博客

  • 消费者仍在消费,但裂痕已开始显现


    2026年5月21日 / 美国东部时间下午3:48 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻(CBS News)

    撰稿:

    针对美国经济状况的消费者民调显示民众情绪悲观:最近一项哥伦比亚广播公司新闻民调的受访者中,三分之二表示感到经济压力,多数人认为飙升的汽油价格正在造成生活困难。

    不过就目前而言,这类情绪尚未压制消费者支出——这一支撑经济运转的关键资金流动。背后原因何在?

    沃尔玛最新财报印证了这一态势,这家全球最大零售商周四公布了又一个季度的强劲销售增长。该公司的低价吸引了各收入阶层的 shoppers,他们在生活必需品上的支出有所增加,尤其是汽油。其他零售商近期也公布了亮眼业绩,包括家得宝、塔吉特以及TJ Maxx的母公司TJX。

    4月份全国零售销售额较上月有所放缓,但仍处于健康水平,尽管伊朗战争推高了汽油价格,仍展现出韧性。

    但高油价的影响正在累积:据布朗大学研究人员估算,自2月底伊朗战争爆发以来,典型美国家庭的燃油支出已额外增加188美元。与此同时,4月通胀率达到3.8%,为近三年来最高水平。

    悲观的消费者情绪与强劲的消费支出之间存在脱节,这一点至关重要,因为消费支出约占美国经济活动的三分之二。目前支出之所以能够维持,主要是因为富裕家庭仍在慷慨消费,以及退税规模扩大等临时性支持措施的存在。

    经济学家警告,如果汽油价格持续居高不下,这一局面可能迅速改变。

    “目前,关于经济及其走向的大量负面情绪让人们感到悲观。但现实是,大多数消费者确实有继续消费的能力,”全球零售管理咨询公司GlobalData的分析师、零售业务董事总经理尼尔·桑德斯告诉哥伦比亚广播公司新闻。

    他指出,尽管消费者信心指数有所走弱,但这些指标反映的是人们的消费意愿,而非消费能力。

    得益于今年春季退税规模扩大,许多家庭的经济状况依然稳定,支出也得以延续。美国国税局数据显示,2026纳税季的平均退税金额比去年高出约12%,典型退税额度为3276美元。

    “这是临时性效应,但确实起到了帮助作用,”桑德斯说。

    高收入购物者为何至关重要

    尽管美国人仍在购物,但支出分布可能预示着未来的麻烦。数据显示,如今的消费者支出越来越多地由高收入人群推动。

    经济学家将这一趋势称为“K型经济”,指的是富裕消费者与低收入家庭截然不同的经济境遇。“K”字的上半部分代表高收入美国人强劲的消费和收入增长。

    经济学家表示,在K字的下半部分,许多普通收入家庭在汽油价格上涨和顽固的通胀面前面临艰难的权衡取舍。美国银行研究所近期在一份消费数据分析报告中指出,4月份,高收入消费者“继续保持强劲消费势头”,而中低收入消费者则缩减了可自由支配支出。

    “可自由支配支出增长的最大差异出现在‘大额’服务领域,比如旅行,这或许反映了低收入家庭对度假计划的犹豫,考虑到工资增长和汽油价格的不确定性,”美国银行研究所的分析师写道。

    许多高收入消费者也会光顾折扣零售商。沃尔玛首席财务官约翰·戴维·雷尼在周四的财报电话会议上表示:“高收入客户对众多品类的消费都充满信心,而低收入消费者则更加精打细算,或许正在应对经济困境。”

    消费者能否持续支撑消费?

    问题在于,如果汽油价格持续高企,消费者能否继续慷慨消费;如果高能源价格波及食品杂货等其他商品和服务,情况又会如何。对美国人而言,更大的挑战在于4月份工资未能跟上通胀增速,如果这一趋势持续,可能会削弱他们的购买力。

    “如果汽油价格在过长时间内保持过高,我们将开始看到一些裂痕出现,”桑德斯说。“近几个月来,这种影响被退税增加带来的意外之财抵消了,但这种情况最终会消退。”

    但他补充道,消费者拥有复杂的应对机制,这意味着一些人可能选择减少旅行以节省汽油开支,而非削减其他商品和服务的支出。

    桑德斯指出,高油价也可能推高零售销售额,因为燃油采购被纳入统计数据,这意味着汽油成本上涨可能推高总销售额数字。

    “低情绪会在很多方面体现出来,包括人们购物地点和购物方式的改变,即便他们仍在消费,”桑德斯说。

    编辑:阿兰·谢特

    Consumers are still spending, but cracks are starting to show

    May 21, 2026 / 3:48 PM EDT / CBS News

    By

    Consumer polls about the state of the U.S. economy suggest the mood is grim: Two-thirds of respondents to a recent CBS News poll reported feeling financially stressed, while a majority said soaring gasoline prices are causing hardship.

    For now, however, such sentiments have yet to quash consumer spending, the critical flow of dollars that keeps the economy humming. What gives?

    Walmart’s latest financial results illustrate the pattern, with the world’s largest retailer on Thursday reporting another quarter of strong sales growth. The company’s low prices are drawing shoppers across the income spectrum who are spending more on essentials, particularly gas. Other retailers have also recently reported strong results, including Home Depot, Target and TJ Maxx owner TJX.

    Retail sales nationwide slowed in April from the previous month but remained healthy, showing resilience despite the surge in prices at the pump driven by theIran war.

    But higher gas prices are adding up: The typical U.S. household is paying an additional $188 in fuel costs since the start of the war in late February, according to an estimate by Brown University researchers. Inflation, meanwhile, reached 3.8% in April, its highest level in almost three years.

    The disconnect between gloomy consumers and resilient spending matters because consumer spending drives about two-thirds of U.S. economic activity. For now, spending is holding up mostly because wealthier households are continuing to open their pocketbooks and because of temporary supports, such as larger tax refunds.

    Economists warn that the picture could change quickly if gas prices stay elevated.

    “At present, there are a lot of negative vibes about the economy and its trajectory that are making people feel gloomy. However, the reality is that most consumers do have some firepower to keep on spending,” Neil Saunders, an analyst and managing director of retail at GlobalData, told CBS News.

    And while gauges of consumer confidence have weakened, these measures reflect people’s willingness to spend more than their ability to spend, he noted.

    Many households are also holding up, and continuing to spend, thanks in part to larger tax refunds this spring. IRS data shows the average refund is about 12% higher than last year, with the typical refund for the 2026 tax season at $3,276.

    “This is a temporary effect, but it has been helpful,” Saunders said.

    Why high-income shoppers matter

    Although Americans continue to shop, the distribution of spending could point to trouble ahead. Data shows that consumer spending these days is increasingly driven by higher-income earners.

    Economists have termed this trend the “K-shaped economy,” which refers to the divergent fortunes of wealthier consumers compared with lower-income households. The upward arm of the “K” represents the strong spending and income growth among upper-income Americans.

    On the downside of the K, many households of modest means face difficult tradeoffs amid rising gas prices and stubborn inflation, according to economists. In April, higher-income consumers “continued to power forward,” while lower- and middle-income consumers pulled back on discretionary spending, Bank of America Institute said in a recentanalysis of spending data.

    “The largest divergences in discretionary spending growth appeared to be on ‘bigger ticket’ services like travel, perhaps reflecting lower-income households’ hesitancy around vacation plans, given uncertainty over wage growth and gas prices,” Bank of America Institute analysts wrote.

    Many higher-income consumers are also shopping at discount retailers. Walmart Chief Financial Officer, John David Rainey, said in an earnings call on Thursday that “the high-income customer is spending with confidence into many categories, while the lower-income consumer is more budget conscious and perhaps navigating financial distress.”

