National Review isn’t what it used to be, and you haven’t specified what are facts in the LaTimes article, so there isn’t anything to refute.
You are the one making the claim so the burden of proof is on you.
If you do not care to read the articles that is your choice.
First you poo-pooed the Times article, and now the National Review article. One on the left, one on the right.
It is clear you are not open to documented facts, as each source is dismissed by you.
It’s interesting to watch people wedded to their preconceptions withstand both left and right leaning sources. It’s more interesting when they asked to be presented with these sources, are presented with them, and then discount them.
We will continue to disagree and the data will continue to be as it is.