Bret Stephens: Gail, the word is that Robert Mueller may soon send his report to Attorney General William Barr. Do you expect a bombshell, a dud — or just a lot more confusion, depending on what Barr makes public and what Congress chooses to do with its conclusions?
Gail Collins: Well, we’ve already got indicted minions. As to Trump himself, I feel very safe voting for “a lot more confusion.” Just on general principles. The Trump presidential campaign was knee-deep in conflicts of interest, many of them involving Russia. But given the man’s general disorganization, I find it hard to imagine the report picking him out as the sinister, canny leader who was orchestrating everything behind the scenes.
Still feeling that the real disaster for Trump is going to come with the investigations into his business practices in New York. How about you?
Bret: That’s my guess, too. Trump’s 0 million inauguration committee looks like a giant pay-to-play scheme. I still think his alleged campaign-finance violations in connection to the Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal payoffs are criminal and impeachable. And who knows what else Mueller’s investigation have dredged up about Trump family values.
Gail: The family that stays together preys together …
Bret: And vice versa. That said, if Mueller finds no clear and credible evidence of collusion or cooperation between the Trump campaign and Russia, it will be a major political victory for the president and a liability for his detractors. Fairly or not, it will call all the other investigations into question, however credible or serious they may be.
That’s one of the reasons I’ve been leery of investing too much political capital in wondering what Trump might have done behind people’s backs. It’s what he does every day in plain sight that is much more concerning.
Gail: Even if the Mueller investigation fails to produce, we’ll still have a bunch of congressional committees digging up dirt. But I know that’s not as satisfying for a conservative Trump-hater. You’re right that there’s plenty to investigate in his normal day-to-day life. Which horrible things the president has done lately seem most appalling to you?
Bret: Well, that list is long. But let me start by praising Trump on a couple of fronts. I think he’s shown moral leadership on Venezuela, by getting much of the world to recognize Juan Guaidó as the legitimate president and drawing attention to the humanitarian catastrophe unfolding under the Maduro regime. And I’m also glad he’s partially reversed course and will keep at least some troops in Syria. I hope he winds up withdrawing none of them so long as they can help protect our Kurdish friends and deter our Syrian, Iranian, Russian and Turkish foes.
O.K. Now to the rest. His declaration of a national emergency over border-wall funding is a threat to constitutional government and the separation of powers and sets a precedent that both sides will abuse if the Supreme Court doesn’t stop it.
Gail: No disagreement on the national emergency. The fact that you haven’t seen a major uprising of Republicans over that is proof that there’s no real Republican Party anymore, only Trumpism.
And I’m looking forward to the next Democratic president declaring that climate change is a national emergency …
Bret: His unloading on The New York Times as “a true ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE” is an assault on the First Amendment and the safety of journalists, including us. His hankering for a deal — any deal — with North Korea’s Kim Jong-un so that he can win a Nobel Peace Prize is a danger to peace and stability in Asia.
Gail: Our publisher really called Trump out on the danger he is creating for journalists. It’s perilous enough reporting from trouble spots around the globe without having the president of the United States cheerleading for the enemies of a free press.
Bret: His desire to start another trade war with Europe, this time over cars, is a threat to global growth and another nail in the coffin of trans-Atlantic unity. His nonstop lies and exaggerations and demagoguery about the purported evils of illegal immigration are an insult to our intelligence and devastating to the G.O.P.’s chances of ever again being a majority party.
Gail: I love it when you get on a roll like this. Keep going.
Bret: And his overall comportment continues to be a foul stain on the office of the presidency, a moral embarrassment to a majority of Americans, and a blot on the record of liberal democracy. How about you?
Gail: Well, you’ve kind of run the table. But I’d add his attempts to undermine women’s reproductive rights. The assault on Planned Parenthood isn’t just about abortion, it’s about the far right’s hatred of anything that gives women the power to decide if and when they want to get pregnant. Can’t tell you what a deep irony it is to have this guy leading that crusade.
Bret: I’d call it hypocrisy, not irony, but I’m being pedantic.
Gail: And everything about guns and domestic violence. Many people have taken note of the fact that the president tweeted out about the Smollett scandal and the suit against The Washington Post by the Kentucky high school student who was involved in that incident with a Native American in Washington. But not a twittery word about the white supremacist Coast Guard officer who has been accused of stockpiling weapons to murder newscasters and liberal politicians. When reporters asked him about it, all Trump could come up with was, “I think it’s a shame.” That’s the kind of thing you say when a politician gets caught cheating on his wife, not when you’re talking about a self-declared white supremacist intent on a politically inspired mass slaughter.
