Who has been caught blocking whom in the trunk White House and why, who won Stephen Miller, Jim cost a showdown in the White House briefing and Is there anything wrong with questioning affirmative action? We will do all this and more on this week edition of the editor. I rich Lowry and I'm joint, as always by the redoubtable in total, the effervescent raw hands, alarm and tourists and be de Michael Brendan Dorothy, the right

double Charles? He W Cook is away on assignment Michael, let's start with the White House first and an item is probably the least consequential in all of this and will be a footnote to a footnote when Syria, the Trump Ministration is written, but the Anthony Scare Muky Interview with Rhineland was one must extraordinary things. I've I've ever read and need the political realm ocean. compulsory, really a readable and entertaining people have drawn, conclusions about how this represents cut, is a rising tide of vulgarity, inner culture and that's it, Bad thing. Do you think that's true or have these conversations always happened. It's that no one has fumbled it so badly that they ve actually had such a conversation on the record with the reporter

Linda report. It, I think the latter. I think no one has done this on the record. and there is a willingness for outlets like the new Yorker, the New York Times to print for letter words, that's a little bit new in light of the Trump Administration and you know clearly the ideas to show a look at this vulgar amateur voluble unpredictable white house? I thought it was an epic interview. Others entertaining this as personal drama. As you know, was interesting was how much steam he was blowing off scare me. She was blowing off, even though he was only seven or eight days into the job. You know Yes, is literally talking about going in and firing the first person he sees

it was entertaining and in a way makes me miss him already rich. There seem to be something else going on in that interview, because it really sounded like a conversation. It maybe not me with IE and would have with one of his body out about their energies. Seventeen level discourse. So I wonder, is there some kind of connection between Lisbon and scary movie whilst care? Much has said that he could have thought there was an implied off the record, proviso on this interview because father and Ryan loses. Father apparently knew each other from real estate going long island to scare me just figure. There is this. This bond but if your Ryan Lizzie is just like this, this piece of gold is dropped into her lap and to have a White House official call you up and say all these things about the White House Chief of staff calling paranoia, gets a frantic

the rest of it. I gotta go now second approach stuff on twitter to drive me crazy and, unlike two minutes later, he accuses, but why has cheapest half of leaking something on twitter Ryan lizzy- I mean. That's that's when, as ever happen to any journeys just then, and it's not as areas like doing she. Leather work at all fell into the lab. This is one of those moments I about this often so. Ok, We saw scary movie tweeting and then he tags rights previous in one of his tweets, and then he says oh, I did that because of course, rights is going to be in charge of hunting down the leaders, but then later on, we have the back channel and we know exactly why he did it which is He was taunting and calling out rights. The thing that I striking about this. Is that, like every single news story, Are those of us my followed this category, not proud of it? Who are relative? on cynical and think? Surely there must be some rational explanation for why someone did this. It couldn't possibly be purely out of. I knew right

a totally clever guy. Let me think of a scene reason why someone would do this and then to have in this story actually know that's totally wrong, and it reminds me like the more dig into stuff, I'm a nice thing about so many stories. Obviously these stories are trickling out about the trumpet ministration, but the Obama restoration in the Bush administration. So many things were. you can kind of sort of tell a plausible story about why something that looks like a screw up, really wasn and then you learn? No, it was all a screw up. These people depend on. They are nuts they are doing things totally out of spite, and it's scary so area that That's my! How offended would you buy this interview? I have to say it is a duty when you when you learn a new vulgarity from my house, I never knew a cock blocking was Well, I'm crazy! I thought that there was a kind of event. A boy what kind of an offended by the the pearl clutching reaction a little

And in this sense, a whole generation of people learn about new sexual activity from the president for the majority of the nineties right and and all the same people who prove vigorously defended the President then come out and say you know. This is the dawn of a new new vulgarity and I take Michael's pointing enriches as well you know on the record and and those sorts of things, but there is a little bit of I rolling, I really policy there. What what relieves boggles my mind is just unconscionable stupidity of of this whole episode, I mean look if you're the White House communications director. You don't talk to your grandparents without clarifying honour off the record, I mean this is just a basic one or one protocol and apparently scary movie who never actually started the job he served negative sixteen days accordingly,

contract didn't was was apparently confused. According to reports about deep background background and off the record in all these things. These are the his you ve gotta get straight, and you know we ve talked a little bit around here about getting people into positions in the White House. Babbling a lot more difficult You know, as we see people unceremoniously fired and and all the rest Also they look at other folks like this. You are put into positions of leadership and realized there. Just massively incompetent never should have been there in the place now seems to be sort of recur, ring tale of the Trump administration. Thus far, I have a question for rich. I wonder Donald Trump Anthony Scare Muti are both guys, who played veneer media like a fiddle they were both in. probably good working reporters they were

great sources. They were great conversations and they were able to really shape the way they recovered. Then they the d c and then suddenly they get tired and feathers. Get ruined and the case a scary movie. This happen over the course of a couple of days. So is what is clearly the stakes are higher when you're talking at the dizzy political press corps. But what do you think's going on in our New York reporters just really bad What's going on here, I think, with with the Anthony it was a product of this being in a role as in pointed out, he did know these basic ground rules. A deal is doing with the porters need dealt with the porters and a much more basic level, and it is His media skill was going on tv, so he's probably best suited to be trumped surrogate rather than heading this up, this taken this job that supposed to be kind of a back office, job we're coming up with a strategy you're not and coordinating, and not supposed to be on camera, the time yourselves

