Knicks Icon Bill Bradley on Finals Fever

Summary

The Beat with Ari Melber – Episode Summary
Episode: Knicks Icon Bill Bradley on Finals Fever
Date: June 6, 2026
Host: Ari Melber
Special Guest: Bill Bradley, with guests Emily Bazelon, Juanita Tolliver, and Erin Brockovich

---

Overview

This episode of "The Beat with Ari Melber" spans a broad slate of topics, from urgent political and legal controversies in the Trump DOJ to the environmental and civic impact of artificial intelligence and its infrastructure. The show wraps up on a hopeful note, marking New York’s renewed “Finals Fever” with basketball legend and liberal icon Bill Bradley, who reflects on how sports can unify a city and offer inspiration in tough times.

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Trump DOJ Legal Controversies and Overreach

[00:39 – 18:06]

• Context:
  Ari Melber starts by reporting on the aggressive legal stance adopted by Trump’s Department of Justice (DOJ), notably defending the so-called "billion dollar ballroom" and asserting extreme executive power – including, dramatically, the claim that the president could bulldoze national monuments like the Statue of Liberty without congressional or public approval.

• Key Issues Raised:

  • DOJ is accused of defending positions reminiscent of Trump’s infamous “I could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue” comment, representing unchecked executive overreach.
  • Federal judges express skepticism toward these claims, with the symbolism of destroying the Statue of Liberty underscoring anxieties about American democracy.
  • Watchdog data highlight “pay for play” concerns: over half of donors to the ballroom project have received or increased government contracts totaling over $50 billion.
  • Melber covers the controversy over the MAGA criminal defense fund, paused amid legal challenges, and notes DOJ’s inconsistent and opaque communication on its future.

• Panel Analysis (Emily Bazelon & Juanita Tolliver):

  • Bazelon notes DOJ’s reckless arguments are partly due to defending past destructive actions (e.g., demolition of the East Wing of the White House), requiring the assertion of “limitless power” to justify itself ([06:54]).
    • “It makes the government seem like they are willing to be reckless and are claiming to the power to destroy any piece of architecture in the country.” — Emily Bazelon [06:54]
  • Tolliver links DOJ’s stance to a broader pattern of institutional destruction and political alienation. She references Trump’s disregard for public opinion, court oversight, and tangible political achievements, with Republicans left unenthused and directionless.
    • “It's giving Sheree Whitfield who's going to check me ... the Trump administration saying, who is going to stop us?” — Juanita Tolliver [09:02]
  • Both note the Senate Republicans’ lack of meaningful resistance, the party’s fading grassroots enthusiasm, and the expectation that “no one will stand up” to presidential power.

• Political Impact:

  • Melber remarks on the “brazen partisan loyalty” as the only standard of success in the Trump DOJ, with long-term damage to the Justice Department’s independence considered collateral.

---

2. Environmental Cost of AI – Erin Brockovich Interview

[20:13 – 32:25]

• Context:
  Melber pivots to a rising but under-discussed issue: the expansion of AI and data centers, their environmental impacts, and the lack of regulation or disclosure.

• Key Issues Raised:

  • AI infrastructure’s real-world toll includes massive electricity and water use, stress on local utilities, pollution (noise/light/heat), and risk to property values and public health.
  • Strong, bipartisan local opposition: regardless of political lines, Americans do not want data centers in their communities.
  • The tech industry’s narrative focuses on progress and prosperity, while ignoring the hidden costs and lack of community involvement.

• Erin Brockovich’s Perspective:

  • She started mapping data center locations after receiving broad-based complaints (from 49 states). Her main finding: communities are frustrated by secrecy, absence of disclosure, and being shut out of the decision process.
    • “First and foremost, what's really disturbing to every single community is the non disclosure. They had no idea they’d been left out of the conversation. They're not being heard and they don't know a lot of information.” — Erin Brockovich [25:18]
    • “If there’s anything that I've learned over 30 years ... you know they will deal with the truth if you just tell them the truth. What they don't deal with is the deception, the cover up, the secrecy, the lies.” — Erin Brockovich [28:06]
  • Local activism is growing: 78 municipalities and counting have called for moratoriums or stricter rules, empowered by social media sharing and grassroots pressure.
    • “This gives them some ability to reach more people. And more people are showing up.” — Erin Brockovich [31:27]
  • She emphasizes the collective power of communities: “Superman may not be coming … but I think we've learned we have the ability, we have a brain. We have some courage. We got a heart.” — Erin Brockovich [31:47]

---

3. Finals Fever – Knicks in the NBA Finals, with Bill Bradley

[33:27 – 43:15]

• Context:
  Shifting to an inspiring cultural moment, Melber celebrates the Knicks’ first NBA Finals since 1999 and only the third since their 1973 championship. He sets the scene in a euphoric, united New York.

