(单词翻译:单击)
听力文本
Hari Sreenivasan: Joining us now for more on the impeachment that's coming in the 2020 campaign is special correspondent Jeff Greenfield, who is in Santa Barbara. So here we are, finally. Nancy Pelosi took some time. She said that she wouldn't do this until she was ready. She says now she's ready to hand it over to the Senate. What do we know? What do we not know about what changed her mind?
Jeff Greenfield: Well, we know what changed her mind is a certain amount of pressure and the threat that the Senate might just scrap the whole idea. But it's what we don't know that I think is the dominant issue. We do not know really what the impeachment will look like. We do not know whether or not witnesses will be called, whether or not if McConnell says no witnesses, there will be four Republican senators to defect and insist that witnesses come and that documents be provided. We do not know if the Senate votes that whether the White House will invoke executive privilege on some key potential witnesses, like former National Security Adviser Bolton or Chief of Staff Mulvaney. We do not know what would happen if the senators try to override a ruling by the chief justice who presides over the center on issues like admitting witnesses. So there's a range of things we don't know about how this impeachment will play out.
Hari Sreenivasan: What is the White House, I guess and its allies, do with the possibility of any of these senators who defect from the party line?
Jeff Greenfield: First thing they do is what we've already seen this week. There's enormous pressure on Republicans in the House and Senate to to stay with the president on everything. When Senator Mike Lee of Utah, very conservative, objected to the kind of briefings that they were getting after the strike in Iraq, Lou Dobbs, one of the president's champions, called the senator a 'Benedict Arnold.' So that's the first thing. Put enormous political pressure, whether you can put political pressure on senators like Susan Collins and Cory Gardner, who are up for reelection in swing states, that's an interesting question. And the second thing, as I mentioned, was they can try to invoke executive privilege and tell people like John Bolton and Mulvaney, you can't testify. And we don't know whether Bolton in particular would defy the White House. It's gonna be an interesting couple of weeks.
Hari Sreenivasan: Yeah. So here we are finally. The couple of weeks are now in January of 2020. We've got Iowa and New Hampshire just around the corner. And it seems that wherever I look, there's new polling data. Oh, this person's up by two. This person is up by six. Is this worth paying attention to?
Jeff Greenfield: You know, I've often said that polling is the crack cocaine of political journalists. I mean, you look at the headlines, you know. "Sanders surging!" And then you look and you realize the first four candidates in Iowa are separated by five points, with only 40 percent of Iowans saying they've made up their mind. And I haven't even mentioned the fact that two billionaires out there, Steyer and Bloomberg, are spending like crazy. Steyer's picked up some support in South Carolina and Nevada. Bloomberg is spending two hundred million dollars, most of it in states that don't have primaries for a month or more. So it's a completely un-analyzable situation if you're trying to figure out, where do we go from here?
Hari Sreenivasan: If there are people like Mr. Bloomberg contesting something further down the line, what does this do to how important those early states were or are?
Jeff Greenfield: It has the potential to completely undermine the enormous over-coverage of those early states. And I'm sure for some of those politicians in those states, they're worried about breaking their rice bowl, as they say in China. They're worried that if Bloomberg, and I guess Steyer, demonstrates that you can skip those early states and with an infusion of huge amounts of money change the dynamic of the whole campaign, I think in future years, those states may lose some of their clout.
Hari Sreenivasan: All right. Jeff Greenfield joining us from Santa Barbara, thanks so much.
Jeff Greenfield: OK.
重点解析
1.worried about 担心
If you are worried about some aspect of your child's health, call us
如果你担心孩子某方面的健康问题，请给我们打电话。
2.preside over 主持
I had been asked to preside over or at the meeting.
我被邀请主持这个会议。
3.hand over 移交
They would just catch the robbers and hand them over to the police
他们会抓住抢劫犯，并把他们交给警方。
4.object to 反对
I do object to their claim, which I find totally unsubstantiated.
我强烈反对他们的说法，那是毫无根据的。
5.play out 展开
The film has eerie parallels with the drama being played out in real life.