Michael, even referred to that the problem of the trumpet menstruation finding a talent, but it may be that, after all, this chaos scare movies brought onto shift riots in the course of of shipping rights also shifts himself and backed up. By till it could be that we get actually a better warehouse chief of staff in the form General Kelly, I mean It is the hope. I think that everyone's expressed, everyone has a high opinion of general Kelly. I worry about armies. Moving from another position, but it's another general and another in this high profile position in which their lot in a kind of joke that you know all this.

Early Goldman guys and an oil man, it looks exactly like you'd expect a? U S administration to look like if he were raised North Korea on their propaganda. But you know the idea that Kelly just got rid of scare Muky very quickly and unceremoniously and didn't innocence, cauterized wound, even if it is it provided a yelp for everyone. Thinking GOSH the sky was just hear her. A week, so you hope that the only thing is that I think we ve said over and over again. Initial, you online, you know David French has written this over and over again. The source of chaos in this White House is the President himself. So unless Kelly can fire the president or put a muzzle on him, which I doubt I still think.

I still think it's going to be a bumpy ride. I want a horn in on in tunnels territory a little bit and serve as the correspondent on what the left is saying about Kelly, because I actually did read a pretty astute criticism of Kelly. It's not one that I share, but I thought it was pretty smart by Darrow, Linda Vocs in her basic point was that Ellie is kind of the ideal, a white house. chief of staff for a White House that's mean a really about fear, so the idea that He has been incredibly effective at the Department of Homeland Security and his orientation is, I trust, frontline guys. I trust the guy. We're doing the border security work, I'm going to defer to them and I'm gonna see to it that they have the tools they need and if they're telling that they need wider authority, I'm going to see to it that they get it and he's the most effective defender of any aspect of the Trump agenda, partly because it's funny it's kind of an unusual thing for someone, certainly from a small government conservative perspective, but to say that hey can I come in

military, where we trust our frontline combat troops and submit a whereas a lot of other conservatives- and I followed this category- sometimes myself like well, actually I'm getting a little bit sceptical of the bureaucrats and you to be a little bit sceptical of the frontline guys who have their interest at work, but in this case. I think that Kelly was an excellent choice. It is interesting to see that emerging criticism from the left. However, that concern is that he might be too effective, so is there anything wrong or anything about you about having a generalised chief stuff understand the concerns. I I think Michael would probably be probably be Better suited on the points I think has concerns run a little deeper. The mine in general have all these new military personnel and Goldman Sachs types and all the rest, you sort of constitute the the central leadership positions in the destruction, but. it doesnt panic me, especially.

You're at a point with this administration or your its Seen from the beginning that you need steady hands, and right now, without other republican politicians willing to come into this administration and the reins and really not being. The position to do that since relations between typical Republican office holders and administration or so fractious. You need people who our have at least some sort of administrative. Experience cracking people into line? That's we ve got in some of these generals it'll be interesting to see. If there are any more, we might have up a secretary of state. The depart before long the knives are out for my master. Just really interesting ass at the national security there, see, there's an open digest position now.

And the rumours that if then, if MC were to go- which I kind of doubt- but that means the bright Bart tight, want him to then there's a rumour that is thinking about point pompiers from CIA to replace master an essay which means you got. You know this new positions, save it's it's it's not as much them. military that the military guys who who worry me as much as their steady. It's the the chaos into which they are thrown idea. You'd have to be herculean entered. make any real organizational headway. When, when we're talking about the new chief of staff, it is important to talk about the previous chief of staff, Ryan's previous, and you know it he's a guy who was very well liked when he was the Aren t chair. But what says real skill as our unseen chair? Was it running a fractious, complex, big organization? It seems the main thing was: he was really

raising money, is really go to dialing four dollars, and that obviously makes everyone happy at a group like the urgency which had been in really bad shape under previous leadership analysed. He was a likeable guy who had dinner. Just have beers around the office in Munich, kept people happy and that certainly something but to be White House chief of staff under this precedent in under the very chaotic circumstances with pretty much the whole media is arrayed against you. That is not the ideal experience, so I think that Kelly in that regard easy unambiguous upgrade big so right, given the authority by the present size or set up to fail and that I think the point you're getting out. He was in a very authoritative figure. Talking to The centre the other day who said anything about Kelly, you he's a military type. It has some some physical since he's a little intimidating as extremely self confident, essentially, we ve seen reports this week. Who knows how this last, but that Trump is good.