• Bill Bradley Interview Highlights:
  (Bradley: Knicks legend, former US Senator, author, and activist)

  On the Knicks’ Finals Run and Values:

  • The current Knicks echo the unselfish, resilient, team-oriented spirit of the championship squads of the 1970s.
    • “They're winning because they're confident and they're playing with confidence. … They're playing unselfishly. They have discipline, they have resilience.” — Bill Bradley [37:30]
    • “You can't underestimate the importance of that. If you go out on the court and your objective is to take the best possible shot and get your teammate the best possible shot, that's a little different than going out seeing how many points I can score.” — Bill Bradley [39:25]

  On Sports as Civic Glue:

  • Sports offer communal joy above daily divisions—Bradley draws a powerful parallel between athletic teamwork and civic participation.
    • “It is a message that says, we have something in common. … For New York City, it means, you know, be a little more generous. … Live your life to the fullest by giving to another human being.” — Bill Bradley [40:55]

  Advice for Aspiring Leaders:

  • Bradley lists discipline, self-awareness, and love for people as critical to both athletic and public life success.
    • “Be clear about what your strengths and weaknesses are. Go out and pay the price. … And if you love, you got to love people. If you're going in politics, you got to love people, which means you got to love their stories.” — Bill Bradley [42:15]

---

Memorable Moments and Notable Quotes

• “...The DOJ making its version of Donald Trump's infamous claim that he could shoot anyone on Fifth Avenue—here, they could proverbially shoot or eliminate Lady Liberty herself.” — Ari Melber [01:57]

• “I think the reason [the DOJ lawyer] felt that he couldn't say no is that the government has already destroyed the East Wing of the White House. And so in order to justify that, he felt that he had to claim that the government has this limitless power.” — Emily Bazelon [06:54]

• “Who is going to stop us? ... This is the play of The Donald Trump administration.” — Juanita Tolliver [09:02]

• “There’s zero information, there’s zero health impact studies, there's zero environmental studies, there’s zero oversight.” — Erin Brockovich [25:18]

• “[The Knicks] are winning because they're confident and they're playing with confidence. ... They're playing unselfishly. They have discipline, they have resilience.” — Bill Bradley [37:30]

• “If you're going in politics, you gotta love people, which means you gotta love their stories.” — Bill Bradley [42:15]

---

Timestamps for Major Segments

• DOJ Overreach & Legal Panel:
  00:39 – 18:06

• AI and Data Center Environmental Impacts (Erin Brockovich):
  20:13 – 32:25

• Knicks Finals, Unity, and Advice from Bill Bradley:
  33:27 – 43:15

---

Tone and Final Thoughts

The episode oscillates between sincere alarm at legal, governmental, and environmental overreach and hopeful energy tied to civic engagement and cultural unity. Melber and his guests are unflinching in calling out abuse of power and environmental neglect but finish on the uplift of New York’s shared excitement—reminding listeners of the potential for community, action, and optimism in the face of daunting challenges.

Transcript

[A]

Hey, everyone, it's Chris Hayes. This week on my podcast, why is this Happening? In the next episode of our special miniseries, the AI Endgame, I'm speaking with legendary philosopher and cognitive scientist David Chalmers about what is consciousness?

[B]

Once you start thinking about the possibility these AI systems are conscious, everything changes. Right now, we treat every single AI system in the world as a tool. Computers are tools which we can use to help us in our projects. And you'd ever think, seriously, well, could I be hurting the computer? So now the possibility becomes on the table that once an AI system is conscious, we have to start asking questions like, could an AI system itself be suffering?

[A]

Why is this happening? The AI end game. Listen now, wherever you get your podcasts.

[C]

Welcome to the Beat, everyone. I'm Ari Melber, and it's Friday, and there's a lot of news and we have a lot planned. Coming up, the famed activist Aaron Brockovich is here on the intersection between green activism and these AI tech giants. And by the end of the hour, Bill Bradley, the liberal icon and Nick's veteran, will join us to talk about the mood really sweeping New York and the nation as everyone watches these NBA Finals. He's here live, but we begin with the Trump DOJ making the kind of autocratic claims that have to be taken seriously when it's not just Donald Trump musing between dozing off at meetings, but actually your government, your tax dollars. They're defending the billion dollar ballroom. And now DOJ lawyers who again work for. For you. They're not Trump's personal lawyers, even though he put his former personal lawyer atop the doj. Right now, they say he could destroy any national monument without Congress, without the public. This is all on tape. DOJ telling a judge, if Trump wants, he could bulldoze the Statue of Liberty and no one can do anything about it.

[D]

The government decides very quickly and bulldoze

[C]

the Statue of Liberty. The people who ancestors, that was the

[E]

first thing they saw coming to this country.

