Repeatedly, the former Florida AG and attorney for Donald Trump was pressed by Democrats on one of the basic pillars of the historic role of the rule of law in our country, DOJ's independence from all politics and everybody else in the executive branch, including a president.

這位前佛羅里達州總檢察長和唐納德-特朗普（Donald Trump）的律師一再被民主黨人逼問我國法治歷史作用的基本支柱之一，即司法部獨立於包括總統在內的所有政治和行政部門中的所有人。

It's the thing that makes the position of attorney general completely different from every other cabinet post.

這也是總檢察長一職與其他內閣職位完全不同的地方。

Pam Bondi gave the country an indication of exactly what kind of attorney general she will be if she is confirmed very early on when she was confronted with the basic question, the answer to which is indisputable to any one of us living on Earth One.

帕姆-邦迪（Pam Bondi）很早就向全國表明，如果她被任命為總檢察長，她究竟會成為什麼樣的總檢察長，當時她面對的是一個基本問題，這個問題的答案對於我們任何一個生活在地球一號上的人來說都是無可爭議的。

That is who won in 2020.

這就是 2020 年的贏家。

Are you prepared to say today under oath without reservation that Donald Trump lost the presidential contest to Joe Biden in 2020?

你今天是否準備在宣誓後毫無保留地說，唐納德-特朗普在 2020 年的總統競選中輸給了喬-拜登？

Ranking member Durbin, President Biden is the president of the United States.

排名第一的杜賓，拜登總統是美國總統。

He was duly sworn in and he is the president of the United States.

他正式宣誓就職，成為美國總統。

There was a peaceful transition of power.

權力實現了和平過渡。

President Trump left office and was overwhelmingly elected in 2024.

特朗普總統卸任後，在 2024 年以壓倒性優勢當選。

Not true, but not a surprise for for Pam Bondi, who in the days after Trump lost the 2020 election by eight million votes, had this to say.

帕姆-邦迪（Pam Bondi）在特朗普以 800 萬張選票之差輸掉 2020 年大選後的幾天裡曾這樣說過。

We do have evidence of cheating, and I'll talk about that in a minute, but we are still on the ground in Pennsylvania.

我們確實有作弊的證據，我稍後再談，但我們仍在賓夕法尼亞州實地調查。

I'm here right now and we are not going anywhere until they declare that we won Pennsylvania.

我現在就在這裡，在他們宣佈我們贏得賓夕法尼亞州之前，我們哪兒也不去。

Pam, did you just say fake ballots?

帕姆，你剛才說的是假選票嗎？

There could be.

可能有。

That's the problem.

這就是問題所在。

If they're letting you know, Steve, do you have have you heard stories of ballots that are fake?

如果他們讓你知道，史蒂夫，你有沒有聽說過選票是假的？

And if so, just tell us what you know.

如果是，請告訴我們你知道什麼。

Well, we know that ballots have been dumped.

我們知道選票已經被丟棄。

There were ballots that were found early on.

有些選票很早就被發現了。

None of that is true.

這些都不是真的。

All of it is false.

所有這些都是假的。

No ballots were dumped.

沒有丟棄選票。

There was no evidence of cheating.

沒有作弊的證據。

And if you don't want to believe me, don't just ask the last Trump appointed and Senate confirmed Attorney General Bill Barr, who said this to congressional investigators.

如果你不願意相信我，不妨問問上一任由特朗普任命並經參議院確認的司法部長比爾-巴爾（Bill Barr），他曾對國會調查人員說過這樣的話。

I told him that the stuff that his people were shuttling out to the public or book was I mean, that the claims of fraud were.

我告訴他，他的人向公眾傳播的東西或書，我的意思是，欺詐的說法是。

We all know what happens in the beep, right?

我們都知道 "嗶 "的一聲會發生什麼，對吧？

What Bill Barr did there tell the truth, Pam Bondi, notably today, didn't do.

比爾-巴爾在那裡所做的是說出真相，而帕姆-邦迪，尤其是今天，並沒有這樣做。

And that, of course, is the point, the whole point.

當然，這才是重點，也是全部重點。

That's why she was there.

這就是她在那裡的原因。

That's why she sat in the chair.

這就是她坐在椅子上的原因。

That's why she was a suitable second choice after Matt Gaetz flamed out.

這就是為什麼在馬特-蓋茨（Matt Gaetz）失勢後，她是合適的第二人選。

Here's what happened, though.

事情是這樣的

When Bondi was asked whether she would drop a case if Trump asked her to, Bondi said this.