Out of his way to up his game to impress general healthy, I seem to pay attention in meetings. I repeat back statistics. He hears us all that But the question is how long at last and that that will as a safe way to our exit question, I ask you first, Michael what Did you say: are the percentage chances that gender Kelly is still trumps chief of staff at the end of the first, her. Tough one I normally Lobal trumps. Chances of of keeping stability, but I'm gonna say there is a eighty percent chance that Kelly stays on an trump likes him and it and it and they keep it going. I think, partly because they do eventually want to settle in and stop Merry go round to might microscopic high. Eighty percent in total

I was thinkin, almost the exact opposite. I was gonna go with her. Forty one percent and I set of rights AIDS say, I'm closer to Michael I'd, say: seventy five percent, the night scenario with Trump has always been which nightmare scenario, one nightmare scenario for Trump? been something like a Schwarzenegger ten years. California, where you get a bad loser, mid way through, and then you throughout all the old guys you bring in if August crowd. So you know I could see happening, but I'd say: seventy five percent steady pair hands, someone the Trump respects as rich was saying so that it makes sense to me. I thought as being confident at sixty percent, but on a lower and lower than you guys. I just think it there's gonna be a tendency for just do it

where down the ship will be tightened, but it's going to spring League that mean how do you really keep in know, Ivanka Jared from being back channels and ass? The history is trumped up that tends to get annoyed. add at his minders unless they're incredibly adapt, sir, I still think I think better and even chances that he still chief staff but I dont say it's a certainty, so right hand. This must have been salad days for you this week, where we actually began having a debate about levels and composition of legal immigration. Senators, Tom, cotton and us has or from Georgia they have released a very impressive. The legislation proposal calling the Rays act and rather than focusing solely on on authorized emigration, they focused on fixing the illegal immigration system, your

here a lot of talk about this. There has already been enormous, intense ferocious push back for immigration advocates on the left and also to some extent on the right, but it's important to get it few things straight. So one thing that the Rays ACT does it says: ok, the majority, the large majority about two thirds of all legal immigrants. Folks we're getting permanent visas to settle in United States are arriving on the basis of family sponsored visas, because their related to people who are either you s, citizens or permanent resin or green cardholders, and it really. This is some of the people forget pretty much all the immigration reform proposals going back a long way, including the net. Race. Gang of eight proposal. Try to do the same thing, to curb the amount of family based immigration. So what their vision is is, if we curb it so that we're getting rid of some of the more extended categories like the adult siblings. Of U S, citizens, if we limited

If folks were spouses and a minor children, we are going to church in the overall influx of immigrants coming to the country, because, right now, if you're coming on a family basis, we are not applied a test as to what your earning potential is, whether or not you can speak English, etc. We're saying that hey you know, this person is someone who is a member of your family, fair enough, and that means that a big company of the less skilled immigration that comes into the country illegally has been coming in through fast sponsor visas, so then The other side we're taking the they can produce legislation takes the employment, vase visas and says well right now we have a bunch of different categories. We have these very complicated per country limits and much else. Let's try rationalize employment based immigration, to see to it that people who have the most economic earning potential by the way that does mean thirty best people that doesn't mean that they are the only ones of beautiful souls who deserved hugged and loved. But his are the people who are going to be were fairly sure. They're gonna be paying more.

Taxes than the receiving in social services? These are p you're also getting a bit of a boost if you're younger, because I mean and you're gonna be working more over the course of life. etc the odious, let's rationalize that system, by having a bee, appoint system, partly but when you apply, you can have sense of where you stand so, if you're on a waiting list, you're, not basically flying blind through this process, its away, if rationalizing at making it more predictable, making more sensible and what they also do. However, is they keep the number employment based visas for permanent immigration. The scene as it has been, while there also planning on curbing the level of family based immigration? That means the overall legal immigration numbers under the proposal, as currently constituted, will fall over time, partly because what you see is a lot of chain migration, if you have initiating immigrants there might be like four hundred immigrants that come as a result of family unification over the course several years, their planning on reducing that the interesting

question now is if this is an opening bid. If this is starting point for negotiation. What else might happen more Krikorian? Frequently, rights for National Review, the executive director of the centre for immigration studies is saying that ok we have the Rays act, changing our approach to legal immigration. Maybe then we can, talk about Dhaka. We can then talk about some kind of amnesty for folks arrived in the country as minors. You know, maybe Do that or another. Possibility. The other direction is, maybe we can increase the number of employment based visas, but this is a very good starting point. As Robert Verb Rugen set on National review online, and I think it something that continent produce can both be proud of. The question is: will the net of associations with tromp. Why sinking, this wonder making the politics of this completely impossible. So, Michael, you cared about immigration policy for a very long time. How happy were you with his royal.