[C]

But the government moved too fast. Nothing can be done. I think. I think that's right. Yes. That's the kind of question a judge poses to test the outer limits. And sometimes you pick something so extreme that a lawyer, in this case, a lawyer for the government, but any lawyer who was supposed to argue zealously but within the law and the facts might say, well, no, not that far, your honor. Certainly there are some limits here, even if we claim to do whatever we want with a ballroom. Not here, though. The DOJ making its version of Donald Trump's infamous claim that he could shoot anyone on Fifth Avenue here. They could proverbially shoot or eliminate Lady Liberty herself. The overtones, the symbolism being quite obvious. But let's check how this really works. The federal appeals court panel was skeptical about those arguments. So the fact that the DOJ said them does not mean they're true or legal, something we've all gotten quite accustomed to lately. The symbolism is striking. Why this DOJ lawyer would want to jump in and claim that you could actually destroy this symbol, this beacon of freedom that on our best days we celebrate and people around the world look to as America. In fact, to pick a modern example, if you type America into your text message, you'll usually get suggestions of the American flag and Lady Liberty herself. That's how synonymous this is. So the symbolism of saying you can destroy it, there's nothing we could do about it is telling. As for the ballroom, watchdog group says corruption is rampant. Over half of the donors have already received or increased getting government contracts for over $50 billion. The White House says these are fake conflicts of interest and everything was just going on anyway. But the numbers, the receipts suggest a kind of pay for play. And again, that's at the cost of the taxpayer. If they give a small amount of money for some cause Trump wants and then get way more taxpayer money in return, money they might not have otherwise gotten, you're footing the bill. We also have late breaking Friday news here coming out of again, an embattled DOJ in a raft of lawsuits challenging the criminal fund. The DOJ has been on defense. Indeed, that MAGA criminal fund has already been paused, subject to further review. Congress may also just cancel it entirely. They've been on the ropes. Now, you might recall that Todd Blanch, the acting AG told Congress that he wouldn't put in writing. But the fund is over, not going forward. Here you have this argument in court where they say it's not going forward. Now, if you look at me here and say, okay, kind of matches up, what's the big deal? Well, what's striking is they're not dropping out, they're not dropping the case and agreeing to just end the fund completely. So we're going to keep a close eye on what happens, although they're clearly in a type of retreat. But second, the DOJ lawyers tonight, this just crossed the wires here within the last few hours are doing exactly what Todd Blanche said he wouldn't do. He's in charge of the doj. But whether he's actually meaningfully in charge, well, that's one of the Questions that gets raised when this happens because he made a big point of saying he wouldn't put the end of the fund in writing.

[E]

You established it in writing, so it just makes sense to rescind it in writing.

[D]

I think a lot of Americans, both

[E]

sides of the aisle, are concerned about it, and it would restore a lot

[D]

of trust about this issue.

[C]

Okay. I'm not committing to doing anything in writing.

[D]

Okay.

[C]

I mean, I'll take it under advisement. Not committed to put in writing, even though he's doing something that actually, in a way is usually bigger than writing when you're a Cabinet official or acting official and you're testifying to Congress. But he drew that line this week and tonight we can report what I showed you briefly on the screen that they have put it in writing. They say it's not going forward, while they also are still defending aspects of what they claim is their power to do this. Whether the courts and Congress ultimately agree is the question. Because Statute of Liberty claims or not, we still live in a democracy. The President and his lawyers do not get to do everything they want unilaterally. And if that includes giving money to criminals who beat up police or musing about the power to destroy the Statue of Liberty, we also have to ask, why would they want to do those things in the first place? I want to bring in our Friday night heavy hitters, Emily Bazelon from the New York Times Magazine and Juanita Tolliver, host of the podcast Archival, also an Ms. Now analyst. Emily, what do you think of the Statue of Liberty thing, which is sort of symbolic, but also maybe not, and the sort of double talk but partial retreat we're seeing in this new DOJ filing?

[F]

Well, I think if the Justice Department lawyer who said, yes, we can destroy the Statute of Liberty had any choice, he would have said no, because it's obviously makes the government seem like they are willing to be reckless and are claiming to the power to destroy any piece of architecture in the country? I think the reason he felt that he couldn't say no is that the government has already destroyed the East Wing of the White House. And so in order to justify that and to say that there's no remedy for that, he felt that he had to claim that the government has this limitless power. So that's my answer to the first part of your question. I think the fund is confusing. You know, do they mean that they're really not going to do it now that they've said so in court? Did Blanche think ahead before he said no? I Won't put this in writing, or was he just feeling defiant? Because that's the general posture when Trump appointees testify before Congress. It's really hard to tell. It's very unpopular. Other than Trump saying the other day that he loved it. They seem to be ready to let go of it. But also not quite.

[C]

Yeah, Juanita, I don't know how much you listen to Future. Future Hendrix, Atlanta's toxic king.

[D]

Come on. Whatever.

