Journalists are accustomed to being attacked, and the Administration’s insults have served only to motivate many of them. But Bannon’s methodology may be more effective in intimidating civil servants. The particular anxiety in Washington last week was that the White House might ally with climate-change deniers and hard-line ideologues in the Republican-led Congress to suppress federal science and medical research, stir up hate campaigns against immigrants and minorities, or sideline intelligence analysts who report inconvenient facts.
　
　　記者們早已習於被攻擊了，川普政府的辱罵也只是更加激勵他們。巴農的作法只能見效於威嚇公務員而已。華盛頓上週瀰漫恐慌氛圍，在共和黨掌控國會的情形下，白宮可能與全球暖化否定派及強硬派結盟，藉以壓制聯邦政府的科學與醫學研究、挑起針對移民與少數族群的仇恨運動，或是邊緣化總是通報不利於川普政府事實的情報分析師。
　
These fears may prove overblown, but Trump’s first week has offered scant reassurance. On Inauguration Day, the Environmental Protection Agency suspended all activity on its Twitter account, which had been posting about the Clean Air Act, water quality, and how to keep one’s home safe from radon and carbon monoxide. The next day, after the National Park Service retweeted an accurate post about the size of the Inaugural crowd, the President called the director of the service to ask why its staff had shared the item—surely the most gratuitous case of Presidential intimidation of the career bureaucracy since the Nixon Administration.
　
　　這些恐慌情緒或許遭過度誇大，但川普在上任的第一週，確實未給予大眾充足的保證。在就職日當天，美國國家環境保護局暫停其推特帳號的一切活動，先前環保局總是張貼關於《淨化空氣法案》、水質以及如何防範氡與一氧化碳以維持居家安全的資訊；而在就職隔日，美國國家公園管理局則回推了一則精確描述就職當日人潮的推文，川普竟就此叫相關業務機關主管去請教他的下屬為何要分享此貼文。這無疑是尼克森政府以來，總統威嚇公務機關最無端的案例。
　
When the White House changes hands from one party to another, it is routine for the new team to adjust what information government agencies and Web sites put out about public policy. In the months ahead, it will be necessary to distinguish between cases where Trump’s appointees are merely reframing policy communication, as their predecessors have done, and cases of improper interference with career employees, scientists, and whistle-blowers. The Supreme Court has upheld the right of federal employees to speak out on public issues as private individuals, and there are robust laws protecting whistle-blowers in the government workforce. Last week, the Office of Special Counsel, an independent agency empowered by Congress, issued a statement reminding the new Administration of the “statutory right to blow the whistle”—a right that can override other government policies.
　
　　每當白宮易主，新政府團隊會慣例地調整政府資訊部門與政府官網的市政宣傳策略。在剛上任的前幾個月，區別政務官單純重塑前任者的政策宣傳策略，以及政府雇員、科學家和吹哨者對宣傳策略的不當介入，是重要而必須的。最高法院始終保障政府雇員以私人身分對公共事務表達意見的權利，也存在堅強的法律保護政府機關裡的吹哨者。上週，美國國會授權的獨立機關「特別檢察署」發表一份聲明，提醒川普政府「告發政府違法或不當行為是法定的權利」，著實是一種凌駕於一切當局政策之上的權利。
　
Still, since the Second World War, as Presidents of both parties have shaped the executive branch’s public communications, they have enjoyed great latitude. After the George W. Bush Administration suppressed climate-research findings by career scientists, the Obama Administration enacted new scientific-integrity policies. Trump could overturn them. During the Obama Administration, some federal agencies allowed their scientists to identify where they worked while debating freely on social media. The Trump Administration could withdraw those permissions.
　
　　然而，自二戰以來，美國歷屆兩黨總統接連形塑出行政部門的大眾宣傳策略，且享有高度自由的裁量空間。小布希政府曾壓制專業科學家的氣候調查，歐巴馬上任後就頒布全新的科學研究誠信政策，如今川普可能將其推翻。在歐巴馬任期中，某些政府機構允許科學家在社交媒體上自由辯駁的同時，表明其服務的機關。川普也或將撤銷此項許可。
　
It may be a weak basis for hope, but the prospects for transparent government and sound taxpayer-funded science could depend in part on Trump’s volatility. The President has not worked for long with his most important Cabinet members or advisers, including Bannon. His political fortunes are tied to those of Republican leaders in Congress, but the trust between them is tenuous. In the ways of Washington, these sorts of unstable relationships can yield a gusher of media leaks. Last week, a remarkable flow of government e-mails and draft executive orders made their way to news outlets. That is according to constitutional design. When the Founders enacted the First Amendment, they could not have imagined the personage of Donald Trump, but they did have tyrants in mind.
　
　　這麼說或許不夠有說服力，但是，人們對於透明政府以及完善納稅人資助科學研究的部分期望，可以寄託於川普的反覆無常。川普尚未與其重要的內閣成員或顧問（包括巴農）共事許久。他的政治前途與國會的共和黨領袖息息相關，但兩者間的信任卻極其薄弱。在華府的世界裡，這種不穩定的關係往往會引來媒體解密的爆發。上週，大量的政府郵件與行政命令草案露出於新聞。如此情形與憲政設計恰恰相符。當美國開國元勛訂定憲法第一修正案時，他們或許沒有預料到大砲川普的出現，但他們時時在心中警惕著專制君主的再起。
　
——————–
 
作者：Steve Coll
編譯：涂敏
原文網址：http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/06/trumps-information-wars