Skip to main content

tv   Charlie Rose  Bloomberg  August 7, 2017 6:00pm-7:00pm EDT

6:00 pm
♪ announcer: from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." filmie: detroit is the new from kathryn bigelow. the film is set during the 1967 detroit riots in the killings of three unarmed black men at the algiers motel. "the l.a. times" caused excruciating and necessary. here is a look at the trailer. >> i assume this is about what went on at the motel.
6:01 pm
>> what happened at the motel? >> ♪ >> you don't know, i will tell you. i was working security. tuesday night, we heard gunfire coming from the area near the algiers. the police was there. there was a lot of shooting. there, three kids had been killed. >> so they were killed right before you got there? you carry a .38, right? >> ♪ you carry a revolver? >> i do have a .38. >> you ever shoot anyone? >> i did not do it. >> here we go.
6:02 pm
in detroit, violence continues. state police a national guardsman -- >> i am declaring a public state of emergency. >> it is a war zone. they are destroying the city. >> police! >> i'm going to assume you are all criminals. >> you don't talk about this to anyone, ever. you understand? >> ♪ >> change is coming! >> i told you what i saw. help to >> what is the matter with you? >> change is coming! >> they are trying to kill us. >> change is coming! >> ♪
6:03 pm
melvin, you want to go home? what happened at the motel? charlie: joining me is the director, kathryn bigelow, the writer, and two of the stars. i'm pleased to have all of you at this table. welcome. previous --i saw a on previous occasions at this table. tell me how this came to be. >> the writer next to me his work is extraordinary came to me with a story set against the detroit riots, the detroit uprising in 1967. setue story, a true crime in the algiers motel. and it was simply put, an execution. and a portrait of police brutality and racial injustice that was extremely moving, very
6:04 pm
timely, and very topical. about the same time he told me this story, the decision not to inict the officer involved the michael brandt shooting had taken place. i felt the story needed to be told. charlie: because it has lessons for today? >> exactly. charlie: had you been thinking about this? how long had you been thinking this is a story that ought to be told? >> we talked about it internally for a while and pushed it over intothem -- what pushed it a script was a meeting i had in detroit with one of the survivors who had not told his story in about 50 years. in the movie, hearing his recollection of how he tried to survive this life and how his life changed.
6:05 pm
when i heard it, i knew it was something i wanted to write. charlie: is it still there in detroit? detroit will always know? is twoink what you feel things. you feel a resiliency in the city and people. a bit of a time, struggle with its history. i think that dichotomy is very much at play. a pretty inspiring place to visit. charlie: did the rise of black lives matter have any input in it? >> i don't think we really discussed that. >> what deeming by input? -- what do you mean by input? charlie: the issues raised by it. pointhas become a focal of national conversation and larger conversation about
6:06 pm
policing. that are partents of a continuum and part of a history that goes back. the film explores it but it predates the film. what was going on in the moment, we are all aware of it. it was this recognition that all of these things were connected. you have a powerful poor moments -- performance. we have said that to you before. you were not born in america. >> i think number one is i am black. the black experience is a very real thing, a global thing. there is a reason why you mentioned black lives matter. why when theren is a rally in the u.s., there will be a rally in the u.k.
6:07 pm
there is a universal language when it comes to the black experience, racism, all those things. not a there was difficulty in understanding the context of the story. specifically, this was about a particular man. him --: described describe him. >> the first thing i noticed speaking with him is he is an introvert. i tried to separate him from the circumstances of what happened that night. i feel if you connect them he may get it misconstrued. he is very soft-spoken. a deep sense of responsibility of the people of his community. i relate to it because my father is the same way. love for people you does not know, which i do not necessarily have. i had to learn that.
6:08 pm
charlie: describe the character. we saw that in the trailer. >> yes. good a man trying to do who is forced into a circumstance he was not prepared for. i got the opportunity to speak to melvin, which is great. stern in some respects but also a do-gooder. textie: when there is a based in part on real events, are you looking for a spirit, mannerisms, a voice? >> a look for spirit first because i feel you can embody a lot about a human being when you get into his soul. i knew intion because would not be up to ask him every night what he would do in this particular circumstance.
