OMG you're right!

Oh my god, he is!

I have a huge crush on everyone in this cast

I know hhahaha

Oops.. I meant say... IT'S THE BITCH OF LIVING

And moritz and moriss

I think it's to help the hearing audience distinguish who is talking, and to give it a more conversational feel, and as you saw, I feel it would be quite a bit of work for one person to interpret when they're signing/talking quickly.

It's actually pretty common- almost to the point of being the standard- for interpreters to work in teams. There's a few reasons. For one, it can help them handle a big group like this, there were so many different people that could be talking that it's helpful to have two people to help distinguish. In cases where there's just one person talking (like a speech or lecture), it can also give each interpreter the opportunity to swap out and rest a bit every so often. Plus, there's also oversight this way. You may have noticed one interpreter having a bit of trouble interpreting for Daniel at the end there. That's just something that happens, it's difficult to avoid and I'm amazed they went that as long as they did without that sort of lag, but when that does happen it can help to have another interpreter to help figure out how to phrase the bit the first interpreter is having trouble with. In addition to all this, it's becoming more common these days to have one interpreter in the team be a CDI- a Certified Deaf Interpreter. This is an interpreter who is themselves Deaf-- a great many hearing interpreters learn ASL later in life and it's much less natural for them, and CDIs can help them bridge the gap slightly. So in that case, the hearing interpreter would provide more of a literal interpretation and the CDI would work to phrase it in a way that flows more naturally in ASL and takes Deaf cultural context into account (ideally hearing interpreters should be able to do that too, but sometimes there's just still the slightest gap there, and there's a lot of contexts-- like court-- where you just can NOT have that sort of ambiguity)

deaf people can read

You're extra, stop that

Unless they were signing in IS (which I highly doubt they were), it wouldn't make a difference anyway. Most, if not all, deaf people who know ASL will also be able to read English. Also, captions are helpful for HOH people who never learned sign language (because their level of hearing loss was never high enough to warrant it) or for deaf people from outside of the US (because English is one of the most widely written languages). Personally, I think that captions are best option here.

Scott they're deaf not blind

Agreed! How hypocritical is it to have Deaf people in an interview and give them screen time when they are signing an answer to a question and then not provide the same level of access for responses from hearing members of the conversation for Deaf audiences???