(单词翻译:单击)
听力文本
JUDY WOODRUFF: Advance warnings of violence ignored, an unprepared Capitol Police force, a president who for three hours refused to tell the mob to disperse, and hundreds of personal threats against election officials across the country over the past nine months.These are just some of the findings in a new three-part investigation by The Washington Post into the forces that led to the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol. Here to walk us through it is one of the more than two dozen reporters who worked on the project, The Post's senior Washington correspondent, Philip Rucker.Phil Rucker, welcome back to the "NewsHour."
Thank you so much for being here. So, there has already been, as you know, so much reporting on January 6. There have been investigations. Why did The Post decide to do an additional deep accounting?
PHILIP RUCKER, The Washington Post: A couple of reasons, Judy. And thanks for having me here. First, there was more information to learn. We talked to more than 230 sources in the government, other key officials and figures who were involved in the run-up to January 6, the event itself, the aftermath. We reviewed thousands of pages of court documents and other internal records at the FBI and Justice Department and found out scores of new details about what led to the attack, the aftermath of it and, most importantly, I think, some of the red flags that were ignored by the FBI, the DOJ and the other agencies in those days before January 6.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, let's start with the red flags, because the report says red flags were everywhere beforehand, that this was carefully planned from one end of the country to the other. What's an example of one of those?
PHILIP RUCKER: For example, on December 20, the FBI got a tip that there had been a threat made against lawmakers, and specifically Senator Mitt Romney, the Utah Republican who was sort of enemy numero uno for President Trump at the time, that people were planning online to wage violence against these lawmakers. The FBI closed the case within 48 hours. They deemed it not a significant enough case to warrant further investigation or action. There was a thought within the FBI and within other law enforcement agencies that the people coming to Washington January 6 would not actually be as violent as they turned out to be. Those red flags were ignored.
JUDY WOODRUFF: This was the plan they saw to sneak guns into Washington.There was conversation online about that.
PHILIP RUCKER: There was.And even the morning of January 6, we learned through our review of police chatter at the U.S. Park Police that hundreds of demonstrators, pro-Trump supporters were gathered at the Washington Monument, at the Lincoln Memorial, and they weren't just gathered for a peaceful protest.A man was seen with a pitchfork.There were others carrying gas masks and other sort of battle gear.There were backpacks that were left unattended.All these are red flags for law enforcement.And yet they decided not to act in those hours before what we all saw happening at the Capitol.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And another disturbing finding, senior -- you mentioned law enforcement -- that senior leaders in law enforcement were taking care not to do or say anything that might aggravate the president.And this ended up in some instances of creating a bigger problem.
PHILIP RUCKER: It's exactly right.They didn't want to get on the president's bad side politically.They were wary, of course, of what had happened six months prior at Lafayette Square in the Black Lives Matter protests, where there was a sense that the military had become this political prop for President Trump.So they were very sensitive to any suggestion that a decision by law enforcement or the Pentagon could be seen as political in nature.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Hence the delay in getting the National Guard.
PHILIP RUCKER: Exactly.
JUDY WOODRUFF: To the Capitol.And you had then immediately -- or, rather, in the aftermath, you describe how unsubstantiated claims of fraud are now not only believed by so many Americans.They are being actively promulgated and promoted by some in the media.And one example of that -- and we have a clip of it -- is -- this is FOX News, today is starting to stream a new series of reports by its anchor Tucker Carlson, arguing that January 6 was actually an act of patriotism.
参考译文
朱迪·伍德拉夫:提前发出的暴力警告被忽视，毫无准备的国会警察部队，三个小时拒绝让暴民疏散的总统，在过去的九个月里，全国各地发生了数百起针对选举官员的个人威胁。 这只是《华盛顿邮报》对导致美国国会大厦暴动的武装力量进行的一项新调查（总共三部分）的部分结果。下面是参与该项目的20多名记者之一，邮报华盛顿高级记者菲利普·拉克。菲利普·拉克，欢迎回到《新闻一小时》。非常感谢你们来到这里。 正如你们所知，1月6日已经有很多报道了。已经进行了调查。为什么《华盛顿邮报》决定做额外的深入调查?
《华盛顿邮报》菲利普·拉克:有几个原因，朱迪。 谢谢你邀请我来。首先，有更多的信息需要了解。我们和政府的230多个线人谈过，也和参与1月6日之前的准备工作的其他重要官员和人物就事件本身以及后果谈过。我们查看了数千页的法庭文件和联邦调查局的其他内部记录，并发现了大量导致袭击的新细节。我认为，最重要的是，在1月6日之前的那些日子里，联邦调查局、司法部和其他机构忽视了一些危险信号。
朱迪·伍德拉夫:我们先从危险信号开始，因为报告说危险信号之前到处都是，从这个国家的一端到另一端都是精心策划的。有什么例子吗?
菲利普·拉克：例如，12月20日，联邦调查局收到线报，称有人威胁议员，特别是犹他州共和党参议员米特·罗姆尼。他当时是特朗普总统的头号敌人，人们正计划在网上对这些议员实施暴力。FBI在48小时内结案。他们认为这不是一个重要到需要进一步调查或采取行动的案件。联邦调查局和其他执法机构都有这样的想法 。1月6日来到华盛顿的人们实际上不会像他们原来那样暴力。这些危险信号被忽略了。
朱迪·伍德拉夫:这是他们看到的将枪支偷偷带入华盛顿的最新计划。网上有关于这一点的讨论。
菲利普·拉克：有过。甚至在1月6日上午，我们通过对美国国家公园警察警方聊天的审查了解到，数百名示威者和支持特朗普的支持者聚集在林肯纪念堂的华盛顿纪念碑，他们不仅仅是为了和平抗议而聚集。有人看到一个人拿着干草叉。还有其他人携带防毒面具和其他类型的战斗装备。有一些背包没有人照看。所有这些都是执法的危险信号。然而，在我们都在国会大厦看到发生的事情之前的几个小时里，他们决定不采取行动。
朱迪·伍德拉夫：还有另一个令人不安的发现，一位资深人士-你提到了执法官员-执法部门的高级领导人小心翼翼地不做或说任何可能激怒总统的事情。在某些情况下，这最终会造成更大的问题。
菲利普·拉克：完全正确。他们不想在政治上站在总统最坏的一边。当然，他们对六个月前在拉斐特广场举行的黑人生命也是命抗议活动中发生的事情持谨慎态度，当时有一种感觉是，军方没有成为特朗普总统的政治道具。因此，他们对任何暗示执法部门或五角大楼的决定不能被视为政治性质的暗示都非常敏感。
朱迪·伍德拉夫：所以国民警卫队才会被推迟。
菲利普·拉克：没错。
朱迪·伍德拉夫：去国会大厦。然后你立即-或者更确切地说，在事后，你描述了未经证实的欺诈指控现在不仅被这么多美国人相信。一些媒体正在积极发布和宣传。其中一个例子-我们已经制作了一段视频-这就是福克斯新闻，今天开始播放其主播塔克·卡尔森的一系列新报道，他们辩称1月6日实际上是一种爱国主义行为。
译文为可可英语翻译，未经授权请勿转载！