[C]

You know. Well, very simply, in an attitude that can come off as arrogant, that can bring you back down to earth, he always used to say, you do what you want when you pop it. And he meant he could get away with anything. And, you know, to compare this, this legal claim that the DOJ is making to a kind of more nefarious gangster energy, I don't think is a stretch. You can't just do anything and everything you want, even if you think you have quote, unquote, power. And so I wonder about what you think this reveals, not only legally but politically, because riding high January after the election, Doge and all that stuff, everybody was a little scattered. They don't have that kind of power now. And they seem to be alienating these judges with these claims because Donald Trump

[D]

doesn't care about what the public thinks. Ari, as Emily pointed out, these are highly unpopular moves. More, a majority of the country opposes this Ballroom. Majority of the country opposes the Arch. A majority of the country does, or two thirds of the country don't want Donald Trump's name on money. All things that he has been pushing forward. And when it comes to the court, I think the signal there is, I don't care what you say, it's, I'll take you to Real Housewives. Lane. Go with me, Ari, because it's giving Sheree Whitfield who's going to check me. And another moment from the hearing today that caught my attention was the judge asked, so no court, this court, the Supreme Court, no court can stop this process is what you're saying to me. And the DOJ attorney said yes. And that translates to the Trump administration saying, who is going to stop us? And I think it falls in line with the trend of destruction of across institutions. Let's move beyond architecture. Go back to dismantling and hollowing out full agencies. USAID defunct. Department of Education, hollowed out. Go back to Elon Musk and Doge running rampant, gaining access to US Taxpayers personal data and information, going after court battle after court battle from agency to agency to try to stop their movements. This is the play of The Donald Trump administration are.

[C]

Yeah. JUANITA Steve Bannon himself looks at all this as losing the midterms in the Senate, risking basically losses that weren't automatic. We know Trump's unpopular, but the congressional races in the Senate cycle is not just a national vote. So the Republicans had some built in advantages. And even with that, here's what Bannon is saying. We're going to lose the Senate in the fall anyway. No grassroots leader, none of the grassroots phalanx, the hoplites. Nobody's excited about going door to door and doing voter engagement.

[D]

Juanita and that's the core of campaigning. ARI I think it's also important to emphasize why nobody's excited to go door to door because Republicans have nothing to show their constituents. Ari what, what is the message going to be on the doors from congressional Republicans who have done nothing to rein in Trump's tariffs, who have done next to nothing up until this week to rein in war powers in Iran, which have, we know, negatively impacted people in their wallets, which Donald Trump has expressly said he does not care about. So when you have nothing to sell to people, no vision of the future, of course, it's looking negative. And Ari, I want to point out, notice he didn't say the House where Donald Trump started the gerrymandering war around gaining seats for their party because they knew, again on substance, there is nothing there to sell to voters. And so rigging the mats was the only way forward for the Republican Party.

[C]

I wonder, Emily, if we could just broaden out. I mean, Todd Blanch, the president says he's going to nominate him. He comes in after a really bruising period at DOJ with Bondi and all these problems and a lot of losses. And I wonder how you rate this sort of acting period, because it's been tumultuous. He's done a ton of political media, he's thrown these bombs, he's overseen the rollout of this program that is immediately engulfed in controversy. It doesn't seem to be by any objective measure a solid start. Although on the brazen partisan loyalty to Trump, the only thing he may care about, he's prove that.

[F]

Yeah, I mean, I think if you rate it as audience of one, Trump said the other day that he was doing a great job. Trump is the person who at least decides whether to nominate him and also whether to keep him in this acting role, whether the Senate confirms him or not. So I think that's the only measure of success that seems to matter to Todd Blanch. And he seems to be Meeting that bar and all of the problems you just outlined, which are going to be part of his legacy and which are, you know, further shredding the independence of the Justice Department and the integrity of its stances in court and all the positions it's taking, those just seem to be, you know, collateral damage.

[D]

Juanita, I think that's absolutely right. The goal here is what I mentioned before. Try to push and buck the system as much as possible with the expectation that no one will stand up to you. We know Congressional Republicans aren't going to stand up to them. They're not going to assert their separate but equal power. And so I'm curious to see what comes of this ruling back to the DOJ attorney explicitly saying, yes, this is the plan, this is the play. We push boundaries with the expectation that no one is going to roll it back on us.

[C]

Yeah. And then you have, of course, not only the vanity projects, but the almost sort of obsessive refurbishment of Washington. I mean, we got a war, we got a gas crisis, we got all these problems. And if you're just a random person going, wait, Donald Trump, the president, each day is obsessing over the algae collection residue issues in the reflecting pool. Like, I'm not exaggerating. That's like, what's on his mind? I'm going to show you how the Daily show went after him on that. Our guests return in 90 seconds. We're back with Emily and Juanita. And here is that Daily show moment I mentioned. He's building an arch. He's covering statues in gold. He's adding a s' mores station to Kennedy's eternal flame. But his biggest project has been renovating the reflecting pool by the Lincoln Memorial, because as you know, one of the powers granted to the president in the Constitution is pool boy. Now, Juanita.

[D]

I guess I'm gonna need to start watching the Daily show more, Ari, because that is wild. And it shows the absurdity of the hellscape that a lot of people are experiencing. Because while Donald Trump is focused on those frivolous, ridiculous, tacky actions, real people are struggling with putting food on the table, putting gas in their cars, like, basically paying for health care since the health care tax subsidies were eliminated by Trump and Republicans.

