the life and influence of steven muller the senior advisor for policy for president trump. an ember publican governor larry hogan of maryland talks about his life and career, followed by science writer adam rutherford with this thoughts on how science refutes racial stereotypes and myths. former schedule information visit book tv.org consult your program guide. >> welcome everyone to politics and prose livelier here live is going to discuss her new book hatemonger in conversation, before we get started i just want to do some quick housekeeping notes. the first is that tonight's book is located in the chapter, there is a link to purchase it and we highly encourage evan to purchase two nights greatly to support the author and support politics and prose. drink flat rate shipping and curbside pickup. the other thing i like to draw your attention to is the latter portion of tonight's event will be dedicated to

your questions, your audience questions. to ask a question as a q&a box at the bottom of your screen. you click on that and typing your question will try to get to as many of those as possible. there is a chat for you guys but if you could keep all of your questions in the q&a, just make things a little bit easier. >> with all that out of the way, it is my honor to introduce jean guerrero. she is an investigative reporter contributing to npr, the pbs news hour and other public media. she is the author of, she's also the recipient of an emmy of the k pbs americas. that should be discussing her new book, hatemonger, steven muller, donald trump and the white nationals agenda. it's from a spiteful teenage troll to one of donald trump's chief advisers. muller who has outlasted many others in the trump forces has

encourages his bosses worse impulses and helped him. from the muslim ban, the family separation policy at the border, miller's finger prints have been all over the cruelest and most decisive moments of the trump era. tonight jean will be in conversation with jonathan blitzer. he is a writer at the york or anyone the 2017 national board for education reporting for american studies, story vetted underground school for undocumented immigrants. his writing reporting is also. the "new york times", the atlantic, and the nation, that any further do come here are jean and jonathan. c1 high everyone. thanks everyone for being here, jonathan thank you for moderating them super excited to talk to about this book. see what likewise and congratulations first and

foremost. this is a major undertaking. there is so much to say. so let me just launch right in. i have a few ideas on how we might kind of move through the conversation to capture the full sweep of what you have done in the book. but before we kind of marched through miller's a biography, i want to ask one general sweeping question at the outset. it may help serve to orient people if they listen. and that is the following, steven miller at this point is known to everyone, he is not a retreating personality in the trump administration. he is notorious for all sorts of things. he's involved in some the most controversial policies adopted by the current administration, he is enthusiastically privately xenophobic, all of this stuff, people have seen on tv, people are used to

seeing him raising his voice and being pugnacious. my question to you, what do you think the media in the coverage of him, what if we all misunderstood. all parts of his personality are the least well understood given his outside public persona? >> guest: out probably start with the fact that he has a lot of or he had a lot of friends who perceived him to be really funny. he has this layered personality that's not really captured in a lot of accounts about steven miller where he is just sort of depicted as architect of trump's anti- policy. he very much is. in the bucket that is important to also show how he

is seen by his friends. many of them point out that he in many ways was a normal teenager growing up in southern california. he was into reality tv show. he really loves elvis pressley and mobster movies. he was dressed up as robert dinero's mobster character of trips to las vegas. which is not totally normal but just eccentric quirks that steven miller had made him appear to be very funny to a lot of his friends. steven miller, as obsessed as he has become with his anti- immigration agenda, for very long time in his life was capable of having friendships with people who did not necessarily agree with him. he has this ability to be civil with you don't see coming across being very

combative is in interviews with journalists. he is able to be laid-back. he is able to be civil. there were a lot of people who kinda found him to be funny because they thought, a lot of people thought he was joking, growing up when he would say these pretty outrageous things about how racism, the figment of our imagination, and how multiculturalism poses an x essential threats. the thought is kind of joking. it wasn't until he joined the trump campaign that people began to realize that this mission had become inseparable from his identity and his self perception. he really became fully consumed by his anti-immigration hostility in this -- what ics's radicalization. a true case study and radicalization of what happens when someone is exposed to an extremist ideology at a young

