Real Time with Bill Maher - Overtime – Episode #615: Chris Wallace, Chris Christie, Katty Kay

Episode Date: October 8, 2022

Bill Maher and his guests answer viewer questions after the show. (Originally aired 10/07/22) See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

It's something else here now. Something new. From. Exclusively on Paramount Plus. It's the series Stephen King calls scary as hell. Everything here is impossible, but it's also real. Sci-fi vision calls it the best show streaming right now. We're running out of time and we still don't know the rules.

Don't miss what the movie blog calls something you need to watch. Saving those children is how we all go home. From binge all episodes exclusively on Paramount Plus. Welcome to an HBO podcast from the HBO late-night series, Real Time with Bill Maugh. These are the questions people send in. This one is for you. Governor, Governor, it's rumored you're considering another presidential run in 2024.

Is there any truth to that? Sure. Oh, I love that. Very, I'm telling you, this show's rubbing off on him. He's getting very bold. Yes, loose. Yeah, that was me. I never had the reputation of being bold.

raw flour type. So you are considering it. Sure. Yeah. Yeah. You should. I mean, why not? Because we need a normal Republican. I mean, as good as it gets Republican. You know, by the way, I may have just figured out why you never had kids.

You're such a sweet talker. I mean, but really, I mean, but do you think you could really take the party away from the clutches of the Trump cult as it is now? Because even if it's not Trump, it's going to be a Trumper. I like to see what happens in the midterms. I think, you know, all I heard in 2016 was that we're going to do so much winning that we're going to be tired of winning, and we're going to ask him not to win anymore.

And then we lost the House of the Senate in 18. We lost the presidency in 20. We lost two Senate seats in Georgia in 20. It's so a lot of losing. I think they might want to go back to winning again. Okay. Katty, as a Brit, what's your perspective of the UK's parliamentary system compared to our mode of governments?

Oh, well, there's an academic question for you. Professor Kay, it's irrelevant because most democracies are not what we have. I mean, they have at least managed to get rid of leaders they didn't like. Yeah, it's a lot easier. You know, they took on Boris Johnson. They felt that Boris Johnson wasn't good for the party, and he was out the next day. Right. which certainly doesn't happen here

with the Republican Party in Donald Trump despite all the losing that might have happened. No. And they seem to have elections. And the other thing, you know, I was over in the UK for the Queen's funeral and I'm not particularly a royalist or a Republican, but I don't have particularly strong feelings either way. But it has made me think being here, there's something to be said for separating

your head of state and your elected officials and not investing in the presidency, all of the kind of ceremonial stuff that goes with having a head of state. You give your elected head of state with the prime minister a grilling. You make sure they're held to account. And then you have your queen or your king, as we have. And you let there be the ceremony. And they handle the gossip.

And they... Not really. It's relevant, because the other day I had Chris Kardashian on my podcast. It hasn't dropped yet. But I was saying that the Kardashians kind of became like the royal family of America. They're not governing, of course. Oh my God.

It's like... The royal family of America? Yeah, because... Now you've got Harry... Seriously. Yeah, because like, everybody just wants to follow one family. just like the royal family. Yeah, but not that family.

I mean, some people want her, but... Well, I mean, as a part, was the royal family in England any better or different? We've now given you Prince Harry and Megan. You're fine. You've got a role family. Exactly.

Living in Montecito, they're fine. You're good. Right, exactly. It's the same... You gave us the ones you didn't want. I mean, come on. You just need... People need some family

that they can follow and sort of like project themselves onto or follow their gossip or their craziness. How about Fred Barney? You just put them up there. Yeah. Chris Wallace, your new show explores a wide range of interest unrelated to politics.

Like this. What triggered this shift for you? Did you become burned out from politics after the past six years of Trump madness? I didn't become burned out, but I became a bit bored. And I will actually say not in the Trump years, because as much of a show as it was, it was always interesting. And you'd wake up on Sunday, and we had somebody who was literally in charge of the tweets, because when I got in at six in the morning,

between then and nine, when I would do the show, things would change depending on a Trump's week. But I spent so much time, for instance, in 2021, each week, slicing the salami thinner and thinner about what was the marginal difference between the build-back better plan this week versus last week, and it became kind of a bore. And conversely...

Good. Politics should be a bore. No, really. It's not supposed to be a show. Well, I know, but you're also supposed to deal with big issues and try to solve them and get things done. And that's boring. The way Biden, that's why Biden's good. He's doing it. That's why we elected them.

Let's get back to boring and normal. Yes. That's, I mean, you're right. Covering it, build back better, was boring because they, but, you know, they started with this number, and then guys objected and mansion and this and cinema and everybody. And then it came down to a better number and a better number. program and they passed it. That's the way it's supposed to work. Boring and effective and

people's lives are better for it. No? No. Let me just say. Well, as the host of a Sunday talk show, boring is not good. But the other thing was, I'm interested in a lot of stuff. I mean, I look at the people you have on the show, and they're not all politicians,

right? Oh, no. No. And, you know, with your scripted talking point, he has always, he has always been one of the least boring politicians in America. Right, he is. I agree. I agree. Right. Okay. Okay.

So, did you vote for Trump? You know, there's a secret ballot. I don't know, some people don't care about that. It was worth the question. Yeah. It was worth a trial. Was it? Yeah. I mean, yeah. Why not? I'll have a better question. Did you vote for Trump? I did. Both times? Yep. Wow. Wow.

