边境沙皇与五万美元的袋子

这是你需要解读的头条新闻。

It's your headline to unpack.

这是你每周都要跟进的故事。

It's your one story to follow week by week.

这是你要破解的Wordle谜题。

It's your Wordle to work through.

这是你要追踪的团队。

It's your team to track.

这是你要探索的36小时。

It's your thirty six hours to explore.

这是你要掌握的腌制技巧。

It's your marinade to master.

这是你要理清的观点。

It's your opinion to figure out.

是时候升级你的床垫了。

It's your mattress to upgrade.

今天是你了解圣母大学还需要什么的时刻。

It's your day to know what else you need to Notre Dame.

《纽约时报》。这是你理解世界的窗口。了解更多请访问nytimes.com/yourworld。

The New York Times. It's your world to understand. Find out more at nytimes.com/yourworld.

这里是《纽约时报》，我是娜塔莉·基特罗耶夫。这里是《每日播报》。

From The New York Times, I'm Natalie Kitroev. This is The Daily.

白宫边境事务主管汤姆·霍曼在2024年9月被FBI监控录像拍到收受5万美元现金。他是私吞了这笔钱还是退还了？

The White House border czar Tom Homan was recorded on an FBI surveillance tape in September 2024 accepting $50,000 in cash. Did he keep that money or give it back?

过去几周，特朗普政府官员不断被问及FBI对边境事务主管汤姆·霍曼的卧底调查。

For the past few weeks, Trump officials have been asked repeatedly about an undercover FBI investigation of border czar Tom Homan.

FBI交给霍曼先生的5万美元现金后来怎么样了？

What became of the $50,000 in cash that the FBI delivered to mister Homan?

而且他们一直回避。

And consistently, they've sidestepped.

他接受了那5万美元还是没有？

Did he accept that $50,000 or not?

乔治，我不知道你在说什么。他为什么接受了5万美元？

George, I don't know what you're talking about. Did he accept $50,000 for what?

或者拒绝回答关键问题

Or refused to answer key questions

FBI拿回来了吗？

Did the FBI get it back?

白宫参议员，欢迎您与FBI沟通。

Senator White house, you're welcome to talk to the FBI.

关于特朗普的一位高级移民官员是否公然违法以及对此采取了什么措施。

About whether one of Trump's top immigration officials brazenly broke the law and what's being done about it.

白宫和总统百分之百支持汤姆·霍曼，因为他绝对没有做错任何事，而且他是一个

The White House and the president stand by Tom Homan 100% because he did absolutely nothing wrong and he is a

今天，我的同事德夫林·巴雷特将讲述这些问题背后的故事，以及为什么汤姆·霍曼丑闻仍未平息。今天是10月15日，星期三。德夫林，我过去几周一直在关注围绕汤姆·霍曼的这些指控的报道。在关注过程中，我不断回想起六月份在节目中采访霍曼的经历。那次采访中让我印象深刻的是，霍曼在阐述他对法律的看法以及违法者应受惩罚的观点时表现得多么坚决。

Today, my colleague Devlin Barrett on the story behind those questions and why the Tom Homan scandal hasn't faded away. It's Wednesday, October 15. Devlin, I've been watching this story of these allegations surrounding Tom Homan unfold over the past several weeks. And as I've watched, I keep thinking about this interview I did with Homan on the show in June. One thing that really stuck with me from that interview was just how uncompromising Homan was in the way he presented his view of the law and what should happen to people who break it, that they should be punished.

我想给你播放一段录音，听听他是如何展现自己和这项使命的。

And I wanna just play you a little bit of tape about how he represented himself and that mission.

我们生活在这个法治国家，对吧？我们有可执行的法律。非法入境是犯罪。我们不会选择性地执法。

We're in this form of laws. Right? We got enforceable laws. Entering this country league is a crime. We don't pick and choose what we enforce.

我们的职责就是执行法律。

We're here to enforce the law.

最近，我们得到了一些关于霍曼的新信息。告诉我们你最初是什么时候得知这个故事的。

And then recently, we got some new information about Holman. Tell us when you first learned about this story.