6:09 pm
when you get the spirit in the beginning, the choices are guided by that. and then there's kathryn bigelow. if i'm going off course, she can easily point me in the right direction. and the words. charlie: how about the character? step was tohe first educate myself where i lacked some critical knowledge. i was not aware of the rebellion in detroit. i think i lacked some knowledge generally speaking when it came to the specifics of race relations in america. complexour own kind of racial history in the u.k., but i really did not know about the state of affairs in america at that time. learning the surface level
6:10 pm
information was important to me. i think delving deep into the topic of race and racial history was not necessary because i was looking to embrace ignorance by playing a racist. that is what you do. on form an opinion based lack of information or misinformation. going in, it was helpful in that respect. i kind of intensified that ignorance in the most aggressive and unapologetic way that i could because i think kathryn and i were in agreement about the fact his character needed to be exposed rather than be developed with any sort of orention to incite empathy any real compassion. charlie: do you do the research in terms of understanding the facts of the story? and you do the research
6:11 pm
understanding the look of the story? is that too easy? >> no, no. i don't want to speak for mark but he wrote the story ended a significant amount of research. i had to do research as well to truly understand and unpack motivations and understand the characters. in so doing, you also get a visual tapestry of what might be possible in terms of how it will look and unfold. in, one of thep things that was so startling to me when i went back to look at this is that there was a pretty richly documented record of this incident. the police department had done an investigation and talked to a lot of people. the transcripts of those conversations were available. charlie: what does that give you? >> it gives me context. it gives me texture. it gives me detail.
6:12 pm
sometimes there are direct quotes on what people actually said so it gives me mannerisms of speech. it gives me a lot. there was also department of justice investigation. after the racial strife, there was the kerner commission. there was a lot of discussion on this issue in the 1960's. what is so remarkable is you think this is relevant to today, and a couple of days ago the president of the united states makes remarks in front of a police group where he jokes about police brutality. charlie: he said later it was a joke. >> either way, it is sort of shocking how little we have learned. participationuch did you get from the police officers involved? >> two of them had passed away. side, it was the
6:13 pm
written record which was quite extensive. for the people that survived, the victims, i was able to speak to the man who john portrays. and a couple of other people who had been there that night. ,he historical stuff is great but to speak to somebody who can bring it to life for you was really the turning point. , thee character of julie real julie was on the set every day giving all of us a degree of specificity was extraordinary. she survived it. charlie: able to give you specificity and if she thought you were under the wrong assumption, to correct that? >> i invited that and really did she. i was hoping that would happen.
6:14 pm
she was a strong supporter and a real inspiration to all of us on the set. charlie: clearly from the trailer and seeing the movie, there is a sense of fast-moving events. a lot of close-up photography. give me a sense of how you wanted to make the film so it would portray how you want it to draw the audience in? >> i think in our early discussions about it, i knew it sort of needed to be immersive. it was more inviting active engagement with the screen as opposed to a passive one between the viewer and the screen. you are at the center of action with the potential to create empathy and also invite a dialogue about what you have just experienced. it becomes almost experiential, not unlike how we handled "hurt locker" where you are given an
6:15 pm
opportunity to witness a day in the life of a bomb tech. tokyo in his skin -- took you in his skin. in this case, took you inside this annex. sadly, the outcome is you are humanizing an unthinkable situation i assume for most people. so doing, you can i suppose walk away with a bit more information and enable and informed response. ♪
6:16 pm
6:17 pm
6:18 pm
♪ charlie: this is a clip where will is rounding up the guests at the motel. >> let's not be stupid in this situation. we still have a crime scene here, and you are all suspects. each and every one of you. don't look at me! turnaround! face the wall! [sobbing] >> was he the one doing the shooting? huh? somebody better start getting honest with me. i want that gun! >> we looked around.
