The Senate will reconvene on Saturday morning, when members are expected to vote on whether to convict Trump Day four of a trial, which has an all but guaranteed outcome.

參議院將於週六上午再次召開會議，屆時成員們將就是否對特朗普定罪第四天的審判進行投票，這有一個全部但有保證的結果。

Yet its participants push on.

但其參與者卻在不斷推陳出新。

It was time for Donald Trump's legal team to make their defense on lay out why the former president shouldn't be convicted.

唐納德-特朗普的法律團隊是時候做出他們的辯護，闡述為什麼前總統不應該被定罪。

The article of impeachment now before the Senate, is an unjust and blatantly unconstitutional act of political vengeance.

現在提交給參議院的彈劾條款，是一種不公正的、公然違憲的政治報復行為。

Their argument focused on freedom of speech, insisting Trump was exercising his First Amendment rights when casting doubt on the election results.

他們的論點集中在言論自由上，堅持認為特朗普對選舉結果提出質疑是在行使第一修正案的權利。

The Constitution in the First Amendment must certainly apply to these impeachment proceedings, and Mr Trump's speech deserves full protection under the First Amendment With Defense also showed a 10 minute video off Democrats using the word fight to argue that Trump's words off fight like hell on January 6 did not incite the rioters who attacked the capital afterwards.

第一修正案中的憲法當然必須適用於這些彈劾程序，特朗普先生的言論應該得到第一修正案的充分保護與辯護還播放了一段10分鐘的視頻，關閉民主黨人使用戰鬥一詞，以證明特朗普在1月6日關閉戰鬥像地獄一樣的話語並沒有煽動之後襲擊首都的騷亂者。

Suddenly, the word fight is off limits sparrows, the hypocrisy and false indignation.

忽然間，鬥字不準麻雀，虛偽與假憤。

The defense team's statements followed two days of arguments by Democrat prosecutors, who said Trump set the stage for the violence of January 6.

辯護團隊的聲明是在民主黨檢察官兩天的辯論之後發表的，他們說特朗普為1月6日的暴力事件提供了舞臺。

They said he summoned the crowd toe Washington and did nothing to stop the rioting, even as a played out on television.

他們說，他把人群召集到華盛頓，卻沒有采取任何措施來阻止騷亂，甚至在電視上播放。

This is about protecting our republic and articulating and defining the standards of presidential conduct.

這是為了保護我們的共和國，闡明和確定總統的行為標準。

And if you want this to be a standard for totally appropriate presidential conduct going forward, be my guest.

如果你想讓這成為今後總統行為的標準 那就請自便吧

But we're headed for a very different kind of country at that point, Mr President.

但到那時，我們將走向一個非常不同的國家，總統先生。

The Democrats are unlikely to gain a conviction as few Republican senators have come out against Trump, who remains popular among Republican voters.

由於很少有共和黨參議員站出來反對特朗普，而特朗普在共和黨選民中仍然很受歡迎，民主黨不太可能獲得定罪。

Both parties are eager to move to a final vote, which could come as soon as Saturday.

雙方都急於進入最後的投票，這可能最快在週六進行。

But all signs point to an ending as a partisan draw on the second acquittal for Donald Trump.

但所有跡象表明，結局是唐納德-特朗普第二次無罪釋放的黨派平局。

What they're doing and for more on this, I'm joined by D.

他們在做什麼，更多關於這個問題，我和D。

W reporter William Blue Croft, William.

W記者威廉-藍-克羅夫特，威廉。

One thing I'd like to understand the defense was given 16 hours to make its case, but it took less than four.

有一件事我想明白，辯方有16個小時的陳述時間，但只用了不到4個小時。

I mean, what does that mean?

我是說，那是什麼意思？

Well, Democrats, House managers, the prosecution in their time also didn't take their entire 16 hours a lot of.

好吧，民主黨人，眾議院經理，檢方在他們的時間也沒有花他們整整16個小時很多。

But they did take Mawr than the three or four hours that we saw yesterday from the defense.

但他們確實比昨天從防守中看到的三四個小時拿下了莫爾。

I mean, it basically says that they don't think very highly of this trial.

我的意思是，它基本上說，他們不認為非常高的這個試驗。

They want to get it over with.

他們想把事情解決掉。

They know that the outcome is pretty much assured.

他們知道，結果是很有把握的。

They don't have to mount a very strong defense to get Republicans to vote with them and therefore acquit Donald Trump.

他們不需要進行很強的辯護，就能讓共和黨人投他們的票，從而宣告唐納德-特朗普無罪。

And also remember, there were repeated shakeups in the Trump legal team, so that probably affected planning and organization and just who was doing what.