我负责报道司法部和联邦调查局。几个月前，我开始听到一些传言，说有针对汤姆·霍曼的某种贿赂调查。但我当时不太清楚具体是关于什么，或者调查进展如何。有一段时间，这就像一个我解不开的谜题。

So I cover the justice department and FBI. And months ago, I had started hearing rumblings that there had been some kind of bribery investigation related to Tom Homan. But I couldn't quite figure out what it was about or where it was. And for a while, I I it just was a puzzle I couldn't solve.

你当时还负责报道很多其他新闻。

You had a lot of other stories you were covering.

司法部和联邦调查局大多数日子都非常忙碌。然后在九月的某个时候，我得到了更多信息，有人知道这些问题的部分答案，并说道：'哦，你是说那袋现金的案子？'

It's pretty busy at the DOJ and the FBI most days. Then sometime in September, I got a little more information where someone knew some of the answers to these questions and said, you know, oh, you mean the case with a bag of cash?

哇哦，一袋现金。这可是个相当重磅的线索。

Woah. Bag of cash. It's a that's a pretty big tip.

没错。你知道，这可不是人们通常认为的常规商业操作。对吧？这几乎就是人们想象中腐败案件的典型模式。是的。

Well, right. That's not, you know, what you think of as like, let's call it regular business practice. Right? It's almost the stereotypical way that people think of corruption cases. Yeah.

所以从那时起，我开始拼凑更多线索，弄清更多事情。我不是唯一追踪此事的记者。MSNBC也查明了真相。最终我了解到的是，从2023年2月真正开始，一直持续到今年，有一项非常引人入胜的调查，后来涉及到了汤姆·霍曼。据消息人士向我描述，回溯到2023年，德克萨斯州的联邦调查局正在针对某位特定商人进行卧底调查。

So from that point, I started putting more pieces together and figuring more things out. I wasn't the only reporter chasing this. MSNBC also figured it out. And so what I eventually came to understand was that there had been, beginning really in 02/2023, but stretching all the way into this year, a really fascinating investigation that came to include Tom Homan. As it's been described to me by sources, if you go back to the 2023, the FBI in Texas was conducting an undercover investigation related to a particular businessman.

而我的消息来源坚称，这项调查最初完全与汤姆·霍曼无关。但在调查过程中，那名商人告诉卧底探员——这些探员假扮成寻求政府合同的企业主——如果他们愿意支付汤姆·霍曼一百万美元，他就能为他们争取到政府合同。

And the investigation, my sources were adamant, was not looking at Tom Homan at all. But in the course of that investigation, that businessman told the undercover agents that if those agents who are posing as businessmen looking for government contracts, if they were willing to pay Tom Homan a million dollars, he could steer government contracts to them.

所以这些探员最初并没有追查与汤姆·霍曼相关的任何线索。当时他们并没有关注他。

So these agents weren't initially fishing for anything related to Tom Homan. They weren't looking at him at that time.

我的消息来源坚称，没有人询问过汤姆·霍曼。这是未经提示主动提出的，汤姆·霍曼就像是突然出现在画面中，闯入FBI特工已经在进行的调查框架里。

My sources are adamant that no one had asked about Tom Homan. That was brought up unprompted, and Tom Homan just sort of wanders into the picture, wanders into the frame of what the FBI agents are already doing.

哇。先说明一下时间背景，现在是2023年。我们知道汤姆·霍曼是特朗普第一任期内的前ICE局长，这位资深边境官员。他其实在奥巴马政府时期也任职过。但此时他并不在政府内。

Wow. Just to put us in time here, we're in 2023. We know Tom Homan as the former ICE director in the first Trump administration, this longtime border official. He actually served in the Obama administration. But he's not in government at this point.

对吧？

Right?

对。他只是个普通公民，经营着一家为寻求政府合同的公司提供咨询的业务。所以他对政府合同有些兴趣并不完全意外。但再次强调，当时他不在政府内，他主要以特朗普前官员的身份闻名，也就是他们有时所谓的竞选代言人。他经常公开露面支持特朗普再次执政。

Right. He's just a private citizen, and he runs a consulting business for companies that are seeking contracts. So it's not completely out of the blue that he would have some interest in government contracts. But again, he's not in government at that time, and he's he's known mostly as a former Trump official who is what they sometimes call a campaign surrogate. He often would appear, you know, speaking publicly in support of another Trump administration.