    Can consumers keep up?

    The question is whether consumers can keep opening their wallets if gas prices remain elevated, and what happens if higher energy prices trickle through to other goods and services, such as groceries. Heightening the challenge for Americans is that wages failed to keep pace with inflation in April, a trend that could weaken their purchasing power if it persists.

    “We will start to see some cracks appear if gas prices remain too high for too long,” Saunders said. “Over recent months, the impact has been offset by a windfall from higher tax refunds, but this will eventually fade.”

    But he added that consumers have complex coping mechanisms, meaning some might opt to cut back on travel to save on gas rather than curtail spending on other goods and services.

    Higher gas prices can also lift retail sales because fuel purchases are included in the data, meaning rising gas costs can inflate topline sales figures, Saunders noted.

    “Lower sentiment shows up in many ways, including changing where people shop and how they shop, even if they are still spending,” Saunders said.

    Edited by Alain Sherter

  • 白宫敦促议员通过铁路安全法案


    2026-05-21 18:56:56 UTC / 路透社

    作者:大卫·谢泼德森

    2026年5月21日 美国东部时间下午6:56 更新于33分钟前

    image
    美国俄亥俄州东巴勒斯坦市,2023年3月2日,载有危险废物的列车脱轨现场全景。路透社/艾伦·弗里德/档案照片 购买授权,打开新标签页

    华盛顿,5月21日(路透社)—— 白宫周四敦促议员通过搁置已久的铁路安全法案,此前2023年诺福克南方铁路公司(NSC.N,打开新标签页)运营的列车在俄亥俄州脱轨起火,释放出超过100万加仑的危险物质和污染物。

    尽管得到了唐纳德·特朗普总统和许多民主党人的支持,但该法案的命运仍不明朗,且面临来自铁路公司和国会许多共和党议员的强烈反对。

    路透社伊朗简报通讯将为您带来伊朗局势的最新动态和分析,点击此处订阅。

    美国众议院运输与基础设施委员会周四正在辩论一项为期五年、规模达5800亿美元的高速公路法案,并考虑追加一项铁路安全法案,该法案将加强危险货物列车的安全程序,并收紧铁路车轮轴承的相关规定。

    得克萨斯州共和党众议员特洛伊·内尔斯表示,该法案十分必要,因为此次脱轨事故“暴露了货运铁路行业安全规范的严重漏洞,尤其是在危险货物运输方面”。

    该委员会共和党主席萨姆·格雷夫斯表示,该法案将在10年内给铁路运输成本增加数十亿美元。“这将波及整个供应链,”格雷夫斯说道。

    2023年的脱轨事故由一节过热铁路车厢的车轮轴承发生灾难性机械故障引发。诺福克南方铁路公司在2024年与司法部达成3.1亿美元的和解协议,同意安装额外装置,以便及早检测过热的车轮轴承,防止脱轨事故发生。

    美国国家运输安全委员会主席珍妮弗·霍门迪表示,自2023年俄亥俄州东巴勒斯坦脱轨事故以来提出的多项安全建议,三年多过去了仍未得到落实。

    “东巴勒斯坦社区的居民和所有美国人都理应得到一套全面的解决方案,以解决关键的铁路安全问题,”霍门迪说道。

    该法案将要求对危险货物列车加强安全程序,还将要求设置路边故障探测器、至少配备两名乘务人员,并加大对违规行为的罚款力度。

    代表主要铁路公司的美国铁路协会批评该法案称,它“日益沦为一项长期存在的劳工和运营强制要求的载体,将推高整个供应链的成本,却几乎无法切实改善安全状况”。

    大卫·谢泼德森报道;奇祖·野山和尼克·齐明斯基编辑

    我们的准则:路透社信托原则,打开新标签页

    White House urges lawmakers to pass rail safety legislation

    2026-05-21 18:56:56 UTC / Reuters

    By David Shepardson

    May 21, 2026 6:56 PM UTC Updated 33 mins ago

    General view of the site of the derailment of a train carrying hazardous waste, in East Palestine, Ohio, U.S., March 2, 2023. REUTERS/Alan Freed/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab

    WASHINGTON, May 21 (Reuters) – The White House on Thursday urged lawmakers to pass long-stalled rail safety legislation ​after the 2023 derailment of a Norfolk Southern-operated NSC.N, opens new tab train in Ohio that caught fire ‌and released over a million gallons of hazardous materials and pollutants.

    Despite support from President Donald Trump and many Democrats, the bill’s fate is in doubt and faces significant opposition from railroads and many ​Republicans in Congress.

    The Reuters Iran Briefing newsletter keeps you informed with the latest developments and analysis of the Iran war. Sign up here.

    The U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is debating a ​five-year $580 billion highway bill on Thursday and is considering adding a rail safety ⁠bill that would boost safety procedures for trains carrying hazardous materials and toughen rules ​on railcar wheel bearings.

    Representative Troy Nehls, a Texas Republican, said the bill was necessary because ​the derailment “exposed serious weaknesses in the freight rail industry safety practices, particularly when it comes to transporting hazardous materials.”

    Representative Sam Graves, the Republican chair of the committee, said the bill would add billions over ​10 years to the cost of shipping by rail. “It’s going to ripple across the ​entire supply chain,” Graves said.

    The 2023 derailment was triggered by a catastrophic mechanical failure of an ‌overheated railcar ⁠wheel bearing. Norfolk Southern in 2024 agreed to a Justice Department settlement worth $310 million, including agreeing to install additional devices to detect overheated wheel bearings early enough to prevent derailments.

    National Transportation Safety Board chair Jennifer Homendy said many safety recommendations made after the ​2023 derailment in East ​Palestine, Ohio, remain ⁠unaddressed over three years later.

    “People living in the community of East Palestine and all Americans deserve no less than a comprehensive approach ​that addresses critical rail safety issues,” Homendy said.

    The legislation would require ​enhanced safety ⁠procedures for trains carrying hazardous materials, as well as require wayside defect detectors, a minimum of two-person crews and increased fines for wrongdoing.

    The Association of American Railroads, which represents major ⁠rail ​companies, criticized the bill saying it has “increasingly become a ​vehicle for longstanding labor and operational mandates that would raise costs throughout the supply chain while doing little ​to measurably improve safety outcomes.”

    Reporting by David Shepardson; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama and Nick Zieminski

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab

  • 前底特律市长达根暂停独立参选密歇根州长竞选


    2026年5月21日 美国东部时间12:19 / 美联社

    底特律市长迈克·达根2024年12月在底特律接受采访

    前底特律市长迈克·达根周四表示,他将暂停密歇根州长竞选,理由是美国总统唐纳德·特朗普与伊朗的冲突以及飙升的油价导致政治环境愈发“有毒”。

    作为长期民主党人士,达根以独立候选人身份参选,以接替因任期限制无法连任的民主党州长格蕾琴·惠特默。他告诉美联社,作为独立候选人“获胜将非常艰难”,因为原本会支持他的民主党人正团结起来,反对华盛顿方面的动向。

    “民主党人对特朗普和共和党人的愤怒情绪极高,”达根说,“短短60天里,这个国家的民众态度发生了巨大变化。人们在加油站感受到了压力,并对此感到愤怒。”

    密歇根州州长一职从未由独立人士担任过,第三方候选人在该州州长选举中通常表现不佳。对于选择以独立身份参选、避开党派斗争的达根来说,竞选胜算显然对他越来越不利。

    “只要我还看到获胜的可能性,我就会继续战斗,”他说,“但我看不到可行的获胜路径。”

    达根认为自己在州长竞选中落后于民主党籍州务卿乔斯林·本森和共和党籍联邦众议员约翰·詹姆斯。杰纳西县警长克里斯·斯旺森也以民主党人身份参选,而百万富翁商人佩里·约翰逊则以共和党人身份参选。

    密歇根州初选将于8月4日举行。

    Former Detroit Mayor Duggan suspends his independent run for Michigan governor

    May 21, 2026 12:19 PM ET / Associated Press

    Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan is interviewed in December 2024 in Detroit.