I am very happy with the substance of the bill. I think the roll out to be a little bit better mean. Yesterday, you saw Stephen Miller, get into a kind of fight with GMO Costa over in the points based system where fluency in English gets an applicant a better chance of coming in, and I thought Miller was pedantic and kind of over the top and didn't let accustomed to serve. himself elegantly sort of over drove at home? So you know those optics aren't great, but I think the bill itself is going to be easy to defend. You know this is not a radical proposal. This is not a nineteen twenties proposal to just that ends up being almost moratorium. If this is not a proposal that does specific by country

caps based on ethnic. Yet does not sanctions on doesnt have your hands. You know, Immigration system does have, as rightly pointed out, nooks and crannies. Where does matter what country are coming from because you might not be allowed in if more people from that country have coming recently, so I think the substance is going to be easy to defend rationally. I think it's an dumb, I'm excited about that. The immigration to be is coming down to the specifics of immigration policy, which is who and how many- and that is the key. The question a sense has been of waited for twenty years, where the question has been innocent. Are immigrants good or is immigration a part of the Americans

worry you know, and now it's we're talking about it as a policy problem, which is what it is yeah and just for for so long on the right TED Chris Velvet, among others, the basically Shea was opposed to illegal immigration. But legal immigration is great with no distinction or thought about who or or or how. Many so even feel free to bounce off any And what did you think in particular of the a Stephen Miller, Jimmy Hasta exchange As you know, I'm a partial to Stephen Miller also just thought it was hauling what Jim accosted did in a he supposed to be a new trawled reporter and objective reporter, and this was grandstanding offers Camera at CNN, and he said

they had a very strong emotional commitment to a certain cited, this debate, which is his right, but you that's inconsistent with his stance as suppose it unbiased, disinterested journalist. I've written once or twice about Jorge Ramos, the anchor and and journalist for unification who innovation or to limit. I forget The set of MIKE I reckon I might get a writer, and here you know bills himself. Is this this view straight down the line reporter and, of course, he harangues trumpet rally and end the point. I've I've made more four times as Ramos is simply an activist masquerading as a journalist and very clear and he's been doing it for thirty years, Jim Acosta showed himself to be based play the same thing over it CNN yesterday in case that wasn't from earlier

Exchanges his hand and swipes he's taken up at this White gratuitously, wouldn't meter, the general ethical standards for journal. For anyone by that by that name. It's also It's also striking how outmatched. He was on the simple substance of the debate. I mean I have my might issues with Stephen Miller, but he knows this stuff cold. He has been doing this for a decade I mean there's, there's our when no one in the country who knows more about immigration policy than than Stephen Miller. no, maybe marker Korean here than our around slump And so you know this idea that you're going to get into this sparring matching come out come on on top was, was silly

as, as Michael said, accosted effectively. Hang himself but he wasn't quite allowed to you know that the reaction follow this, of course, was deeply dispiriting in that now we are debating over whether Emma Lazarus poem on the base of the statue of liberty is part of our statutory law it's out on the basis of such a lively, it's it's inside insides. It's in an exhibit inside, and it was and you probably know this better than I decades later you I'm in. Basically, it was written by folks at a moment when you know french republicanism seemed very much. You know dying cause and Vienna these guys want to celebrate the fact that the Eu S as a republic in a free proud was still around still kickin immediate steps

The statue itself was really nothing about immigration. I mean it happened. It was right to York Harbor area, but you know it's kind of amazing, whereas the the palm as you know in with you know it was written decades, or by someone who is running about a very different context. Who was this kind of cultural debate about and partly in a word we as folks assimilated? Well settled folks were detained a previous wasted immigrants do about these newcomers coming, so it was a very different hunting, but it's amazing how even conflated and the American Amelia I mean an and look Europe poets through the uneconomic. Legislators in the world and an end, and all that- and I dont know I agree, but the point is Michael's which, as this is a policy issue, the young if you like somebody, like the exact Beauchamp Vocs yesterday retreat of your what, if I told you that all immigration restriction is and is in this has been racist- will the only logical extension of that is that you can't have borders right there. Have to have a glow, a global country, and presumably it's going to be run by Zack, Beauchamp

So you know this is silly and your dear telling all these people, who frankly got tired of it that you know their reality is racist and that too, to set any sort of cap on whose allowed into the country they happened. To be born. Honest is bigger. and that's that silly and you know any reasonable thinking person Disagrees with that. So I think Michael set about this being easy to defend, is in. Theory. True. We ve seen republic Republicans struggle to defend a lot of fairly straightforward policy over a number of years, but there is a something sort of obvious in this and in and caught in the context of immigration policy generally and there's something just intuitive about the fact that that count we as more than you know, an economy in a given territory. I think people responded that, and certainly trump voters did, and we ought to

acknowledged to that. Unlike the healthcare debate, trumpets, come right at the beginning of this one and put him meal put himself of the four may be that for me for the worse, but presidential leadership makes a difference on legislation. I thought that just the first fifteen minutes that Stephen or breathing, he did more to make the public case for prettier than administration ever did fur repeat absolutely place, I want to come back of the head on this point more in the exit question, but just Ryan, Michael, very briefly, theo. I think one of the more intelligent react and so the centre left to this bill is from a Josh borrow who wrote a piece for business. Insider saying: oh, you know it. I think really good idea to have more bear merit based immigration, but if you do You are eliminating all the problems that restrictions are worried about now in terms of difficulty, assimilating except excetera so actually should be able to admit more rather fewer