普遍预期是如果特朗普赢得连任，霍曼将重返政府。2023年11月，他公开表态说：我向特朗普总统承诺，如果他回归，我就回归。他还补充道：我将运作这个国家有史以来最大规模的驱逐行动。

And there's a lot of general expectation that if Trump wins reelection, Homan will rejoin the government. And in November 2023, he out and out says it. He says, you know, I promised president Trump that if he goes back, I go back. And then he added to that, and I'm gonna run the biggest deportation operation this country's ever seen.

没错。他被广泛视为未来特朗普政府的可能成员。他说自己会加入。而且有种预期是，大量资金将投入他可能涉及的边境执法领域。

Right. He's he's widely seen as a likely member of a future Trump administration. He's saying he's gonna be there. And there's this sense that a lot of money is gonna be thrown at the area that he's gonna be involved in in in border enforcement.

嗯，是的。整个那段时期，特朗普竞选团队都在谈论驱逐数百万人。这是个非常昂贵的计划。所以自然预期会有大量与边境安全工作和驱逐工作相关的政府合同。

Well, right. That that whole time period, the Trump campaign is talking about deporting millions of people. It is a very expensive prospect. So there's a natural expectation that there will be significant government contracts related to both border security work and deportation work.

好的。那么回到调查上来。接下来发生了什么？

Okay. So back to the investigation. What happens next?

所以一旦那位商人提出这个想法，即卧底特工可以付钱给汤姆·霍曼以获取政府合同，随后就展开了一系列对话。这项调查持续了很长时间，但最终在2024年9月20日安排了一次会面。据我的消息来源透露，在那次会面中，卧底特工带来了5万美元现金，这些现金被放在一个外卖食品袋里，一个来自Kava连锁店的袋子。据向我描述的情况是，在那次会面中，霍曼不仅接受了现金，而且似乎表示他愿意帮助他们未来获取合同。

So once that businessman just sort of proposes this notion that the undercover agents could pay Tom Homan to get government contracts, a series of conversations follow. This investigation goes on for a long time, but eventually a meeting is set up for 09/20/2024. And at that meeting, my sources tell me the undercover agents bring $50,000 in cash, and that cash is put in a takeout food bag, a bag from the chain Kava. So what has been described to me is at that meeting, Homan both accepts the cash and seems to convey that he's willing to help them get contracts in the future.

德夫林，我们知道他具体说了什么吗？我们有这方面的具体信息吗？

Do we know exactly what he says, Devlin? Do we have any specific information about that?

我们不知道他具体说了什么，这显然是整个过程中的一个大问题。但我们确实知道联邦调查局特工对这次会面进行了录音。所以据我了解，在政府的档案中，存在这次讨论的录音。向我描述的情况是，霍曼接受了现金然后离开了。这对调查来说是一个很好的开端。

We don't know exactly what he says, and that's obviously a big question in this whole process. But we do know that the FBI agents made an audio recording of the meeting. So somewhere in government files, there exists, I am told, an audio recording of this discussion. And what's been described to me is that Homan accepts the cash and leaves. And that's a great start to an investigation.

你在这里有很多可以跟进的内容，对吧，因为你调查的对象已经拿了钱，并且似乎同意为此做某些事情。但这并不是调查的真正结束。

You've got a lot to work with there, right, because the person you are investigating has taken the money and appears to have agreed to do things in exchange for the money. But that's not really the end of the investigation.

为什么不是？

Why not?

有几个原因。第一，因为他没有同意为那笔钱做非常具体的事情。第二，重要的是要记住，在他拿钱的时候，汤姆·霍曼仍然不是政府官员。他当然不能让当时执政的拜登政府授予合同。所以在现金交付的那一刻，即使霍曼想兑现，他也确实无法做到。

For a couple reasons. One, because there was no very specific act that he agreed to do in exchange for that money. And two, it's important to remember, at the time he takes the money, Tom Homan is still not a government official. He certainly can't make the Biden administration, which was running the government at that time, award contracts. So in the moment the cash is handed over, Homan really can't deliver even if he wants to.

对。我猜这里的假设是，这就像是为他未来可能提供的服务支付的首付款。对吗？

Right. I guess the assumption here is that this is like a down payment for future services that he could potentially render. Correct?

对。调查人员认为这是这段关系的开始。这是整个过程的开始。

Right. The investigators thought of it as this is the start of the relationship. This is the start of the process.