age and slowly becomes consumed by it. and eventually becomes the most powerful advisor in the white house. c1 that is a fascinating point and definitely something that is fallen out of the popular imagination where muller is concerned. we all see him but there is a personality there, a big personality there. just listening to you talk brings to mind a quote from one of his friends, just quoting from your book here, the friend, miller's friend from i believe high school says to you, quote what they are saying about him, about muller, is directionally accurate. i would just say that i think steven in reality is probably two thirds what you see of him in the media. if he is a ten and the media on whatever scale you're thinking, and realities probably six or seven. how surprised were his friends? the friend that you spoke with, but he became the figure that he did? i mean where they -- honesty by the time you got in touch

with them he is very much in the public eye. but did they describe feelings you sort of shocked on seeing him for the first time? either warming up trump during the 2006 and campaign are on the early cnn appearances in 2017. did this shocked them? i mean the guy who gave you this quote himself seem to be pretty self reflective about what it meant to once be friends with muller. it did seemed like there's some soul-searching among his friend friends. >> guest: yeah, let's friend that you are quoting, he told me that he was very concerned about steven miller at one point. when he was watching steven miller starting to get a lot of national attention on the trump campaign and in the white house as well. he would watch his friend on national tv, on cnn and things like that battling with jake tapper. and he started to get really concerned like what would happen if -- what would happen

long-term? what would this mean long-term for steven miller's career? at one point his friend calls him up and says are you sure that this is something that you want to be doing? are you sure that this is right? and steven miller said that yes, he was sure. he was not worried. his friends weren't surprised that he came into a position of power, because they know how disciplined and hard working muller has been for his life. and very ambitions from the time he was in high school appearing on talk radio show programs. and being on national television when he was in college. so people aren't so much surprised, that has friends that knew him well weren't very surprised by his rise to power. but there were some of them who expressed me they were concerned about what this would mean for him long-term. because he was coming off, is such a villain in the media.

>> host: that's really interesting. and said let's start with his childhood. and the question of geography to begin with. i wonder, the early chapters of your book really smartly deal with california and seems to be the late '80s and 90s. : : : it have a different kind of flavor. would he be who he is now if

he have not grown up in california. from my reporting for the book it is clear that california played a central role in who they became. a very reactionary ideology that incorporates the language of the left into it. that the liberals normally use. in using it against them. the notice of oppressive elite. being used it has been used to describe the republicans. the reactionary component where he uses a lot of the tools of the left and also is very combative in a way having grown up as a person whose ideology was a minority in the city in which he grew up. in the high school in which he

grew up. the other aspect of it. this is kind of what drew me to tell stephen miller's story is someone who grew up in southern california at the same time as stephen miller does a couple hours south of where he lived there was this unprecedented hostility statewide in california i remember there were attacks on affirmative action. in bilingual education. there was a tax on social services. it was a widespread statewide scapegoating that happened bold all of their problems with the crime problems. on immigrants and it's truly a microcosm or was a microcosm

for what we are seeing today. and the resurgence of the ideologies. why people became an minority for the first time in the state. nationally we are going through the same growing pains that they underwent. he was growing up and listening to this. with the racist rhetoric. even me as the daughter of a mexican immigrant. in a puerto rican mother. very much internalizing the shame associated with being mexican. my mom used to say you are american in a way i felt like i could bring my perspective as someone who could relate having these views. and it was this desire to be

seen with all of the privileges. and to approach it with a really open mind. i came into it thinking that stephen miller had been understood. and really trying to understand him. this is why the environment in which he grew up. plays a central role in my book. and turning it into a character. he was listening to rush limbaugh who is now a huge talk radio hosts. at the time was less well-known. but he was broadcasting out of the state. railing against multiculturalism. and painting white men is that principal aggrieved party in america and saying anyone else who complains lacks self reliance. but white men are allowed to complain about anything.

really gravitated towards it. he talks about reading rush limbaugh's a book. and finding them to be the most informative in his life. he was a set a descendent of jewish refugees. >> i want to ask about this because it was a new revelation to me. reading your book his father seem to have a major vector for stephen in his childhood to begin to shift this forward. going from a family of jewish refugees. with the right --dash mike white majority. it seemed like his father began as a moderate democrat but who over time it seemed largely for personal reasons. a very conflicted person who was embroiled in a series of lawsuits. that sense of a grave meant while very personal ended up

maybe for stephen being a gateway into a broader sense of rage and anger. see mac tell. >> tell us about his father. this is when his father starts to rail against the ridiculous liberal elites. the very conservative viewpoints when his real estate company is sort of falling apart. and getting sued by his brother. in his former law firm. unsuccessfully and having all of these bankruptcies and that he was dealing with it being forced to move from a very affluent part of santa monica to a slightly smaller house in a more diverse area when you see the shift in his dad e you start to see the sheriff in stephen miller himself. going around one thing is that he have to go to santa monica high school.

