评论
打印
Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio, a top Republican ally of the president’s,
俄亥俄州众议员吉姆·乔丹，共和党内部总统极其重要的一位盟友，
cited Mr. Morrison’s comment about Colonel Vindman and criticism from Fiona Hill, his former boss at the National Security Council,
在询问为何应该认为文德曼的担忧与此事有关时，引用了莫里森对文德曼中校的评语，
to ask why the witness’s concerns ought to be considered relevant.
以及他在国家安全委员会就职时的上司菲奥娜·希尔对他的批评。
“Any idea why they have those impressions?” Mr. Jordan asked.
“你知道他们为什么会有这种感觉吗？”乔丹问道。
Colonel Vindman, who apparently came prepared for the criticism, pulled out a copy of the performance evaluation Ms. Hill wrote about him in July,
文德曼中校，显然已为那些批评做好了准备，拿出了希尔7月写给他的一份绩效评估报告，
read aloud from it and pressed ahead with his account of what transpired.
大声地念了出来，接着继续讲起了当时的情形。
Soft-spoken at first, Colonel Vindman grew more confident in addressing lawmakers who criticized him as the hearing went on.
起初，文德曼中校的言辞还较温和，但随着听证会的进行，在回应批评他的议员时他的信心变得愈来愈强。
“Ranking member, it’s Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, please,”
“这位高级成员，请称呼我为文德曼中校，”
he instructed the committee’s top Republican, Representative Devin Nunes of California, after Mr. Nunes addressed him as “Mr. Vindman.”
在委员会最高共和党人，加州众议员德文·努涅斯称其为“文德曼先生”后，他以教导的口吻向努涅斯说道。
In another exchange that touched on Colonel Vindman’s loyalty to the United States,
在另一段涉及文德曼中校对祖国的忠诚的对话中，
Steve Castor, the top Republican staff lawyer, asked him about three instances
共和党首席律师史蒂夫·卡斯特提及了
when Oleksandr Danylyuk, the director of Ukraine’s national security council, had approached him with offers to become the country’s defense minister.
乌克兰国家安全委员会会长奥列克桑德尔·达尼柳克曾三次带着帮他登上美国国防部长之职的提议接近他一事。
Colonel Vindman confirmed the offers and testified that he repeatedly declined,
文德曼中校证实了这些提议，但作证说提议均被他拒绝了，
dismissing the idea out of hand and reporting the approaches to his superiors and to counterintelligence officials.
他当场便打消了接受提议的念头，随后就向上级和反情报官员们汇报了此事。
“Every single time, I dismissed it,” he said, adding: “I’m an American. I came here when I was a toddler.”
“每次提议都被我回绝了，”他说，接着他又补充道：“我是美国人。我刚学走路的时候就来美国了。”
Mr. Danylyuk himself said Tuesday that the offer was not a serious one.
本周二，达尼柳克本人则表示，那些提议并非严肃的提议。
Democrats fumed, accusing Republicans of sliming a patriot because he had a politically inconvenient story to tell.
民主党人怒了，他们指责共和党人因为一个政治上不合时宜的故事侮辱了一位爱国者。
“They’ve accused you of espionage and dual loyalties,” said Representative Jim Himes, Democrat of Connecticut.
“他们指控你从事间谍活动，指控你臣一主二，”康涅狄格州民主党众议员吉姆·希姆斯说道。
“The three minutes we asked about the offer making you minister of defense — that may have been cloaked in a Brooks Brothers suit,
“就在我们就帮你当上国防部长的提议提问的那三分钟里，这一提议或许是穿着华丽的外衣现身的，
but that was designed exclusively to give the right-wing media an opening to questioning your loyalties.”
但他也是专门设计来给右翼媒体一个质疑你忠诚的机会的陷阱。”
Democrats also continued to push back against what they saw as efforts by Republicans to tease out the name of or information about the whistle-blower
另一方面，民主党人也在继续反击被他们视为共和党企图挖出举报人的姓名和信息的举措，
whose account of the July 25 call helped lead to the impeachment inquiry.
正是这位举报人有关7月25日电话的陈述促成了针对总统的弹劾调查。
Democrats sought throughout both hearings to redirect attention back to actions by Mr. Trump,
两场听证会，民主党人都试图将注意力转回特朗普的行为上，
who they said withheld the $391 million in assistance earmarked for Ukraine
他们称，特朗普为获取他认为乌克兰能够给予他的政治利益，
and a coveted White House meeting to get the political advantages he thought Ukraine could deliver him.
不仅扣留了拨给乌克兰的3.91亿美元的军事援助，还推迟了备受期待的一次白宫会面。
It may be too early to fully know the effect the hearings are having on public opinion.
目前距离完全掌握这次听证会将会对舆论产生的影响或许还有很长一段时间。
Television ratings and opinion polls released in recent days suggest that public engagement has so far
最近几天公布的电视收视率和民意调查显示，到目前为止，公众在弹劾案中的参与度不仅
fallen short not only of hearings at the height of Watergate and the impeachment of President Bill Clinton,
已经落后于水门事件以及比尔·克林顿总统弹劾案最严重时的参与度，
but of earlier blockbuster Trump-era congressional hearings.
就连特朗普时代早期轰动一时的国会听证会上民众的参与度都比本次的要高。
But it is harder to measure the reach of proceedings online and on social media.
然而，相比之下，本案在网络上和社交媒体上引起的反响程度更难衡量。
And after three long days of public testimony, House Republicans appeared to be holding together in Mr. Trump’s corner,
经过三天漫长的公证，众议院的共和党人似乎一致团结在了特朗普这边，
either unconvinced his behavior was as the witnesses described
要么不相信他的行为真如目击者所描述的那样，
or unconvinced that it warranted a remedy as drastic as impeachment.
要么不相信有必要采取弹劾这样严厉的补救措施。
“An impeachment inquiry is supposed to be clear,” said Representative John Ratcliffe, Republican of Texas.
“弹劾调查应该是原委明确的，”德克萨斯州共和党众议员约翰·拉特克利夫说。
“It’s supposed to be obvious, it’s supposed to be overwhelming and compelling,
“也应该有显而易见的，压倒性的必要，以及令人信服的理由的，
and if two people on the call disagree honestly about whether or not there was a demand and whether or not anything should be reported on a call,
如果电话上的两个人就是否要求要汇报，以及是否存在需要电话汇报的内容产生了分歧，
that is not a clear and compelling basis to undo 63 million votes and remove a president from office.”
那就算不上清晰明确，令人信服的，要将6300万张选票代表的民意作废，将总统赶下台的理由。”
译文由可可原创，仅供学习交流使用，未经许可请勿转载。