德夫林，这是否有助于解释我一直以来的一个疑问：5万美元确实是一大笔钱，但对于像霍曼这样的人来说，为了这笔钱去做如此冒险、可能彻底毁掉他职业生涯的事，感觉又不太够。

Devlin, does that help explain a question I've had about all this, which is $50,000 is a lot of money, but it also doesn't feel like enough for someone like Homan to do something this risky that could really jeopardize his career.

对。这不一定是你给了他这5万美元，他就立刻开始为你做事。一位消息人士将其描述为，你知道，他们花钱是为了在一个常规的腐败调查中交个朋友。自然会有后续的会面，也许还有后续的付款。在这类调查中，这当然是一种可能性。

Right. It wasn't necessarily that you give him this $50,000, and then he immediately starts doing things for you. One source described it as, you know, they paid money to make a friend in in a regular corruption investigation. There would naturally be follow-up meetings, maybe follow-up payments. That's certainly a possibility in such a in such an investigation.

对。他们这是在下一盘长远的棋。

Right. They're playing the long game here.

没错。他们这个案子开局非常顺利。他们有非常有力的证据，也有非常好的基础来推进调查。然后，特朗普赢得了选举。

Exactly. They have a very strong start to a case. They have very good evidence, and they have a very good basis to proceed with their investigation. And then, Trump wins the election.

对。

Right.

而在特朗普赢得选举后的几天内，这位当选总统宣布汤姆·霍曼将成为他的边境事务主管。很多人并不了解政府和白宫有时会宣布的这些主管职位的具体细节。

And within days of Trump winning the election, the president-elect announces that Tom Homan will become his border czar. And not many people know the ins and outs of these czar positions that government and White Houses sometimes announce.

是的。我一直想知道，在美国政府中，‘主管’是一个真正的长期职位吗？

Yeah. I've always wondered, is that a real long term position in The US Government, czar?

这不是一个需要提名的职位，也不是需要参议院确认的职位。它更像是政府在特定议题上的联络人。但在此情况下重要的是，由于无需参议院确认，对主管职位的背景审查不会像内阁官员或副内阁官员那样严格。这在霍曼的情况下很重要，因为存在这个潜在的未决案件。

It's not something you're nominated for. It's not something that the senate confirms you for. It's it's very much sort of a point person for an administration on a particular subject. But what matters in this instance is that because there's no senate confirmation, there's not the same kind of background check scrubbing that goes on for a czar position as there is for a cabinet official or a deputy cabinet official. And that's important in Homan's situation because there is this underlying outstanding case.

你的意思是，这可能是故意的，特朗普政府可能提名霍曼担任主管职位是为了避免背景审查？

Are you saying basically that this might have been intentional, that the Trump administration might have nominated Homan to the czar position in order to avoid a background check?

目前尚不清楚。但我们确实知道，在过渡期间，特朗普当选后但尚未就职前，联邦执法官员通知并基本上警告了即将上任的政府，存在对汤姆·霍曼的调查。

It's really unclear. But we do know, however, that during the transition, after Trump is elected but before he is sworn into office, federal law enforcement officials notify and and essentially warn the incoming administration that this investigation exists into Tom Homit.

然后特朗普政府的司法部确实接手了这个调查。请告诉我们他们是如何处理的。

And the Trump Justice Department then does inherit this investigation. Walk us through what they do with it.

简短的答案是，他们几乎没有采取任何行动。该政府的高级官员审视了这个案件，他们不喜欢它。他们非常怀疑这个案件是否值得追查，而这个特工和调查人员认为是非常扎实、非常有前景开端的案件，就这样被关闭了。

The short answer is they don't do much of anything with it. The senior officials of that administration look at the case, and they don't like it. They're very skeptical that this is anything worth pursuing, and this this case that the agents and investigators thought was was a very solid case, a very promising start, It just gets closed.

我们马上回来。

We'll be right back.

我是黛博拉·卡门，《纽约时报》的调查记者。当我提到房地产时，我猜你们会想到诸如租金成本、市场状况、抵押贷款利率是否会上涨之类的事情。而我所做的是探究这些数字背后发生的事情。那些运营这个行业的人，多年来一直相对隐形。

I'm Deborah Kamen. I'm an investigative reporter at The New York Times. When I say real estate, I'm guessing you're thinking about things like the cost of rent, what the market looks like, whether or not mortgage rates are gonna go up. What I do is I look at what goes on beneath those numbers. The people running the industry, who for so many years have been relatively invisible.