Bret: The Smollett and Covington High stories are fascinating in a cultural sense, mostly for what they tell us about our current culture of victimhood and the assumptions too many people, including too many in our profession, make about who is the victim based on current stereotypes. But the case of the Coast Guard officer is genuinely terrifying given that it comes on the heels of the Florida mail bomber, the Pittsburgh mass killer and the California man charged last year with phoning in death threats to journalists. That’s a terrifying reality of the culture war from which most of the right prefers to look away.
Gail: Not long before he announced that he was running for president, Trump went to an N.R.A. convention and got a wild, massive reception. Right then I knew he was going to be a huge gun-rights supporter, no matter what he had believed before.
When he was running against Hillary Clinton I thought he was terrible, but not nearly as terrible as he turned out to be. Kind of amazing. Did you foresee all of this?
Bret: Partly. I wrote more than a dozen columns for The Wall Street Journal during the last presidential campaign, denouncing his bigotry, lawlessness, ignorance and demagoguery. He vindicates my first impression with his every foul tweet. I think he’s debasing our political culture in ways we will be living with, and suffering from, for at least a generation. And he’s becoming a role model of sorts for other populist demagogues around the world, from Brazil to Italy.
Gail: Well, I wrote a lot about what a jerk he’d been in New York for the last 30-odd years. I guess I didn’t take him seriously enough because he’d always behaved like such a fool.
Bret: On the other hand, the world didn’t end with his presidency. The economy is robust, we haven’t stumbled into a catastrophic war (yet), and democracy is still alive and well considering all the Democrats planning to run against him. That isn’t to say things might not still go horribly wrong, only that the habit of comparing Trump to despots of yore is off the mark and undermines the case against him.
Gail: Right. He’s our own special unique despot wannabe.
Bret: But can I switch the subject? Last week The Times ran an eye-opening story on Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, basically to the effect that she is a truly horrible boss, with some of the highest staff turnover in the Senate. From a policy standpoint she’s my favorite Democrat in the race, but this is a serious issue for her candidacy. How do you think voters should factor that into their considerations?
Gail: I’m playing the wait-and-see card. We’re undoubtedly going to find out unpleasant things about a lot of the candidates as we go along. But that story about her using her comb to eat a salad on an airplane and then giving it to her aide to wash is going to … resonate.
Your position is that you’ll vote for whoever the Democrats nominate, even if it’s a modern-day Attila the Hun, right?
Bret: Definitely not! Of course I can’t vote for Trump under any circumstance. But I would never vote for Bernie Sanders, who seems to think bread lines are a good thing because they’re egalitarian. I couldn’t vote for Elizabeth Warren, either; she’s too far to my left and her prevarications about her ancestry are morally insulting and intellectually embarrassing.
I have personal reservations about Cory Booker, stemming from his deceits as mayor of Newark, and Kamala Harris, stemming from her behavior as a prosecutor. If any of them is the nominee, I will probably write in Bill Weld or John Kasich or Larry Hogan — middle-of-the-road Republicans or former Republicans who know how to win over Democrats and could govern from the center.
Gail: Ah, I remember many Republicans who had those sentiments: Trump was appalling and impossible to support, but Hillary Clinton was too far a bridge to cross. And so they voted for people like Gary Johnson, the Libertarian. Which meant they helped put Trump in office.
Bret: I voted for Hillary Clinton, even though I had plenty of reservations. But there’s no way I’m going to follow Democrats jumping off the cliff on the left because I’m angry at Republicans for jumping off the cliff on the right.
Gail: Really, I have to warn you. If I hear any Trump-hater talking about writing in his mother’s name or the Green Party name or Howard Schultz I immediately decide this is a person who would rather have four more years of Donald Trump than compromise his principles by voting for a deeply imperfect Democrat.
Bret: I’m already compromising many of my usual political principles by voting for centrist Democrats, never mind the real lefties. I could vote for Joe Biden, though I doubt he’ll get the nomination, or Senator Michael Bennet from Colorado (our boss’s brother), or any other middle-of-the-road Democrat. That category included Klobuchar, but I have a problem with people who are horrible bosses and don’t have the good sense to use their fingers to eat the way I do.
But let’s talk about something our readers really care about: the Oscars. Did you watch? Did your favorites win?
Gail: I believe this is the first year ever that I’ve seen all the movies nominated for best picture, and best actress and best actor — and pretty much everything. This is all about avoiding Donald Trump. Since he’s been president I’ve instinctively organized my life around trying to forget about current events for at least a few hours a day. It’s the same reason I’ve been watching football for the first time in my life.