[F]

Right.

[D]

Like, that is what they're going to be taking into the voting booth come November. Ari. Because Trump has made no effort, Congressional Republicans have made no effort to ameliorate these conditions that real people are experiencing day to day. And I saw a post about Trump on Truth Social saying that Republicans have won the affordability. Affordability. No, they have not. And people struggling day in and day out is going to reflect that. I think that's also shown in the lack of enthusiasm we're seeing. I saw an NPR poll that recently showed that Democrats are extremely enthusiastic about voting in the upcoming midterms at levels they were in 2018, whereas Republicans are down 12 points from where they were in 2018. And so I'm going to be watching that to see how much more the reality continues to impact voters and whether or not they're going to show up at the polls come November. Ari?

[C]

Hmm. Yeah. And Emily, the way the president wants to do it all alone, that's why he's in court so much. Republicans control both houses. If he just had his folks send up the plans, fold it into other legislation on a lot of the building stuff, you'd expect a lot of it to pass. I mean, they don't fight him on much. It's because he seized the unilateral powers and started tearing things down and then going ham that finally the Republicans, even in the Senate, pushed back on the ballroom. But can you speak to just how unusual it is for a, a president to seize this much unilateral power, including on what are basically small remodeling items?

[F]

Yeah, I mean, there's a real decline of the Roman Empire vibe here and a sense of imperialism. And you certainly see it in stiff arming Congress, doing everything possible by executive order instead of legislation. And I think you also see it in court, going back to the arguments we were talking about earlier, that the Trump administration is saying to the judges, you have no job to do here. We can do whatever we want. The executive branch makes all the decisions, and you are shut out of even reviewing our decision making process. They have made that argument in case after case since Trump took office the second time. And that is just very hard for judges to swallow, I think more than Congress even. Right. Because they are a step removed from partisan politics and they are no longer standing for election. And so it's just a lot that the Trump administration is asking for their party and even the judges they've appointed to go along with.

[C]

Yeah, you know, it's, it's really striking because you look at the end of a week like that and of this that we've lived through. In any other era, you'd be talking about these rampant corruption scandals, DOJ failures, at least until the midterms, maybe rebalance some of the politics. But people just say, well, I guess that's Trump. I guess that's kind of president he is. And his party may care a lot about the gas prices in the polls, but, but he doesn't. So, so we're kind of going to live through that for however many months longer and then we'll see what the, what the people say. Emily and Juanita, thanks to both of you. I want to tell folks with all this Knicks fever, we have Bill Bradley returning to the show tonight, liberal icon, and of course, he played on the last Knicks team to win a championship. We also are taking another look, as we've been doing lately, not just at the daily politics, but but some of the forces underneath it. These MAGA tech billionaires who, some of them are taking over media and news and CNN and cbs. Some of them are part of a push to build data centers that really reshape the American landscape as we know it. Activist Aaron Brockovich is here on that.

[E]

There's two things that aggravate me, Mr. Masri, being ignored and being lied to. I trusted you.

[C]

I'm sorry about that. I don't need pity.

[E]

I need a paycheck.

[C]

The real life Aaron Brockovich joins us coming up.

[A]

Hey, everyone, it's Chris Hayes. This week on my podcast, why Is this Happening? In the next episode of our special miniseries, the AI Endgame, I'm speaking with legendary philosopher and cognitive scientist David Chalmers about what is consciousness?

[B]

Once you start thinking about the possibility these AI systems are conscious, everything changes. Right now, we treat every single AI system in the world as a tool, computers or tools which we can use to help us in our projects. And you never think seriously, well, could I be hurting the computer? So now the possibility becomes on the table that once an AI system is conscious, we have to start asking questions like, could an AI system itself be suffering?

[A]

Why is this happening? The AI End Game? Listen now, wherever you get your podcasts,

[C]

For all the things that are happening in our politics, our government, our civic life, our media, underneath them, there is a growing force that matters a lot. Whether you think about it or don't, whether you fear it or welcome it. Artificial intelligence and the massively rich tech companies building and distributing it has a huge impact on all of us. And we don't have laws for most of it. As I mentioned in a related report we did this week because it's brand new, most laws are about things that we've had for a while. There are way more laws about transportation and trains than there are about AI right now. And that could be a problem because it's just running roughshod over A lot of things, from the job market to the environment. So Americans are increasingly skeptical of AI. We've seen pushback in a lot of different ways, and it's coming to them. So while AI sounds like a virtual thing and you can have a little chatbot on your phone, something's gotta power all of that stuff. And it turns out it is a massive undertaking. So they have these data centers that fuel what has become a fast, massive global computing system. It uses a lot of energy and electricity. So that's one question of whether it pays for itself or not. Most of this is from fossil fuels. It's strained power grids. It's actually raised prices in some areas where people who may not be a part of the AI boom at all just find that all the energy is getting sucked up. It's thousands of gallons of fresh water daily. That also keeps those sites from overheating. So there's a lot of cascading impacts here. There is related pollution and noise. So more and more people in places that have found these data centers are coming to them, are going to town meetings and pushing back the community, the residents. We will be forfeiting our water in for the benefit of these data center corporations.