我越深入调查，就越发现有人在进行不道德的操作，他们的不道德行为影响着每一个美国人。如果我们只关注数字，就像报道选举结果而不关注政客一样。要了解系统为何如此，你必须理解背后做决策的人。在《纽约时报》，我们从不只停留在表面讲故事。我们总是深入一点，帮助读者更好地理解某件事不仅是什么，而且为什么是这样，以及是谁导致了它成为这样。

And the more that I look into it, the more that I find there are people operating unethically, and their unethical behavior affects every single American. If we only focus on the numbers, it's like covering the results of an election and not looking at the politicians. To know why the system is the way it is, you have to understand the people making decisions behind it. At The New York Times, we don't ever tell a story at just the top level. We're always looking a little bit deeper to help readers better understand not just what something is, but why it is, and also who's causing it to be that way.

您可以在nytimes.com/subscribe订阅《纽约时报》。

You can subscribe to the New York Times at nytimes.com/subscribe.

那么，德夫林，一旦关于这项调查以及调查结束的报道曝光，会发生什么？特朗普政府如何回应？他们解释了他们放弃此案的决定吗？

So, Devlin, once this story breaks about the investigation and about the ending of the investigation, What happens? How does the Trump administration respond? Do they explain their decision to drop this case?

当我们要求司法部解释为什么结案时，联邦调查局局长卡什·帕特尔和副司法部长托德·布兰奇表示，此案经过了特工和检察官的审查，他们说这些特工和检察官没有发现任何可信的犯罪不当行为证据。他们基本上称这是一项毫无根据的调查。这就是他们所说的结案原因。

So when we asked the justice department to explain, you know, why was this case closed, the FBI director, Kash Patel, and the deputy attorney general, Todd Blanche, said that, you know, it was reviewed by agents and prosecutors, and they said those agents and prosecutors found no credible evidence of any criminal wrongdoing. They basically called it a baseless investigation. And that's why they say they closed it.

他们没有具体提到那袋现金吗？

They don't mention the bag of cash, specifically?

他们没有提及那袋现金，而这成为了后续所有关于政府在此事中做了什么以及为何这样做的质疑焦点。对此最早公开评论之一来自白宫新闻秘书凯伦·莱维特。

They don't mention the bag of cash and that becomes a real focal point of all the questions that follow about what the administration did here and why they did it. One of the first very public comments about all this is the White House press secretary, Karen Levitt.

霍曼需要归还那5万美元吗？首先，霍曼先生从未拿过你提到的那5万美元，所以你应该先搞清楚事实。

Does Homan have to return the $50,000? Well, mister Homan never took the $50,000 that you're referring to, so you should get your facts straight, number one.

完全否认他拿了那笔钱。几小时后

Denying that he took the money at all. Hours after that

汤姆，我想给你一个机会回应周末曝出的这篇文章。

Tom, I wanna give you a chance to address this article that came out over the weekend.

汤姆·霍曼上了福克斯新闻，他有机会直接回应报道，回应这些指控。他的回答在某一方面很能说明问题，就是他从未否认拿了钱。

Tom Homan goes on Fox News, and he's given an opportunity to just respond to the reporting, respond to these allegations. And his answer is very telling in one way in that he never denies taking the money.

我很抱歉。听着。我没有做任何犯罪的事。我没有做任何违法的事。这是一篇接一篇的抹黑文章。

I'm sorry. Look. I did nothing criminal. I did nothing illegal. And there's hit piece after hit piece after hit piece.

他非常强调地重复他没有犯任何罪。

He repeats very emphatically that he didn't commit any crime.

而且我很高兴联邦调查局和司法部站出来说，你知道，说没有发生任何违法的事情，也没有任何犯罪活动。是的。

And I'm glad the FBI and DOJ came out and said and, you know, said that nothing illegal happened and nothing you know, no criminal activity. Yeah.

突然之间，我们讨论的不再是这件事是否发生了，而是它是否合法。显然，这两者是非常不同的。

Suddenly, we're talking not about whether this happened or not, but about whether it was legal. And, obviously, those two things are very different.

