He now faces another Senate trial, this time to determine whether or not he incited an insurrection.

他現在面臨著參議院的另一次審判，這次是為了確定他是否煽動起義。

But there are several other key differences and MAWR historic firsts to come in Trump's second impeachment trial, says Reuters legal correspondent John Wolf, is very unusual impeachment because it's going to be of Trump after he's left office.

但在特朗普的第二次彈劾審判中，還有其他幾個關鍵的差異和MAWR歷史性的第一次，路透社法律記者約翰-沃爾夫說，這是非常不尋常的彈劾，因為它將在特朗普離職後對他進行彈劾。

Trump and his defenders have already argued that you can't impeach a former official in the sense you can't have a Senate trial for a former official.

特朗普和他的辯護人已經認為，你不能彈劾一個前官員，就像你不能對一個前官員進行參議院審判一樣。

But most legal experts reject that, and they say it makes sense as a matter of policy because it can result in Trump's disqualification from future office.

但大多數法律專家拒絕了這一點，他們說，這在政策上是合理的，因為這可能導致特朗普失去未來的資格。

In the trial, Trump's legal team is likely to argue that his remarks before his supporters stormed the capital were not a call to violence and were protected under the First Amendment.

在審判中，特朗普的法律團隊很可能會辯稱，他在支持者衝進首都之前的言論不是呼籲暴力，受第一修正案保護。

But some legal experts say that's beside the point.

但有法律專家表示，這不是重點。

All sorts of First Amendment protected speech could be grounds for impeachment.

各種受第一修正案保護的言論都可以成為彈劾的理由。

I mean, if we had a president using racial slurs and promoting fascism and denying the Holocaust, nobody disputes that that president could be impeached, but that's all protected by the First Amendment.

我的意思是，如果我們有一個總統 使用種族汙言穢語 並促進法西斯主義 並否認大屠殺， 沒有人質疑，總統 可以被彈劾， 但這一切都保護 第一修正案。

Incitement for purposes of the Senate trial is whatever Congress wants it to be.

在參議院的審判中，煽動是國會想要的任何東西。

So if Congress thinks that Trump incited an insurrection that his speech provoked that attack on the capital, they can convict him.

所以，如果國會認為特朗普煽動了叛亂，他的演講引發了對首都的攻擊，他們可以給他定罪。

At least 17 Republicans would have to join the Democrats to convict Trump and Mawr.

至少要有17名共和黨人和民主黨人一起，才能給特朗普和莫爾定罪。

Republican senators have said they'd consider doing so this time around.

共和黨參議員表示，他們這次會考慮這樣做。

One big difference with Trump's second impeachment that's underway is there's more bipartisan support in the House, which effectively charged Trump.

與特朗普正在進行的第二次彈劾有一個很大的不同，就是在眾議院有更多的兩黨支持，這實際上是對特朗普的指控。

We had 10 Republicans join with Democrats and say, You know, we see an impeachable offenses here and in the Senate, which will conduct a trial to determine Trump's guilt.

我們有10名共和黨人與民主黨人一起說，你知道，我們在這裡和參議院看到了一個可彈劾的罪行，參議院將進行審判以確定特朗普的罪行。

We could see quite a few Republicans cross party lines.

我們可以看到不少共和黨人跨越黨派界限。

Maybe not.

也許不是

Not enough to convict him but mawr than last time when we only had one.

雖然不足以給他定罪，但比上次我們只有一個人的時候要好得多。

Republican Senator Mitt Romney of Utah, who joined Democrats in condemning Trump.

猶他州的共和黨參議員米特-羅姆尼，他和民主黨人一起譴責特朗普。

While the Senate would need a two thirds majority to convict Trump, historical precedent suggests the Senate would Onley need a simple majority to disqualify him from holding office in the future.

雖然參議院需要三分之二多數才能給特朗普定罪，但歷史先例表明，參議院Onley需要簡單多數才能取消他未來的任職資格。

But Wolf says.

但沃爾夫說。

Few really know how that would play out In this case, there's gonna be, you know, some debate about the proper vote threshold for disqualification.

很少有人真正知道這將是如何發揮出來 在這種情況下，會有，你知道，一些辯論 關於適當的投票門檻取消資格。

There'll be debate about whether you can disqualify if you don't first convict, so we are definitely in some uncharted legal territory here.

如果你不先定罪，是否可以取消資格會有爭議，所以我們在這裡肯定是在一些未知的法律領域。

There's not a lot of court rulings to rely on, and for that reason I'd be worry of anyone who says they're absolutely certain about what the rules of engagement are going to be.

沒有多少法院的裁決可以依靠，為此，我會對任何一個說自己絕對確定交往規則的人感到擔心。

In Trump's last impeachment, the House charged him with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress stemming from his request that Ukraine investigate his political rival, now his successor.

在特朗普的最後一次彈劾中，眾議院指控他濫用權力和妨礙國會，源於他要求烏克蘭調查他的政治對手，現在的繼任者。

That made Trump the third US president to be impeached, but no president has ever been convicted in a Senate trial.

這使得特朗普成為第三位被彈劾的美國總統，但從來沒有一位總統在參議院的審判中被定罪。