    Carlos Osorio/AP

    Former Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan said Thursday he is suspending his campaign for Michigan governor, citing an increasingly “toxic” political climate due to President Donald Trump’s war with Iran and skyrocketing gas prices.

    Duggan, a longtime Democrat, was running as an independent to replace Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer who can’t run again due to term limits. He told The Associated Press that it was going to be “very hard to win” as the Democrats who would have supported him are galvanizing against what’s going on in Washington.

    “Democrat anger against Trump and Republicans is extremely high,” Duggan said. “In 60 days, there’s been a huge change in the attitudes of this country. People are feeling the pain at the pump and are angry about it.”

    An independent has never served as Michigan governor and third-party candidates typically don’t fare well in elections for the state’s top seat. To Duggan, who shunned partisan fighting while choosing to run as an independent, it was clear the odds were stacking against his campaign.

    “As long as I knew there was a path for victory, I was going to fight,” he said. “I don’t see a likely path to win.”

    Duggan believed he was trailing Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson and Republican US Rep. John James in the governor’s race. Genesee County Sheriff Chris Swanson also is running as a Democrat, while millionaire businessman Perry Johnson is running as a Republican.

    Michigan’s primary election will be held August 4.

  • 田纳西州因未能找到死囚静脉以注射致命药物中止行刑,律师称


    2026年5月21日 / 美国东部时间下午2:43 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻(CBS News)

    田纳西州死囚托尼·卡拉瑟斯的律师表示,该州于周四中止了对他的行刑,原因是负责建立静脉通道以注射致命药物的工作人员耗时超过一小时仍未能成功插管。

    “他们对他施以酷刑,”律师玛丽亚·德利贝拉托在一条通过美国公民自由联盟(ACLU)获得的短信中说道,“当他们尝试进行中心静脉置管时,往他胸部注射了利多卡因,但他告诉他们仍能感觉到穿刺的痛感,可他们还是强行进行了穿刺。”

    德利贝拉托在短信中称,现年57岁的卡拉瑟斯一直在呻吟,尝试注射的部位出现了出血。她表示,工作人员先后三次尝试在这名囚犯的手臂和脚部建立静脉通道,还试图穿刺他颈部的静脉。

    卡拉瑟斯的辩护团队曾向田纳西州地区法院法官提出紧急禁令,要求中止行刑,称反复插管的行为“构成了残忍且不寻常的惩罚”,侵犯了他的宪法权利。但法官驳回了这一请求,理由是其团队未能提供足够证据证明州政府的行为属于“残忍且不寻常”。

    据美国公民自由联盟的一名发言人透露,田纳西州州长比尔·李已发布缓刑令,暂停了行刑程序,但目前尚不清楚该暂停是临时性的还是永久性的。

    李在周四回应卡拉瑟斯的减刑请求的声明中,维持了对卡拉瑟斯的死刑判决。

    “在仔细考虑托尼·冯·卡拉瑟斯的减刑请求,并全面审查案件后,我维持田纳西州的原判,”该州长说道。

    卡拉瑟斯因1994年绑架并杀害马塞洛斯·安德森、其母亲德洛伊斯·安德森以及弗雷德里克·塔克而被定罪并判处死刑。

    但长期以来,维权人士一直呼吁李中止卡拉瑟斯的行刑,以便其法律团队能够更深入地评估可能证明他无罪的DNA证据。在田纳西州死囚区度过的30年里,卡拉瑟斯一直坚称自己无罪。

    在周四随紧急动议一同发布的声明中,卡拉瑟斯的律师将州政府不顾其开展法医分析的努力、执意推进行刑的行为描述为“严重的不公”。法庭文件显示,州政府驳回了其辩护团队提出的对从受害者身上提取的证据进行“定罪后”DNA检测的动议。

    “当田纳西州为注射致命药物建立静脉通道失败后,行刑人员仍执意推进这场拙劣的行刑,这起不公变得愈发野蛮,”律师兼死刑项目主任卡西·斯塔布斯说道。

    美国公民自由联盟在一份请愿书中指责田纳西州领导层忽视了卡拉瑟斯案件中的诸多问题。该机构称,对他的定罪仅基于“付费线人”的证词,没有任何实物证据能将他与罪行联系起来。

    据美国公民自由联盟透露,定罪后的法医检测本旨在评估“犯罪现场遗留的未匹配指纹和DNA”,这些证据“从未与卡拉瑟斯的同案被告十多年前指认的另一名嫌疑人进行过比对”。

    美联社与梅利莎·奎因为本报道供稿。

    Tennessee stops execution after failing to find inmate’s vein for lethal drugs, attorney says

    May 21, 2026 / 2:43 PM EDT / CBS News

    Tennessee halted the execution of death row inmate Tony Carruthers on Thursday, his attorney said, after the officers tasked with establishing an intravenous line through which to administer lethal drugs failed to do so for more than an hour.

    “They tortured him,” said the attorney Maria DeLiberato, in a text message that CBS News obtained through the American Civil Liberties Union. “When they tried to do the central line, they put a shot of lidocaine in his chest and he told them he could still feel the puncture and they did the puncture anyway.”

    In the text, DeLiberato said Carruthers, 57, was groaning and bleeding from his attempted injection sites. She said officers tried three times to establish the line in the inmate’s arms and feet, and also attempted to access a vein in his neck.

    Carruthers’ defense team had asked a Tennessee district court judge to stop his execution in an emergency order, which alleged that the repeated attempts “constituted cruel and unusual punishment” and violated his constitutional rights. The judge denied that request on the grounds that his team had not met their burden of proof to demonstrate the state’s actions were “cruel and unusual.”

    While Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee issued a reprieve, pausing the execution proceedings, whether it would be temporary or permanent was unclear, according to an ACLU spokesperson.

    Lee upheld the state’s death sentence for Carruthers in a statement responding to his clemency request on Thursday.

    “After deliberate consideration of Tony Von Carruthers’ request for clemency, and after a thorough review of the case, I am upholding the sentence of the State of Tennessee,” the governor said.

    Carruthers was sentenced to death after being found guilty of the 1994 kidnappings and murders of Marcellos Anderson; his mother, Delois Anderson; and Frederick Tucker.

    But advocates have long called on Lee to halt Carruthers’ execution so that his legal team could more deeply evaluate DNA evidence that they believed might exonerate him. Throughout his 30 years on Tennessee’s death row, Carruthers has maintained his innocence.

    In statements released alongside the emergency motion on Thursday, Carruthers’ attorneys described the state’s decision to move ahead with the execution despite blocking his efforts to run forensic analyses as “a grave injustice.” His defense team’s motion for a “post-conviction” DNA test on evidence taken from the victims was denied by the state, court filings show.

    “This injustice turned barbaric when Tennessee’s efforts to set an IV line for the lethal drugs failed and the executioners continued to press forward anyway with the botched execution,” said attorney and Capital Punishment Project director Cassy Stubbs.

    The ACLU, in a petition, accused Tennessee leadership for neglecting to address issues with Carruthers’ case. It said his conviction rested on the testimonies of “paid jailhouse informants,” and no physical evidence connects him to the crime.

