2026年6月26日 美国东部时间中午12:08 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻（CBS News）
撰稿
《纽约时报》记者玛吉·哈伯曼和乔纳森·斯旺在其新书《政权更迭：唐纳德·特朗普的帝国 presidency》中指出，与历任总统相比，特朗普“对美国总统职权有着截然不同的理解”。
哈伯曼和斯旺周五做客《哥伦比亚广播公司早间新闻》，畅谈了他们的新书。该书深入剖析了特朗普的第二任期，基于1000多次采访撰写而成。
“本届政府与特朗普首届政府时期相比，已经面目全非，”哈伯曼在《哥伦比亚广播公司早间新闻》与共同主持人盖尔·金的对话中说道。
她表示，在长达数月的报道过程中，“我们愈发清晰地意识到，我们所报道的并非民主党向共和党、或是民主党向民主党移交权力。这是对美国总统职权的一种截然不同的根本性理解。”
以下是他们报道中的部分核心要点。
特朗普前所未有地动用行政权力
斯旺表示，特朗普的第二任期以及这本书“核心探讨的是他动用行政权力的方式”。
“就单边行使行政权力而言，我们这代人从未见过类似场景，”斯旺说道，他同时指出，当下“很难想象有哪位美国总统能像特朗普这样牢牢掌控国会中的本党议员”。
“这确实没有先例。我的意思是，他基本上能让国会山的共和党人完全按他的意愿行事，而他出兵伊朗时甚至都没有咨询国会。”
斯旺指出，即便曾因发动伊拉克和阿富汗战争饱受批评的前总统乔治·W·布什，也获得了国会授权。
“特朗普只是直接行动，”斯旺说，“他先行行动，而整个体系正努力跟上他的步伐。实际情况大体就是如此。”
特朗普从根本上改变美国外交政策方针
通过一系列单边行动，特朗普先生也在改变美国的外交政策思路，从收购委内瑞拉石油，到毫不掩饰地渴望获取格陵兰岛。
“这正在改变世界各国、各国领导人以及美国民众对本国总统的看法，正如你所说，我们此前并不常报道本国的政权更迭，”哈伯曼说道，“但我们当时确实就在报道这样的事件。”
对特朗普而言有两件事至关重要：忠诚与外在形象
哈伯曼和斯旺称，总统在挑选核心职位高级官员时，其决策归根结底取决于两点：该人是否对他绝对忠诚，以及他们是否符合“标准形象”。
“忠诚是他首要寻求的特质，而且正如我们在书中所写，忠诚的定义多少有些模糊可变，”哈伯曼说道，“真正的试金石变成了1月6日事件。你在1月6日和1月7日的立场如何？在特朗普看来，只要你在1月7日与他有任何立场分歧，他就不想让你留在身边。”
两位作者还在书中记述了总统如何挑选内阁成员。据该书透露，在挑选约翰·拉特克利夫担任中央情报局局长之前，总统曾表示，他认为拉特克利夫长得像演员加里·格兰特，完全是“标准选角”的模样。
“‘标准选角’这一点非常重要，”哈伯曼说，“以皮特·赫格瑟为例，他如今已是国防部长，总统看中他擅长在电视上表现自己，也喜欢他为所谓的‘勇士’辩护。至于图尔西·加巴德这位前国家情报总监，当时总统的想法是，‘把这个职位给她，她又能造成多大危害呢？’”
特朗普身处“信息茧房”，几乎无人向他通报坏消息
哈伯曼和斯旺在书中写道，与第一任期相比，特朗普总统如今更是身处“信息茧房”之中，他的顾问几乎从不向他通报坏消息。在总统的第一任期内，还有更多顾问偶尔会提出反对意见，但如今这种情况已不复存在。
哈伯曼指出，前总统乔·拜登也讨厌收到负面消息，但她补充道：“特朗普身处的信息茧房是我记忆中前所未有的。”
“传递给他的信息渠道极其有限，”她说道，还补充称，很多时候“决策都是由大约六个人的小圈子做出的”。
例如，哈伯曼举例称，在筹划对伊朗动武期间，“能源部长和财政部长这两位本应负责应对这场战争引发的全球能源危机及其后续影响与经济冲击的官员，最初并未参与这些会议，因为他们担心信息泄露。”
国安会会议室曾用于讨论爱泼斯坦文件
哈伯曼和斯旺在书中写道，在一系列秘密会议中，本应是最高级别国家安全决策场所的国安会会议室（Situation Room），被用于讨论如何处理杰弗里·爱泼斯坦事件及相关文件的后续影响。
“去年夏天举行的这一系列会议非同寻常，会议场所本身也颇为特殊，”斯旺说道。
“去年夏天，他们实质上把国安会会议室变成了爱泼斯坦危机应对中心，美国政府最高级别的官员聚集在这个房间里， essentially 商讨应对爱泼斯坦危机的公关策略，”他说道。
“他们当时面临的一个问题是，计划上线一个司法部面向公众的网站。他们在网站中搜索特朗普相关内容时，发现了大量涉及特朗普的信息，其中一些相当尴尬，因此他们必须决定哪些内容可以公开，哪些不能。但这实际上是一场政治危机，其长期影响远超其团队的预期。”
“Regime Change” authors on Trump’s “information bubble,” Situation Room meetings on Epstein
2026-06-26 12:08 PM EDT / CBS News
By
President Trump has “a fundamentally different conception of the U.S. presidency” than his predecessors, New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan explain in their new book, “Regime Change: Inside the Imperial Presidency of Donald Trump.”