6:19 pm
we did not find a gun. >> that does not mean it is not here. go find it! >> during the 1967 rebellion, there was the threat of snipers. there was a muzzle flash presumably that came from this particular building they are in. those i spent time with in preproduction talk specifically about hearing and seeing the national -- muzzle flash. the with the national guard detailed dissented on the house with detroit officers and state police to find the origin of the sniper fire. that is what is happening right there. what will poulter is doing with the other two officers is clearing floor by floor and room by room that entire building looking for the gun responsible for the sniper fire. oft is kind of the engine
6:20 pm
the early moments in the and next -- annex. charlie: tell me about your training and what has given you the most tools to work with. >> at nine years old, i decided i wanted to act. i got a scholarship to the local theater group where i had to do contemporary dance and ballet in order to do acting. it came as a deal package, so i had to do all of it. is probablylet good. >> i can still boogie down. after that, i went to pursue drama school seriously. i went to identity and met my agent. that training was intense. charlie: how long have you been doing it? >> i have been doing it professionally six years i think it will be. six years. charlie: what did you learn from
6:21 pm
this role in this film? "detroit" gave me purpose. have ato do movies that big commentary on the world once in a while. i like to have fun most of the time. my mind draws me toward projects that have serious context -- content. it changed me in the sense because now i am having to tell my agent i do not want to ever be below this creative standard that was in "detroit." i never want to go below that because i was exposed to a side of myself creatively. charlie: she got things out of view you might not have it even known yourself. >> yes. charlie: did you feel some sense of urgency that we find the rawest part of racism and show it? >> i think it was the truth and
6:22 pm
honesty of the story and tell it with his much integrity as possible --as much integrity as possible. >> that is a good question. i am not sure i would phrase it exactly like that. the way i thought about it was a very frank and unvarnished portrayal. you put it so eloquently at a panel the other day. on one level, it is a system of lies. without trying to put a psychological framework around without trying to shade it too much, because if something is a lie, it is a lie. that is very black and white. i was thinking about that in the writing with the characters. it would have been very possible wayraw the character in a -- but it is a lie and he believes a lie.
6:23 pm
there's something about the starkness of that. why not just go there? charlie: he does not believe he is a racist, does he? have you thought about that? right -- he he is a thinks he is right. he is wrong and he believes he is right. charlie: where did you get it? >> i think i looked at a number of different -- what is frightening if don't even have to look at performances. you can actually look close to home and see inspiration, and that is the unfortunate thing. of thisthe relevance film bears two recent cases of police brutality or force is harrowingly strong and it is
6:24 pm
also relevant. to see people with a similar mindset 50 years on still operating with the same degree of confidence and still causing such damage to communities, upholding these systems that continue to deprive people of social justice, it is real life. charlie: some of this is in the trailer. let me show this again. this is questioning carl. served for eight years, two diplomas, honorable discharge. >> is that fake? >> no, sir. >> is that your girl? >> his name is carl greene. you just said what is his name. >> you are lucky i have not broken your neck yet. >> i see what you are trying to
6:25 pm
do. i am not going to cause any trouble. i'm not going to lie down for you either. charlie: what are you thinking? i really enjoy working with anthony and will. i like being in that room and being around this incredible talent. charlie: there is a moment in a director's life where the actors take it beyond what you might have imagined. >> absolutely. that happened like every day on the set. charlie: how does a director get that? there are moments when you take it beyond. what is her role? >> for me, the best directors know how to collaborate. the best directors know the balance between technical and because there are many things to concentrate on. it is the balance they hold. also, it is guidance with notes.