    The post-conviction forensic testing had sought to evaluate “unmatched fingerprints and DNA from the crime scene,” which “have never been compared” to an alternative suspect that Carruthers’ co-defendant identified more than a decade ago, according to the ACLU.

    The Associated Press and Melissa Quinn contributed to this report.

  • 伊朗与阿曼讨论建立霍尔木兹海峡长期收费系统


    2026年5月22日 00:01 / 联合早报

    伊朗与阿曼讨论建立霍尔木兹海峡长期收费系统

    image

    伊朗正与阿曼讨论建立某种永久性收费体系,以正式确立对霍尔木兹海峡海上通行的控制。

    伊朗驻法国大使穆罕默德·阿明-内贾德(Mohammad Amin-Nejad)星期三(5月20日)在巴黎接受彭博采访时说:“伊朗和阿曼必须调动所有资源,才能做到既提供安全服务,又能以最适当的方式管理航运。”

    他通过翻译用波斯语说:“这中间肯定涉及成本,这是不言而喻的,希望从这条航道获益的人必须承担自己的份额。该体系将是透明的。如果今天人们希望局势改善,就必须找到解决问题的办法。”

    阿曼政府暂未回应置评请求。

    霍尔木兹海峡北接伊朗、南临阿曼,连接波斯湾与印度洋,平时承担全球约五分之一的石油和液化天然气运输量,同时也是铝和化肥等大宗商品的重要运输通道。

    阿明-内贾德坚称,海峡通行并未完全中断,他还在未提供证据的情况下声称,在伊斯兰革命卫队协助下,星期二至星期三总计有26艘油轮及其他船只完成通行。

    这一数字对近几周而言已属异常高位,但仍远低于战前日均约135艘船的水平。

    阿明-内贾德将通行减少归咎于高昂的保险成本,但航运公司指出,真正的问题在于导弹和无人机袭击风险,以及触碰水雷的危险。多数航运公司称,在战争结束前不会派船穿越海峡。

    阿明-内贾德淡化了伊朗与阿拉伯联合酋长国和沙特阿拉伯之间的紧张关系。彭博此前报道称,在停火前,这两个国家曾分别秘密袭击伊朗,反击伊朗向它们以及卡塔尔、巴林等国发射数千架无人机和导弹的行为。

    阿明-内贾德说:“对我们而言,最痛苦、最艰难的时刻是我们别无选择、不得不打击那些位于此类国家境内的军事基地时。一旦战争结束,长期积累的误解很容易得到解决。”

    5月21日,伊朗阿巴斯港附近霍尔木兹海峡的船只。 (路透社)

    伊朗正与阿曼讨论建立某种永久性收费体系,以正式确立对霍尔木兹海峡海上通行的控制。

    伊朗驻法国大使穆罕默德·阿明-内贾德(Mohammad Amin-Nejad)星期三(5月20日)在巴黎接受彭博采访时说:“伊朗和阿曼必须调动所有资源,才能做到既提供安全服务,又能以最适当的方式管理航运。”

    他通过翻译用波斯语说:“这中间肯定涉及成本,这是不言而喻的,希望从这条航道获益的人必须承担自己的份额。该体系将是透明的。如果今天人们希望局势改善,就必须找到解决问题的办法。”

    阿曼政府暂未回应置评请求。

    霍尔木兹海峡北接伊朗、南临阿曼,连接波斯湾与印度洋,平时承担全球约五分之一的石油和液化天然气运输量,同时也是铝和化肥等大宗商品的重要运输通道。

    阿明-内贾德坚称,海峡通行并未完全中断,他还在未提供证据的情况下声称,在伊斯兰革命卫队协助下,星期二至星期三总计有26艘油轮及其他船只完成通行。

    这一数字对近几周而言已属异常高位,但仍远低于战前日均约135艘船的水平。

    阿明-内贾德将通行减少归咎于高昂的保险成本,但航运公司指出,真正的问题在于导弹和无人机袭击风险,以及触碰水雷的危险。多数航运公司称,在战争结束前不会派船穿越海峡。

    阿明-内贾德淡化了伊朗与阿拉伯联合酋长国和沙特阿拉伯之间的紧张关系。彭博此前报道称,在停火前,这两个国家曾分别秘密袭击伊朗,反击伊朗向它们以及卡塔尔、巴林等国发射数千架无人机和导弹的行为。

    阿明-内贾德说:“对我们而言,最痛苦、最艰难的时刻是我们别无选择、不得不打击那些位于此类国家境内的军事基地时。一旦战争结束,长期积累的误解很容易得到解决。”

  • 美国国立卫生研究院传染病研究所代理负责人已离职,参议员透露


    2026-05-21T19:30:41.113Z / 路透社

    2025年4月23日插画中展示的美国国立卫生研究院标志与美国国旗 REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo

    华盛顿5月21日路透电 – 两名民主党参议员周四在参议院听证会上透露,美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)下属传染病研究所的代理负责人已辞职,而此时美国正忙于应对埃博拉和汉坦病毒疫情。

    杰弗里·陶本伯格于2025年4月出任美国国家过敏和传染病研究所(NIAID)代理负责人,此前唐纳德·特朗普政府罢免了该研究所前任所长。

    晨间速递:《每日案卷》简报将最新法律新闻直接发送至您的收件箱。在此注册

    参议员塔米·鲍德温在关于美国国立卫生研究院2027财年预算的听证会上开场时表示,陶本伯格已辞职,无法按计划出席作证。参议员帕蒂·默里也提及了陶本伯格的离职。

    作为特朗普任命的国立卫生研究院院长,杰伊·巴塔查里亚在证词及回答议员提问时并未否认这一离职消息,他表示该研究所需要新的领导层,因为其将不再专注于民用生物防御工作。

    负责监管国立卫生研究院的美国卫生与公众服务部未就陶本伯格的离职或美国国家过敏和传染病研究所的埃博拉应对工作置评。

    鲍德温表示:“在埃博拉疫情新发之际,我们这座全球顶尖传染病研究所乃至整个卫生机构都陷入了领导真空,这令人极为担忧。”

    在前行长安东尼·福奇任职期间,美国国家过敏和传染病研究所在美国应对新冠疫情以及2014至2016年西非埃博拉疫情中发挥了主导作用。

    巴塔查里亚称,多年来美国国家过敏和传染病研究所一直专注于民用生物防御——即防范和应对生物袭击、疫情大流行等威胁,但特朗普政府希望将其工作重心转向埃博拉、汉坦病毒等新发传染病,同时优先开展过敏与免疫学研究。

    “这一转变意味着我们需要新的领导层,”他补充道,并称离职的美国国家过敏和传染病研究所工作人员已被安排至国立卫生研究院的其他岗位。

    曾被卫生部长小罗伯特·F·肯尼迪解雇的美国国家过敏和传染病研究所前负责人珍妮·马拉佐在采访中表示,“这座全球顶尖生物医学研究机构”似乎并未与研究人员和业界合作开发治疗手段以应对刚果(金)的埃博拉疫情,这一点令人非常担忧。

    此次人事变动进一步加剧了这家全球最大生物医学研究公共资助机构的领导真空问题,国立卫生研究院下属27个研究所中有超过一半由代理负责人掌管。美国国家过敏和传染病研究所是该院第二大研究所,预算超过65亿美元。

    本月大西洋海域一艘豪华邮轮上暴发安第斯型汉坦病毒疫情,造成三人死亡,美国目前暂无确诊病例。但包括18名在内布拉斯加州接受隔离人员在内的41人正被监测是否可能感染该病毒。

    本报华盛顿记者艾哈迈德·阿布勒内因、芝加哥记者朱莉·斯坦休森报道;卡罗琳·休默、威尔·邓纳姆编辑

    Acting head of US NIH infectious disease institute has left, senators say

    2026-05-21T19:30:41.113Z / Reuters

    United States National Institutes of Health logo and U.S. flag are seen in this illustration taken April 23, 2025. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo

    WASHINGTON, May 21 (Reuters) – The acting director of the U.S. NIH’s infectious disease institute has stepped down, two Democratic senators said on Thursday during a Senate hearing, even as the United States ​scrambles to respond to Ebola and hantavirus outbreaks.

