
如果他在下个月的选举中赢回美国参议员席位,俄亥俄州民主党人谢罗德·布朗表示,他不会支持弹劾唐纳德·特朗普总统。“我不能代表其他所有人发言,但我不会支持弹劾特朗普,”布朗在上周接受《哥伦布邮报》采访时说。“无论中期选举发生什么,根本没有理由那样做。”布朗曾担任三届参议员,他有权就民主党如果从共和党手中夺回国会控制权是否应该弹劾特朗普发表意见。
If he wins back a U.S. Senate seat in next month’s election, Ohio Democrat Sherrod Brown says he won’t back impeaching President Donald Trump“I can’t speak for everybody else, but I would not support an impeachment of Trump,” Brown told The Columbus Dispatch when interviewed last week. “There’s just simply no reason for that, no matter what happens in the midterms.”Brown, who previously served three terms as senator, is free to opine on whether Democrats should impeach Trump if they snatch control of Congress from the GOP.
但考虑到如果特朗普第三次面临弹劾,他作为美国参议员将扮演的特定角色,这一表态是不明智的。通过表达对特朗普可能面临弹劾的全盘反对,布朗削弱了同僚的立场,并损害了弹劾程序的合法性。
But his declaration was ill-advised, given the specific role he’d play as a U.S. senator if Trump were impeached for a third time. By expressing blanket opposition to Trump potentially facing impeachment, Brown weakens his colleagues’ hand and undercuts the legitimacy of the impeachment process.
通过表达对特朗普可能面临弹劾的全盘反对,布朗削弱了同僚的立场,并损害了弹劾程序的合法性。
By expressing blanket opposition to Trump potentially facing impeachment, Brown weakens his colleagues’ hand and undercuts the legitimacy of the impeachment process.
不妨承认,布朗的情绪反映了竞选的胶着。他一直在全力争取击败现任共和党参议员乔恩·赫斯特德,而这个州在过去二十年里每次选举都变得更红(更倾向共和党)。根据俄亥俄州参议院竞选最新民调平均值,布朗以四个百分点领先赫斯特德,但他似乎并不认为这意味着胜券在握。
Let’s concede that Brown’s sentiment reflects a tight race. He has been hustling hard to unseat incumbent Republican Sen. Jon Husted in a state that has spent two decades getting redder with each election. Brown has a four-point lead over Husted, according to the latest polling average of the Ohio Senate race but he doesn’t seem to be taking that as a sign that he’s got the race sewn up.
布朗的竞选活动高度聚焦生活成本问题,而他拒绝弹劾这一想法,可能表明他想缓解一些选民的担忧——即民主党更在乎惩罚特朗普,而非缓解导致共和党在俄亥俄州政治前景下滑的经济痛苦。
Brown’s campaign has focused hard on cost-of-living issues and his rejection of the idea of impeachment may be a sign that he wants to allay some voters’ concerns that Democrats care more about punishing Trump than alleviating the economic pain that contributed to the GOP’s political fortunes declining in Ohio.
但如果布朗返回华盛顿,他将无权决定特朗普是否会被弹劾。根据宪法,众议院控制对联邦官员因严重罪行和轻罪提出指控的程序,并且可以以简单多数通过弹劾条款。参议员则充当100人的陪审团,权衡众议院针对被弹劾官员所提出的案件。其中三分之二,即66名成员,必须投票定罪,被告方才会被免职 — — 但在众议院提交弹劾条款之前,无需咨询他们中的任何一人。如果民主党重新夺回国会,特朗普是否还会面临另一次弹劾?
But should Brown return to Washington, he would have no say in whether Trump is impeached. Per the Constitution the House of Representatives controls the process for charging a federal official with high crimes and misdemeanors and can pass articles of impeachment with a simple majority. Senators act as a jury of 100 to weigh the case the House lays against the impeached official. Two-thirds of them, or 66 members, must vote to convict for the defendant to be removed from office — but none of them needs to be consulted before the House sends over articles of impeachment. Is another Trump impeachment in the cards for Democrats if they retake Congress?
2026年8月16日,共和党人引用特朗普之前的两次弹劾,不是作为他腐败的后果,而是作为针对他的民主党阴谋的证据。“这基本可以肯定,可能就在第一天 — — 第一或第二天,”众议院议长迈克·约翰逊(共和党人,路易斯安那州)在最近的一次采访中警告道。“记得,他们已经在这届国会提交了弹劾条款。而且他们正蓄势待发。”
August 16, 2026 Republicans cite Trump’s previous two impeachments not as a consequence of his corruption but as evidence of a Democratic plot against him. “It’s guaranteed, probably on the first day — first or second day,” Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., warned in a recent interview“Remember, they’ve already filed articles of impeachment in this Congress. And they’re raring to go.”
