
唐纳德·特朗普的司法部长托德·布兰奇周日在接受采访时发火,为司法部提起前所未有的诉讼进行辩护,该诉讼旨在如果共和党现任议员落选,就阻止阿拉斯加联邦参议员选举结果的认证,他称电视主持人的提问“疯了”。
Todd Blanche, Donald Trump’s attorney general, lashed out during an interview on Sunday while defending the justice department’s pre-emptive lawsuit to block certification of Alaska’s US Senate results if the GOP incumbent loses, calling a TV host’s question “crazy”.
这场尖锐的对话发生在CNN节目《国情咨文》中,围绕司法部史无前例的法律行动展开,该行动指称阿拉斯加选票上有两名叫丹·沙利文的候选人,可能导致“选民混淆”。当被问及该诉讼时,特朗普对记者说:“是我说要这么做的。”
The testy repartee unfolded on CNN’s State of the Union over the DoJ’s unprecedented legal action, which alleges that there could be “voter confusion” due to two candidates named Dan Sullivan on Alaska’s ballot. Trump told reporters, “I’m the one that said do it” when asked about the suit.
《国情咨文》主持人达娜·巴什说:“一个大问题是特朗普是否会试图推翻大选,那可能导致的后果是,但愿别发生,我们在1月6日后看到的那种情况。”
Dana Bash, State of the Union host, said “one of the big questions is whether or not “Trump tries to overturn the election, and the result of that could be, God forbid, what we saw after January 6”.
“噢,别说了,”布兰奇说。“噢,你得别再提那套了。你不是在像个正常人那样交谈。得了吧,伙计。“这简直疯了!”巴什说,“这不疯。”
“Oh, stop it,” Blanche said. “Oh, you got to stop it with that. You are not being a real person. Come on, man. “That is crazy!”Bash said, “it is not crazy.”
“在1月6日之前我会这么说,”巴什说,指的是否认大选结果的特朗普支持者对国会大厦发动的震惊袭击。一份两党参议院报告称,有七人死亡与该事件有关。
“I would have said that before January 6,” Bash said, referring to election-denying Trump supporters’ shocking attack on the Capitol. A bipartisan Senate report said there were seven deaths in relation to this incident.
“因为总统,因为司法部,担心阿拉斯加正在发生绝对的欺诈,他想对此采取行动,您的意思是,布兰奇部长,因为美国总统想要制止阿拉斯加的欺诈和混乱,他会做出什么疯狂举动吗?那不是,那不是一个真正的问题。”
“Because the president, because the Department of Justice, is concerned that there is an absolute fraud happening in Alaska, and he wants to do something about it, you’re saying, Mr Attorney General, because the president of the United States wants to stop a fraud and confusion in Alaska, is he going to do something crazy? That is not, that is not a real question.”
“我们没有为总统那样做铺设任何基础,”情绪激动的布兰奇坚称。“我说的是我们正在为阿拉斯加、为阿拉斯加州铺设基础。”
“We’re not laying any groundwork for the president to do that,” a fiery Blanche insisted. “What I said is the groundwork that we are laying is for Alaska, for the state of Alaska.”
“如果大选后这成为一个问题,我们将有能力判断是否存在违反法律的混乱情况,从而决定参议员人选。”布兰奇在接受哥伦比亚广播公司(CBS)《面对国家》节目主持人玛格丽特·布伦南采访时也显得恼火,当时布伦南概述了诉讼情况,并询问特朗普是否指示他提起诉讼。
“If it becomes an issue after the election, we’ll have the ability to determine whether there was confusion that violates the law in determining who the senators should be.”Blanche also appeared irked during an interview with Margaret Brennan on CBS’s Face the Nation after she summed up the litigation and asked whether Trump directed him to file suit.
“首先,让我纠正一下您,好吗,”布兰奇说。“您描述的事实充其量只是误导,实际上是对观众撒谎。”虽然特朗普的司法部声称阿拉斯加选票上可能存在“选民混淆”,从而可能推动民主党参议院候选人玛丽·佩尔托拉获胜,但选举专家认为这一立场在法律上站不住脚。
“Well first of all, let me correct you, OK,” Blanche said. “You described facts that were just simply either at best misleading, but really a lie to your viewers.”While Trump’s DoJ has claimed there might be “voter confusion” on Alaskan ballots, potentially propelling Democratic Senate candidate Mary Peltola to victory, election experts maintain that this position is legally weak.
“法律主张薄弱得荒谬,几乎没有任何成功的可能性,”圣母大学法学教授德里克·穆勒在一篇博文中写道。
“The legal claim is so absurdly thin, there’s essentially no likelihood of success,” said Derek Mueller, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame, in a blogpost.
另一位专家、选举创新与研究中心执行主任大卫·贝克尔表示,这起诉讼标志着“联邦政府前所未有的干预”,并指出阿拉斯加法院已“充分审理”过这一问题。
Another expert, David Becker, executive director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research, said this suit marked “an unprecedented intervention by the federal government” and noted that Alaska’s courts had “fully litigated” this issue.
贝克尔说,这起诉讼“引发了关于政治干预的严重担忧”,他记不得“曾经试图阻止选举认证——更不用说在投票结束前11天了”。
The lawsuit, Becker said, “raises serious concerns about political interference” and that he could not remember “ever attempting to stop the certification of an election – and certainly not 11 days before polls close”.
专注于选举法的纽约大学法学教授理查德·皮尔德斯对《纽约时报》表示:“这是我见过的最薄弱的选举诉讼之一。”“它在法庭上不应有任何现实的成功机会,”皮尔德斯说。
Richard H Pildes, a law professor at New York University who focuses on elections, told the New York Times: “It is one of the weakest election lawsuits I’ve ever seen.”“It should have no realistic chance of success in the courts,” Pildes said.