没错。因此，政府最终对霍曼在这次采访中提出的观点非常坚持，即只是说这里没有犯罪。随着问题不断出现，这成为了整个政府的一种口头禅。你知道坐在这里的所有

Right. And so the administration ends up getting very adamant about the point that Homan makes in his interview on this, which is just to say, there was no crime here. And that becomes a kind of mantra throughout the administration as the questions keep coming up. Do you know sitting here All

我所知道的是，副司法部长托德·布兰奇和联邦调查局局长帕特尔说没有案件。而卡罗琳

I know is that deputy attorney general Todd Blanche and FBI director Patel said there was no case. And Caroline

上周，参议院司法委员会举行了一场听证会，司法部长帕姆·邦迪非常对抗。她是对的吗？

Last week, there's a hearing before the senate judiciary committee in which attorney general Pam Bondi is very confrontational. Was she right?

为我工作的话，你早就被解雇了。

Work for me, you would have been fired.

她坚持认为没有犯罪发生，并且基本上采取了攻击姿态，批评那些甚至提出问题的立法者。同样地，就在上周末，副总统JD·万斯接受了ABC的乔治·斯特凡诺普洛斯的采访，再次被问及汤姆·霍曼和那袋现金的事。

She is adamant that no crime was committed, and she basically goes on the attack and just criticizes the lawmakers who are even asking the question. In the same vein, just this past weekend, the vice president, JD Vance, is interviewed by ABC's George Stephanopoulos, and he's asked again about Tom Homan and the bag of cash.

提问。你是说他并没有接受那5万美元吗？

Question. Are you saying that he did not accept the $50,000?

万斯的回答与邦迪的非常相似。

Vance's answer is very similar to Bondi's.

问题是，他是否做了违法的事？而且完全没有证据表明汤姆·米勒曾经参与过

The question is, did he do something illegal? And there's absolutely no evidence that Tom Miller's ever taken a

驾驶或违法。要求你去做

drive or being illegal. Asking you to do

为什么在政府工作？

why is working in the administration?

我我必须 他坚称没有犯罪发生，并且再次对提出这个问题本身发起攻击。

I I must He insists no crime was committed and, again, goes on the attack for even asking the question.

当然，这届政府在能够真正证明是否犯罪之前就放弃了调查。那么，德夫林，你怎么看他们的论点？

Of course, this administration dropped the investigation before they could actually prove whether or not a crime was being committed. So, Devlin, what do you make of their argument?

所以在政治层面上，他们的论点非常简单。这是一场由上一届民主党政府发起的党派性政治迫害。法律层面的论点实际上稍微复杂一些，涉及很多方面。首先我要说，司法部内部并非所有人都对这个案件持完全相同的看法。我采访过一些人，他们坚信这是一个非常有力的案件，一个可以起诉、值得追查的案件，这些人对案件被撤销感到非常沮丧。

So on a political level, their argument is very simple. This was a partisan witch hunt generated by the last Democratic administration. The legal argument is actually a little more complicated, and it touches on a lot of things. First, I would just say, not everyone inside the Justice Department has the exact same view about this case. I have talked to people who feel very strongly that it was a very strong case, a chargeable case, a pursuable case, and it's frustrating to those people that the case was dropped.

我也与司法部其他人士交谈过，他们提出的论点是：这确实是个很好的案件开端，但我们尚未完成调查，在没有更多证据的情况下还算不上完美案件。所以即使在司法部内部，观点也不统一。同时，这个案件也触及到一个长期存在的争议——司法部是否过度使用和扩展了反腐败法律，超出了立法初衷。多年来，最高法院基本上一直在削弱联邦反腐败法律的适用范围，并反复向司法部传递信号，表明法院中的保守派确信司法部在很多案件中滥用或过度使用反腐败法规来追究政治人物的责任。

I have talked to other people inside the department who have made the argument, look, this was a great beginning of a case. We had not finished the case, and it's not a terrific case without more evidence. So there aren't universal views about this even inside the department, but it also this case speaks to what's really a long running disagreement about whether or not the Justice Department is overusing and stretching corruption laws beyond what they were intended to do. And over a number of years, the Supreme Court has basically whittled away at how federal corruption laws can be used, and has repeatedly sent a signal to the Justice Department that certainly the conservatives on the court believe that the Justice Department is, in many cases, misusing or overusing corruption statutes to go after politicians.