a very diverse public high school where as his younger brother would later attend a mostly white private high school. they find himself displaced feeling angry like he has lost his place in line and this is when you see him breaking up with his mexican friend telling him that he can't be friends with someone with latino heritage. and this is when you see him going around school telling his mexican classmates to go back to their countries. to rail against measures with racial equity. and expressing a lot of passion about these issues. you don't normally see teenager get that riled up about. i was always shocked by this parallel. and obviously the current star. the father who is a lawyer by

training ended up leaving the law and entering real estate of all things. and that also. what a bizarre way to the present moment. very combative. in the court documents i found for the buck describe him as a masterpiece of invasion and manipulation. a lot of the same languages that you see. you see his business dealings and for the people that i spoke with. they believe that part of the reason he gets along so well with donald trump is that he gets them. he gets them emotionally and psychologically and spiritually because he grew up in a similar family to donald trump. stephen miller's paternal uncle got permanently separated from the family with a no contact order in a settlement agreement in deprived of most of the family

inheritance. very much like what we see with mary trump and donald trump's. they helped to explain the attraction to stephen miller and the way that these men just kind of loosely understand each other. and jive. >> i just want to get people who are watching and listening and a little flavor of what some of this might have sounded like at home for a young stephen miller listening to his father. this is from an interview interview you did with stephen's uncle his mother's brother. who some people well now as a figure who is a written publicly about his frustration with the term that has nephew has taken. and here is david glosser. he says that he was a

traditional economic republican who over the years became more and more embittered overregulation in which he felt was the intrusion into his personal and business fares. the ridiculous liberal elite. he was convinced that they were dominated by the extreme west wing political view of the world. he read a passage like that in your book and that could be a description it seems to me of stephen. did you know about some of this going in. as someone that has reported a lot. i have to say it was really a total revelation to me. stephen miller has the myth that they come from the democratic family. and he helps to turn them into conservatives.

but really, from the court documents that i found. in the conversation with the other relatives it became clear that stephen miller it did not invent this ideology. it comes in large part with the relationship from the father. and just hearing you read that passage. comments of david horwitz. they meet stephen miller during the time in their life. and in doctorates him in the idea that schools are the left wing machines and they are contributing to the destruction of america because of the democratic party that is allied itself with other people of color who pose a threat to america. they introduce them to the

fantasy that he has to save the country from some kind of apocalypse that he perpetuates. he nurturing that through his school for political warfare and trains them to attack the civil rights movement with the language of the civil rights. into launder the premises and the idea of economics. and then he introduces it to the idea that white men created everything that we hold dear in america from equality to freedom which ignores the central role that people of color have played in our history. it's obviously ahistorical. it appears at a young age. and ended up taking over his life. >> absolutely.

i have a lot a question about david horowitz. i'm tempted to ask one final question about his childhood. it makes a lot of sense to me to connect up the weight miller's father was to the rhetorical platform. i just want to ask one thing because this really struck me and some of the reporting that i've done over the years someone told me who worked with miller. once told me in response to a question i head about what animated the racism towards immigrants. how that could be explained. and this is a direct quote. that they seize immigrants and particularly those as the rabble. i thought about it bit reading your book.

there is one formative experience that you already alluded to but i want to hear a little bit more on. is the miller family moves during stephen's childhood basically from a as you have already described. the one that is a little bit more racially and economically diverse. it's seen as a real comedown for the millers. i wonder how much some of the views have towards immigrants also has this kind of clash of overlay. was that something that struck you. >> that is a really excellent question. i do think it's very tangled up in his head. the racism with a sense of elitism. one of the first racist thoughts is really more cautious than racist. how he hates his latin america

housekeeper dropping him off at school because it makes him look poor. he referred to her junkie car. it made him feel poor. stephen miller has been so effective at taxing the democratic party as elite. and those that want to decimate america with importation of and stephen miller he enjoys wandering around in his bathrobe and having leather books. in the glass window condominium. he embodied him in a very conscious way but he is able to deflect with the tools that