what do you think this is an area where I part company, with mark recurrent who, for a variety of good and and oftentimes, pretty compelling reason says that the numbers period matter, partly because it concerns about ethnic group fishermen and assimilation, and what have you but broadly share Josh's view. I think that in a one way to think about it, that hey we're gonna differ, speed limits for differ groups of folks by the way by group. I do not mean national origin. I do not mean race, ethnicity, but I mean you're dealing with someone who speaks english Thirdly, and who has a very high earning potential the nature, economy the way that our economy is changing. It means that that person is going counter, we fewer barriers and by the way we happened oh that in this country, your pair level of education and income has a very big effects on your outcomes. So. This has a knock on effect for the next generation as well. You know, I guess my big concern is that, as in said, Donald Trump self front in centre with this legislation and Donald Trump, is a very polarizing figure. Why,

pattern we ve seen an american politics. Is that it's a bit thermo static, when you have a point and if one party, the public oftentimes move in the opposite direction, and particularly in the case of Trump with immigration, either the that I seem suggests that actually people are more problem operation under Trump and the horror who Brok of Amr, which is very interesting, and then there's this bigger political question. If you have something like this that is inevitably going to be contentious. How do you pay could you? How do you characterize it? There's a most Americans do not know how many immigrants enter the country they do not really know about the the average skill level of those immigrants etc. So a lot of people say tat, the exact number of immigrants. We have right now, that's about third it of the country according to gallop another third, percent says, let's lower the number. So the thing is that you know what job said about the numbers is actually kind of important effects things similarly This legislation proposes a cap on refugees, fifty thousand may or may not be a good policy. I think there is certainly a case for it, but again that risk muddying the issue by saying that we're going.

talk about refugee policy. At the same time, they were trying to fix the basics of the immigration policy. So my concern is: how do you make such a policy survivable in public debate and a big part of it? to make it very very clear. This is not bout race or color, or what have you there people supported. For that reason there might be people who are racists who air go support, quitting right hunts, La Memorial library I cannot. But the question is the substance of the policy. Is that some You can robot, we defend, and I think the trump complicates that so MIKE Let's just say, take the merit part of it as a given. We we get that. Would you be in favour of lower numbers? I am in favour of lower numbers for at least a period of time in which we can see if the federal government and get a handle on illegal immigration are continuing

And internal enforcement, and then also I would like to see. Obviously the unemployment number is very low and favourable right now. I would still like to see more signs of economic health in the middle class of America before you begin raising it again. I like the idea of admitting many more high school immigrants, because I think that in a sense having Tipp the immigration so far towards low skilled immigrants, whether intentionally or unintentionally, over the last three decades, I think that's been very deleterious towards working class people, people kind of on the edge of the middle class and has been very good for our elite. I like to see the elite get a little bit more competition,

bring in more doctors bring in more people might become lawyers, inventors whose companies can compete for funding in Silicon Valley, bring them all in and and let's see what that does for living standards. I think it a very good so I'd I'd like to see numbers go down for a while and let the federal government earn trust on this issue again before raising them. I mean if the effects are as Ryan thinks what they will be and what it is, I think they will be. There will be a political room to raise the rate of immigration up again, but for now I think it's fine to say we ve had his big historic waive. This is the period. This is the pattern of american history to have a big wave, TAT, crest and two and two Let it crest and fall and begin their assimilation process that is so long overdue, so exit question all you kind of touching on this a little bit already, but from a restriction s perspective

in total will trump and his allies succeed, not asking whether spell actually passed, but what Will they succeed in moving the ball in the public debate on this issue, or will they lose ground? I think, though, I think will move the ball, particularly with sessions continuing to push a fairly aggressive immigration enforcement enforcement policy and from his person. The deer, and you know already the progress you see with border crossings in that sort of thing. There is a reorientation going on on immigration policy, and I think that this will push things forward, not as far forward as as gotten in Purdue. Probably why but in the right direction. I believe it moves the ball forward and a very smart fundamentalism. That's very salient this debate them common sense of all the proposal. The more crazily hysterical. The opposition has to be,

that really fits here. Another question is, as Michael was suggesting, I think, does this: since actually matter does the fact that well, let's scratch beneath us and see what's actually happening and how fundamentally crazy? The idea actually is, or the fact that this is an winning bid and the starting point for a negotiation. So I feel optimistic about it

but I've gotta say the blow back. Just really tells you about how far this debate has moved in such a short period of time. You want to speak to them. I think that all is going to move forward and other exit question. I do think, even without masterful planning from the White House would be difficult not to begin driving a wedge between public opinion and where Democrats are on this issue. Voting Democrats on this issue and where the media is on this issue, which is that most Democrats are much more restriction, is then the media people claim to be representing all that's good, indecent american tradition, which apparently now means completely open borders as a humanitarian gesture. So I think that wages is going to naturally drive in, and you will see in the next couple of weeks

