分析：亚伦·布莱克
2小时前
发布于 2026年2月5日，美国东部时间上午6:00
（白宫新闻秘书卡罗琳·利维特在2026年1月22日从世界经济论坛返回途中，在空军一号上聆听美国总统唐纳德·特朗普向记者讲话。）
照片来源：Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
在这种情况下，当唐纳德·特朗普的助手试图“翻译”总统的言论时，你或许应该假定他们根本不清楚自己在说什么。
周二，特朗普彻底否定了白宫新闻秘书卡罗琳·利维特试图淡化其争议性言论的做法。这已成为一种令人熟悉的场景。
当前特朗普政府的争议焦点是，特朗普曾提出“将选举国有化”的主张。
“共和党人应该说，‘我们想要接管’，”特朗普在周一发布的播客节目中对前联邦调查局副局长丹·博宁诺表示，“我们应该接管投票工作，至少在15个地方进行接管。共和党人应该将选举国有化。”
鉴于宪法将选举管理权力赋予各州，这一主张极不切实际。但更具煽动性的是，特朗普曾以大量虚假的选民欺诈指控为由试图推翻选举结果。试想一下，这个人竟试图掌控选举进程。
于是，利维特站出来声称特朗普从未说过这样的话。
她声称，特朗普实际上是在指国会通过《SAVE法案》（一项旨在打击联邦选举中非法移民投票的法案，而此类行为本身已属非法，专家称此类情况极少发生）。
当然，这显然是无稽之谈。《SAVE法案》仅增加了联邦层面的选民登记要求，而特朗普谈论的是在特定15个州“接管”投票工作，而非制定适用于全国的法律。
果不其然，特朗普周二明确表示他的话就是字面意思。当被CNN的凯特兰·柯林斯问及“选举国有化”的具体含义时，他未提及《SAVE法案》，反而进一步强调联邦政府应行使更广泛的控制权。
“如果一个州无法管理选举，我认为我身后的人应该采取行动，”特朗普在椭圆形办公室签署仪式上提到国会共和党人时说道。
他指出底特律、费城和亚特兰大存在所谓的“选举腐败”，并补充道：“如果他们不能合法、诚实地计票，那么应该由其他人来接管。”
“我不明白为什么联邦政府不直接这么做，”总统若有所思地说。
这种矛盾在任何其他政府中都可能构成丑闻。特朗普的首席发言人声称他另有意图，但事实证明这是谎言。至少，这严重损害了发言人的可信度——毕竟，他们的职责就是“代表”总统发声。
然而，这大体上已是特朗普的常态。他经常否定助手们试图“翻译”的解释：
- 2016年：特朗普在竞选时提出“禁止穆斯林移民”的政策。但2017年他对多个穆斯林占多数的国家实施旅行限制时，助手们声称这并非真正的“禁令”（一个对法律辩护不利的词汇）。然而特朗普随后再次称其为“禁令”。
- 2018年：媒体报道特朗普曾称一些主要由黑人居住的国家为“粪坑国家”。多名助手和共和党参议员声称他从未说过此话，但去年特朗普承认了这一言论。
- 2019年：特朗普声称美国在叙利亚的利益是“控制石油”。这一说法可能违反国际法，国防部长马克·埃斯珀随后向记者解释称，特朗普指的是“防止ISIS获取油田”。但特朗普随后重复道：“我们正在控制石油……我们留下军队就是为了石油。”
- 2020年：特朗普在集会上称自己指示政府“放缓新冠病毒检测”。白宫新闻秘书凯莉·麦肯尼称这是“玩笑”，另有顾问附和“特朗普只是在开玩笑”。但特朗普随后表示：“[我从不开玩笑]。”
- 去年：特朗普提到中国、朝鲜和俄罗斯进行地下核试验，并补充称“我们也必须进行试验”。能源部长克里斯·赖特解释称，特朗普指的是“核部件测试”而非“核爆炸”。但几天后，特朗普称“[我们将像其他国家一样进行核试验]”（目前尚无证据显示特朗普政府实际开展核武器试验）。
在多数情况下，谁在说真话并不明确。历史表明，特朗普常提出不切实际却从未兑现的主张。
但关键在于：当特朗普的助手试图解释他的真实意图时，你永远不能相信他们。
南卡罗来纳州参议员林赛·格雷厄姆在2017年就曾一针见血地指出：
“我不相信特朗普与俄罗斯合谋，”格雷厄姆告诉《华盛顿邮报》，“因为我不相信他会与自己的员工合谋。”
这句话在特朗普是否参与“通俄门”调查中或许令人安心，但这绝对是治理国家的糟糕方式。
Trump obliterates an aide’s efforts to downplay his comments – again
Analysis by Aaron Blake
2 hr ago
PUBLISHED Feb 5, 2026, 6:00 AM ET
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt listens to US President Donald Trump speak to reporters on board Air Force One while returning from the World Economic Forum on January 22, 2026.
