No matter that an impeachment hearing in the House alone seems far off, given the caution of key Democrats on the matter, not to mention Republican control of the Senate. “Many tremble at the idea, fearing how Trump’s supporters will react to an impeachment inquiry, worrying that it will further polarize an already deeply divided nation or that there will not be enough votes in the Senate to convict him, even if the House votes to impeach,” former New York Representative Elizabeth Holtzman, a member of the House Judiciary Committee that voted to impeach President Richard Nixon, writes in her new book, The Case for Impeaching Trump.
僅僅在眾議院舉行彈劾聽證會似乎還很遙遠,而考慮到關鍵民主黨人在這件事上的謹慎態度,就更不用說共和黨控制參議院了。“許多人對這一想法感到震驚,擔心特朗普的支持者將如何應對彈劾調查,擔心這會進一步分化一個已經嚴重分裂的國家,或者參議院沒有足夠的票數來判定他有罪,”前紐約州眾議員伊麗莎白·霍爾茨曼是投票彈劾理查德·尼克松總統的眾議院司法委員會成員,她在自己的新書《彈劾特朗普案》中如是寫道。
Nixon had similar fantasies of “the people” coming to his rescue as Congress and prosecutors closed in. But as it turned out, the “creature of the establishment,” as Watergate chronicler Elizabeth Drew recently described Nixon in The New York Times, bowed to reality and resigned: “Nixon, a lawyer who had been a member of the House of Representatives, a senator and a vice president, was more accepting of the political order.”
尼克松也有過類似的幻想:當國會和檢察官審判他時,“人民”會來拯救他。但事實證明,尼克松是“當權派的產物”,正如水門事件記錄者伊麗莎白·德魯最近在《紐約時報》上對尼克松的描述那樣:“尼克松曾是眾議院議員、參議員和副總統,但作為一名律師,他更愿意接受這種政治秩序。”
But the current occupant of the Oval Office, she pointed out, is an entirely different creature. “Mr. Trump, with no government experience, and little knowledge of how the federal government works, has been a free if malevolent spirit, less likely than even Nixon to observe boundaries,” Drew wrote. But Holtzman expressed confidence in an interview that the president would go when impeachment was inevitable. “He’s a lot of bravado, but in the end he’s a coward and a wimp,” she says.
但她指出,現任總統完全不同。“特朗普沒有政府工作經驗,對聯邦政府的運作方式也知之甚少,他是一個自由但心懷惡意的人,甚至比尼克松更不可能遵守邊界,” 德魯在1975年出版的開創性著作《華盛頓日報》寫道 。但霍茲曼在接受采訪時表示,他認為彈劾不可避免時,總統將會消失。“他總是虛張聲勢,但實際上他是個膽小鬼和懦夫,”她說。
If Nixon’s final days are any guide, however, the system is in for a whole lot of shaking before Trump exits. He has already followed Nixon’s path in trying to rid himself of his principal nemeses, FBI Director James Comey and Attorney General Jeff Sessions (replaced with a pliant temp, Matthew Whitaker). But he has stopped short of firing special counsel Mueller, as Nixon did with independent Watergate prosecutor Archibald Cox, in the infamous “Saturday Night Massacre” of October 1973; that provoked a national uproar and the resignations of Attorney General Elliot Richardson and his deputy, William Ruckelshaus.
然而,如果說尼克松當總統的最后幾天有什么指導意義的話,那就是在特朗普下臺之前,整個體制將經歷一場劇烈的震蕩。特朗普已跟隨尼克松的腳步,試圖擺脫他的主要對手聯邦調查局局長詹姆斯·科米和司法部長杰夫·塞辛斯(換成溫順的臨時工馬修·惠特克)。但他沒有像尼克松在1973年10月臭名昭著的“周六夜大屠殺”中解雇水門獨立檢察官阿奇博爾德•考克斯那樣解雇特別顧問米勒;當時的解雇引起了全國騷動,司法部長埃利奧特·理查森和他的副手威廉·魯克爾紹斯辭職。
譯文由可可原創,僅供學習交流使用,未經許可請勿轉載。