意思是，法律界对于什么才构成腐败存在分歧？或者说至少在法庭上证明腐败的门槛是什么？

Meaning, there's a disagreement within the legal community about what actually constitutes corruption, or at least what's the threshold for proving it in court?

没错。律师们争论这个案件的一个焦点是所谓的'利益输送型腐败'，这种观点认为不需要非常明确的等价交换。不需要非常直白的'你给我X美元，我就为你做Y事'。

Well, exactly. And one of the ways that this case gets argued about among lawyers is there's something called stream of benefits corruption, which makes the argument that you don't need a very explicit quid pro quo. You don't need a very explicit, you give me x dollars, and I will do y for you.

就像《黑道家族》那种风格。

Soprano style.

对。也就是说可以存在某种腐败的流动关系，比如我为你做以下事情（提供现金），你作为回报为我做以下事情（提供官方便利，如获取合同），但法院必须确信这种关系是明确的，不能只是一系列模糊的行为。这就是起诉此类案件的理论依据。

Right. That what you can have is a sort of corrupt flow relationship, where I do the following things for you, like cash, and you, in exchange, do the following things for me, like official favors, like getting contracts, but the court has to believe that it's explicit. It can't just be a vague set of actions. That's the argument for how you could charge a case like this.

显然这里存在很多未解决的法律问题，也许FBI手头的证据还不足以构成铁案。但霍曼作为执法人员，作为本届政府移民政策的首席发言人，收取这笔钱确实引发了各种疑问。政府不予追查同样令人质疑。德夫林，我在想的是——到目前为止特朗普政府周围已经涌现出太多类似丑闻，从加密货币到免费飞机的腐败指控。在我们日常经历的新闻洪流中，很多这类事件都逐渐淡出了公众视野。

So there are obviously a lot of open legal questions here, and maybe what the FBI had in its hands wasn't an open and shut case yet. But Homan taking this money as a lawman, as the chief spokesman of this administration's immigration policy, it does raise all sorts of questions. And the administration not following up also raises questions. I guess what I'm wondering, Devlin, is there's been so many similar scandals swirling around the Trump administration at this point, allegations of corruption from crypto to the free airplane. A lot of those have kind of faded away in the fire hose of news that we are all experiencing on a day to day basis.

但这个案子已经有点超出特朗普新闻周期的热度了。为什么？

But this one has kind of outlived the Trump news cycle. Why?

我的意思是，作为一名报道司法部和联邦调查局的记者，我可以告诉你，很多腐败案件都难以追踪、难以解释、难以梳理和剖析。加密货币可不是容易解释的东西。

I mean, look, as someone who covers the Justice Department and the FBI, I will tell you that there are many corruption cases that are hard to follow, hard to explain, hard to just unravel and unpack. Crypto isn't an easy thing to explain.

确实。

Sure.

你知道什么容易解释吗？一个装满现金的古巴包。这很简单。他为什么要拿那包现金？他用现金做了什么？

You know what is easy to explain? A cava bag full of cash. That's pretty simple. Why did he take a bag of cash? What did he do with the cash?

而且

And

除了现金包的简单性之外，我们从报道中得知，某处存在一份录音带。

in addition to how simple a bag of cash is, we know from the reporting that an audio tape exists somewhere.

没错。而且那份录音带可能会被公开。人们可能会开始要求公开它。

Right. And that tape could be released. People could start demanding its release.

没错。所以如果你花一分钟想想杰弗里·爱泼斯坦案，显然，汤姆·霍曼案并非杰弗里·爱泼斯坦案。爱泼斯坦是一个完全不同类型的案件，有着完全不同的背景。

Right. So if you think for a minute about the Jeffrey Epstein case, obviously, the Tom Homan case is not the Jeffrey Epstein case. Epstein is a completely different type of case with a completely different history.

是的。

Yep.

但要求公布汤姆·霍曼录音带的要求在某些方面与要求公布爱泼斯坦文件的要求非常相似。因为这是一个简单直接的问题，当你被告知不行时，它自然会让人质疑，为什么答案是否定的？

But the demand to release the Tom Homan tape is in some ways very similar to the demands to release the Epstein files. Because it's a simple straightforward question, and it it sort of when you are told no, it begs the question, well, why is the answer no?

我能问一下，我们知道那笔钱，那5万美元，到底怎么了吗？

Can I just ask, do we know what happened to the money, the 50,000?