當邦迪被問及如果特朗普要求她撤訴，她是否會撤訴時，邦迪這樣說道。

What would you do if your career DOJ prosecutors came to you with a case to prosecute, grounded in the facts and law, but the White House directs you to drop the case?

如果司法部的職業檢察官根據事實和法律向你提出起訴，但白宮卻訓示你放棄此案，你會怎麼做？

Senator, if I thought that would happen, I would not be sitting here today.

參議員，如果我認為會發生這種情況，我今天就不會坐在這裡了。

That will not happen, will not happen.

這不會發生，不會發生。

Except for when it does, because it already did.

除非它真的發生了，因為它已經發生了。

Here's former FBI Director Jim Comey back in 2017.

這是聯邦調查局前局長吉姆-科米在 2017 年的照片。

And so that's why I understood him to be saying that what he wanted me to do was drop any investigation connected to Flynn's account of his conversations with the Russians.

所以我理解他的意思是 他想讓我做的是 放棄任何與弗林與俄羅斯人談話有關的調查

Quote, see to it to let Flynn go.

報價，看它讓弗林去。

That's what Trump said.

特朗普就是這麼說的。

Bondi today was also asked about her past comments on pursuing investigations into Donald Trump's political enemies.

邦迪今天還被問及她過去關於對唐納德-特朗普的政敵展開調查的言論。

Here's a particularly testy exchange with Senator Adam Schiff.

以下是與參議員亞當-希夫（Adam Schiff）的一段特別激烈的交流。

Sitting here today, sitting here today, are you aware of any factual predicate to investigate Jack Smith?

今天坐在這裡 你是否知道調查傑克-史密斯的任何事實依據？

Sitting here today?

今天坐在這裡？

Yes or no?

是還是不是？

Senator, I will look at the facts and the circumstances.

參議員，我會研究事實和情況。

You can't answer that question.

你無法回答這個問題。

You're not a part of the department yet.

你還不是部門的一員。

There's no worry about divulging law enforcement sensitive information.

不用擔心洩露執法部門的敏感資訊。

So just tell us.

那就告訴我們吧。

Are you aware?

你知道嗎？

Senator, just tell us.

參議員，請告訴我們。

Are you aware of a factual predicate to investigate Jack Smith?

你是否知道調查傑克-史密斯的事實前提？

Yes or no?

是還是不是？

Senator, what I'm hearing on the news.

參議員，我從新聞上聽到了什麼？

Are you aware of a.

您是否知道

Do I know?

我知道嗎？

You seem reluctant.

你似乎不太情願。

I have not.

我沒有。

You seem reluctant to answer a simple question.

你似乎不願回答一個簡單的問題。

Let me ask you a different simple question.

讓我再問你一個簡單的問題。

The president also wants to jail Liz Cheney sitting here today.

總統還想把今天坐在這裡的利茲-切尼關進監獄。

Are you aware of any factual basis to investigate Liz Cheney?

你是否知道調查利茲-切尼的任何事實依據？

Yes or no?

是還是不是？

Senator, that's a hypothetical.

參議員，這只是個假設。

And I'm not going to answer.

我不會回答。

No, it's not.

不，不是這樣的。

It's a hypothetical.

這是一個假設。

I'm asking you sitting here today whether you are aware of a factual predicate to investigate Liz Cheney.

我今天坐在這裡問你 你是否知道調查利茲・切尼的事實依據

Senator, no one has asked me to investigate Liz Cheney.

參議員，沒有人要求我調查利茲-切尼。

That is a hypothetical.

這是一個假設。

The president has called for it publicly.

總統已公開呼籲這樣做。

You are aware of that, aren't you?

你知道這一點吧？

No one has asked me to investigate.

沒有人讓我調查。

But the president has.

但總統已經做到了。

We're also worried about Liz Cheney, Senator.

我們也很擔心利茲-切尼，參議員。

The president has called for this.

總統呼籲這樣做。

You know what we should be worried about?

你知道我們應該擔心什麼嗎？

Ms. Bondi, please answer my questions.

邦迪女士，請回答我的問題。

The crime rate in California right now is the root of the roof.

加州目前的犯罪率是屋頂的根源。

You are aware.

你是知道的。

Ms. Bondi.

邦迪女士

Your robberies are 87 percent higher than the national average.

你們的搶劫案比全國平均水平高出 87%。

My question is this.

我的問題是

That's what I want to be focused on, Senator.

參議員，這正是我想關注的。

So wearing her nominee hat, those were her answers.

戴上提名人的帽子，這就是她的答案。

But here she is wearing just her, I don't know, Tuesday on Fox News hat.

