An Assassination Attempt That Seems Likely to Tear America Further Apart（雙語 Bilingual） 一次似乎可能進一步撕裂美國的暗殺企圖 https://blog.creaders.net/user_blog_diary.php?did=NDkyMjIz NYTimes NEWS ANALYSIS An Assassination Attempt That Seems Likely to Tear America Further Apart
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/14/us/politics/trump-shooting-violence-divisions.html?unlocked_article_code=1.7E0.prWc.YS_3zahDsB-s&smid=url-share The attack on former President Donald J. Trump comes at a time when the United States is already polarized along ideological and cultural lines and is split, it often seems, into two realities. By Peter Baker
Peter Baker has covered the past five presidents. July 14, 2024 Abridged House Democrats impeached Mr. Trump for instigating the Capitol attack with his inflammatory language at a rally beforehand. The former president has a long history of encouraging violence. He urged supporters to beat up protesters at rallies, cheered a Republican congressman for body-slamming a reporter, called for looters and shoplifters to be shot, made light of the attack on Mr. Pelosi and promised pardons to Jan. 6 rioters. When some of his supporters chanted “Hang Mike Pence!” on Jan. 6, Mr. Trump told aides that maybe the vice president deserved it because he had defied efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Republicans turned the tables on Democrats this weekend, arguing that if Mr. Trump was responsible for provocative rhetoric, then Mr. Biden should be as well. Speaking with donors on Monday, the president said he wanted to stop talking about his poor debate performance and instead “put Trump in a bull's-eye.” He described his strategy as “attack, attack, attack.” “The central premise of the Biden campaign is that President Donald Trump is an authoritarian fascist who must be stopped at all costs,” Senator J.D. Vance, Republican of Ohio and a front-runner to be named Mr. Trump's running mate, wrote on social media two hours after the attack on Saturday. “That rhetoric directly led to President Trump's attempted assassination.” Mr. Scalise, also the victim of a political attack, agreed. “For weeks, Democrat leaders have been fueling ludicrous hysteria that Donald Trump winning re-election would be the end of democracy in America,” he said. “Clearly, we've seen far-left lunatics act on violent rhetoric in the past. This incendiary rhetoric must stop.” Representative Mike Collins, Republican of Georgia, wrote on social media that “Joe Biden sent the orders” and urged the local prosecutor to “immediately file charges against Joseph R. Biden for inciting an assassination.” But not all hands are clean. Mr. Collins once ran a campaign ad in which he fired a rifle at Ms. Pelosi's agenda and shot a cardboard cutout of so-called RINO Republicans. Some Republican leaders took a more measured approach. Speaker Mike Johnson, speaking on “Today” on NBC, said on Sunday that Mr. Trump had “been so vilified and really persecuted by media, Hollywood elites, political figures, even the legal system” and cited Mr. Biden's “bull's-eye” comment. “I know he didn't mean what is being implied there, but that kind of language on either side should be called out,” Mr. Johnson