But about the winners — I like watching people be genuinely surprised, so I really enjoyed seeing Olivia Colman win for playing the dotty queen in “The Favourite.” How about you?
Bret: I saw only a few of the films. But I was thrilled with the win for “Free Solo,” the documentary about climber Alex Honnold that I wrote a column about last year. And I was deeply moved by “Roma.” I grew up in Mexico City, and the movie perfectly captured a world I know very, very well. Nice to see that in this accelerated age of ours there’s still appreciation for a film that takes it slow and goes deep.
Gail: And while we’re talking about awards that made me happy — congratulations on winning the Ellis Island Medal of Honor, Bret! I’m so glad your fight for immigrant rights is being recognized. You deserve it. And as a bonus, I can’t think of anything that would irritate Donald Trump more.
Bret: Thanks, Gail. Of course I’ll be bringing my mom to the ceremony. This year will be her 69th as an immigrant in this country.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.B:
管家婆彩图029【莫】【易】【站】【起】【来】，【观】【察】【四】【周】，【后】【面】【那】【个】【身】【影】【缓】【缓】【飘】【起】【来】【跟】【在】【莫】【易】【后】【面】，【看】【着】【莫】【易】【在】【地】【板】【上】，【墙】【壁】【上】【敲】【敲】【打】【打】。 “【一】【定】【有】【机】【关】【吧】。”【莫】【易】【自】【言】【自】【语】【的】【说】【着】，【还】【一】【边】【心】【里】【想】【着】，【这】【里】【毕】【竟】【是】【白】【小】【恋】【带】【自】【己】【来】【的】【地】【方】，【她】【总】【不】【会】【坑】【了】【自】【己】。 【莫】【易】【这】【样】【想】【着】【继】【续】【看】【着】【旁】【边】【的】【东】【西】，【后】【面】【那】【个】【身】【影】【缓】【缓】【伸】【出】【手】，【在】【这】【同】【时】，【这】【只】
“【是】【你】【说】【的】【我】【们】【还】【有】【机】【会】【见】【面】，【所】【以】【我】【便】【一】【直】【都】【在】【等】【着】【与】【你】【见】【面】【了】。”【白】【酒】【一】【笑】，“【今】【夜】【见】【到】【公】【子】，【便】【也】【没】【什】【么】【好】【意】【外】【的】【了】。” 【白】【酒】【的】【原】【则】【向】【来】【很】【简】【单】，【那】【就】【是】【打】【得】【过】【就】【打】，【打】【不】【过】【就】【跑】，【要】【是】【跑】【不】【了】【就】【躺】【平】【任】【嘲】，【她】【如】【此】【好】【的】【心】【态】，【也】【就】【是】【让】【她】【在】【什】【么】【情】【况】【下】【都】【能】【保】【持】【镇】【定】【自】【若】【的】【原】【因】。 【春】【水】【缓】【缓】【往】【前】【走】【了】【几】
【摄】【政】【王】【低】【头】【看】【向】【站】【在】【自】【己】【面】【前】【的】【这】【个】【女】【人】，【他】【脸】【上】【的】【神】【色】【在】【月】【光】【下】【有】【些】【模】【糊】【不】【清】。 【他】【本】【来】【以】【为】【自】【己】【是】【不】【会】【对】【任】【何】【女】【人】【感】【兴】【趣】【的】，【甚】【至】【曾】【经】【有】【一】【度】【还】【有】【人】【给】【他】【送】【过】【男】【人】，【可】【他】【除】【了】【厌】【恶】【还】【是】【厌】【恶】，【不】【论】【男】【女】。 【他】【是】【朔】【日】【国】【的】【摄】【政】【王】，【他】【若】【是】【不】【愿】，【这】【个】【女】【人】【怎】【么】【可】【能】【嫁】【的】【过】【来】。【那】【日】，【他】【同】【朔】【日】【国】【国】【主】【商】【量】【此】【事】，