但在這裡，她只戴著她的，我不知道，週二福克斯新聞的帽子。

She was a lot more definitive answering those questions.

在回答這些問題時，她的回答要明確得多。

You know what's going to happen?

你知道會發生什麼嗎？

The Department of Justice, the prosecutors will be prosecuted.

司法部、檢察官將被起訴。

Because the deep state, last term for President Trump, they were hiding in the shadows.

因為深層國家，上一任特朗普總統，他們都躲在暗處。

But now they have a spotlight on them and they can all be investigated.

但現在，他們被聚光燈照著，都可以接受調查。

Joining our conversation, former acting assistant attorney general for national security at the Department of Justice.

加入我們對話的是司法部負責國家安全事務的前代理助理檢察長。

Now lucky for us, an MSNBC legal analyst, Mary McCord is here.

現在我們有幸請到了MSNBC的法律分析師瑪麗-麥考德（Mary McCord）。

She's the co-host of the podcast, Maine Justice, along with Andrew Weissman, a former top official at the Department of Justice and also an MSNBC legal analyst.

她與安德魯-魏斯曼（Andrew Weissman）共同主持播客 "緬因州的正義"（Maine Justice），安德魯-魏斯曼是司法部前高級官員，同時也是 MSNBC 的法律分析師。

Also joining us, voting rights attorney, founder of the site Democracy Docket, Mark Elias, is back.

同時加入我們的還有投票權律師、Democracy Docket網站創始人馬克-埃利亞斯（Mark Elias）。

Andrew Weissman, I start with you.

安德魯-魏斯曼，我從你開始。

It's so interesting.

太有趣了

Hagseth was yesterday and Bondi was today.

哈格斯是昨天，邦迪是今天。

And because the adaptive brain goes to relative comparisons, there was a lot of analysis about her qualifications.

由於適應性大腦會進行相對比較，是以對她的資歷進行了大量分析。

And that's fine.

這很好。

She went to law school.

她上過法學院。

That's clear to me, too.

我也很清楚這一點。

But the Department of Justice is predicated on a politically unintentioned administration of the rule of law.

但是，司法部的前提是在政治上不遺餘力地推行法治。

And she couldn't, she couldn't make it clear that that's what she would do in the post.

而她不能，她不能明確表示這就是她在職位上要做的。

Look, she's helped by the fact that you have Hagseth the day before and that everyone knows that Matt Gaetz was the first choice.

聽著，前一天有哈格塞斯，大家都知道馬特-蓋茨是首選，這對她很有幫助。

So, you know, compared to that, you know, she's doing great.

所以，相比之下，她做得很好。

But I'm just, let's just focus for a moment on the two things that you just played that struck my ear that tells you why there are red flags here.

但我想，讓我們先把注意力集中在你剛才播放的兩段話上，這兩段話讓我印象深刻，告訴你為什麼這裡會有危險信號。

One, in her answer about, you know, who won the presidency and whether there was outcome determinative fraud, she threw in there not just that Donald Trump had a massive current to win, which overplays what happened, which is concerning, but also said there was a peaceful transfer of power.

其一，在回答誰贏得了總統大選以及是否存在結果決定性的舞弊行為時，她不僅說唐納德-特朗普（Donald Trump）有巨大的獲勝潛力，這誇大了所發生的事情，令人擔憂，而且還說權力是和平轉移的。

We all saw with our own eyes that that is not true.

我們都親眼看到，事實並非如此。

So that is very concerning because it's just, it's a spin that it's completely counter to a DOJ indictment and charge and something we all saw.

是以，這是非常令人擔憂的，因為它只是一個自旋，它完全違背了司法部的起訴和指控，以及我們都看到的東西。

And the second is in response to Senator Schiff, when she throws in what we should be talking about is the crime rate in your state.

其次是迴應希夫參議員，她拋出了我們應該討論的是貴州的犯罪率。

That is such a political answer.

這真是一個政治答案。

If this was a political debate, if you were advising politicians, maybe that's an okay answer, right?

如果這是一場政治辯論，如果你是在為政客們出謀劃策，也許這是個不錯的答案，對嗎？

To sort of, you know, it's a good, you know, good defense is good offense.

你知道，這是一個很好的排序，你知道，好的防守就是好的進攻。

That's not the right response for somebody who's supposed to be at the role of the attorney general of the United States is to be dispassionate, is to be apolitical.

作為美國司法部長，他應該是冷靜的，是不帶政治色彩的。

And as she, she agreed with that, that it should be just based on the facts and the law.

