評(píng)論
打印
Mr Cohen says Mr Trump asked him to make hush-money payments—
科恩表示，特朗普要求他支付保密款項(xiàng)——
something that is not illegal for ordinary citizens,
這對(duì)普通公民來(lái)說(shuō)并不違法，
but counts as an undeclared donation when done on behalf of a political candidate, as Mr Trump was at the time.
但在代表一位政治候選人捐款時(shí)，就算是一筆未申報(bào)的捐款，特朗普時(shí)值總統(tǒng)候選人。
So what?
那又怎樣？
After all, America treats breaches of campaign-finance law much more like speeding tickets than burglary:
畢竟，美國(guó)對(duì)待違反競(jìng)選資金法更像是對(duì)待超速罰單，而不是入室行竊：
they are often the result of filling in a form wrongly, or incorrectly accounting for campaign spending.
認(rèn)為違反競(jìng)選資金法通常是錯(cuò)誤填寫表格的結(jié)果，或者是競(jìng)選經(jīng)費(fèi)計(jì)算錯(cuò)誤。
There are good reasons for this indulgent approach.
這種放縱的做法有很好的理由。
When voters elect someone who has bent the rules, it sets up a conflict between the courts and the electorate that is hard to resolve cleanly.
當(dāng)選民投票給一個(gè)違反規(guī)則的人時(shí)，就會(huì)在法院和選民之間引發(fā)一場(chǎng)難以干凈利落解決的沖突。
Mr Trump does not stand accused of getting his paperwork wrong, however, but of paying bribes to scotch a damaging story.
特朗普不應(yīng)因文書(shū)工作有誤而被譴責(zé)，而應(yīng)因?yàn)樾匈V抹殺有破壞性的事件被譴責(zé)。
That is a far more serious offence,
這是一個(gè)嚴(yán)重得多的罪行，
and one that was enough to end the career of John Edwards, an aspirant Democratic presidential candidate, when he was caught doing something similar in 2008.
嚴(yán)重到足以終結(jié)約翰·愛(ài)德華茲的政治生涯，這位野心勃勃的民主黨總統(tǒng)候選人，2008年做了類似的事情。
There is no way of knowing if Mr Trump would still have won had the story come out.
如果特朗普的事情被曝光，我們無(wú)從知曉他是否仍會(huì)贏。
Even so, the possibility that he might not have done raises questions about his legitimacy, not just his observance of campaign-finance laws.
即便如此，他可能并沒(méi)有這么做，但僅是可能性也引發(fā)了對(duì)特朗普合法性的質(zhì)疑，不僅僅是遵守競(jìng)選資金法。
What of the convention, which has been in place since the Nixon era, that the Justice Department will not indict a sitting president?
自從尼克松時(shí)代以來(lái)就存在的慣例是，司法部不會(huì)起訴在任總統(tǒng)。
Again, there are good reasons for this.
同樣，這是有充分理由的。
As with breaches of campaign-finance law, such an indictment would set up a conflict between the bureaucracy and the president’s democratic mandate that has no happy ending.
就像違反競(jìng)選資金法一樣，這樣的起訴將在官僚機(jī)構(gòu)和總統(tǒng)的民主授權(quán)之間引發(fā)一場(chǎng)兩敗俱傷的沖突。
The convention would doubtless be void if there were credible evidence that a sitting president had, say, committed murder.
如果有可信的證據(jù)表明在任總統(tǒng)，比如說(shuō)，犯了謀殺罪，那么該慣例毫無(wú)疑問(wèn)是無(wú)效的。
But the payment of hush money to avoid an inconvenient story about an extramarital affair falls a long way short of that.
但是，為了避免發(fā)生婚外情而支付的封口費(fèi)與此相去甚遠(yuǎn)。
The authors of the constitution wanted to allow the president to get on with his job without unnecessary distractions.
美國(guó)的憲法起草者們想讓總統(tǒng)在沒(méi)有不必要干擾的情況下工作。
But, fresh from a war against King George III, they were very clear that the presidency should not be an elected monarchy.
但是，剛經(jīng)歷過(guò)和英國(guó)國(guó)王喬治三世的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)，他們非常清楚總統(tǒng)不應(yīng)是民選的君主政體。
If a president does it, that does not make it legal.
如果總統(tǒng)那樣做，就是不合法的。
The constitutional problem that America is heading towards is that the Justice Department’s protocol not to prosecute sitting presidents dates from another age, when a president could be expected to resign with a modicum of honour before any charges were drawn up, as Nixon did.
美國(guó)正面臨的憲法問(wèn)題是，司法部協(xié)議不起訴在任總統(tǒng)，這可追溯到另一個(gè)時(shí)代，在起草任何改變前，總統(tǒng)都被期望帶著一點(diǎn)榮譽(yù)退位，正如尼克松所做的那樣。
That norm no longer applies.
這一標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不再適用。
The unwritten convention now says in effect that, if his skin is thick enough, a president is indeed above the law.
現(xiàn)在生效的不成文的慣例是，只要臉皮夠厚，總統(tǒng)確實(shí)可以凌駕于法律之上。
譯文由可可原創(chuàng)，僅供學(xué)習(xí)交流使用，未經(jīng)許可請(qǐng)勿轉(zhuǎn)載。