[G]

We're worried about light pollution, noise pollution, heat pollution.

[C]

The noise doesn't drop down and get stopped. The noise radiates from above.

[E]

I don't want sick kids, I don't

[D]

want a sick community.

[E]

I don't want tainted water.

[C]

Who's going to want to buy the house with that noise? No one's going to want to buy.

[G]

Please don't let us down, please.

[C]

Our land won't.

[D]

Our businesses will be destroyed here. Our

[C]

big companies coming in, putting down those data centers, saying, hey, this is a boom. This is a new thing. And while some people somewhere may benefit from aspects of it, that's fine. They sometimes talk about it like it's all upside or we'll all just have free time when the robots take our jobs. The question being, well, without jobs, what will we all do and how will we pay for our livelihood? And those houses nearby, there's what is of their future, right? Because that cost is just being passed on to them. So while we've had different, of course, revolutions in technology before in this country, and there were a lot of people who've gotten used to the Internet and the dot com boom and social media and use it, if you follow politics, you know, social media is a big part of politics, kind of unavoidable. And yet on this one, polling already shows across political Lines. People are against at least the data center component of this, so they don't want it in their communities. You see, in a time of polarization, broad agreement on that. And yet the data centers keep coming. Lawmakers and activists are trying to figure out whether, as I mentioned, you need to make new rules for something like this, because literally 10 years ago, we didn't have this type of data center question or questions about AI use on children or use in ways that could become dangerous. I told you. We have a special guest tonight, and that's the environmental activist Erin Brockovich. She's actually started a public source mapping project that tries to, in a way, fight fire with fire or at least use public information so the public can actually see what's happening with these data centers and whether they're coming to your community. Next, Aaron is our special guest. Next, We're looking at new ways to confront big Tech. And we're joined by consumer advocate Erin Brockovich, the famed environmentalist whose activism fighting groundwater contamination in her town. The local type of issues we're going to discuss tonight was also adapted into the famed Julia Roberts film.

[E]

I want you to think real hard about what your spine is worth, Mr. Walker, or what you might expect someone to pay you for your uterus. Ms. Sanchez. Then you take out your calculator and you multiply that number by 100. Anything less than that is a waste of our time.

[C]

Her new project is the Brockvich AI data center reporting site. Tell us about this work and how it can inform people and in your view, maybe also catalyze activism.

[E]

Hi, Ari, how are you? Thanks for having me on.

[C]

Good.

[E]

So the data center began with just 30 individuals emailing me from the same town with the same concern. And so anytime I see that, it's a pattern that I begin to recognize. And so the reason I created the map is because I was shocked and didn't know this isn't a town or a state. This is the entire country. So I was very surprised to see people reporting from 49 states about these data centers that are in their backyards and how concerned they are about it. And you know, what's happening here. And we run stats on all the submissions that are coming in. We have over 8,000. We've now mapped over 4,800. But first and foremost, what's really disturbing to every single community is the non disclosure. They had no idea they'd been left out of the conversation. They're not being heard and they don't know a lot of information. They're very worried about their water quality, they're worried about the water consumption, they're very worried about the electrical grid on an already strained system. Their electric rates are going up, they're worried about their health. Living next to one of these and their live reports from their backyard is almost unlivable. And so we're almost setting ourselves up and you and I've had these conversations before about putting the cart before the horse. There's zero information, there's zero health impact studies, there's zero environmental studies, there's zero oversight. And they're extraordinarily frustrated because they've just been completely left out of anything to say about these ginormous data centers and in their backyards.

[C]

It really goes to the heart of the larger big tech conversation. They're telling a story where they make value and we're hearing and seeing a lot of evidence that they take value on the front end of the AI products. They're taking human work and labor, usually without credit or payment. And in this land example, they're taking the value out of the neighboring area. So they say, well, we bought this spot. And it seems we just platformed and quoted people in these communities to say, well yeah, but what about how it affects the whole rest of the community? What has your work shown about these questions and whether companies could be trusted to just do the right thing if they're not forced to?

[E]

Well, what they're showing me is that's exactly what happens. It's just being shoved down their throat. Nobody's coming in and telling them anything. If there's anything that I've learned over 30 years about these communities, you know they will deal with the truth if you just tell them the truth. What they don't deal with is the deception, the COVID up, the secrecies, the lies. And that is the biggest problem of all here. And again, with no information, they're not in a position to trust these big companies. And what I'm really seeing here is at a very local level, they're not trusting their own city councils, they're not trusting their own leaders who aren't even giving them an opportunity to show up and have a voice at the table. So there is great distrust.