6:26 pm
as an actor, you are within yourself when the cameras are rolling. the director guide you to come back to the character and story. she guided us very well. kathryn with barry creates a realistic environment. it was astonishing to be on the set and feel genuinely in that world. actors, to be given the ,reedom to do what felt natural in many ways that was a catchphrase of catherine's onset. i was fully prepared to be ofromanaged over the cadence my line and every expression. often, she would bless me with just something as simple as do what feels natural. do whatever feels right. that for want to say
6:27 pm
me what was shocking is i have never experienced that when the camera has been rolling. i have only experienced that on stage. i have never experienced it on film until this. strange. i wish every project was like this. [no audio] >> especially the people. we just had a premier there. it has been overwhelming, the response has been incredible. especially people who lived during the 1967 uprising. charlie: did you get a sense that they thanked somebody for telling their story? there had then a lot of things written.
6:28 pm
film is a powerful chronicle of emotion. >> that is the message that has come back to me, that this has been in the dark for 50 years and it is time it be out there. i'm sorry. >> i was going to say the city has been revisiting and commemorating the 50th anniversary for the last couple of months. in the context of that. obviously, everybody knows there's a lot going on in detroit right now in terms of attempts to revitalize it. detroiters who lived through 1957 and for the children who are incredibly loyal to the city and incredibly town, looking d of at this dark perio
6:29 pm
history, there is the pride of place that comes with the commemoration. sensee: there also is a that it is our history and you want to own your history whether it is bad or good. you want to understand it ofause you feel the deepness the roots in a place that shapes you. >> i am from new york city. i am not from detroit. i did not encounter this when we were working. there was a sense of you are not really from here. there are lots of reactions that fall in that category. i think when people saw the film, the quality of the speaks for itself. charlie: you said humanizing the algiers canedy of
6:30 pm
create empathy. empathy is different from sympathy, a more active engagement. and from that comes may be the start of justice. thank you for making that film. thank you for writing it. thank you for being at this table. we will be right back. stay with us. ♪
6:31 pm
6:32 pm
6:33 pm
opening onnew film netflix explores russia's long-running doping program. it began however with a different premise. the original intention was to expose the sailors of jug testing athletes by taking performance-enhancing drugs and whileng detection participating in an amateur cycling race. they embarked under the supervision of the former director of russia's anti-doping center. the story took a dramatic turn as the scope and details of russia's doping program began to emerge. here is a look at the film's trailer. we start asking questions and you answer. yes or no. were you the mastermind that cheated the olympics? >> yes. today, the world anti-doping agency suspended russia's sports drug testing lab.
6:34 pm
>> 99% of russian athletes are guilty of doping. >> it is worse than we thought. >> if this is true, it is an unimaginable level of criminality. they facilitate one of the most doping employees in -- doping plys in sports history. .> every sport was putin aware of the existence of a russian doping system? >> yes. >> it is quite mind blowing. >> the new york times is breaking tomorrow. >> it has the potential of affecting the credibility of all sports. of -- wouldnt and
6:35 pm
i watch an event that is fixed? >> in any danger? >> yes. the claimalls slander. >> two people connected with the russian doping program are already dead. >> there never was and i doping in russia, ever. doping in russia, ever. >> you are recording. charlie: it premieres on netflix on august 4. >> i was interested because i have been a lifelong cyclist. i looked at a guy who has still
6:36 pm
to this day past 500 anti-doping controls. the only way they help is through criminal investigation. i looked into what was wrong with the anti-doping system that they could not catch the most tested athlete on planet earth. i decided i would embark on this kind of investigative mission, first to explore the flaws in the anti-doping system, and second, to see exactly what these drugs did and whether or not i come in fact, could evade positive attention myself. charlie: did you know dan at that time? guest: i did not. charlie: how to do two come together -- how did you two come together? guest: i put together the 25 seizedpiece and dan this piece and calls me up the next day and basically says "what do you need to finish the movie?" and that began what has now been
6:37 pm
another three years between a conversation and us sitting here. charlie: how did you get involved? david: this is a guy that is trying to show the doping system does not work. it is really interesting. you should go watch the races and see how they go. when i went to europe and i saw what idid racing, realized was that this is really interesting, but the more interesting piece is how so many people had evaded doping for so long. it created this dynamic where brian said "let's go find out exactly how the russians are doing it." and that was super fascinating. charlie: when did you find out you had a massive program by the russians with accusations that president vladimir putin knew? >> there was a period to november 2015.