The fire turn away from from a little bit and towards democratic politicians who are not as hard core open borders as the media thinks they should be so away a little about losing ground that the points Ryan's made about it, the Sheer Association with with Trump potentially being problematic. I think that they move the ball forward in terms of the debate Think it's just hard argue against. The idea. Having more merit based immigration system, and this is a real proposals. Do that, in contrast to the false salesmanship that some often surrounds comprehensive immigrants reform in at least puts the question of numbers out there. Makes it a question that has to be discussed, and I think that's progress. well, so in another hot button issued this week in your time. Splashing leads door,

in the paper, suggesting that the Trump administration looking at format of action policies on camp with the sceptical critical eye, constituted a gigantic dog whistle to racist out there in the country. Basically, what do you make of this work, the new times framing was simply gruesome. Those anti white loaded trouble ministries, and looking in the anti white pious, it was clear that they without without quite saying so, work trying to make this an issue of white people's Rachel. resentment on on campus policies, but to the extent that out there. It has very little to do with the demographic composition of select

select colleges and universities and in the country which is as which is where a lot of this is taking place as you You climb up the ladder thing to do becomes narrower, a narrower, the competition becomes far more intense and the other egalitarian impulses to which affirmative action is supposed to cater are have to be to be imposed with more and more force. So, as my colleague, David French noted in peace and as an hour's editors noted the editorial in the the the worst of the worst victims affirmative action. policies, especially to the sort of it in the inn. Extremists way that their impose now, our asian Americans you, I can't, I can't raiment recall who did the

the study, but you, if you're Asian American, looking to get in to say you see, allay or Berkeley place in the universe. California system, you have score. Hundreds, the points better than a white applicant. You have two square about two hundred fifty points better than hispanic look at you have to score forehead Seventy points better than an african affair, an applicant on your authorities. This is you they're. All Different mechanisms now better are put into place to descend affair. fifthly, disenfranchise the the best performing students from selective institutions, indeed toward the end of of getting a more careful population there and that's not to say that right using the rate at which minorities attend. College is not an admirable goal. It saying that the way

he's in which we ve been doing that for a long time now are actually, imposing the exact discrimination that these policies are supposed to militate against and the trump administrations. Finally, looking at that- and I think that worthwhile, and it should be noted that us A straightforward reading of the Civil Rights ACT should be enough to take care of these policies, but that's a law that that is enforced selectively. Course. I really do a very dangerous thing, which has disagree even slightly in Tuttle when, in the said that the biggest folks who are most harmed I racial preferences or asian Americans. I would suggest that the people who are harmed are those who benefit from very large racial preferences and then go to schools for which there not necessarily you know best prepared, took Make it through and then don't graduate

and who then wind up with a lot of debt and not a degree. and you know again, this is not always what happens, but I mean it s. My opinion on racial preferences is a little bit weird. My big crews Aid is just transparency, but I think we should see is that the interests of the schools and the students are not always well aligned, if I'm in, university. Partly I want to be more diverse for purposes of legitimacy right, want to look like a representative institution. So what that could mean predict we're not the most selective, but at the somewhat less selective schools with they could mean- that I am willing to admit people, even though, provide them with the resources that the ultra elite very well funded. Private institutions can provide every student with, so that mean but some of these students, some of them. Why floundering right, some of them. Why? going into other majors that are not the ones they intended to pursue? Initially because you know a variety of ways: But partly because you know they feel like there are in a more comfortable environment right, so this funny

is that the plaintiffs in these affirmative action cases are often women like Abigail Fisher, a young woman. woman from middle class family, who said you know hey you no kind of I shouldn't be punished: in favour of these kids are underrepresented backgrounds, but in a way the. Ideal plaintive would be someone who said in a way I feel like I was cheated by this university because they did not tell me that other students My board scores other students with my level of preparation, oftentime struggle they did not tell me this because they cared about representatives. The thing is that no one is ever going. Come forward and be a plaintive someone who's who's coming from that perspective, partly because it is so psychologically wounding to have that kind of expense. it'll just absolutely never happen, but I really do think that that's a different way of thinking about the debate and the harms the other thing I'll, throw there there's a one but by Hugh Davis gram heap? pushed it. I must happen in two thousand three called collision course, one of my favorite books and

friend of Jason, will read a great piece about this for the american interests and the basic point he brought up but in a funny way the politics of affirmative action in the politics of immigration are very closely tied together, why's that when we're lookin the beneficiaries of racial preferences and higher education oftentimes their of immigrant origin, now, if you're, one who buys that a firm it I can make sense as a compensatory mechanism to deal with the fact that african in particular, have been brutalized oppressed, marginalized in all kinds of ways for decades, and this has left a real, lasting ma tat generational legacy, but then to say that someone who is second generation, China but immigrants from West Africa? from Bangladesh or for size. I am from the Caribbean. etc. Does it really make sense to apply this compensatory mechanism. The fact that the justification gone from compensation for this historical injustice to diversity

way means that hey, if I'm ITALY University. If I get these scrappy stryver from the suburbs, who happened to be the right skin color, but they're, not actually people who are the descendants of slaves, they're, not people who are you too much tougher nut to crack in terms of getting people connected these elite networks? You know it's kind Funny thing, and then for a lot of people, their reaction is wait a second. I don't know if this naturally makes sense. That's made a hermit and more vulnerable than it would have been added had that very clear and pretty compelling moral, just vacation. So I think that that's another complicating factor will, I think, what is happening and I think what had light would have liked to have seen willing address and what I think we should address is that.