And you would again? No. Good try. You've got more honesty out of me than you've gotten anybody else. I'll take my winning to go home. Okay, this is for everybody. Biden is declaring the risk of nuclear Armageddon is at the highest level since the Cuban missile crisis.

Have a great weekend, everybody. As Russia continues to discuss the use of nukes on Ukraine, what does the U.S.'s best course of action prevent such dire straits? Well, I'll start off, I hate to keep saying this, but I'm glad Biden's here for this, and not some idiot, or someone who's 39. If we're talking about the worst nuclear possible crisis since the Cuban missile crisis, yeah, I want the 79-year-old guy there who's seen it all. Yeah, I don't... Yeah, I'm not sure the use of the word Armageddon is very helpful. I mean, Putin wants us to be afraid,

and you can, I mean, half of Europe's in uproar about him saying Armageddon, because actually all that does is play into Putin's desire to make us afraid. You can say there's a serious threat, and there is a serious threat, and Bill Burns, the director to the CIA, who, thank goodness, used to be the ambassador to Moscow, has made it very clear to the Russians that were they to launch any kind of tactical or small nuclear weapon, as if that was possible?

teeny tiny nuclear weapons. The Americans would bomb every Russian column, in Ukraine and the war would be over and sink every ship in the Black Sea. That's great. I'm just not sure the use of the word Armageddon's very helpful. And then what happens? And then he's, then you've doubled down on the guy who doesn't want to lose the war, but has nuclear weapons. Well, but perhaps even worse than that, if he goes away, who replaces him. And then you've got a whole bunch of nukes laying out there unsupervised, the second most in the world. And you've got to start thinking about how you deal.

with that, and on your point about you want someone to see it all, so do I, but I'd like to also understand it. And when he says nuclear Armageddon, it's clear to me he doesn't understand it, because he's causing alarm in a way that is not productive. Like, you know

what, if you really think that, then go and try to start to fix it. But don't give us some pronouncement. It's going to scare the crap out of everybody. Well, everyone should have the crap scared out of them, and there's no way to fix it. I don't know if there's any way to fix it. We could have fixed it in 1986, when Gorbachev and Reagan came that close to getting to zero.

That would have been a terrible idea. A terrible idea? I think so. And I will tell you people. Zero nuclear weapons? Yes, because there would never be zero nuclear weapons. And in a world with there's zero nuclear weapons, the person with one nuclear weapon is king. Wins the ball game.

Yep. That's right. That may be right. But we don't need, I mean, how many do we have now? At the time, we had like 30,000 each, which is... Look, to me, the problem. To me, the problem with him saying this stuff is your job is not

to be a weatherman when you're president. Oh, let me show you what the map looks like now. We're a pundit. Right? It's to go and come with a solution. And to say, oh, you know, we're as close to nuclear Armageddon as we've been since 1960. Well, okay, thanks a lot. Now, genius, what are you going to

do about it? Well, what would you do about? What is the solution? So we're in an alternate universe now. Chris Christie is president. He doesn't use this terminology, but he has the solution. Well, first... I'm all ears. I'm so...

I'm so glad to have your attention. You've got it. I'm divided. What he should be doing is he should be playing a constructive role between Zelensky and Putin. Putin knows he's losing. Putin's not stupid. He knows he's losing. You've got to give him an exit ramp. He's got to find a way to

get out without... in saving face. Okay, but that's a non-starter. He has exit ramps. He's flush with cash from the high oil prize. He's about to bring on another 300,000 troops. He controls the state media. He can call this a winner any moment that he wants to call it a win. So he is choosing not to take the exit ramp.

I don't think there's any negotiation, especially now, to be done between Zelensky and Putin particularly. Yeah, I disagree. Well, the exit ramp would be some accommodation where he gets some territory in Ukraine. And Zelensky isn't going to go for that. He'll go for letting them keep Crimea. Well, that's kind of a done deal.

was annexed in 2014. Well, but that's some territory in Ukraine. You've got to go in there and try to sell it, man. Don't be sitting your hair on fire and yelling about nuclear arm again unless you're going to come forward solution. On the other hand, you're blaming Biden for Putin's, what Putin is doing?

I'm not blaming Biden. I'm blaming Biden for saying nuclear arm again. Yes, but you can't blame him for the failure of Putin to take off ramp after off ramp that has been offered to him. I just don't want. You're saying, well, no, you've got to go in and sell it. No.

going to make a solution. Putin doesn't want an off-ramp at this point, and there's nothing you can do about it. And frankly, I think Biden has handled, I agree. I think Armageddon was a stupid remark. But you've got to handle this as well as you can. And right now, bloodying his nose and pushing back where they are for Ukraine, pretty good strategy.

Yeah. Biden's done a good job on this stuff so far. He's rallied NATO. He's kept inconsistent. He has. He's supplied the Europeans with everything. extra gas to try and get through the winter as much as he can. He's kept the coalition together.

And he kind of thought Ukraine could win when nobody else did. You know, he said, we'll just back him. And I don't disagree with any of that. But I think that the alarmist language he's using creates an atmosphere that makes it more likely to happen, not less. I agree with. We will be back next week, hopefully. Thank you very much. Catch all new episodes of Real Time with Bill Maher every Friday night at 10.

Or watch them anytime on HBO on demand. For more information, log on to HBO. com.