還記得，特朗普的法律團隊屢屢出現動盪，所以這可能影響了規劃和組織，只是誰在做什麼。

Really.

真的嗎？

The effort was very clearly reflected by how poorly they did in that first time around.

第一次他們的表現有多差，非常明顯地反映了他們的努力。

Even Donald Trump was reported to have been outraged at how weak their original defense was, and you could hear in.

據報道，就連唐納德-特朗普也對他們原來的防禦是多麼的薄弱感到憤怒，你可以聽到在。

There's much stronger, more muscular defense yesterday, very much with having Donald Trump watching this and many of its supporters in mind when they went through their points on and how overall once the defense got going, did their arguments compared to the prosecution's Do you think?

昨天有更強大，更有肌肉的辯護，非常有唐納德-特朗普看這個和許多支持者在腦海中，當他們通過他們的觀點在和整體上如何一旦辯方得到了，他們的論點與檢方的相比你認為嗎？

Well, Democrats, the House managers, they laid out a very long, consistent case, not just on January 6, but in the weeks leading up to it.

好吧，民主黨人，眾議院管理者，他們提出了一個很長的，一致的案例，不僅僅是在1月6日，而是在之前的幾個星期。

In fact, all of Donald Trump's term in office, where he repeatedly used rhetoric that was stoking this kind of violence in this kind of anger that we saw erupt on January 6th and the defense Onley focused on January 6th, Onley on that one speech, the fight like hell speech just before the mob attacked the capital.

事實上，唐納德-特朗普的所有任期，他反覆使用的言論都是在煽動這種暴力的這種憤怒，我們在1月6日看到爆發，防守昂利集中在1月6日，昂利集中在那一次演講上，在暴徒襲擊首都之前，像地獄一樣的戰鬥演講。

Now that was part of the article of impeachment that Democrats are arguing that they brought Trump to try Alon.

現在，這是民主黨人爭論的彈劾文章的一部分，他們帶著特朗普去審判阿隆。

But that is not the entirety of their case, and the defense just ignored all of these other points that they were making.

但這並不是他們案件的全部內容，被告方只是忽略了他們提出的這些其他觀點。

They made quite a What about is, um, case drawing a false equivalency between Trump's actions and words and other instances in different context of Democrats and liberals doing much much the same thing, but in completely different context and not not really explaining what that context wa?

他們做了相當的是，嗯，情況下繪製一個虛假的等價物之間特朗普的行動和話語和其他實例在不同的背景下民主黨人和自由主義者做了很多同樣的事情，但在完全不同的背景下，並沒有真正解釋什麼，背景瓦？

So it was a very much a cherry picked kind of kind of defense that left a lot of people scratching their heads what it was really about.

所以，這是一種非常挑剔的一種防守，讓很多人都摸不著頭腦，這到底是什麼原因。

Okay, Well, listen, we're expecting a vote today, Largely along party lines.

好吧，聽著，我們預計今天會有一次投票，主要是按黨派劃分的。

It looks like a foregone conclusion.

這看起來像是一個必然的結論。

The Republicans will vote to acquit.

共和黨人會投票宣判無罪。

Is there anything else to look for?

還有什麼需要注意的嗎？

Yeah.

是啊。

I mean, we know we're unlikely to see 17 Republican senators join Democrats to convict Trump.

我的意思是，我們知道我們不太可能看到17名共和黨參議員與民主黨人一起給特朗普定罪。

So the question is, how many will we know?

那麼問題是，我們會知道多少？

5 to 6 Republican senators voted to have this trial take place, so we could maybe expect to see five or six Republican senators vote to convict.

5到6名共和黨參議員投票贊成進行這次審判，所以我們或許可以期待看到5到6名共和黨參議員投票定罪。

It could beam Or will it be 10?

它可以是光束還是會是10？

Will be 12 will be eight.

將是12將是8。

That will be interesting.

這將是有趣的。

The ultimate number and as well as who is voting to convict Mitch McConnell, the leader of the Senate leader of the Republicans.

最終的數字和以及誰在投票給共和黨參議院領袖米奇-麥康奈爾定罪。

Formally, the leader of the Senate on a huge enabler of Donald Trump over all these years has really distanced himself from Donald Trump and his left it very open is the how he's going to vote will be very, very interesting to see if he ultimately votes to convict or not.

從形式上看，參議院的領導人對唐納德-特朗普的巨大推動者這些年來真的與唐納德-特朗普拉開了距離，他的離開它非常開放是他如何投票將是非常，非常有趣的，看看他最終是否投票定罪。

And then what?

然後呢？

That means for the Republican Party going forward.

這對共和黨今後的發展意味著。

All right, we'll be watching that closely.

好吧，我們會密切關注的。

Thank you, William.

謝謝你，威廉