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
At this point, when an aide or adviser to Donald Trump offers to translate something the president has said, you should probably assume they have no idea what they’re talking about.
Trump on Tuesday laid waste to White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt’s efforts to pretend he didn’t say something as controversial as he did. And this has become an altogether familiar exercise.
The controversy du jour in the Trump administration right now is Trump having floated nationalizing elections.
“The Republicans should say, ‘We want to take over,’” Trump told former FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino in a podcast episode published Monday. “We should take over the voting, the voting in at least many — 15 places. The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting.”
This is highly impractical, given the Constitution gives the power to run elections to the states. But it’s also provocative, in that this is the president who tried to overturn an election based on a volume of false voter fraud claims. Imagine that guy commandeering control of an election.
So up stepped Leavitt to suggest that Trump hadn’t actually said what he said.
She claimed Trump was instead referring to Congress passing the SAVE Act, a bill that aims to combat noncitizen voting in federal elections – something that is already illegal and that experts say rarely happens.
That was nonsensical, of course. The SAVE Act would add federal requirements to register to vote, sure, but Trump was talking about taking over the voting in a specific number of places (15) – not passing a law that would apply to the whole country.
And sure enough, Trump on Tuesday made clear that he meant what he said. Asked by CNN’s Kaitlan Collins what he meant by nationalize the election, he made no mention of the SAVE Act and doubled down on the idea of the federal government asserting a more expansive form of control.
“If a state can’t run an election, I think the people behind me should do something about it,” Trump said, referring to congressional Republicans standing alongside him at an Oval Office signing ceremony.
He pointed to purported “corruption on elections” in Detroit, Philadelphia and Atlanta and said: “If they can’t count the votes legally and honestly, then somebody else should take over.”
“I don’t know why the federal government doesn’t do them anyway,” the president mused.
It’s the kind of contradiction that would be a scandal in any other administration. Trump’s top spokesperson said he meant one thing, and that turned out not to be true. If nothing else, it’s a huge mark against a spokesperson’s credibility. After all, their job is to quite literally speak for the president.
Except that this is largely par for the course. Trump has regularly contradicted his aides’ and advisers’ attempts to play translator:
- In 2016, Trump campaigned on a proposed a “ban” on Muslim immigration. But when he instituted travel restrictions on a series of majority-Muslim countries in 2017, aides claimed it somehow wasn’t actually a “ban” (a word that was unhelpful for their legal defense). Except Trump then said it was a “ban,” again.
- In 2018, Trump was reported to have referred to some largely -Black countries as “shithole” countries. Some aides and GOP senators went on to suggest he had not said that. But last year, Trump admitted to the whole thing.
- In 2019, Trump said the United States’ interest in Syria was in “keeping” its oil. Except that could be a violation of international law, so Defense Secretary Mark Esper assured reporters Trump was instead referring to denying ISIS access to the oilfields. Trump then repeated, “We’re keeping the oil. … [We left troops behind only for the oil].”
- In 2020, Trump said at a rally that he had told his administration to slow down coronavirus testing. White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany then said Trump’s comment was “in jest,” while another adviser said Trump was joking. Trump later said: “[I don’t kid].”
- Last year, Trump referred to China, North Korea and Russia doing underground nuclear tests and added, “We have to test.” Energy Secretary Chris Wright suggested Trump’s comment was about testing nuclear components, “not nuclear explosions.” But days later, Trump said that “[we will do nuclear testing like other countries do].” (There’s no evidence that the Trump administration has actually set about doing nuclear weapons tests.)
In many of these cases, it’s not clear who is telling the truth. History suggests Trump often aims to do impractical things that never come to fruition.
But the point remains that you just can’t trust his aides when they try to tell you what Trump really meant.
Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said it pretty well back in 2017.
“I don’t believe Trump colluded with the Russians,” Graham told the Washington Post, “because I don’t believe he colludes with his own staff.”
That might be reassuring when it came to Trump’s culpability in the Russia investigation, but it’s a heck of a way to run a country.
发表回复