我们真的不知道。自最初报道以来，你所看到的很多情况都是人们在试图找出这个问题的答案，但政府真的不会告诉我们，霍曼至今也没有透露。所以这个案子可能已经不了了之，但我认为人们想知道答案的愿望并没有消失。因此，我认为在可预见的未来，无论汤姆·霍曼走到哪里，他都会被问到那个问题。你把钱用在哪里了？

We really don't. A lot of what you've seen since the initial reporting is people trying to figure out the answer to that question, but the administration really won't tell us, and Homan so far hasn't told us. So the case may be dead, but I think what hasn't died is people's desire to know the answer to that question. So I think for the foreseeable future, wherever Tom Homan goes, he's gonna be asked that question. What did you do with the money?

好吧，德夫林，非常感谢你来参加节目。

Well, Devlin, thanks so much for coming on the show.

谢谢邀请。

Thanks for happening.

我们马上回来。以下是今天您还应该了解的消息。周二，特朗普总统宣布美国在委内瑞拉海岸附近击毙了一艘船上的六名男子，这是自九月以来在加勒比海对船只进行的第五次已知打击。他表示这些男子正在运输毒品，但未提供任何证据支持这一说法。尽管他发布了袭击视频，但总统未透露嫌疑人的国籍细节，也未确认他们属于任何特定犯罪集团。

We'll be right back. Here's what else you should know today. On Tuesday, president Trump announced that The US had killed six men aboard a boat off the coast of Venezuela, the fifth known strike on a boat in the Caribbean Sea since September. He said the men had been transporting drugs, but provided no evidence to support that claim. And while he posted a video of the attack, the president offered no details about the nationality of the suspects and didn't identify them as belonging to any particular criminal group.

美国军方在这些船只袭击中现已击毙27人，将他们视为战区中的敌方士兵而非犯罪嫌疑人。

The US military has now killed 27 people in these boat attacks, treating them as if they were enemy soldiers in the middle of a war zone rather rather than criminal suspects.

而且

And

非常荣幸能接待阿根廷领导人，这是一个我热爱的地方，我曾去过，也是世界上最美丽的地方之一，总统先生。我真的很想非常感谢您

It's a great honor to have the leader of Argentina, a place that I love, I've been to, and one of the most beautiful places in the world, president. And I really wanna thank you very

非常。

much.

特朗普周二在白宫接待了阿根廷总统哈维尔·米莱，就在美国同意推进对阿根廷200亿美元救助计划的几天后。

Trump hosted Argentinian president Javier Malay at the White House on Tuesday, just days after The US agreed to move ahead with a $20,000,000,000 bailout of Argentina.

我们认为他会赢。他应该赢。如果他赢了，我们会非常乐意提供帮助。如果他没赢，我们不会浪费时间，因为你们有一个其哲学根本不可能让阿根廷伟大的人

We think he's gonna win. He should win. And if he does win, we're gonna be very helpful. And if he doesn't win, we're not gonna waste our time because, you you have somebody whose philosophy has no chance of making Argentina great

又是特朗普。

again. Trump

明确将美国对该国的经济支持与马克里的政治命运挂钩，马克里正试图避免国内金融崩溃，其政党本月面临艰难的中期选举。特朗普承认，救助旨在支持阿根廷领导人的财政保守政策，对美国影响不大。今天的节目由凯特琳·奥基夫和卡洛斯·帕雷多制作，由莉兹·奥贝林和迈克尔·贝努瓦编辑，包含玛丽安·洛萨诺、威尔·里德和丹·鲍威尔创作的原创音乐，由艾莉莎·莫克斯利负责技术制作。《每日新闻》到此结束。

explicitly tied US economic support for the country to the political fortunes of Malay, who's trying to stave off a financial meltdown at home and whose party is facing tough midterm elections this month. Trump acknowledged that the bailout was intended to support the Argentinian leader's fiscally conservative policies and wouldn't make a big difference for The US. Today's episode was produced by Caitlin O'Keefe and Carlos Paredo. It was edited by Liz O'Baelyn and Michael Benoit and contains original music by Marian Lozano, Will Reed, and Dan Powell and was engineered by Alyssa Moxley. That's it for The Daily.

我是娜塔莉·凯特洛维。明天见。

I'm Natalie Ketrowev. See you tomorrow.