he learned from a very young man and cause people to see trump as the only person who can a fight against these elites. even though trump himself is also an elite. you can have with the strands of the childhood. in college years. one big question i head for you. a report on miller. the conversation of the book. they tried to turn the language around. a quick study in that

department. you quote a friend of miller's in college who sent the following. some people want money some people want influence. a lot of people run around not knowing what they want. they want the cheers of the enemies and then they went out and got them. in the reason i bring this up in particular. at what point does miller come to the ideology. it is childhood high school years. during much of the college experience they have the trolling sensibility. in the straight to the jugular of individuals. is there adequate and ideological worldview as a policy and then one starts to

take shape. does it happen later. when does he get the conversion. from grievance politics. two actual policy ideas. i think it is slowly as you begin. how effective. it becomes more invested in the ideology. and less able to question it. if there is a turning point. this was at the the lacrosse scandal that a lot of people have heard about wear a black stripper accuses the duke

lacrosse players of raping her. during the investigation stephen miller was defending these players as being targeted only because of their skin color. when they were dropped. it was a point where it was conforming for him that he had been right all along. integrating these beliefs the only real racism. it is a racism against whites. as a figment of your imagination. when they get national tv attention. and then they decided they had been right all along. i think that's when it starts to become a true ideology ingrained in his character.

when they got the first jar for comp --dash job for congress. the more it provides for him. the more necessary it becomes towards his self perception. i truly believe there is a big part of him that believes that he is truly up protecting americans from grave threat in the form of too many brown and black people coming here. obviously it has nothing to do with race. it connects the dots. where he is drying the drawing the policies from. becomes it very clear what is motivating him.

he is a quick study. whether it is just in a competitive politics. i know immigration wants them to win. for all of the apparent failures of the trumpet administration with regard to the trump policy. in the controversy of family separation i do think it has to be said. miller has said that he is wildly successful. how does he do this. how does he hit the ground running. he's going up against people that should be out getting him in every sense. and he manages to get to force through what he wants. whether it is lowering the refugee ceiling. and regulations on public charge. he is working the

bureaucracy. what is your sense of where that came from. i want to say i feel like he often will get the karl rove treatment like he is the brains behind trump. i think it is important to distinguish between that and what is actually going on with stephen miller. he is not some kind of mastermind who is inventing all of the step. what makes him so effective. his discipline and his work ethic. he is a great skill. for memorization. he is really good at networking. throughout the trump campaign. he was from the e-mails that i obtained. you see him feeding exclusive

talking points. sitting on radical islam. and islamic terrorism. part of what makes him so effective is that they sent a strategy paper that talks about the importance of demonization. in fear and other hostile emotions to rally people around an agenda. obviously there is a strategy within the white house. which stephen miller he has a great relationship that with donald trump. because he has been so useful from the beginning. hope to get those during the campaign.

they are comfortable in the shadow. with his role in shaping the trump is in. they're trying to make that they are sure sure they always get is the credit. and then they also repeatedly found ways. to push through his agenda. and really just disregard the input. in making sure to circumvent

and establish that policy channel. they are experienced. and definite views about the ways the government is working. i guess the question i have also. and this follows from what you said. about they attribute to this part inside the administration. obviously he relies on a group of co-conspirators for one thing. he also exploits what is the exact word for it. the lack of interest of other parties inside the

administration so he's able to really drill down because other people may be just head their attention divided. who do we need to know about to understand miller and his success. who would you describe the key cast. one of the key players is jean hamilton. he met during his time. and help to bring into the white house and he played an instrumental role at the department of justice. and working together with the department of homeland security. over the years. he has actually become increasingly even though he continues to draw from the ideas of other people. he's getting some hostility from people who used to be allies of his. he is seen as trying to have sole control over the anti- immigration agenda and in the process pushing out people that were effective at implementing it as well.

at the have of the u.s. citizenship and immigration services until stephen miller decided he was taking too long to pursue the public treasure regulation. and then he decided to get rid of him. over the years he has become so obsessed with the number one expert on this issue and people like ann coulter who used to love and spine over its stephen stephen miller are now kind of angry that he has pushed so many restriction us out. so you had control over the issue. the core group of people who are young like themselves. the core group of people who are young like themselves. he has become a one-man show. what would you say to final questions to final questions.