Haberman and Swan sat down with “CBS Mornings” Friday to talk about their book, which dives into the president’s second term and is the result of more than 1,000 interviews.
“This administration is so unrecognizable [compared] to Trump’s first one,” Haberman told “CBS Mornings” co-host Gayle King.
She said “it became really clear to us,” over many months of reporting, “that we were covering not the transfer of power from a Democrat to a Republican or a Democrat to a Democrat. This is a fundamentally different conception of the U.S. presidency.”
Here are some of the key takeaways from their reporting.
Trump is using executive power like never before
Swan said the second Trump administration, and the book, are “really about the way he’s using executive power.”
“We haven’t seen anything like this in our lifetime in terms of the unilateral expression of executive power,” Swan said, noting that it comes at a time when “it’s pretty hard to think of a precedent for a U.S. president having the command that Trump has had over his own party in Congress.”
“There really isn’t a precedent. I mean, he basically got them to do whatever he wanted, and Congress wasn’t even consulted when he went to war with Iran.”
Even former President George W. Bush, for all the criticism of the wars he led in Iraq and Afghanistan, got congressional authorization, Swan noted.
“Trump is just acting,” Swan said. “He is acting and the system is trying to catch up to him. That’s really the way it’s working.”
Trump is fundamentally changing the U.S. approach to foreign policy
Through his unilateral actions, Mr. Trump is also changing the United States’ approach to foreign policy, from his acquisition of Venezuelan oil to his unabated aspirations of acquiring Greenland.
“It is changing how countries around the world, leaders around the world, how people in the U.S. look at their president, and we’re not used to covering regime change, as you say, here,” Haberman said. “But that is what we were doing.”
Two things that matter to Trump: Loyalty and looking the part
The president’s decisions in picking top officials for critical roles boil down to two things, Haberman and Swan said: Is that person fiercely loyal to him, and do they look the part?
“Loyalty was a premier characteristic he was seeking, and loyalty — and we write about this — has a bit of a fungible definition,” Haberman said. “What became the real litmus test was January 6th. Where you were on January 6th and where you were on January 7th? If on January 7th in Trump’s mind in any way you were separated from him, he did not want you around.”
The authors also wrote about how the president selected members of his Cabinet. According to the book, before picking John Ratcliffe as CIA director, the president said he thought he looked like actor Cary Grant, straight out of central casting.
“The ‘central casting’ aspect is a big one,” Haberman said. “Part of that is Pete Hegseth, how you now have him as the secretary of defense/war. He liked that Hegseth was good on TV. He liked that Hegseth defended, quote unquote, warriors. When it comes to someone like Tulsi Gabbard, who was the director of national intelligence, it was, ‘Let’s give it to her, what harm could she really do?’”
Trump operates in an “information bubble” and is rarely told bad news
Much more so than in his first term, the president operates in an “information bubble” where his advisers rarely tell him bad news, Haberman and Swan write. In the president’s first term, he had more advisers who would push back on occasion — but not so much these days.
Haberman noted that former President Joe Biden also hated receiving negative news, but she said, “Trump is in an information bubble that is unlike anything that I can remember.”
“The inputs that are reaching him are so small,” she said, adding that many times “decisions are being made by a group of about a half a dozen people.”
For example, Haberman said, in the lead-up to the Iran war, “The energy secretary and the treasury secretary, the two people would have to manage the after-effects and economic impacts of a global energy crisis caused by this war, were not part of these meetings initially because they were concerned about leaks.”
The Situation Room was used for meetings about Epstein files
In a series of closely held meetings, the Situation Room — normally the site of top-level national security decisions — was used for discussions about how to handle fallout from Jeffrey Epstein and the Epstein files, Haberman and Swan write in their book.
“This was a pretty extraordinary series of meetings that happened last summer and the setting itself was extraordinary,” Swan said.
“Over the summer of last year they essentially turned the Situation Room into an Epstein crisis response center, and you had the most senior officials in the U.S. government gathering in that room to figure out essentially a PR strategy to deal with the Epstein crisis,” he said.
“One of the problems they had was they built this website that they were going to release — a Justice Department public-facing website. And they were searching around in it for Trump and they were finding a lot of stuff on Trump and some of it was, you know, embarrassing, so they had to make decisions about what to disclose and what not to disclose. But that really was a political crisis that has had long-term effects way beyond what his team expected.”
发表回复