[討論] 攻敵必救車上竊聽的內容是說什麼?

[pled (高分子led)]

Ron Sperling是參議員 也是Sloane案聽證會主席

Sloane被控“干涉預國會議員海外旅遊”

違反參議院道德守則(Senate Ethics Rules)





看到後來大家都知道

Dupont賄絡Ron Sperling, 就像是拿錢給法官影響辦案一樣




補上車內他們對話的台詞：

Dupont: Things are not looking so good for you this cycle, Ron.

        You ask me, you're gonna need a lot more paid media.

Ron Sperling: I didn't ask you

Dupont: Now, who might just be able to fund those coveted TV spots.

Ron Sperling: I'm committed to Heaton-Harries.

              I can't vote for it with one hand and

              choke it with the other.

Dupont: Under cover of impartiality, sure you can.

        You've been a vocal critic of lobbyists in the pasts.

       You'll lead an inquiry into Sloane's affairs in response to

       growing media pressure regarding her litany of misdeeds

Ron Sperling: The cost of hearings is paid from the public purse.

              聽證會的錢是納稅人出的

Dupont: Ron, our clients have identified you as the man to pull this off.

        If you decline, I can't stop from them blitzing you

        with negative finance.

        They won't stop until they annihilate you.

        You know where the root of the word “annihilate”?

        It's Latin. It means reduce to nothing.

        That's what they're going to do to you, Ron.

Ron Sperling: So what?

              I'll be taking a wedge from Bill Sandford and leading

             the attack on Heaton-Harries' most visible advocate?

             A sixth-grader could connects the dots.

Dupont: We can create a structure to obfuscate the source.

        Your big wedge will arrive courtesy of 8 to 12 smaller

        entities with no affiliation to guns.

Ron Sperling: How big a wedge are we talking?

Dupont: Big enough to be the difference between the continuation

        of your duties as a United States Senator and the

        reduction of your career to nothing.








想請問：

(1)如果要控告Sloane“干涉預國會議員海外旅遊” 還有“竊聽”

   為什麼一定要賄絡參議員Ron Sperling?

   不賄絡他就沒辦法開聽證會嗎?

(2)“聽證會的錢是納稅人出的”是什麼意思?

   上下文中冒出這句話很奇怪

(3)最後Sloane還是坐牢

   “竊聽”是罪證確鑿的

   那“干涉預國會議員海外旅遊”這個罪名有成立嗎?

--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 123.192.80.201
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/movie/M.1526961097.A.9E3.html
推 ckshchen    : 3.有成立啊，關鍵的簽名故意自己簽就是
推 harkk2001   : 1.Sperling是反對派,賄絡他倒戈,並且主持聽證會向
→ harkk2001   : 他的選民交代
→ harkk2001   : 2.大概想給軟釘子幫納稅人省錢
→ suzan       : 最後坐牢是不是也因作偽證？
→ ckshchen    : 沒，是避免她手下做偽證
→ ckshchen    : 被告本身說謊不構成偽證
推 Vassili242  : 是做偽證啊 這是國會聽證會 她是證人 不是被告
→ jennya      : 2.「聽證會的錢可是納稅人出的」