i would love to get your sense given your expertise in these matters the specific knowledge about stephen. what would you say if you have to come up with a list of his major accomplishments over these last couple years. what would you say are the key highlights for him. what would he be able to come away from first-term saying he has done. and how should we understand that? >> he has largely succeeded in his effort to reengineer the demographics of this country. mostly through the very beginning. and cracking down on refugee admissions. slicing it to new historical historic lows every year. part of his reputation is tied with david horwitz.

a large portion are muslim. and they come from muslim majority countries. all they they really pushed stephen miller internationally as a beacon of hope with violence and persecution. they have dismantled this infrastructure that is can you take years to rebuild if ever. he has succeeded very well with a look of liberating admissions. he made a big dent. the other key thing that steve miller has done. he has obliterated the asylum system. it started initially with the executive orders from

january 2017 where they expand the borders patrol and the officers and the ability to keep them detained. and no longer prioritizing serious criminals but to try to keep everyone detained as what they saw as a deterrent strategy in order to make people no longer want to come here. when they see that systematic separation. even though that was eventually struck down as a policy it did have the intended effect traumatizing hundreds of families and many families that were deported without their children. this was part of creating a show of cruelty in order to deter more family immigration

from central america. and then eventually with the protocol. they force asylum-seekers to await their court proceedings in mexico. they are essentially turning everyone away at the us-mexico border. i think his two main accomplishments had been to target people fleeing a violence violence either through the refugee system. they go through this very long process to come here as will is with the asylum system. you said at the start of your answer. that they've really managed by pulling very policy lovers to change with those who enter the country.

and it leads me to my final question for you before we open this up. is the stephen stephen miller a white nationalist. definitionally is that his identity. is that his world view. do we need to be more forthright in our writing and thinking he would obviously deny that he is a white nationalist. it is much harder for him to not deny that agenda. whether he identified as a white nationalist or not. the policies that they put in place. they were derived with white national people. and think tanks that exist.

he drew his policy from. they believe in the genetic superiority of right whites. with the culture and privileges. that cannabis speaks to the thai talking about. i lost my train of thought. i can finish answering your question. i think it's really important to call out the white nationalist agenda for what it is. as journalist we allowed white nationalist to spread within our governmental institutions by not calling it what it is.

and allowing these organizations to launder the ideas. in the national security. i called the book hatemonger and you write this book to tell you that stephen miller has hate in his heart. we had rephrased from using terms. i can't tell you what he can tell you. he is fluent in hate. he has been inciting hate and playing with the emotion of hatred in order to become more powerful and to rally people around his anti- immigrant agenda. and where he's he spent inspired.

it is a central aspect of everything that he does. >> i hate to say that's a nice note to end on. bear with me one second. i want to call up some questions just so everyone knows as they see me squinting on my computer. i'm just sifting through questions that people have posted on the q and a window. as miller more powerful than kushner. i would be curious to hear your thoughts on that. where does miller fit in the hierarchy. a lot of people describe him as being the most powerful advisor i would argue that stephen miller holds more sway

over trump because for trump his primary goal is to be reelected in november. and trump believes that stephen miller knows his face and that stephen miller is the way that he won in 2016. if he wants to win again in 2020. he needs to lean heavily on stephen miller. from the very beginning of his time in the white house he was working on using demonization to support his policies. one of the first things he did was create an office dedicated to this. issuing press releases about their crimes. this kind of language in order to rally support weather for an agenda or a candidate is something that has proved very useful for trump so far. and then this is a central

agenda. i think he is in a may be expanded a little bit more into a more general demonization of anyone. it's part of what we are seeing now. the protests in portland. i would argue that he is a less powerful advisor. this is from mark had fold. is the path there. to his own views. have any impact on miller or on miller's role in the administration. any thoughts on that. i don't know if he have an impact on him. after that dylan roush shootings. he was very concerned about the reaction towards the confederate flag.