【不】【过】【也】【好】，【起】【码】【还】【都】【活】【着】，【起】【码】【还】【在】【一】【起】，【没】【有】【分】【离】，【就】【是】【最】【大】【的】【幸】【运】。 【疑】【惑】【的】【开】【了】【门】，【门】【口】【站】【着】【毕】【恭】【毕】【敬】【的】【一】【个】【人】，【是】【喻】【初】【雪】【亲】【自】【挑】【选】【的】【侍】【从】，【不】【畏】【惧】【灾】【星】【的】【侍】【从】，【其】【实】【说】【不】【畏】【惧】【是】【假】【的】，【谁】【都】【害】【怕】【倒】【霉】，【但】【是】【如】【果】【表】【现】【的】【畏】【惧】，【一】【定】【会】【更】【倒】【霉】，【所】【以】，【还】【是】【强】【装】【着】【镇】【定】，【这】【样】【起】【码】【会】【给】【掌】【权】【者】【一】【个】【好】【的】【印】【象】。 管家婆彩图029【顾】【北】【嘴】【角】【微】【微】【弯】【起】【一】【抹】【邪】【笑】，【身】【影】【一】【闪】，【直】【接】【冲】【了】【出】【去】。 【左】【一】【爪】【右】【一】【爪】，【几】【十】【只】【老】【鼠】【被】【他】【宛】【如】【割】【韭】【菜】【一】【般】，【一】【茬】【又】【一】【茬】【儿】，【很】【快】【便】【将】【所】【有】【的】【老】【鼠】【都】【给】【灭】【了】，【包】【括】【想】【往】【下】【水】【道】【里】【面】【钻】【的】，【也】【不】【例】【外】。 “【别】【怪】【我】，【要】【怪】【就】【怪】【这】【个】【残】【忍】【的】【世】【界】【吧】！” 【他】【看】【着】【堵】【的】【死】【死】【的】【老】【鼠】【洞】，【摇】【了】【摇】【头】，【直】【接】【先】【离】【开】【了】。 【下】
【彻】【底】【离】【开】【云】【海】【仙】【门】【地】【界】【之】【后】，【袁】【无】【极】【脸】【上】【浮】【现】【一】【抹】【古】【怪】【笑】【容】。 “【我】【感】【觉】【我】【的】【演】【技】【又】【得】【到】【了】【升】【华】【啊】！” 【感】【叹】【一】【声】，【袁】【无】【极】【望】【向】【三】【界】【塔】【的】【方】【向】，【目】【光】【却】【是】【逐】【渐】【变】【冷】。 “【鸑】【变】【迦】【罗】，【你】【竟】【敢】【招】【惹】【吾】……” “【那】【吾】【就】【好】【好】【陪】【你】【玩】【一】【局】。” 【袁】【无】【极】【目】【光】【一】【闪】，【嘴】【角】【流】【露】【一】【抹】【冷】【笑】。 【之】【前】【在】【云】【海】【仙】【门】【的】【正】【气】
【凶】【手】【直】【接】【掏】【开】【了】【女】【孩】【的】【心】【脏】，【随】【后】【从】【心】【脏】【撕】【开】【的】【口】【子】【中】【拿】【出】【了】【其】【他】【内】【脏】。 【章】【警】【官】【立】【刻】【下】【令】【寻】【找】【其】【他】【丢】【失】【的】【器】【官】，【因】【为】【凶】【手】【过】【于】【残】【忍】，【局】【里】【立】【刻】【针】【对】【此】【案】【开】【了】【研】【讨】【会】。 【顺】【其】【自】【然】【成】【立】【了】【专】【案】【组】。 …… 【界】【孽】【照】【旧】【去】【那】【条】【街】【摆】【摊】，【生】【意】【仍】【旧】【非】【常】【少】，【甚】【至】【可】【以】【说】【没】【有】。 【因】【为】【附】【近】【死】【人】【的】【事】，【这】【一】【条】【街】【上】【做】
【黄】【龙】【真】【人】【虽】【然】【弱】，【但】【也】【是】【实】【打】【实】【的】【大】【罗】【金】【仙】【境】，【申】【公】【豹】【虽】【然】【帮】【自】【己】【忽】【悠】【了】【不】【少】【的】【高】【手】，【但】【是】【这】【些】【人】【中】【实】【力】【最】【强】【的】【魔】【家】【四】【将】【联】【手】，【也】【只】【有】【和】【太】【乙】【金】【仙】【抗】【衡】【的】【实】【力】，【还】【不】【足】【以】【对】【抗】【大】【罗】【金】【仙】【境】。 【所】【以】【想】【要】【杀】【死】【黄】【龙】【真】【人】，【沈】【羽】【还】【得】【找】【其】【他】【的】【人】【帮】【忙】。 【苦】【思】【冥】【想】【了】【良】【久】，【沈】【羽】【最】【终】【还】【是】【把】【这】【个】【可】【以】【帮】【自】【己】【的】【人】，【锁】【定】【到】