这部电影和现实生活中发生的一系列戏剧性事件有着诡异的巧合之处。
参考译文
哈里·斯里尼瓦桑：特派记者杰夫·格林菲尔德发回的有关2020年弹劾展望的更多报道。杰夫现在正在圣巴巴拉市。好，我们开始步入正题。南希·佩洛西还是花了些功夫的。她说她要等准备好之后再开始干。她说现在她已经准备好将材料递交给参议院了。我们知道什么呢？是不是有什么我们不了解的事情促使她改变了想法呢？
杰夫·格林菲尔德：咋说呢，我们了解到，让她改变主意的是巨大的压力和威胁，因为参议院威胁说可能会一笔勾销。但我觉得我们不知道的事情才是主导因素。我们不太清楚弹劾会是什么样子。我们不知道是否会叫证人出席，如果麦康奈尔说不需要证人的话，还会不会有证人出席。会有4个共和党参议员叛变说证人会来，也会提供一些文件。我们不知道参议院的投票结果是不是白宫可以行使一些关键潜在证人的行政特权，比如前国家安全顾问博尔顿或者幕僚长马尔瓦尼。我们不知道如果参议员们试图凌驾于司法部长的判决之上，那会发生什么。毕竟司法部长要主持认可证人等问题。有一系列事情是我们不知道在弹劾过程中会如何上演的。
哈里·斯里尼瓦桑：在面对参议员们可能变节的情况下，白宫及其盟友会怎样做呢？
杰夫·格林菲尔德：他们做的第一件事儿就是我们本周已经了解到的那样。众议院和参议院的共和党们受到了巨大的压力，因为要跟特朗普总统站在一边。犹他州的参议员麦克·李是个保守派，他反对伊拉克袭击后的那种简报，而特朗普总统的一个拥护者多布斯称这名参议员是“贝内迪克特·阿诺德”。所以，这是他们做的第一件事。施加大量的政治压力，你可以将政治压力施加在参议员身上，比如苏珊·科林斯、科里·加德纳。他们准备在摇摆州重新竞选，这是一个有趣的问题。第二件事，就像我提过的那样：可以试图行使行政特权，告诉约翰·博尔顿和马尔瓦尼你不能作证。我们不知道博尔顿会不会蔑视白宫权威。这几周会很有意思。
哈里·斯里尼瓦桑：那么现在已经到了这个节骨眼了，2020年1月也已经过了几周了。爱荷华州和新罕布什尔都要开始投票了。似乎无论看向哪里，都有新的票选数据。哇哦，这个人的票涨了2点，那个人涨了6点。这个值得关注吗？
杰夫·格林菲尔德：大家都说票选是政治类记者的可卡因。毕竟每到这时候，头条都是“桑德斯崛起了！”这种。你观察数据的时候会意识到爱荷华州的4名候选人差了5点，而只有40%的爱荷华民众表示已经下定决心了。我甚至还没有提有2个亿万富翁也参选了——斯太尔和彭博，他们都砸了不少钱。斯太尔在南卡州和内华达获得了一些支持。彭博斥资2亿美元，其中大多数钱都花在了至少一个月没有举行初选的几个州。所以，现在的形式完全没法分析，如果要弄明白的话，要从哪里着手呢？
哈里·斯里尼瓦桑：如果有彭博这样的人一路打下去，会对早期几个州的重要性产生何种影响呢？
杰夫·格林菲尔德：有可能会彻底破坏对这几个早期州的大幅报道。我肯定这些州的某些政客会担心丢掉饭碗，在中国人们会这么说。他们担心如果彭博和斯太尔说可以跳过这些早期州的话，那么太多的斥资会改变整个竞选运动的局势。我想在未来数年中，这些州可能失去部分势力。
哈里·斯里尼瓦桑：好的。感谢杰夫·格林菲尔德从圣芭芭拉发回的报道。
杰夫·格林菲尔德：客气啦。
译文为可可英语翻译，未经授权请勿转载！