as is confederate. they are on part. that is kind of like the only direct link that i can make. but throughout numerous white terrorists shootings have involved this idea that there is an invasion at the border. and that white people are being systematically replaced by brown and black people. that stephen miller read. and was inspired by and promoted. in 2015. it was a very interesting parallel between what they

care to say in the idea that stephen miller is pushing in the white house. see mac my here is another good question. marcel says what role do you see him playing in a post trump world. where does miller go. do you see him running for public office? i don't know what will happen to stephen miller. he wanted to be a senator they thought he would be a prosecutor for a little while. his career took a different path. it is possible that he would run for office somewhere i think it will always had allies in the far right. i think he will continue to have a community no matter what happens in november. of question of whether these movements will be relegated to the fringes here is a question

from someone who points out that our discussions may be seen a historical there had been other permissions. who over the years had advocated for fewer legal immigrants to come into the u.s. including prominent democrats who have enjoyed their careers. it sounded a lot different on immigration issues. they ask what is the basis for calling miller and trump. in light of this historical flirtation over the years. where does miller in the suite depart and go off much more rattle direction.

>> stephen miller has taken it to an unprecedented extreme on the asylum system. we have not seen this before. i think it's important to point out. it's part of what i try to show in the book. trump and stephen miller are the logical outcome of a that decade long by policy apart. the steep scapegoating has been going on for a very long time. even the obama administration kind of laid the framework for what were seeing now with the record deportations on helping to marry the concepts of immigration and only bringing up immigration when you're

talking about national security. this is something that helped trump and stephen miller do something to you cannot reckon with the forces of stephen miller. if you don't reckon with the movements that propel them. >> a question a little bit more about your craft than about miller what was it like to report this book. here you are reporting on one of the most controversial figures. at a time when the administration is demonizing a journalist. what was your experience doing the actual part of the book. people who were close to miller. i won't specify beyond that. they were told me they were very afraid that they made a

mistake by talking me. a lot of sources that are scared to speak to me. he has become victoriously vindictive. that was kind of a struggle trying to navigate that as a journalist. and try to figure out how to protect people. from the very beginning. they have turned in those books. and try to really get inside his head in addition to interviewing over a hundred people who knew him i'm looking at the court documents and the type of respondents and to try to figure out what makes this guy tick.

you have done more to extend the question. you had reported on border issues and immigration before trump entered office. has there been apart from a in a durable perspective. and what it feels like and looks like to do this work. over and above that you have humanitarian harbors. has a landscape change the weight you practiced the path. i think it makes you all the more careful. you don't want to get anything wrong you can actually go the extra mile to make sure that you don't get anything wrong. and you have a solid backing for everything that you write. is a tendency to go after journalists.

i hired a fact checking team. to make sure i wasn't making some stupid mistake. these are important things to do no matter who is in the white house. the added sense of need to make sure that everything is bulletproof i could come under attack personally i delve into my family. knowing how they had been attacked in the past. i do find ways these are things that are becoming an increasing concern. here is a good question from chris leonard. all of the reporting you have done on some of the deeper

courses what would happen if they would lose in november. in what ways are they dependent on him. will it retain any power. and governance if trump were to lead --dash mike leave office. it is a great question. i think it exists independently. it's part of why he came to power. i do believe if trump loses in november over time we are going see it die away. nationwide we are seeing the same thing we saw in california they are going to become a minority so there is

a lot of white fear and white anxiety. as in california. they became an increasingly diverse place. there there's no third world takeover. they begin to celebrate multiculturalism and realized the strength that it brings to the table. we will see that over the next few decades and generations with people who are going to be increasingly mixed. i do think we will see tribalism drive down nationally. the way in california. in california there is still a way of white nationalist movement. not sure it will ever go away. i'm optimistic that i'm not can it take over the country. one final question for me as you near the end. the pandemic has allowed them

to do all sorts of things. on the immigration front. given what you know both about miller's thinking in maneuvering inside the white house. on how dhs has changed under miller's pressure. what sorts of things and give you concern what sorts of areas and immigration policy should the public be paying attention to. they are martin have on immigration policy. what should people be paying attention to. it's not just about immigration. something we need to be wary of as something that comes to

stephen miller. the laser focus on the immigration agenda. on then attacking cartels. and traffickers and things like that. they had left them more vulnerable. like the pandemic that we are seeing today. resources were diverted from fema in order to create the migrant detention. it's not just about worrying about immigration policy although that is a central concern. but also looking at the broader national security question. how it has impacted the economy as a whole. by distracting from a focusing on distributing masks and

medical equipment. and let's suspend green card access because we have to protect american workers. let's shut down the border. because people are having a fit for mexico. is bigger than the immigration question. to quickly answer your question. where are the policies that they recommended their blueprint that they adopted almost verbatim. for one of the think tanks. one of the policies that he hasn't yet got pushed through. was revoking birthright citizenship. if you were born here.