    Jeffery Taubenberger became acting director of the National Institute ‌of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in April 2025 after President Donald Trump’s administration pushed out the previous head.

    Jumpstart your morning with the latest legal news delivered straight to your inbox from The Daily Docket newsletter. Sign up here.

    Senator Tammy Baldwin opened the hearing on the National Institutes of Health’s 2027 budget by saying that Taubenberger had stepped down and would not testify as ​planned. Senator Patty Murray also mentioned Taubenberger’s departure.

    NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya, a Trump appointee, in his own ​testimony and responses to questions from lawmakers did not dispute the departure, saying that ⁠the institute needs new leadership because it will no longer focus on civilian biodefense.

    The Department of Health and ​Human Services, which oversees the NIH, did not respond to questions on Taubenberger’s exit or the NIAID’s role in ​Ebola response efforts.

    “In the midst of an emerging Ebola outbreak, we have a leadership vacuum at the world’s premier infectious disease institute and across our health agencies. This is of great concern,” Baldwin said.

    Under former director Anthony Fauci, NIAID played a leading role ​in the U.S. response to the COVID-19 pandemic and the 2014-2016 Ebola outbreak in West Africa.

    Bhattacharya said NIAID ​had focused on civilian biodefense – meaning preventing and preparing for threats like biological attacks and pandemics – for years but that the ‌Trump ⁠administration wanted to shift its focus to infectious diseases when they emerge, such as Ebola and hantavirus, and also prioritize allergy and immunology.

    “That shift means that we need some new leadership,” he said, adding that departing NIAID staff had been assigned to other roles at NIH.

    Jeanne Marrazzo, who was fired as the head of NIAID by ​Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy ​Jr., said in an ⁠interview that it is very concerning that “the world’s premier biomedical research institute” does not appear to be working with researchers and industry to develop treatments to address the ​Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

    The exits add to the leadership ​vacuum at the ⁠world’s largest public funder of biomedical research, with more than half of the NIH’s 27 institutes led by acting directors. NIAID is the agency’s second largest institute, with a budget of over $6.5 billion.

    There are no confirmed cases in the ⁠United States ​of the Andes hantavirus that killed three people in an outbreak ​aboard a luxury cruise ship in the Atlantic Ocean this month. But 41 people, including 18 quarantined in Nebraska, are being monitored for ​possible infection.

    Reporting by Ahmed Aboulenein in Washington and Julie Steenhuysen in Chicago; editing by Caroline Humer and Will Dunham

  • 特朗普称他推迟了人工智能行政令“因为我不喜欢当时看到的内容”


    2026年5月21日 / 美国东部时间下午2:18 / 哥伦比亚广播公司(CBS)新闻

    华盛顿——特朗普总统周四表示,他推迟了原定于当日下午签署的一项人工智能行政令,因为他不想“阻碍”美国在人工智能开发与进步领域引领全球。

    总统原计划周四下午签署一项有关联邦政府人工智能监管思路的行政令,这是本届政府推动美国人工智能进步举措的延续。但周四早些时候,总统在椭圆形办公室一场无关的活动中对记者表示,他推迟了此次签署仪式,称希望美国尽可能保持竞争力。

    “因为我不喜欢其中某些内容,所以我推迟了,”当《Punchbowl》记者在X平台发布相关消息后,特朗普被问及此次推迟时说道,“你知道,我们领先中国,领先所有国家,我不想做任何会阻碍这一领先地位的事。”

    总统称人工智能正带来“极大的益处”,并声称它正在美国创造大量就业岗位。“我原本以为这(行政令)可能会成为阻碍,我希望确保不会出现这种情况,”他补充道。

    “我推迟了那场仪式,那本是一场新闻发布会,实际上是一场签署仪式,”他说,“因为我不喜欢当时看到的内容。”

    目前尚不清楚特朗普认为行政令草案中的哪些具体条款可能会阻碍人工智能发展。

    周四早些时候,一位熟悉该行政令草案的消息人士告诉CBS新闻,当前版本的草案包含保障五角大楼系统和联邦民用系统安全、推广人工智能工具使用的相关内容。草案还呼吁与人工智能开发者建立自愿框架,以便在发布受监管模型时与联邦政府进行沟通,包括提前获取部分技术的预公开权限。

    玛格丽特·布伦南与艾玛·尼科尔森对本文亦有贡献。

    Trump says he’s postponing AI executive order “because I didn’t like what I was seeing”

    May 21, 2026 / 2:18 PM EDT / CBS News

    Washington— President Trump on Thursday said he delayed the signing of an executive order on artificial intelligence expected that afternoon because he doesn’t want to “get in the way” of the United States leading the world in the development and advancement of AI.

    The president was expected to sign an executive order Thursday afternoon concerning the federal government’s approach to AI, building on the administration’s efforts in championing AI advancement in the U.S. But early Thursday afternoon, the president told reporters in an unrelated Oval Office event that he is postponing that signing, saying he wants the U.S. to remain as competitive as possible.

    “Because I didn’t like certain aspects of it, I postponed it,” Mr. Trump said when asked about the delay after a reporter for Punchbowl posted the news on X. “I think it gets in the way of, you know, we’re leading China, we’re leading everybody, and I don’t want to do anything that’s going to get in the way of that lead.”

    The president said AI is causing “tremendous good” and claimed it is creating many jobs in the U.S. “I really thought that could have been a blocker, and I want to make sure that it’s not,” he added.

    “I postponed that meeting, it was a press conference, it was a signing, actually,” he said. “Because I didn’t like what I was seeing.”

    It’s not clear what specific provisions in the executive order draft Mr. Trump feels would have potentially stifled that progress.

    Earlier Thursday, a source familiar with the draft executive order told CBS News the current order included language to secure Pentagon systems, secure federal civilian systems and promote the use of AI tools. It also called for a voluntary framework with AI developers to engage the federal government over the release of covered models, including pre-public access to select technology.

    Margaret Brennan and Emma Nicholson contributed to this report.

  • CNN获得2024年大选民主党全国委员会长期保密的“复盘报告”。民主党全国委员会主席肯·马丁完全否认该文件


    2026-05-21T18:44:07.867Z / CNN 政治频道

    CNN获得2024年大选民主党全国委员会长期保密的“复盘报告”。民主党全国委员会主席肯·马丁完全否认该文件

    作者:达纳·巴什,CNN新闻
    发布于美国东部时间2026年5月21日周四下午2:44

    视频广告反馈
    CNN获得2024年大选民主党全国委员会长期保密的“复盘报告”。民主党全国委员会主席肯·马丁完全否认该文件

    《政坛内幕》栏目
    CNN的艾萨克·多弗雷尔加入《政坛内幕》节目组,解读他关于民主党全国委员会2024年“复盘报告”的报道。这份文件分享了一些民主党人认为他们输掉2024年总统大选的关键原因,但这份明显未完成的报告也未能提及该届大选存在的一些重大问题。

    5:44 • 消息来源:CNN

    By Dana Bash, CNN

    Published 2:44 PM EDT, Thu May 21, 2026

    Video Ad Feedback

    CNN obtains long-private DNC ‘autopsy’ for the 2024 campaign. DNC Chair Ken Martin completely disavows the document

    Inside Politics

    CNN’s Isaac Dovere joins the Inside Politics panel to break down his reporting on the DNC’s 2024 “autopsy”. The document shares key insights into why some Democrats believe they lost the 2024 presidential race, but the clearly unfinished report also fails to address some of the major issues at play in the campaign.