她也同意這一點，認為應該以事實和法律為依據。

But those statements belie that.

但這些說法是不實的。

And it gives you, you know, a sense of that she is still, you know, whatever she's trying to portray, she still has in her all of the realness of the Fox News clips that you were playing.

你知道，這讓你感覺到，無論她想塑造什麼形象，她身上依然有你播放的福克斯新聞片段的真實感。

What's amazing to me, Mary, is there's no political analysis that suggests that she's at risk of not being confirmed, but she'll only be successful, including in Trump's eyes, if she's able to do what she was attacking Adam Schiff for, if she's able to use the department effectively to bring cases against federal crimes and federal criminals.

瑪麗，讓我感到驚訝的是，沒有任何政治分析表明她有可能不被確認，但她只有做到她所攻擊的亞當-希夫（Adam Schiff）所做的事，如果她能有效地利用該部門，對聯邦犯罪和聯邦罪犯提起訴訟，她才會成功，包括在特朗普眼中。

And she'll only be able to do that, you know, you can't do that by yourself, she'll only be able to do that if she's able to lead the vast majority of that workforce.

她要做到這一點，你知道，你一個人是做不到的，只有她能夠上司絕大多數員工，她才能做到這一點。

Why have answers so detached from reality, answers that you, I mean, federal judges are the ones who disagree with what Pam Bondi was saying in her confirmation hearing today.

為什麼答案如此脫離現實，你的答案，我的意思是，聯邦法官是不同意帕姆-邦迪今天在確認聽證會上所說的話。

So it's so interesting, and I wasn't able, of course, to watch the entire hearing in real time, but based on all the reporting I've seen, including your clips, it almost seems like we saw two Pam Bondis today, right?

這太有意思了，當然，我沒能實時觀看整個聽證會，但根據我看到的所有報道，包括你的剪輯，我們今天似乎看到了兩個帕姆-邦迪，對嗎？

We saw the Pam Bondi who was trying to say that she believed in the independence of the Department of Justice, that she would take very seriously her obligations when it came to investigations and prosecutions and doing those things with the dispassion that Andrew just mentioned.

我們看到帕姆-邦迪（Pam Bondi）試圖說她相信司法部的獨立性，她會非常認真地履行她在調查和起訴方面的義務，並以安德魯（Andrew）剛剛提到的冷靜態度來做這些事情。

Yet on the other hand, every time there was an opportunity to kind of be a cheerleader for Donald Trump, she did so.

但另一方面，每當有機會為唐納德-特朗普打氣時，她都會這麼做。

And I think that, you know, probably that's because she was playing to a couple of different audiences today.

我想，你知道，這可能是因為她今天是在為不同的觀眾表演。

One was Donald Trump himself, and the other were the members of the Senate that have to vote on her.

一個是唐納德-特朗普本人，另一個是必須對她進行投票的參議院議員。

And so that's why I think she was resistant to questions about fraud in the election.

是以，我認為她對有關選舉舞弊的問題很牴觸。

That's why I think she was resistant to the questions that Adam Schiff posed to her.

這就是為什麼我認為她對亞當-希夫向她提出的問題有牴觸情緒。

I will say, though, one of the things that I thought Senator Schiff did that was really important at the end of the hearing, or I guess the second round, was when he posited to her, look, we're asking you these questions because we want to know if you can put your loyalty to the president, you know, aside when you're making decisions, particularly investigative and prosecutorial decisions.

不過，我要說的是，我認為希夫參議員在聽證會結束時，或者我猜是第二輪聽證會結束時所做的一件事非常重要，那就是他向她提出，聽著，我們問你這些問題是因為我們想知道，當你做出決定，特別是調查和起訴決定時，你是否能把對總統的忠誠放在一邊。

Now, as we all know, when it comes to policy, that's one thing.

眾所周知，政策是一回事。

Executing the president's policy priorities are very different than individual prosecutions and investigations.

執行總統的優先政策與個人起訴和調查截然不同。

And what he said to her was, there will come a day, because that day comes for everyone, where your loyalty to the president may diverge from your duty to the country as the attorney general.

他對她說的是 總有一天 你對總統的忠誠會與你作為總檢察長對國家的責任相背離 每個人都會有這麼一天

And the question is, what will you do?

問題是，你會怎麼做？

Because that's what you will be remembered for.

因為這就是你將被銘記的原因。

And I think that's really one of the key things here.

我認為這才是關鍵所在。

And you know, I don't know what her response is.

你知道，我不知道她的反應是什麼。