[C]

We, we've talked also about how, you know, you have protests these things, but we're still using the system as it is. And most activism is like that. I mean, Martin Luther King thought about how to get in the paper and, and on TV to reach people, right? You can't change it all overnight. And so we're seeing these tools TikTok a lot of criticisms of how it works, and yet some people are able to get on there and, and give voice to this stuff. Take a look.

[D]

This is the beautiful city of Maysville. Oh, sorry, could you not hear me? That might just be the two pre existing data centers right behind me.

[C]

Georgia Power is expecting all of the

[D]

tax citizens and the landowners here to subsidize their project.

[E]

Go look into China and their data centers. They are using like windmills and not using water.

[D]

18 of these turbines back here and they're wanting to put 41 in place.

[C]

Do you find there's value in people sharing their. Their own experience in their own community? And what more can people do?

[E]

Absolutely. And what they can do, and they're doing it, they're showing up. You know, I did write a book called Superman's Not Coming, and that never bothered me as long as the people showed up. And they're finally starting to do that. And listen, people like AI People don't like AI It's a tool. But that technology gave all of us those videos. You just showed us the way to fight back, and that is to reach more people, get more people to show up. And that has been effective. You know, while we're seeing a lot of bad things going on here, we are also seeing about 78 municipalities and growing who have decided, wait a minute, let's take a pause, let's take a look at this. Let's consider a moratorium. And that's because of the pressure of the voice, of the people showing up in numbers and on TikTok and on Instagram over and over again about what's happening in their backyard. We have to see them, we have to hear them. And this gives them some ability to reach more people. And more people are showing up.

[C]

Yeah, I think you're saying something that is both true and uplifting. And we have power, especially when people work together and communicate. And some of these forces want to make people feel powerless. It's not the case. You know, I don't know where everyone else falls, Aaron, but I think I like the real Aaron Brockovich even more than the movie. And I love that movie.

[E]

Well, you know, Ari, it wasn't just me. It took the town and the people to show up and to get in alignment. And that, I think, went away for a while, but I'm seeing a swing again. We are showing up. And so again, Superman may not be coming, and we may have thought that whoever Superman is, was. But I think we've learned we have the ability, we have A brain. We have some courage. We got a heart. This is something that the whole country is going to stand up and fight for. Water, air, land, and health.

[C]

There you have it. Aaron Brockovich, always good to see you. And this is a very live topic. Thank you. Appreciate your time. I'll tell folks. Coming up, as promised, a liberal icon and Knicks hero. Who better to talk to than Mr. Bradley himself about all of this next.

[A]

Hey, everyone, it's Chris Hayes. This week on my podcast, why Is this Happening? In the next episode of our special miniseries, the AI Endgame, I'm speaking with legendary philosopher and cognitive scientist David Chalmers about what is consciousness?

[B]

Once you start thinking about the possibility these AI systems are conscious, everything changes. Right now, we treat every single AI system in the world as a tool. Computers are tools which we can use to help us in our projects. And you never think seriously, well, could I be hurting the computer? So now the possibility becomes on the table that once an AI system is conscious, we have to start asking questions like, could an AI system itself be suffering?

[A]

Why is this happening? The AI End game. Listen now, wherever you get your podcasts,

[C]

You know, often at the end of the week, end of the show, we turn to broader topics and culture. And we have an uplifting story right now that's about the culture of sports, but also transcending just that to captivate a city and a nation. As you may have heard, game two of the NBA Finals tips off tonight. The New York Knicks have secured the first win against the spurs, and just about everybody has been talking about this one. The Knicks.

[E]

The New York Knicks are heading back to the Finals. Paper ball.

[C]

For the first time in nearly three

[F]

decades, New Yorkers are in a very celebratory mood.

[E]

Today, an epic NBA Finals matchup begins.

[C]

The Knicks superstar leading New York on a thrilling comeback. It is the hottest ticket and toughest ticket arguably New York sports has ever encountered. And that's big because New York is a place with plenty of sports, plenty of tickets, plenty of options. But this one is different. Mayor Mamdani signing a fun executive order that purports to cancel kids bedtimes so that they have the city support staying up as late as they want to finish these games. Now it's a New York story. But for the Knicks, it's also about overcoming being an underdog, having patience and perseverance. They're not the only team, of course, that's gone down this road, but they haven't been to the finals in 27 years, and they haven't won a championship since all the way back in 1973. A mayor, muslim, my begu's jewish, my christian, new york, I make a brand new star.

[G]

Part of it.

[C]

In all New York, the energy's enthusiastic, infectious, diverse, big crowds. We have the perfect guest lined up tonight. A former Knicks player, of course, and Democratic United States Senator Bill Bradley. I'll remind everyone he played for the Knicks during their only championship winning years, 1970 and 73, making 10 seasons in total. He helped secure a gold medal for the US basketball team at the 64 Olympics. He is of course a member of the Basketball hall of Fame. And he took that following and fame and in 1979 took it to politics where you might remember he was a Democratic U.S. senator representing New Jersey for 20 years, running as a liberal for president and went for that nod against AL GORE In 2000, pushing the party a little bit to the left, progressive for his time on several issues.