    5:44 • Source: CNN

  • 特朗普就最高法院重大公民身份对决发出警告:“这将是一场灾难”


    2026年5月21日 美国东部夏令时下午2:23 / 福克斯新闻

    最高法院预计将在未来几周内就特朗普2025年1月的行政令是否符合宪法作出裁决


    特朗普在重磅出生权公民身份裁决前抨击最高法院

    特朗普总统周四在椭圆形办公室发表讲话时表示,他预测最高法院将在出生权公民身份案件中作出对他不利的裁决。

    NEW 您现在可以收听福克斯新闻的文章!

    blob:https://www.foxnews.com/2516267d-e461-41fe-a72d-fa1e8665b0be

    收听本文
    3分钟

    唐纳德·特朗普总统周四抨击了最高法院,当时大法官们正准备裁决一起重大的出生权公民身份案件。他预测法院可能会否决他限制部分在美国出生儿童自动获得公民身份的举措。

    “如果美国最高法院允许这种情况发生,那将是一种耻辱。记住我所说的话,20%到25%进入我国的人将通过出生权公民身份入境,”特朗普说。“他们将通过出生权公民身份成为公民,这将让我们付出我甚至认为难以承受的代价。”

    这起案件的核心是特朗普2025年1月的行政令,该命令试图限制部分在美国出生儿童的自动公民身份,这一举措引发了重大的宪法争议。


    特朗普在4月份出席了口头辩论,当时首席大法官约翰·罗伯茨以及大法官艾米·科尼·巴雷特和凯坦吉·布朗·杰克逊质疑特朗普的行政令是否符合第十四修正案的公民身份条款。此次出席是已知的在任总统首次参加最高法院的口头辩论。

    最高法院关于出生权公民身份的对决裁决可能重塑美国

    特朗普预测法院将作出对他不利的裁决,并指出他对最近的裁决“不满意”。(索尔·勒布/法新社通过盖蒂图片社拍摄;大卫·休姆·肯纳利通过美国银行/盖蒂图片社拍摄;马里奥·塔马/盖蒂图片社拍摄)

    巴雷特当时警告称,对公民身份问题进行调查会引发混乱,而杰克逊则问道:“我们是不是要传唤孕妇进行作证?”

    特朗普周四预测法院将作出对他不利的裁决,并指出他对最近的裁决“不满意”,他提到了最近的一项关税裁决,称该裁决将让美国损失1490亿美元。

    “最高法院的这项裁决是一项非常重大的裁决。他们可能会作出对我不利的裁决,因为他们似乎喜欢这么做,”特朗普说。“坦率地说,我对某些裁决并不满意。”

    本届政府辩称,出生权公民身份为非法移民创造了动机,并被所谓的“生育旅游”机构所利用,这些机构诱使外国公民前往美国分娩,以便他们的孩子能够获得美国公民身份。

    “这一条款原本不是为了让中国富豪让他们的孩子成为我国公民而制定的。不管是富人还是穷人,这一条款原本是为奴隶的孩子制定的,”特朗普说。


    “这项修正案是……在内战结束后立即签署的。你看看日期,仅凭日期就能看出,这原本是与奴隶的孩子有关的,而人们一直在滥用它。如果这项裁决维持原判,我国将在经济上遭遇一场灾难,”他补充道。

    美国最高法院预计将在未来几周内就这项行政令作出裁决。

    这起案件引发了全国关注,抗议者认为出生权公民身份是美国的一项基本权利。

    中国利用“生育旅游”在美国获取长期政治影响力,作者警告

    “如果美国最高法院允许这种情况发生,那将是一种耻辱。记住我所说的话,20%到25%进入我国的人将通过出生权公民身份入境,”特朗普说。(美联社照片/杰奎琳·马丁)

    加州大学伯克利分校法学教授约翰·尤此前告诉福克斯新闻数字频道,他认为最高法院将否决特朗普的出生权公民身份行政令。

    “在当前的出生权公民身份宪法规则下,更好的做法是更有力地执行签证政策,并关闭那些鼓励和助长生育旅游的企业,”尤说。

    约翰·尤:最高法院对决暴露了反对出生权公民身份的脆弱论据

    2026年4月1日,华盛顿特区最高法院外的抗议者。(格雷姆·斯隆/彭博社通过盖蒂图片社拍摄)


    福克斯新闻的一项民调显示,69%的选民支持为非法移民在美国出生的子女提供出生权公民身份——这一比例较2006年福克斯新闻首次进行该调查时的45%有所上升。

    点击此处下载福克斯新闻应用程序

    福克斯新闻数字频道已联系最高法院征求评论。

    阿什利·J·迪梅拉为福克斯新闻数字频道报道政治新闻。

    Trump fires warning shot at SCOTUS as major citizenship showdown looms: ‘It will be a disaster’

    May 21, 2026 2:23pm EDT / Fox News

    Court expected to release a decision in coming weeks on whether Trump’s January 2025 executive order is constitutional

    Trump rips Supreme Court ahead of blockbuster birthright ruling

    President Trump said he predicts Supreme Court will rule against him in birth right citizenship case while speaking in the Oval Office on Thursday.

    NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

    blob:https://www.foxnews.com/2516267d-e461-41fe-a72d-fa1e8665b0be

    Listen to this article

    3 min

    President Donald Trump blasted the Supreme Court on Thursday as justices prepare to decide a major birthright citizenship case, predicting the court may rule against his effort to restrict automatic citizenship for some children born in the U.S.

    “It would be a disgrace if the Supreme Court of the United States allows that to happen. Remember what I said, 20 to 25% of the people coming into our country will come in through birthright citizenship,” said Trump. “They’ll become citizens through birthright citizenship, and it will cost us numbers that are, I don’t even think they’re doable.”

    The case centers on Trump’s January 2025 executive order seeking to limit automatic citizenship for some children born in the U.S., a move that has triggered a major constitutional fight.

    Trump sat in on oral arguments in April as Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson questioned whether the president’s executive order complies with the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment. The visit marked the first known time a sitting president attended oral arguments at the Supreme Court.

    SUPREME COURT’S SHOWDOWN ON BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP DECISION COULD RESHAPE AMERICA

    Trump predicts the court will rule against him, noting he is “not happy” with recent rulings.(Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images; David Hume Kennerly via Bank of America/Getty Images; Mario Tama/Getty Images)

    Barrett warned at the time that investigating citizenship would create chaos, while Jackson asked, “Are we bringing pregnant women in for depositions?”

    Trump predicted on Thursday that the court will rule against him, noting he is “not happy” with recent rulings, pointing to the recent tariff decision he said will cost the U.S. $149 billion.

    “This decision by the Supreme Court is a very big one. They’ll probably rule against me because they seem to like doing that,” said Trump. “You know, frankly, I’m not happy with some of the decisions.”

    The administration has argued that birthright citizenship has created incentives for illegal immigration and has been exploited by so-called “birth tourism” operations, in which foreign nationals travel to the U.S. to give birth so their children can obtain American citizenship.

