海湖庄园的突击搜查削弱了人们对司法部和联邦调查局的信任

Good evening and thank you for joining us. I'm Trey Gowdy and it's Sunday Night in America.

晚上好，感谢您收看本期节目。我是特雷·高迪，这里是《美国周日夜晚》。

It looks like we will get to see part of the affidavit used to justify the search of former president trump's home in Florida.

看来我们将看到部分宣誓书的内容，该宣誓书被用来证明搜查前总统特朗普在佛罗里达州的住所是合理行为。

Judge Bruce Reinhart did what judges often do: would just say yes and no, yes.

布鲁斯·莱因哈特法官做了法官们经常做的事情：只会说是以及不是，是的。

The public is entitled to see portions of the affidavit because there's a significant interest in the search of a former president's home.

公众有权看到宣誓书的部分内容，因为搜查前总统住所这件事关系重大。

But no, the public won't see it all because there could be safety concerns for witnesses or it could impact ongoing investigations.

然而，不，公众不会看到一切，因为这可能会导致证人的安全出现问题，或者可能会影响正在进行的调查。

Prosecutors have until Thursday to propose redactions and then the judge will decide whether those proposed redactions are reasonable.

检察官必须在周四之前提出修改意见，然后法官将决定这些修改意见是否合理。

There are a couple of things worth thinking about between now and then even if we do get to see the affidavit.

从现在开始到那时候的这段时间内，即使我们能看到宣誓书，也有一些事情值得我们思考。

It's just one side of the argument.

这只是争论的一面之词。

It's the government’s side.

是政府的一面之词。

The target of the search doesn't get to appear in front of a judge and he doesn't get to argue against the search or the affidavit.

搜查的目标不能出现在法官面前，也不能对搜查或宣誓书提出异议。

The information has not been cross-examined and the rules of evidence which do apply in court don't apply to search warrants.

这些信息没有经过盘问，法庭上适用的证据规则不适用于搜查令。

Secondly it takes probable calls to search but it takes a whole lot more than that to convict.

其次，进行搜查可能只需要打几通电话，但若是要定罪，需要的远不止这些。

Whatever is in the affidavit may or may not wind up being true or proven.

宣誓书中无论有什么内容，最终都可能有真有假。

And it certainly isn't the whole story because only the government participates in seeking a search warrant.

这当然不是事情的全貌，因为只有政府才能参与搜查令的申请。

We don't know and we won't know until both sides present their facts and test the evidence on the other side.

在双方都拿出他们的事实作证，并验证另一方的证据之前，我们不知道，也不会知道事情的全貌。

Thirdly and perhaps most importantly, we should ask ourselves why, why do we want to read the affidavit?

第三或许也是最重要的一点，我们应该问问自己为什么，为什么我们想要看宣誓书？

How will it help us arrive at the truth?

它将如何帮助我们找到真相？

Do we want all the facts or are we content with just the facts that support what we already believe?

我们是想要所有的事实真相，还是对我们已经相信的观点有利的事实真相就好？

Credible evidence is supposed to move us to persuade us.

可信的证据应该是打动我们说服我们。

Can we still be persuaded?

可我们还能被说服吗？

Are minds still open for facts if you're an ardent supporter of the former president?

如果你是前总统的热心支持者，你还会对事实持开放态度吗？

Is there anything in this affidavit or anywhere else which could lead you to believe that he didn't follow the rules or the law?

在这份宣誓书或其他任何东西上，还有什么内容可以让你相信他没有遵守规则或法律吗？

If you don't like or support the former president, is he still entitled to a legal presumption of innocence?

如果你不喜欢或支持前总统，他还有权享有法律上的无罪推定吗？

Are you still open to the possibility that no crime has been committed?

你还愿意相信他可能并没有犯罪吗?

Does the evidence still matter or have people already made up their minds despite what others may tell you?

证据还要紧吗？还是说不管别人会说什么，人们都已经做出了判断？

Waiting and wanting to see the evidence is good. It's even better when the jury hasn't already made up its mind.

等待和想要看到证据是好事。陪审团还没有做出决定的时候这样就更好了。