he has criticize it and i realize i said final questions. things like this have actually come up before. they had towed this line at different points in very recent history. but there's always been a roadblock to that kind of action. congress continues to exercise its function and write laws in this country. right now we are living in a moment where congress has been completely dysfunctional how important is that to someone like miller has he been able

to do things that we otherwise wouldn't head. has congressman pulling its weight. he recognizes it. a lot more power going back to his time. who later became the attorney general. stephen miller really focused on derailing the immigration reform bill that he had been working on. just creating wedge issues that divide people not just based on their skin color but their political ideology. writing is very is very important for stephen miller. will just head to see we'll

just head to see how things change over the next few months as a evolves. >> here is my official last question. i'm trying to call some of the questions that i am seen in the comments. obviously the world is on fire right now. it's overwhelming following all of the news. you spent a lot of time on it. what you hope readers take away from reading this book at this moment. i realize you could probably answer this question a million different ways. if you have to give sort of one or two or three broad takeaways with what it brings into public be right now. how would you describe that. i think if you want to understand the era of polarization and division that we are living today yet

understand the story of stephen miller. i hope that my book helps people to get some perspective on how we came to be subdivided as a country because it is something that stephen miller has exploited and been able to weapon eyes and further increase through that purposeful demonization not just the people of color but of any of their liberal allies. and that is one of the key takeaways and trying to understand this era of polarization and how stephen miller's story is a microcosm for how we got here. it's just important for people to connect the dots themselves. using the book as a resource between the immigration policies that we are seeing now and the white supremacist. in the white nationalist that they had been drying the policies from.

this is not about national security it is not about protecting the american economy is about changing the demographic flows into this country. to make sure that america is a majority white country. for the x just central survivor. it has been great chatting with you. i wish you didn't have to write it. but i'm glad that you have. i hope everyone goes out and buys it congratulations again. see mac mike it's been great talking to you. a look now at some of the best selling nonfiction books. topping the list. and milani and me. the first first lady's senior advisor. and why they left the administration. and followed by the activist untamed and the prize.

in the hidden caste system in the united states. after that fox news post argues that a democratic presidential victory in 2020 would lead to socialism and economic strife. in live free or die. wrapping up some of the books. how to lead. the businessman and for rant the best. the device. some of these authors have appeared on book tv and you can watch them online and book tv.org. >> during a virtual event hosted by the commonwealth club of california. robert gates took a critical look at the use of u.s. power around the world here is a portion. how the united states have gone from a position of

supreme power and on rivaled since the roman empire in every dimension of power in 1993 to a country today set my challenges everywhere. how did that happen. how did we get here. i began looking at all of the major foreign policy challenges we had had since 1983 thinking about what we have done that contributed to the decline in the role in the world. what i came up with was a set of nonmilitary instruments of power that had played such an important role in our success in the cold war against the soviet union and have largely been neglected and weathered

after the end of the cold war. at a time when we continued to fund our military. all of the non- military instruments of power. two strategic communications. and more. as a look at the situations from the challenges in haiti in 1993. right up to our relationship with russia and china today. it occurred to me we have failed in many respects to figure out how to compete with these powers outside of the military realm. and the reality of the challenges that i write about. for all practical purposes i

considered 13 to be failures. and that is why in the title the world failures comes first. they are important successes. there are some lessons to be learned from those as well. we have a lot of problems during the 27 year time. i would conclude by saying the wars in iraq and afghanistan both began with very quick military victory. whether it was iraq and afghanistan war somalia in haiti or others. once we have achieved military victory we then changed our mission we then decided to move to try to bring democracy and reform the governments of those countries. and that's where we ran into failure.

tonight on book tv in prime time. history professor martha jones explores the efforts by black women to black women to win the rights to vote. netflix founder rita hasting discussed the unorthodox workplace culture behind one of the largest tech companies in the world. .. ..