6:38 pm
in this time, i am working with gregory, who smuggles -- dr. gregory. the time running the third-largest anti-doping laboratory in the world, which is the moscow lab, which had overseen all the testing for the sochi olympics, but was overseeing testing of all russian athletes across all sports and all international athletes coming to russia to compete. so ibm working with gregory, -- so i began working with gregory. 2014is basically december to november 2015 and during this year, gregory is under investigation, but i keep going on with my film and gregory is helping to advise me. a report comes out based on this investigation and it is now alleging that gregory is essentially the mastermind of the state-sponsored doping program. at the time, it is still only the investigation is
6:39 pm
only am a track and field. but this creates a series of events. the lab is shut down. agree is forced to resign. russia is suspended from world track and field. gregory is basically telling me that he is going to be killed by the russian government, and i helped facilitate his escape from moscow to los angeles, and then, over the next few months, i learned the full size and scope. charlie: once he was in los angeles and free to tell you? guest: yes, and that is when i learned the size and scope of this spectacular conspiracy to cheat the olympics that had been placed for essentially all of modern sport, but specifically what they did episode two games, which -- what they did at the --sochi games, which was unimaginable fraud. when you look at how russian sport is set up, unlike the
6:40 pm
u.s., where it is all private, in russia, it is controlled by the ministry. charlie: the sports ministry? guest: yes, the sports ministry in russia. all russian athletes are essentially being paid by the russian government to compete. so everything under russia is under ministry umbrella and gregory is running the anti-doping lab, which is really the anti-anti-doping lab, and the guy that is his boss, his russian ministry, the sports minister russia, his best friend is vladimir putin, who he grew up with, the chain of command was essentially gregory to him to prudent. -- to putin. charlie: what happens to the head of the minister of sorts? sport,the minister of
6:41 pm
when this entire scandal gets revealed, putin elevates him to the deputy prime minister of russia, essentially the vice president of russia, and has never accepted any responsibility for the state-sponsored doping program. and the guy below him, the deputy vice minister of sport, is forced to resign, and is now under criminal investigation. charlie: what is it that makes this so compelling? out asthis film started one thing. that was interesting after. brian thought the anti-doping system was not working and in fact a fraud. he wanted to set out to test that by taking the drugs himself and seeing if he could get through all the test looking clean. be 100 times bigger than we imagined when not only was all that true, but he became friends and through saving him and bringing him from russia to
6:42 pm
the united states when his life was in danger, we learned what the russians had been doing, which was gaining the system for 40 years and reaching a crescendo at sochi, at which they collected clean urine from every russian athlete in sochi before the games, cap it in a secret kgb vault and when any of those athletes got a medal, and they would be drug tested, found a way to break and a breakable sotem and dump dirty urine it could never be tested and replace it with clean urine, gaming the entire system. it was an incredibly brazen fraud that said not only can you get by the system in small ways, but you can crack it open in a gigantic way. charlie: who has confirmed the story of grigory about what happened? guest: after we go to the new york times, they are forced to
6:43 pm
launch another investigation into the claims put forward in the new york times. i helped to facilitate a meeting, and richard mclaren was the head of that investigation, independently, and this investigation went on between may 2016 through december of this year. the investigation found, beyond a reasonable doubt, that every single thing grigory said and put forward is true. corroborated all the evidence. charlie: this is the investigation by the new york times? guest: no, the new york times broke the story based on all the evidence we brought to them. then the world anti-doping agency led an investigation because they were able to actually get the samples from sochi that were being held by and test them to see if they had been tampered with. between that process plus what
6:44 pm
was 1666 documents of evidence that led straight back to the ministry, this report found, beyond a question about, reasonable doubt, that not only was this true, but the extent of this fraud goes back further than they can even imagine. we brought forward evidence of beijing in 2008, of london in 2012, of multiple championships that were held in russia around since that time, and of course, sochi. when they went and examined these bottles, they literally found the scratches of how the , broke into these bottles. they found spectacular levels of content in the urine samples, because grigory was adding salt into the herein samples to match the