    “This was not meant for Chinese billionaires to have their children become citizens of our country. This was meant, or other rich people, poor people. This was meant for the babies of slaves,” said Trump.

    “This was signed… right after the Civil War. You look at the dates, the dates alone, immediately after, this was having to do with the babies of slaves, and people have used it. And if this is allowed to stand, it will be a disaster economically for our country,” he added.

    The nation’s highest court is expected to rule on the executive order in the coming weeks.

    The case has drawn national attention, with protesters arguing that birthright citizenship is a fundamental American right.

    CHINA EXPLOITING ‘BIRTH TOURISM’ TO GAIN LONG-TERM POLITICAL INFLUENCE IN US, AUTHOR WARNS

    “It would be a disgrace if the Supreme Court of the United States allows that to happen. Remember what I said, 20 to 25% of the people coming into our country will come in through birthright citizenship,” said Trump.(AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

    University of California Berkeley law professor John Yoo previously told Fox News Digital he believes the Supreme Court will overrule the Trump birthright order.

    “The better way to operate under the current constitutional rule of birthright citizenship is to more vigorously enforce visas and to shut down businesses that encourage and enable birth tourism,” said Yoo.

    JOHN YOO: SUPREME COURT SHOWDOWN EXPOSES SHAKY CASE AGAINST BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP

    Demonstrators outside the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on April 1, 2026.(Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

    A Fox News Poll found that 69% of voters support birthright citizenship for children born in the United States to illegal immigrants — which is up from 45%, when Fox News first asked in 2006.

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    Fox News Digital reached out to the Supreme Court for comment.

    Ashley J. DiMella reports on politics for Fox News Digital.

  • 为特朗普“反武器化”基金辩护者寥寥无几,且处境艰难


    2026-05-21T19:28:25.630Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/21/politics/defenders-trump-anti-weaponization-fund

    • 特朗普17.76亿美元的“反武器化”基金在国会山遭遇质疑,几乎无人愿意为其辩护。
    • 为其发声的人都是在为和解的理念辩护,而非这项和解协议的具体条款。
    • 即便极少数共和党人出面辩护,也都附带了保留条件。

    本文由AI生成摘要,经CNN编辑审核。

    唐纳德·特朗普总统与美国政府达成的设立17.76亿美元“反武器化”基金的和解协议,似乎在国会山反响极差。

    多名共和党参议员对该基金表示怀疑,甚至直言批评。该基金可用于向定罪罪犯支付赔偿,其中包括2021年1月6日冲击国会大厦的人员。拜登政府甚至公开表示,只要那些当日袭击警察的人被认为受到了拜登政府的不当对待,就有可能获得赔偿。

    “蠢到家了”,即将退休的北卡罗来纳州参议员汤姆·蒂利斯周四如此评价。不久后,该基金问题打乱了参议院对一项重大移民执法法案的审议,议员们纷纷离场。

    参议院甚至考虑对该基金设置限制,这无疑是对特朗普的显著谴责。

    但与这些谴责同样能说明问题的,是为该基金辩护的声音何其有限且牵强。站出来为其辩护的人相对较少,且几乎全部来自政府内部,而非国会。即便那些冒险出面辩护的人,也难以给出令人信服的理由。

    他们大多似乎只是在为和解的概念辩护,而非这项和解协议的具体条款和流程。

    回顾一下,该基金将赋予特朗普政府的司法部极大的自由裁量权来分配这17.76亿美元,几乎不受问责机制约束。特朗普的前辩护律师、代理司法部长托德·布兰奇将任命管理该基金的五名委员会成员,国会领袖仅能对一名任命人选提出意见。这些成员将直接对特朗普负责,因为他可以无理由罢免他们。该基金的相关报告也将保密。

    这一切并非源于针对相关人员的诉讼,而是特朗普就国税局非法泄露其纳税申报单提起的诉讼的结果。(特朗普撤回了100亿美元的诉讼并达成了和解,尽管实际上他在谈判中站在了双方的立场上。)

    我们周二还获悉,在和解协议的一项新增条款中,司法部还将向特朗普、他的儿子们及其企业提供截至本周和解协议签署之日的过往税务问题的有效豁免——此举可能会极大地帮助这位此前被认定存在欺诈行为的总统。

    直白地说,很难解释为什么针对特朗普纳税申报单的未经授权泄露,需要采取这样的应对措施。

    但还是有人站出来尝试解释。

    周四上午,负责司法部纽约南区的美国检察官杰伊·克莱顿将该和解协议称为对“政府官员故意泄露你的纳税申报单以在公众面前让你难堪”这一情况的合法解决方式。

    “他们试图点名羞辱他,试图毁掉他,”克莱顿在CNBC节目中表示,“好吧,我们解决了这个问题。”

    但没有证据表明有政府官员“故意”泄露特朗普的纳税申报单以伤害他。事实上,泄露者是一名为咨询公司工作的政府承包商,他有权接触特朗普和其他人的纳税申报单。

    即便克莱顿对事件的描述准确,也不清楚为什么这项安排会涉及向与纳税申报单泄露毫无关系的第三方支付赔偿。

    周二为该基金辩护时,副总统J·D·万斯援引了蒂娜·彼得斯作为合适的受助者例子。彼得斯是科罗拉多州前选举办事员,最近获得了民主党州长贾里德·波利斯的赦免。

    “哪怕你完全相信检察官对她的指控,她充其量也只是犯了轻罪 trespassing(非法侵入),”万斯说,“但却有人对她严惩不贷。”

    但彼得斯并未因非法侵入被定罪;她被判有罪的罪名是与特朗普的盟友合谋破坏其所在县的投票系统,以证实特朗普关于2020年大选存在大规模选民欺诈的虚假说法。

    更重要的是,她甚至不属于该基金宣传时所称的受益人群体,因为她是由地方当局起诉的,而非拜登政府。(特朗普政府曾表示,该基金是为那些遭受过往政府“武器化”对待的受害者设立的,但彼得斯的起诉部分是由一名共和党地方地区检察官发起的。)

    该基金最常见的辩护者是布兰奇,他周二就该基金作证,并在周三接受CNN记者宝拉·里德采访时继续为其辩护。

    这位代理司法部长表示:“引发愤怒的是我们做了一件完全合法、符合法律规定且此前也曾有过先例的事情。”

    政府及其盟友将“反武器化”基金与此前用于赔偿政府受害者的基金相提并论。最常被提及的是“Keepsagle诉维尔萨克案”,在该案中,联邦政府设立基金,赔偿因农业部歧视而遭受损失的美国原住民农民和牧场主。

    但两者存在关键且极其重要的区别。最大的区别在于,此前那起案件的和解协议是作为诉讼的一部分由法院批准的,而诉讼的实际参与者正是将从中受益的各方。

    而特朗普基金所依据的和解协议,是由他的团队与他领导的政府谈判达成的。此案从未涉及如今将从中受益的各方,法官也未参与批准该和解协议或基金的参数。

    “这才是关键问题,”在“Keepsagle案”中代表美国原住民的律师约瑟夫·塞勒斯告诉CNN,“你必须服务于在提起的诉讼中利益攸关的同一社区。”

    此外,尽管布兰奇保证和解协议是合法的,但即便特朗普与他领导的政府达成和解在法律上是允许的,也不意味着这是一件好事。合法的事情有很多,但未必符合道德或伦理标准。

    最后,即便极少数为这项和解协议背书的共和党议员,也附带了一些保留条件。

    据《爱荷华公报》报道,参议院司法委员会主席查克·格拉斯利在谈及该基金时表示:“我认为大家都一致认为,联邦政府不应……被用于针对政治对手的政治武器化,无论对手是共和党还是民主党。”