[G]

We want to help working families pay for their health insurance. First thing I'd do is make the Voting Rights act permanent. I wouldn't let it expire every this period of time. Racial profiling is a deep and serious issue. It challenges all of us. I think what we need in this country today is registration and licensing of all 65 million handguns.

[C]

What a career. And he's not over. He's been stayed involved in politics. You can see him there with Barack Obama. He also hosts a serious radio show, American Voices. He and Republican John Danforth working on a new project about reaching across party lines. You are really wrapped up in American history, sir. And I. Like I said, you're not done. Thanks for joining us tonight.

[G]

It's my pleasure, Ari, to be on your show. I really admire you.

[C]

Oh, I didn't know that. Well, it's very nice of you to say so. We'll start with the sports here. Obviously, Knicks going into game two. What would the coach be telling them in the locker room? How do you look at this matchup?

[G]

I think that the Knicks simply have to go out and play like they have been playing. They're winning because they're confident and they're playing with confidence. I mean, coming back in the fourth quarter at the first game of the Cleveland series and now the first game game of the spurs series, that makes a big difference. They're playing unselfishly. They have discipline, they have resilience. And I'm sure he's going to say we just got to go out and do what we do best and then we can win and don't let it out yeah.

[C]

And there are ways that the game has changed over these decades. What do you think are the fundamentals that still apply? What, what, what would, what do you tell a team like this when obviously talent is high, pressure is high, and that's what makes championships sort of such a special case?

[G]

Yeah, well, I mean, there are changes since I played 3 point year olds an example of that. But you tell people the same thing. Players help out on defense, hit the open man if you gotta go, push it up the floor, and if you got an open shot, take it. But always look for somebody that has a better shot than you do and get the ball to them because then the other side can't key on you. They have to. They have to play defense against everybody.

[C]

Why did it take this long? People talk about this is a franchise where players want to live in New York, will be based here compared to some other places you could get into the management, which is a running conversation, ownership in New York. And yet it's taken a really long time. You have any view on that since you are of course back to the championship team yourself?

[G]

Well, to me you mean how since. Why has it taken. Since 73. That's a long, long story. I think the key point now is that a lot of the values that we manifested when we played back in the 70s are now being manifested by the current Knicks. I mean, you know, the unselfishness. You can't underestimate the importance of that. If you go out on the court and your objective is to take the best possible shot and get your teammate the best possible shot, that's a little different than going out seeing how many points I can score. And I don't think that any one of the Knicks cares about how many points they score as long as they get the best shots and they win the game and they play tough defense in the process. And to me, that's why they are where they are.

[C]

Yeah. What do you think about how sports can unite a city? Or in the Olympics, they can unite a country. And you've had the experience in both in a way that's different from the other things that we spend all our time fighting about. You know, I've lived in New York a long time and people, you know, people talk to each other straight up. You walk around Brooklyn, you could talk to anybody, but you could debate anybody. And then something like this is happening and the photos tell the story. People are so united across every other line you can think of. What do you think about all that tonight? Does that give us any Any hope beyond sports?

[G]

I think it's a beautiful moment. It is a message that says, we have something in common. We can share something important for all of us, and we can champion the values that we see demonstrated in this case by the Knicks as they play. And for New York City, it means, you know, be a little more generous. I mean, you know, Nick Player is generous to his teammate. Nick Player is considerate of his teammates. And I think that it's kind of a nice little message for all people in New York to live their life to the fullest by giving to another human being. And to me, that's a nice thing.

[C]

Yeah. Last thing I'll ask you is, I am familiar with your career. What's the rule of thumb or the tip you would give for someone who looks and says, gosh, go play at the top of a sport, win a championship, play in the Olympics, run for office, win there? I mean, you did a lot of winning, run for president. You're still at it. You're not someone who seems to have just completely kicked back. Or you could have. What's your tip for someone who might, I don't know, want to do some of those things, you know, not everyone wins a championship and serves in the Senate. What's your tip?

[G]

Be clear about what your strengths and weaknesses are. Go out and pay the price. Have the discipline to develop your skills and recognize if you love, you got to love people. If you're going in politics, you got to love people, which means you got to love their stories. That's what you know, I've. I've done 1500 interviews on American voices. And basically what I'm doing is I'm doing interviews with people about their lives. When I used to walk the Jersey shore every summer, all in every community along the 127 mile shore, people will come up and tell me their life stories, their stories. I love that. And that's what you have to do. You have to appreciate human beings and their diversity and their difficulties and their dreams. And if you do that, it can be a great experience.

[C]

Amen. What a way to end the week. I know you're wishing the Knicks all the luck, whether they need it or not. Bill Bradley, thanks for making time for us tonight.

[G]

Go Knicks. Go Nicks.

[C]

Thursday, June 25th. Join Rachel Maddow, Ally Velshi and Jen Psaki in Philadelphia for a dynamic evening. Ms. Now live presents we the People. America 250. Get tickets at Ms. Now, America 250 today.