6:45 pm
gravity. they corroborated everything that grigory brought forward as undeniable truth. charlie: where is the russian sports program today? what hasght now, happened, to start with, there was a little bit of luck here. we started to make a movie about brian doping in the system. and then the relationship with grigory rodchenkov, we discovered what happened. this was a way to pump up putin's popularity, which in the two weeks after sochi, he ended up affecting the ukraine. this was used as a political motive to be able to use the sports system as a way to enhance russia's political agenda. guest: that is right. and where the russians are now is there are two separate investigations by the ioc of the russians to determine whether or
6:46 pm
not they should be allowed to participate in the february winter olympics in south korea. so there isn't serious question about whether they will be allowed to participate? guest: we still do not know. one thing that has been obvious is that the ioc does not want anything to happen to russia. the ioc has made clear that if they could, they would sweep this completely under the rug. charlie: how would they do that? guest: the world anti-doping association is their arm that punishes countries and athletes if they are doping. when we expose all this in the new york times, president thomas falk of the ioc said "we are going to let the world anti-doping association decide what should happen to the russians." they came back and said "in the real olympics -- real olympics, every russian athlete should be banned because of what russia did hear." the ioc said "sorry, we are not
6:47 pm
going to do that." only the track and field athletes were banned. nobody wants to expose duping and sports. why? because it is bad for business. if you are the ioc, you don't want audiences to think these athletes are cheating. what they really want is spectacular athletic feats supported by doping with a system that looks like they are fighting doping, but in fact, does not really catch anyone. this is not in anyone's interest. it is in the interest of audiences and clean athletes everywhere who want a level playing field. charlie: what do you hope the consequence of the film is, david? david: there is a couple of thoughts. one is from a storytelling point of view, the courage that brian an his team did by exposing international incident that was supposed to be around sports and ended up leading to some pretty nasty politics. charlie: political considerations?
6:48 pm
david: absolutely, including a country being attacked and people being murdered. that story needs to be told. it takes kurds to tell that story. this started as a story about sports and ended up being about the manipulation and politics. we got lucky that this happens to be geopolitically very live right now. the movie played on january 20 at sundance. at the time we were playing the movie, within one hour of the movie being played at sundance, our current president was sworn in. we have seen over the last six month how the relationship with russia has led to an enormous amount of consequence with the united states. in a way, telling this story led to something that was very relevant as to how we look at how we handle the world right now. guest: what is most interesting about this film? right now, in america, what is most interesting about this movie is that it shows the extent the russians are willing
6:49 pm
to go to project soft power in the world, the way they are willing to manipulate, july, to to deceive,to lie, and to create fraud in the world of international sports. imagine what they are willing to do on issues of hard power. charlie: why did rodchenkov do this? without him, you have no story. guest: without him, i have no story. to answer that question, i think first, you have to look at the that he put forward to tell the story. when he came to the united states, he could have kept his , heh shut, but instead took a third rate risks to bring this story forward. if he had not, none of this would have come forward. he knew he was going to be a dead man in russia. he could have come to the united states and probably stayed quiet , figured out a way to get a
6:50 pm
silent, went to canada, whatever. he decided he was going to bring this story forward. the reason why is that sochi, for him, broke his back. his career was actually as a scientist, and part of that, working under the ministry, was to figure out how to get around the doping test. was an did at sochi outright fraud and he was upset at the ministry. he told them this had to stop. after sochi, not only did it not stop, it continued into this woman world championships, into the junior athletics world collegiate, where they were doing this with the collegiate athletes. then they had put the system in place for next year's world cup, which is still being held in moscow next summer. this was not going to stop. this was going to continue. grigory had reached -- as he said -- its logical conclusion, and he wanted to bring the story to the world.