    这位爱荷华州共和党议员还指出,前联邦调查局官员彼得·斯特佐克和丽莎·佩奇曾就2024年泄露他们短信的事件与政府达成和解并获得赔偿。

    “我没看到民主党人对这项明显不合理的赔偿提出抱怨,”他说。

    但同样,斯特佐克和佩奇都参与了相关诉讼,他们的和解协议也经过了法官的批准。

    特朗普的这一举措之所以格外不同寻常,是因为设立该基金是为了帮助那些根本没有提起诉讼向政府索要赔偿的人。特朗普实际上是在试图大幅降低向他们支付赔偿的门槛——而这在很大程度上仅需得到他所掌控的人员的批准。

    考虑到这位总统在16个月前决定赦免几乎所有1月6日国会山骚乱的参与者,包括袭击警察的人,这似乎意味着可能会出现有问题的赔偿支付。

    这或许也解释了为什么就连格拉斯利也在呼吁加强国会监督。

    “首先,别忘了这项基金要接受国会监督,”他说。

    “我的司法委员会会定期邀请司法部长参加监督听证会。我相信这将是他们讨论的重要议题。”

    Defenders of Trump’s ‘anti-weaponization’ fund are few. And they’re struggling

    2026-05-21T19:28:25.630Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/21/politics/defenders-trump-anti-weaponization-fund

    • Trump’s $1.776 billion ‘anti-weaponization’ fund is facing skepticism on Capitol Hill, with few willing to defend it.
    • People who are vouching for it are defending the concept of a settlement, rather that the terms of this one.
    • And even the rare Republicans offering defenses are doing so with caveats.

    AI-generated summary was reviewed by a CNN editor.

    President Donald Trump’s settlement with his own government to create a $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization” fund appears to be going over like a lead balloon on Capitol Hill.

    Many Republican senators have offered skeptical or even outright critical comments about the fund, which could be used to pay convicted criminals, including those who stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021. The administration has even left open the possibility of compensating people who assaulted police that day, as long as they are viewed as having been mistreated by the Biden administration.

    “Stupid on stilts,” said retiring North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis on Thursday, shortly before the situation derailed the Senate’s consideration of a major immigration enforcement package and lawmakers left town.

    The Senate has even flirted with placing limits on the fund in what would be a remarkable rebuke of Trump.

    But what’s as telling as the rebukes is how limited and strained the defenses have been. Relatively few have stepped forward to vouch for the fund, and nearly all of them have been from the administration rather than Congress. And even those who have ventured defenses have struggled to produce cogent ones.

    Mostly, they appear to be defending the concept of a settlement, rather than the terms and process of this settlement.

    To recap, the fund would give Trump’s Justice Department great latitude to dole out the $1.776 billion, with little in the way of accountability. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, who is Trump’s former defense lawyer, gets to appoint the five members of the commission who will run the fund, with congressional leaders getting to weigh in on one appointee. Those members would be answerable to Trump personally in that he could remove them without cause. The fund’s reports would also be confidential.

    All of this is the result not of litigation involving these people, but of Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS for the illegal leaking of his tax returns. (Trump withdrew that $10 billion lawsuit and reached the settlement, despite effectively being on both sides of the negotiations.)

    We also learned Tuesday that, in a late addition to the settlement, the DOJ was also giving Trump, his sons and his business effective immunity for past tax issues, up to the date of the settlement this week — a move that could greatly benefit a president who has previously been found liable for fraud.

    Put plainly, it’s difficult to explain why all of this is an appropriate response to the unauthorized leaking of Trump’s tax returns.

    But some have stepped forward to try.

    On Thursday morning, US Attorney Jay Clayton, who runs the Justice Department’s Southern District of New York, cast the settlement as a legitimate resolution to a situation in which government officials “intentionally leak your tax returns to embarrass you in the public.”

    “They tried to name and shame him. They tried to destroy him,” Clayton said on CNBC. “Okay, we resolved that.”

    But there is no evidence that a government official “intentionally” leaked Trump’s tax returns to hurt him. Instead, it was a government contractor who worked for a consulting firm and had access to the returns of Trump and others.

    Even if Clayton’s summary of the situation were accurate, it’s not clear why this arrangement would involve compensating third parties who had nothing to do with the leaked tax returns.

    While defending the fund on Tuesday, Vice President JD Vance spotlighted Tina Peters as an example of someone who would be an appropriate recipient of the money. Peters is the former Colorado elections clerk who recently got clemency from Democratic Gov. Jared Polis.

    “This is a woman who, at worst, if you believe everything that the prosecutor said about her, committed misdemeanor trespassing,” Vance said. “And somebody threw the book at her.”

    But Peters wasn’t convicted of trespassing; she was convicted of conspiring with Trump’s allies to breach voting systems in her county to try to validate Trump’s false claims of mass 2020 voter fraud.

    What’s more, she isn’t even the kind of person the fund has been advertised for, given she was prosecuted by local authorities, not the Biden administration. (The Trump administration has said the fund is for victims of the “weaponization” of past administrations, but Peters was prosecuted in part by a Republican local district attorney.)

    The most frequent defender of the fund has been Blanche, who testified about it on Tuesday. And he continued to make the case in an interview with CNN’s Paula Reid on Wednesday.

    The acting attorney general said that “the outrage is (over) us doing something that is completely legal, allowed under our laws, and has been done before.”

    The administration and its allies have compared the “anti-weaponization” fund to previous funds to compensate victims of the government. Most-cited has been the Keepseagle v. Vilsack case, in which the federal government created a fund to compensate Native American farmers and ranchers over discrimination by the Agriculture Department.

    But there are key and hugely important differences. The biggest one was that the settlement in that earlier case was approved by a court as part of litigation that actually involved the parties that would benefit.

    The settlement that resulted in Trump’s fund, however, was reached by his side negotiating with the government he leads. The case never involved the parties that will now benefit, and a judge wasn’t involved in approving the settlement or the parameters of the fund.

    “That really is the critical issue,” Joseph Sellers, a lawyer who represented the Native Americans in the Keepseagle case, told CNN. “You have to serve the same community whose interests were at stake in the litigation that was brought.”

    What’s more, despite Blanche’s assurances that the settlement is legal, just because it might be legal for Trump to reach a settlement with the government he leads, that doesn’t mean it’s a good thing. There are many things that are legal but are immoral or unethical.

    And finally, even one of the rare Republican lawmakers to vouch for this settlement did so while hedging a bit.

    “I think that there’s a unanimous understanding that the federal government shouldn’t be … used for political weaponization against your political enemies, whether they’re Republican or Democrat,” Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley said when talking about the fund, according to the Iowa Gazette.

    The Iowa Republican also noted that former FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page benefitted from settlements with the government over the leaking of their text messages in 2024.

    “I didn’t see Democrats complaining about that clearly illegitimate payout,” he said.

    But again, Strzok and Page were involved in the litigation, and their settlement was approved by a judge.

    What makes Trump’s gambit so extraordinary is that this fund is being created to benefit people who haven’t bothered to file lawsuits seeking money from the government. Trump is effectively trying to make it a lot easier to pay them — largely only subject to the approval of people he controls.

    Given this is a president who 16 months ago decided to blanket pardon nearly all January 6 rioters, including those who assaulted police, that would seem a recipe for some potentially problematic payouts.

    Which might be why even Grassley is also invoking his oversight.

    “First of all, don’t forget that this is subject to congressional oversight,” he said.

    “My judiciary committee has the attorney general in frequently for oversight hearings. I’m sure this is going to be a big subject of discussion with them.”