Me since universities have come up with a defence mechanism against that tension, which is that, instead of these policies being able to address a historic wrong in slavery, at Jim, Crow, red lining and although multigenerational oppression of african Americans, it's now about de throwing white supremacy so innocence, that's how you can square the circle on both these issues and say that white Super See is the existing live threat, immigration and racial preferences for any non white student? Isn't it in a sense, a hammer blow against. Might prove the Rainbow Coalition white privilege and so on, and I think the end that is that ideology is that what is informing some of the more hysterics

open borders, ideology that we see in the immigration debate, and I think it is what will be deployed to protect affirmative action from further criticism, even if the beneficiaries in that I agree with in that, in a sense, even Americans, or the ones that lose out the spots that they so desperately of God, add one more thing, which is something that is of particular importance to me, and I think is related to this- you bet it sort of hard to talk about is the little so nebulous, but at that the lead schools, schools that are very that are dedicated to it. sort of identity metric. We have enough of these people. We sell They are all very varied, different individuals, and also you know, we coordinate we cabin you off. According to the groups to which you belong in, you know, become a part of this society in and the rest, it creates a

a fragmentation within the the school itself, which I think is deeply unhealthy to the actual activity of turning a real education requires a community of people who were all invested invested in the process of working together. Who can you know who can together and struggle over these questions there dealing with an end the sort of thing and creating these artificial identities and these quotas and the rest coordinates people off to themselves and into their own group, and they feel defend save against other groups. So you destroy that the possibility of real community on campus, and I think that that is not as maybe not a central fact, bus he has to do with impart the thing.

singly, predatory nature of of colleges? New comes to men and women, viciousness and and frankly just it's it's sort of part of a nasty electrical process with the fact that a lot of college still offer education's like like they did Ryan exit question will front of action on campuses ever ended by ever, I mean say in twenty years. No, my hope is that able, take a healthier, more constructive form in which its more transparent about the odds facing students who who are the beneficiaries. The ostensible beneficiaries of very large preferences, Michael. No, I don't, I don't think. Well, I mean I want a reserve, some percentage, that a Supreme court decision could just knock out. Deliver some knockout blow by fear.

Don't think, that'll happen in no. I don't think so and of course, a lot of them. A lot of the mission Policies are a sort of, as, as Ryan pointed out, they become less. Its parent by becoming holistic near. We have all these I'm not for. I am not at all for up a sort of numerical check, the box type of admissions process, but increasingly you get in, We don't need the score. We don't. We don't need to go ahead, says a couple of universities. Prominent universities are thinking about doing now. That's all a wave of sort of quietly veil. The affirmative action- that's that's happening so Fourthly, that's very difficult to to get rid of it. I think the answer is no it's an lighter items, really quickly so right hand. You been reading Thomas Mouth, yes, Tom. Melon has written ace, a series of really terrific historical novels a lot of which have to do with american politics in the course of american politics over the twentyth century. The most reach,

of them was published on twenty fifteen. It's called finale and it's all about the latter half of the Reagan presidency. It is a delight to read particularly anyone with an interest in politics, you feel like you're are there and it made me laugh out loud, so highly recommended Michael. What is a book dart so book darts have solved a lifelong me, which is that stopped reading as many electronic books and return back to paper, and but I never liked defacing my own books, I never liked. I dont like reading with a pen in hand. I dont, like doggie hearing. Age because they offer more know. What am I want to return to on that page book darts, but if you underlined and augured you'd know already, but these solution, as literally Then we d be levied book, darts, darts

and their name and a sponsor of this part it no but they're so worth it it's. You can buy ten of a hundred and twenty five bronze or borodino other types of metal with their called darts, and they slip over a page and literally point to a single line on a page. they don't damage your book. You can put one hundred and fifty eight and stick out Rambo from the book. They wrapped around the page see concise. He had a brass kind of grasping the edge of the page It may seem like plastic versions of these, like a little arrow type thing: they're they're, just beautiful there perfectly solve a, I think, a basically they solve a five hundred year old problem, and they're nice. There, economists look at an end in a way that kind of nice to shake and make a good baby rattle any in. In a pinch,

quite an endorsement, and so you had right hand going relatively high minded for rather block, and last but not least, I assume you gonna goddamn ash. I gotta this is a very literary group of white light items. I sympathise with Michael on on dog hearing, which is to impose structure damage on onto a burgers crushes made, but I d write in glaring sought, structural. Damn, yes, and I seriously breaking a binary, kill you killing your crushing the book ever see the movie with the wish for confining Forrester Sean country who plays a pleasure, reclusive novelist meta young author, and they become friends and at one point he had. He says book I handed to him by the student is his book. Ices talk by what is

you ve dog, eat. One of the pages. Christ have little respect for the reverse voice, sympathise with William Forrester. In that the moment literary recommendations in addition to Thomas Mallon, Thomas, whose novels, whose novels throw myself I've been meaning to read. I've been reading a serve hard to to get, but extraordinary book of poetry by polish poets, female named anti communist sky and she wrote in the second half of the twentieth century and response in part to the Nazi years in Poland and to the cold war and its view the full sharp edged poetry about family and also about her search God and and ultimately Christ through that period is just it's. It's wonderful, wonderful crystal.