6:51 pm
charlie: take a look at this, clip number two. they discuss the growing concerns about russian knowledge. here it is. >> there is a top-level decision, you know who i mean, and the big boss, vladimir putin thinks, to show the best result in sochi. we must show others who we are. we could make him do one month. decided to use them during sochi. >> through the competition, so they could be at the very top level? >> right. >> vladimir putin? >> instead of using the science,
6:52 pm
the science you developed to get around the system, you abandoned the science? >> most important, yes. and gentlemen, let me be clear that 126 sessions with the international olympic committee is open. charlie: call to me about what you did in wanting to go through this expanding yourself. guest: i wanted to go through it for many reasons. as an athlete, and i competed as a cyclist from the time i was 13 until i was 20, and wanted to be a pro. i had this curiosity my whole life of what exactly do these drugs do? would they make me a better athlete?what i possibly have been a champion? i had that curiosity. the second part of that curiosity was what decision does an athlete competing on a world
6:53 pm
level, at the best of his sport, have to make whether they are going to use a substance or not use a substance if the system itself does not work? that was the driving force behind my desire to do what i wanted to do. charlie: did you talk to lance armstrong? guest: i met him 2.5 years ago, before my movie took this pivot. at the time, i showed him the same 25 minute piece that i showed dan. lance was very excited about it because it was showing that he was a needle in a haystack rather than the haystack itself. yet, and i had always viewed lance as essentially a needle in a haystack rather than the haystack he had been put up as essentially. charlie: you wanted to say everybody does it? guest: yeah. charlie: what will this accomplish? guest: the major piece that this
6:54 pm
will show is that russia's manipulation of a system that started out with athletes internally. the ioc externally. and now, the potential of opening up our eyes to how they impact charlie: other countries. how the government can use that to enhance a political strategy? guest: sure. sports is just an analogy of other parts of our lives. in and of itself, the story of sports was interesting. it is interesting. the reason this story has become such a phenomenon is because it leaves us to rethink how the russians or o other country can manipulate the political system. how easy it was for them to manipulate political gain by using those you to justify it. any example of how it has played out over the last six month with the united rates government. that story has to get cold, charlie. guest: there are two impacts. one is to show what the russian government is willing to do simply on soft power, to
6:55 pm
manipulate and undercut international systems. and if you think they are willing to do that just in sports, imagine what they are willing to do in politics. guest: and not only that, but in january, january 7 when the cia, nsa, and fbi released their declassified report into election hacking, they listed seven reasons. reason number three that they listed why our election was hacked with what they perceived with putin's revenge or america's involvement in the doping scandal and the release of the panama neighbors. thought that because richard had -- because rodchenkov come to the united states and the story broke in the new york times and the department of justice and fbi launched an investigation into the scandal that the u.s. was behind this. they list this as one of the seven reasons our election. hack, and consequently, the new may broke on the hack of the dnc and clinton was one month later.
6:56 pm
almost 30 days to the date. guest: the other impact significantly is the world of sports. the only way to have integrity in the world of sports is for athletes, clean athletes, to get up and say "we will not accept an olympics that has so much doping." and we hope that the film shows exactly how corrupt the system is and serves as a rallying cry for athletes to change. most athletes are clean. there is an organization now fair sport that want to support whistleblowers coming out and telling the truth about doping in sport. if clean athletes stand up, we think that can make a change in this film can help inspire that. charlie: thank you. "icarus" opened on the float and in theaters on august 4. thank you for joining us. see you next time. ♪
6:57 pm
6:58 pm
6:59 pm
track your pack. set a curfew, or two. make dinner-time device free. [ music stops ] [ music plays again ] a smarter way to wifi is awesome. introducing xfinity xfi. amazing speed, coverage and control. change the way you wifi. xfinity. the future of awesome.
7:00 pm
anchor: now is not the time. the fed's jim bullard is saying sluggish inflation is putting rate hikes on the back burner. he is: a return to -- still looking for deals. anchor: iron ore and steelmakers on the move. commodity traders betting on tighter supply. not lie.he numbers do disney expects movies and theme parks to offset weakness in media. anchor:


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on