通过预先将任何弹劾推动描述为仅仅是对特朗普的另一次攻击,约翰逊实际上是在承诺:无论是他本人还是他的党,都不会考虑民主党若掌权时可能收集的任何针对特朗普的不当行为证据。而布朗所说的“根本没有理由”进行弹劾的言论,进一步增强了这一共和党论点。
By preemptively framing any impeachment push as just another attack on Trump, Johnson is essentially promising that neither he nor his party will consider any evidence of wrongdoing against Trump that Democrats might gather if they are in charge. And Brown’s statement that there’s “simply no reason” for impeachment boosts that GOP argument.
据报道,民主党正准备调查特朗普涉嫌违法、自肥及其他罪行的报告,但目前没有迹象表明,对特朗普的弹劾调查是民主党多数派的当务之急。(他们是否应该推动弹劾是另一回事。)在特朗普之前的每一次弹劾审判中,布朗都投票定罪特朗普,但特朗普最终均被无罪释放。2021年特朗普被无罪释放后,当时他被指控在2021年1月6日骚乱事件后煽动叛乱,布朗在一份声明中写道,投票反对定罪的共和党人“向我们的国家和世界传递了一个信息:对我们的公民、我们的民主以及人民意志的暴力攻击不会有后果。”共和党人多次玷污了宪法中唯一针对失控行政部门的保障机制的合法性。
While Democrats are reportedly preparing to investigate reports of Trump’s lawbreaking, self-enrichment and other offenses, there is no indication that an impeachment inquiry is an immediate priority for a Democratic majority. (Whether they should be pursuing impeachment is another issue.) In each of Trump’s previous impeachment trials, Brown voted to convict Trump, but he was ultimately acquitted. After he was acquitted in 2021, in a trial in which Trump was accused of incitement of insurrection after the Jan. 6, 2021, riot, Brown wrote in a statement that the Republicans who voted against conviction “sent a message to our country and the world that violent attacks on our citizens, our democracy, and the will of the people have no consequences.”Republicans have repeatedly tarnished the legitimacy of the one constitutional failsafe against an out-of-control executive.
布朗知道,大多数共和党人在尚未出现任何证据之前就已经预先决定投票赞成无罪释放。但如今,在宣布自己反对仅仅是特朗普弹劾这一想法时,布朗让自己处于一个令人不适的相似位置。
Brown knew that most Republicans had predetermined to vote for acquittal before a single shred of evidence had been presented. But now, in declaring himself in opposition to the mere idea of a Trump impeachment, Brown puts himself in an uncomfortably similar position.
值得注意的是,布朗表示特朗普没有做任何值得被弹劾的事情。如果他这样说,肯定会疏远他接下来三周需要动员的坚定民主党人。他也有一点道理:需要构建一个弹劾案,而不是在法庭上进行,而草率行事并无帮助。不过,众议院候选人才是负责考虑弹劾的人选,而不是参议员。
It’s important to note that Brown say Trump has done nothing to deserve impeachment. That would have surely alienated the stalwart Democrats he needs to turn out over the next three weeks. He also has a point that there’s a need to build an impeachment case, not in a court of law and that jumping the gun doesn’t help. Again, though, House candidates are the ones responsible for considering impeachment, not senators.
布朗可能认为他对弹劾的否认算是一种克制。但他本可以用更明智的方式表达自己的立场,既能避免削弱弹劾程序,又能更好地维护其效力。共和党人一再玷污了宪法中针对失控行政权力的唯一保障机制的合法性。如果弹劾将来 ever 能被成功使用,那么其合法性必须得到恢复——但布朗在特朗普政府腐败盛行时期否认弹劾作为一种选择,只会产生相反的效果。
Brown may have thought his disavowal of impeachment counts as restraint. But there are ways for him to have framed his position that would have been savvier and avoided undermining the impeachment process. Republicans have repeatedly tarnished the legitimacy of the one constitutional failsafe against an out-of-control executive. If it is ever to be successfully wielded, then the impeachment’s legitimacy must be restored — but Brown disavowing it as an option during a spectacularly corrupt Trump administration can only have the opposite effect.
该帖子:谢罗德·布朗在弹劾特朗普问题上是错误的 MS NOW
The post Sherrod Brown was wrong about impeaching Trump MS NOW