(单词翻译:单击)
听力文本
I'm joined now by Senator Lindsey Graham, chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Chairman, good to see you tonight. Thank you for being here. Thank you. So, I want to get first your response to this blame pointing over this tragic photo, and what it tells you about where we are in this -- in this battle? One is disgusting, this is not the president's fault. People from Central America are being enticed to come here in record numbers, where we double the number of people have come this year versus last, at this stage of last year. And we're gonna double that again. We're gonna spend four point something billion to deal with the humanitarian crisis if you don't change the laws, they'll keep coming. I hate it very much that this father and daughter died. But, they should -- they should stay in their country, we should help them in their country. This journey they're taking is very dangerous. So, to my Democratic colleagues, if we don't change our law, you're gonna have millions of people overrunning our border. And what are you gonna do about that? Yeah. We're gonna talk more about tonight. And you know, everybody is waiting for Congress to come up with some kind of solution. It's been decades, I mean. And as they -- you can tell the frustration-- It's ridiculous.-- that I hear in your voice and we heard it today on the Hill. Yeah. And these people are pawns, sadly, in this political -- Can I just say this? Yeah, go ahead.
Here is our law. If you get one foot in the United States, you claim asylum, you're entitled to a hearing. The hearing is like three years away. People don't show up. If you're bringing the small child, we can only hold the child for 20 days. We don't want to separate families, so we let the entire family unit go. Word is out on the street in Central America. If you small -- bring a small child to the United States and ask for asylum, you're never gonna be sent back, you stay in America forever. And until we change that law, nothing changes. And it leads to some of the tragedies that we're seeing. Yes. Because people feel that it's gonna work and it entices them, as you say. I want to talk to you about the Mueller testimony that's coming up on July 17th. I thought he was pretty emphatic when he said -- Yeah.-- you know, my testimony is this report. Then, Jerrold Nadler kept coming out and saying, you know -- no, he's gonna show up, he's gonna testify. So, I'm curious what you think transpired what. What do you think motivated Robert Mueller to accept what is -- by their own description, a friendly subpoena an agreement to come. Really, I don't know. But I do know this. If he stays within the four corners of the document, what good is his testimony? If he goes outside the document, he's gonna get killed politically. Because then he becomes a political commentator. So, if he does what he said he would do in his press conference, refer back to the document, this is just a political circus. This is not about trying to find the truth, this is about setting up impeachment of President Trump. The biggest loser of Mueller coming into the House, I think, it's Nancy Pelosi. Because it's gonna be harder for her to control her troops after Mueller testifies.
译文由可可原创，仅供学习交流使用，未经许可请勿转载。
参考翻译
我现在与参议员林赛·格雷厄姆连线，他是司法委员会主席。主席，今晚见到你很高兴。谢谢你能来。谢谢。我想第一个知道你的看法，关于对这张悲惨照片的指责，以及这件事体现出我们在这场战斗处于什么位置？这令人不适，这不是总统的错。中美洲人被怂恿来到这里，人数创历史新高，这一数字比去年此时增长了一倍。而且马上又要增长一倍。我们将要花费四十多亿美元来解决人道主义危机，如果法律不修改，他们会源源不断地来。我不愿看到这位父亲和女儿的去世。但他们应该留在自己的国家，我们应该在他们的国家援助他们。他们的旅程是十分危险的。所以，我想对我的民主党同僚说，如果我们不修改法律，未来将会有数以百万的人闯入边境。你们要怎么做呢？是的。我们要谈谈今晚的事。你知道的，人人都在期待国会可以提出一些解决措施。已经过去几十年了。当他们-- 可以感受到失望-- 太荒谬了。-- 从你的声音里感受到的失望，我们今天听听国会怎么说。是的。悲哀的是，这些人都是棋子，在这场政治 -- 我能说说吗？好，请讲。
这就是我们的法律。如果你的一只脚踏进了美国，你提出庇护申请，你有权出席听证会。听证会可能会在三年之后才开。人们不会出现。如果你带着小孩，我们只能拘留孩子20天。我们不想让家人分离，所以我们让一家人通过。中美洲的大街上都传开了。如果你带着小孩来到美国并寻求庇护，你永远都不会被遣返，你将永远待在美国。在我们修改法律之前，什么都不会发生改变。这导致了我们看到的一些悲剧发生。是的。因为人们觉得这方法可行，而且就像你说的，诱惑他们。我想和你说说7月17日穆勒的证词。我认为他在说：“我的证词就是这份报告。”时非常斩钉截铁。是的。然后，杰罗德·纳德勒一直跳出来说 -- 不，他会出现的，他要去作证。因此，我很好奇，你想的事情又能透露出什么信息。你想的事情导致罗伯特·穆勒接受了 -- 他们描述的“一张友好的传票、一份即将达成的协议”。我确实不知道。但我知道这个。如果他和文件内容保持一致，他的证词有什么好的地方？如果他超出文件内容，他将会在政治上被处决。因为那时他是一个政治评论员。因此，如果他按照自己在新闻发布会上所说的那样去做，引用那份文件，这就是一场政治游戏。这不是寻找真相，而是准备弹劾特朗普。我认为，穆勒来到众议院的最大输家是南希·佩洛西。因为对她而言，在穆勒作证之后，她更管不了她的手下了。
