states by challenging mail-in ballots, pressuring Republican legislatures, and sowing distrust even in a clear Biden win. They debate how realistic worst-case scenarios are, but agree that sustained claims of fraud could erode democratic legitimacy and normalize an alternate reality for a sizable share of the country. The conversation then shifts to Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death and the GOP’s push to confirm a replacement, with attention to how vulnerable Republican senators may be prioritizing loyalty to Trumpism over electoral strategy. They argue Democrats should keep the focus on process fairness and, more importantly, on practical stakes like the ACA and Roe rather than attacking a n...

The episode unpacks a cascading week of political crises culminating in President Trump and the First Lady testing positive for COVID-19, arguing that the diagnosis reflects the White House’s sustained disregard for basic public-health precautions and the administration’s broader pattern of denial and spin. Sykes and Miller also revisit the first presidential debate—especially Trump’s refusal to clearly condemn white supremacists and his lack of empathy toward Biden—while examining how Republicans privately express “concern” yet continue enabling him. They discuss election- and governance-related fallout including stalled stimulus negotiations, the GOP rush to confirm Amy Coney Barrett amid potential exposure, escalating vote-suppression tactics in Texas, and looming ballot-count controver...

The episode uses a darkly comic doctor–patient dialogue to satirize how people weigh expertise against charisma, fame, and “outsider” appeal when making high-stakes decisions. As Mr. Thomas distrusts credentials and institutions, he’s swayed by a confident clown, conspiracy thinking, and emotional defiance even in the face of clear evidence that the trained surgeon is the only safe option. The conversation ultimately argues that flawed systems still require reality-based choices, and that rejecting competence for spectacle can compound harm and remove better options for everyone.

The episode centers on the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election, mixing relief at Joe Biden’s win with anxiety about Donald Trump’s refusal to concede and Republicans’ reluctance to acknowledge the result. The hosts discuss how close the race remained in key states, what the margins suggest about Trump’s enduring influence, and the likelihood that claims of a “stolen” election become a loyalty test within the GOP. They also dig into practical risks of a delayed transition, including the role of the GSA in formally starting it and the potential public-health consequences as COVID surges and a new vaccine headline collides with partisan incentives. A major theme is whether political reality and governance can reassert themselves once Trump loses presidential power, or whether a post-p...

The episode centers on Trump’s post-election efforts to overturn the 2020 result, with the hosts describing a “low-energy” but still dangerous attempt involving legal theatrics, pressure on certification boards, and officials being punished for disputing fraud claims. They argue that while the effort looks incompetent and is unlikely to succeed because the margin wasn’t close, it has been politically effective at binding much of the Republican Party and its voters to the narrative that the election was stolen. The conversation turns to Georgia, praising Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger for resisting intense pressure from Trump allies while warning that ongoing “rigged election” rhetoric could depress GOP turnout ahead of the Senate runoffs. They also discuss how Republican ambitions f...

The episode examines the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, arguing it was driven by President Trump’s encouragement and sustained by Republican claims of a stolen election, and it follows reporter John Bresnahan’s firsthand account of how the breach unfolded inside the building. Bresnahan describes the chaotic mix of violence and spectacle—rioters forcing entry, lawmakers and staff hiding in fear, and intruders treating historic spaces like a stage for social media—while questioning why security preparations were so inadequate and noting the stark contrast to law enforcement responses seen at other protests. The conversation then shifts to the political aftermath, including Republicans continuing objections to electoral certification even after the assault and efforts to deflect blame,...

Charlie Sykes and Tim Miller react to the aftermath of the January 6 Capitol attack, describing the Trump administration’s rapid unraveling through resignations, elite defections, and renewed calls for impeachment. They argue that the violence was the predictable culmination of years of Trump’s rhetoric and Republican/media enabling, rejecting what they see as last-minute “reputation laundering” from figures like Nikki Haley, Bill Barr, and Mitch McConnell. The conversation focuses on whether impeachment or prosecution will constrain Trump going forward, while sharply criticizing Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley for stoking election-fraud narratives even after the riot. They also examine the security failures that allowed the breach and warn that the radicalization behind it hasn’t disappeared, de...

The episode traces the buildup from post-election “Stop the Steal” rallies to January 6, focusing on how false fraud claims and increasingly violent online rhetoric culminated in the Capitol attack. Through minute-by-minute accounts from NPR reporters on the ground and testimony from a lawmaker, a photographer, and police, it depicts the rapid shift from a festive crowd to an organized-and-spontaneous mob, the mix of extremist groups with everyday supporters, and the danger faced inside the building. It also examines the aftermath, including injuries and deaths, COVID exposure during evacuation, trauma among officers, and reporting that federal agencies had warning intelligence but did not produce a formal threat assessment—raising questions about what could happen next.