two clear, poetry in is looming slides inside, I really enjoyed it and that the only real selection of her poetry in Canada a book this one called astonishment. right longing to be in the right hand, role. I saw movie that the last week, atomic blonde I saw a good very entertaining. I think the plot ridiculous, but its carried by Charlene thereon, is a high surname. I've never We heard at the real proliferation is like to ruin, but I think she goes like therein for Americans like us, but whereas it while the fact that the problem I had with it, is just that the fight scenes one. It's just a little absurd that this. This woman, you beat up about fifty men, throughout the course of the movie to just. have a problem with fight scenes in movies generally and they're they're, so, often played as like the emotional high point you can. Just you can see. Just all the

the energy and technical proficiency that are poured into these scene. And there invariably the most boring part of the movie. There, never distinguishable memorable compared to any other fight. Seen in any other contemporary move B and I thought were completely dispensable in atomic blond, all those one of their great selling point, supposedly that you see her beating up so many people and see her getting getting bruised cuz. I don't see the point of that but anyway, it's time for our editors picks. But this is a very special and sad podcast for us here at the editors, because it is in tunnels. Last podcast, with us, he is going off to study, not surprisingly, philosophy I thought in honour of the inn and unbeknownst to IE and we'd. Have a special in total version our editors picks and in you

receive a dispensation you don't have to have an in Tuttle editor's pick, but maybe you can share a thought or two about what might have been your you're, a couple of favorite pieces, but will let you that by going to ride hands with your favorite internal peace, Rick, lowries started off today's podcast by referring to one of Anthony scary movies, really colorful and frankly, pretty offensive terms, it reminded me of one of my favorite in Tuttle pieces. It was really a series of peace, as it was back when internal was clock blocking that has built up so in tunnel, not over a superhero. His supervillain would be a fourteen year old boy, deepen the heart of Texas and who claim to have built from scratch his own clock and then it,

of racism on the part of his local public school. They just punished him for being a brilliantly inventive young ban, thank Goodness one of the arab oil monarchies came to his rescue and that of his family, but anyway, just in has an enormous amount of range. This is truly one of the sharpest most apart from being just kind of a kind, wonderful person, just really one of the most incisive writers. I know we really through this guy into the Hornets nest early on running on the most controversial topics, but which is kind of funny because he has such a thoughtful guy. But really, if you want to read the true artistry of e en Tuttle, just go back twenty fifteen and his encounters with clock boy, and it will not-

socks off. It really will like thank you here. So I'm not reclaim. This is one of the best Intel pieces, but I think it is one of the most representative of internal virtues, which is a little after the election last year in total wrote a peace that America needs a scene laughed and that we weren't it didn't seem like we were going to get one anytime soon. I thought this kind of imports, it is the internal virtues which is that it should dishes it's fair. It has a concern of about american politics in the american polity in society that is kind of a collage uncle in its in its grasp of how left and right work together and kind of existence, symbiosis and in dialogue and conflict and dumb

Yeah, I just think you read this and see a generous good man engaging with the world as he finds it and dumb will miss him you're here. Yes, I is one of the most exceptionally talented young writers, I've ever had the privilege to work with her or just be around and joke with the Incas. Invariably anything he delivers and he has written a lot of our editorials over the last couple of years. It's is whatever the topic firm it of action where the topic is draft too, and there always so goods wonder how a draft three, how good weather and actually won my fair pieces. Recent cover story that you did on the roots of of left wing.

Violence and credibly, trenchant and elegant, as always in this, is actually a peace where we we saw more than to drastically and had it in, and I had a little trouble getting together, not exactly what what I wondered. What what the exactly right version of it was our energy, and I think you ended up like writing. For versions of this, and at at the end like deadline day, you delivered to like twenty five hundred work as it is, and so we're going back and forth at which which to go with. I think member Jason Store Saint just published from both about good bye and thanks. So much for everything you ve done for four and are its has been a real honour and we hope you'll keep running for us and work at two distracted by your studies. Thank you very much, and ours. extraordinary place, and it's been an extraordinary privilege to be here for I have a night. I do hope. When I can, whenever I can manage to to publish a fuel if you're still have me- and I will make-

a recommendation is suitable to me. I think the rest, a recommendation review online published annual summer reading symposium this week, as filled with staff, writers here and that are and friends of ours giving their there, favorite reads for the year, so so make sure you see that it sets a good time. Great. That's it for us, this week, thanks ie and thanks Righthand thanks, Michael thanks, everyone for listening. We are the editors and we will see you next week