said. But he emphasized that “both sides” have “got to turn the temperature down in this country.” Mr. Biden did not directly respond to criticism of his language during two televised appearances since the shooting, but he flatly condemned the attack and called Mr. Trump to express relief that he was not more seriously hurt. The danger is if political violence becomes normalized, just another form of the endless partisan wars. A study published in May found that 11 percent of Americans said violence was sometimes or always justified to return Mr. Trump to the presidency, and 21 percent said it was justified to advance an important political objective. But Garen J. Wintemute, the director of the Violence Prevention Program at the University of California, Davis, and the lead author of the study, said it was important to remember that most Americans still rejected political violence. “It's the job of that majority to make their views known, over and over again, and as publicly as possible,” Dr. Wintemute said. “A climate of intolerance for violence reduces the chance that violence will occur. The question before us as a nation is, ‘Will violence become part of American politics?' Each of us as an individual needs to answer that question, ‘Not if I can help it.'” Peter Baker is the chief White House correspondent for The Times. My comment: Only two kinds of violence are justified in politics: violence for either liberation or revolution. All other ones are wrong and out of justifications. [Mark Wain 07/14/2-24]
漢譯文本
《紐約時報》新聞分析 一次似乎可能進一步撕裂美國的暗殺企圖
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/14/us/politics/trump-shooting-violence-divisions.html?unlocked_article_code=1.7E0.prWc.YS_3zahDsB-s&smid=url-share 對前總統唐納德·J·特朗普的襲擊發生在當前正是美國已經在意識形態和文化方面兩極分化並且經常被分裂成兩個實體的時候。 https://blog.creaders.net/user_blog_diary.php?did=NDkyMjIz 作者：彼得·貝克
彼得·貝克報道過過去五位總統。 2024 年 7 月 14 日 節選 眾議院民主黨人彈劾特朗普先生，因為他在之前的集會上用煽動性語言煽動了國會大廈襲擊。這位前總統長期以來一直鼓勵暴力。他敦促支持者在集會上毆打抗議者，為一名共和黨議員毆打記者的行為歡呼，呼籲槍殺搶劫者和商店扒竊者，對佩洛西遭到的襲擊不以為然，並承諾赦免 1 月 6 日的暴徒。1 月 6 日，當他的一些支持者高呼“絞死邁克·彭斯！”時，特朗普告訴助手，也許副總統應該受到懲罰，因為他無視推翻 2020 年大選的努力。 本周末，共和黨人反擊民主黨，稱如果特朗普要為挑釁性言論負責，那麼拜登也應該負責。周一，總統在與捐助者交談時表示，他希望停止談論自己糟糕的辯論表現，而是“把特朗普放在靶心上”。他將自己的策略描述為“攻擊、攻擊、攻擊”。 “拜登競選的核心前提是，唐納德·特朗普總統是一個獨裁的法西斯主義者，必須不惜一切代價阻止他，”俄亥俄州共和黨參議員、特朗普競選搭檔的領跑者 J.D. 萬斯在周六襲擊發生兩小時後在社交媒體上寫道。“這種言論直接導致了特朗普總統的暗殺企圖。” 同樣遭受政治攻擊的斯卡利斯先生對此表示同意。“數周以來，民主黨領導人一直在煽動荒謬的歇斯底里，認為唐納德·特朗普贏得連任將是美國民主的終結，”他說。“顯然，我們過去曾看到極左瘋子用暴力言論採取行動。這種煽動性言論必須停止。” 佐治亞州共和黨眾議員邁克·柯林斯在社交媒體上寫道，“喬·拜登下達了命令”，並敦促當地檢察官“立即對約瑟夫·R·拜登提起煽動暗殺的指控”。但並非所有人都清白。柯林斯先生曾經在競選廣告中向佩洛西女士的議程開槍，並射殺了所謂的共和黨人的紙板剪影。 一些共和黨領導人採取了更為慎重的態度。眾議院議長邁克·約翰遜在 NBC 的“今日”節目中表示，特朗普先生“受到了媒體、好萊塢精英、政治人物甚至司法系統的嚴重誹謗和迫害”，並引用了拜登先生的“靶心”評論。 “我知道他不是故意的，但雙方的這種語言都應該被譴責，”約翰遜先生說。但他強調，“雙方”都必須“降低這個國家的緊張局勢”。 自槍擊事件發生以來，拜登在兩次電視露面中都沒有直接回應對其言語的批評，但他斷然譴責了這次襲擊，並致電特朗普表示對特朗普自己沒有受到更嚴重的傷害感到寬慰。 危險在於，如果政治暴力成為常態，那只是無休止的黨派戰爭的另一種形式。5 月份發表的一項研究發現，11% 的美國人表示，為了讓特朗普重返總統寶座，暴力有時或總是合理的，21% 的人表示，為了推進一項重要的政治目標，暴力是合理的。 但加州大學戴維斯分校暴力預防項目主任、這項研究的主要作者 Garen J. Wintemute 表示，重要的是要記住，大多數美國人仍然拒絕政治暴力。 “大多數人的工作就是一遍又一遍地、儘可能公開地表達他們的觀點，”溫特穆特博士說。“對暴力不容忍的氣氛減少了暴力發生的可能性。我們作為一個國家面臨的問題是，‘暴力會成為美國政治的一部分嗎？’我們每個人作為個體都需要回答這個問題，‘如果我能幫助它，就不會。’” 彼得·貝克是《紐約時報》首席白宮記者。
我的評論：
在政治上，只有兩種暴力是正當的：為解放或革命而施行的暴力。所有其他暴力都是錯誤的，沒有正當理由的。[馬克·韋恩 07/14/2-24]
| 