Seth Meyers contrasts the incoming Biden administration’s concrete plan to fix the pandemic response and vaccine rollout with the chaos of Trump’s final days, including Trump entertaining conspiracy-driven figures like the MyPillow CEO and talk of extreme measures. He argues that the Capitol insurrection and Trump’s premeditated effort to undermine the election were enabled by years of Republican complicity, highlighting how party leaders and right-wing media amplified false fraud claims and now resist holding Trump accountable. The episode frames Trump’s departure as a broader indictment of institutional rot within the GOP and a warning that the underlying threat to democratic norms will persist beyond his presidency.

The episode centers on the January 6 Capitol attack and the impeachment trial, with a focus on how Trump faces some accountability while many Republican lawmakers, conservative media figures, and other “middle-tier” enablers largely escape consequences despite amplifying election-fraud lies. The hosts react to the House managers’ presentation and the riot footage, emphasizing the terror of mob violence, the injuries and trauma suffered by Capitol Police, and the moral numbness of senators who appear uninterested in the evidence while treating the outcome as predetermined. They debate what real accountability could look like—resignations, donor and social pressure, and lasting political costs—while wrestling with pessimism about whether the country can rebuild shared norms when a large shar...

The hosts open with light banter about parenting, screen time, and kids’ shows before turning to politics and a debate over Mitt Romney’s Wall Street Journal critique of Biden’s $1.9 trillion stimulus, weighing whether Romney’s arguments are substantively fair but politically out of step with today’s GOP. They then focus on Sen. Ron Johnson amplifying conspiracy claims that January 6 was driven by Antifa provocateurs, and discuss how Fox News and Republican messaging has evolved into an evidence-proof narrative that downplays or reframes the insurrection. From there, the conversation shifts to whether anti-Trump conservatives should form a third party, with the speakers arguing it’s impractical in a two-party system and that influence is more likely through a pro-democracy coalition within...

With Sarah Longwell absent, JVL and Tim Miller dig into the looming House GOP vote to oust Liz Cheney, treating it as a test of whether the party is normalizing election denial and authoritarian instincts, and debating how many Republicans might privately support her versus publicly break ranks. They explore what Cheney’s future could look like and what happens to the slice of Republican voters who accept Biden’s win but remain tied to the party, while questioning whether Trump is a uniquely destabilizing figure or merely the most shameless expression of a broader movement. The conversation then shifts to the origins of COVID-19, arguing that the lab-leak possibility should be treated as an open question rather than a partisan loyalty test, and grappling with how misinformation, fear, and ...

The hosts unpack the Ohio Republican Senate primary as a case study in how GOP incentives reward trolling and extremism, focusing on J.D. Vance’s attention-grabbing provocations (including elevating Alex Jones) and contrasting him with the more “authentic” MAGA style of Josh Mandel. They argue that Vance’s strategy is about boosting name recognition by being hated by the right people, while also debating what each candidate’s success would signal about the Republican Party’s inability to control the movement it helped create. The conversation then widens to a Politico report suggesting Trump has a “turnkey” 2024 operation and is increasingly likely to run as Biden’s approval slips, with the hosts warning that elites, institutions, and even the media will normalize his return despite Januar...

Chris Hayes argues that Donald Trump and his allies carried out an attempted coup after the 2020 election, walking through a string of pressure campaigns in Georgia aimed at breaking the chain of democratic certification, from audits and calls to Gov. Brian Kemp and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to efforts to weaponize the Justice Department via Jeffrey Clark. The episode’s centerpiece is Reuters reporting that Trevian Kutti, a publicist tied to Kanye West (Ye), confronted election worker Ruby Freeman and, on police bodycam, pressed her to falsely “confess” to election fraud under threats of jail and harm. Hayes connects this intimidation effort to the broader strategy of manufacturing just enough “evidence” to delay or derail January 6 certification, culminating in Trump’s rally r...

The episode centers on newly released January 6 committee text messages suggesting Sean Hannity had unusually close, advisory communications with Trump’s White House before, during, and after the Capitol attack, raising questions about what he knew of the plan and how Fox hosts privately reacted versus what they promoted publicly. It then widens to a one-year-later look at Trump’s broader effort to overturn the 2020 election, including pressure on state officials and election workers, coordinated legal and political maneuvers in swing states, and the local guardrails that helped prevent subversion. Finally, it explores the American right’s admiration for Hungary’s Viktor Orbán—highlighting Tucker Carlson’s coverage and Trump’s endorsement—as a case study in “illiberal” governance and what ...

The episode examines warning signs that the U.S. is moving closer to political violence, beginning with January 6 and reports of forged electoral certificates, and then broadening into political scientist Barbara Walter’s research on how modern civil wars start. Walter argues that the biggest risk factors are a weakening “partial democracy” and politics organized around racial or other identity factions, with elections, elite disinformation, and government overreaction potentially serving as triggers that turn sporadic extremism into sustained insurgency-style conflict rather than a traditional battlefield war. The conversation also explores what might reduce the risk, emphasizing reforms that strengthen democratic institutions, regulation of social media amplification systems, and more ag...