《纽约时报》：当特朗普遇上中情局……
纪思道 2016年8月5日
政府正在做出安排，让相关人员向希拉里·克林顿(Hillary Clinton)和唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)汇报机密情报，为他们入主白宫做准备。向提名人汇报情报是长期以来的一个惯例，但是今年却引起了争议：参议员哈里·里德(Harry Reid)已敦促中情局针对特朗普做出“假汇报”，而众议院议长保罗·瑞安(Paul Ryan)说，克林顿没能力处理机密材料。但是，向特朗普汇报情报究竟会是什么样呢？
“特朗普先生，我是中情局的基恩·史密斯(Gene Smith)。”
“史密斯，是吧？这是你的化名吗？我很了解中情局，比中情局的大多数局长都更了解。中情局是一个很棒、很漂亮、很好的机构。”
“其实史密斯是我的真名。那我首先汇报的是中国的情况，根据我们的评估，习近平(Xi)比胡锦涛(Hu)更加强势。”
“她(She)比谁(who)更加强势？”
“没错。”
“嗯，我想见见她。我喜欢强势的女性。听上去她能打个10分。”
“谁？”
“我不知道。那个强势的女性。”
“我不知道是不是我理解错了。总之，在中国，我们非常相信，习近平将继续开展强势的民族主义——”
“她听起来很火辣。不，我只是在开玩笑而已。但是，说实话，女人喜欢我。”
“特朗普先生，习近平是个男人，是中国主席。”
“她是个男人吗？中国国家主席是变性人？天啊，他们比我以为的更新潮——我是说，我就知道是这样。我非常了解中国。你应该看看我用筷子的样子！我跟你说过我曾和一个中国辣妹约会过吗？她是那么的新潮，身材就像——”
“特朗普先生！我们预计中国将保持在南海的民族主义主张——”
“呃，别担心了。我有很多中国朋友。我喜欢中国菜。特朗普大厦里有世界上最好的泰式炒粉。那么，根据你们的看法，中国觉得我怎么样？”
“我们非常相信，中国领导层希望你赢得大选。”
“我觉得这很正常。一些非常、非常坏的记者，在没人看的烂报纸上说，我可能会启动贸易战。但是，中国希望我在大选中获胜！真是太不错了！那么，为什么她希望我获胜，就是他们那个变性主席？”
“习不是变性人！他希望你赢，是因为你不会重视维护同盟关系，你当总统可能导致美国的影响力出现前所未有的下滑。”
“前所未有！太棒了！所以中国人觉得我会是前所未有的？喜欢我的还有谁？”
“嗯，朝鲜官方已经表示，支持你，特朗普先生。他们说你‘有先见之明’(prescient)、‘很睿智’。”
“‘很明(present)、很睿智！’他们喜欢我！俄罗斯也喜欢我。普京和我是老交情了。我们就像是”——特朗普把手指交叉扣在一起——“我希望当选之后，能够终于和他见上面。”
“是的，我们相信普京总统支持你。”
“普京很专业。不像小小的乌克兰。可悲！”
“嗯，普京认为北约可能会在你当总统期间崩溃，他就可以更加放心地在乌克兰和波罗的海国家施展手腕了。”
“波罗的海国家，我比任何人都了解他们！梅拉尼娅就来自斯洛文尼亚。有人说是我把她那些玉照泄露给了《纽约邮报》。我为什么要这么做？你看到了那些照片了吗？在这里——”
“特朗普先生！你指的是巴尔干地区，尽管斯洛文尼亚不是——”
“巴尔干、波罗的海——我不会让自己陷入到细节当中。我看重的是战略。现在来谈谈伊斯兰国(ISIS)？我对ISIS的了解比军队的将军还多。不过，我想听听你们的看法。他们支持我吗？”
“我们的评估是，他们支持你，因为觉得你有助于他们招募更多信徒。事实上，我们担心ISIS可能会进行恐怖袭击，以帮助你赢得选举。”
“每个人都支持我！那中东怎么样？我可能会达成一个和平协议——我做交易很在行，你知道吗？我可能会获得诺贝尔和平奖，和我新到手的紫心勋章摆在一起。”
“这个么，先生，中东的情况很复杂——”
“中东纯粹、完全的是场灾难。他们不尊重我们。使用核武器怎么样？如果我们有核武器，为什么不使用它们？”
“先生，我们只汇报情报，不提供政策建议。但是——”
“难道我们不应该朝着这些库尔德人扔几颗核弹？”
“库尔德人？在叙利亚，他们是我们唯一能干事的盟友。”
“他们正在做坏事。非常坏的事情。我在一个周日节目上看到过。”
“哦，你是说的……圣城旅(Quds Force)？”
“库尔德人(Kurds)，圣城旅(Quds)，有什么区别？如果我下令轰炸他们，你们是可以负责细节安排的。去找麦克·潘斯(Mike Pence)吧。”
“但是，你正在竞选——”
“算了吧，给我讲讲互联网安全的事情。我感觉有点无聊。要不我们黑进瑞典小姐的手机，看看她的自拍怎么样？我当选之后，要组建一整只团队来做这事儿……”
The New York Times：
I Ran the C.I.A. Now I’m Endorsing Hillary Clinton.
By MICHAEL J. MORELL
August 5, 2016
During a 33-year career at the Central Intelligence Agency, I served presidents of both parties — three Republicans and three Democrats. I was at President George W. Bush’s side when we were attacked on Sept. 11; as deputy director of the agency, I was with President Obama when we killed Osama bin Laden in 2011.
I am neither a registered Democrat nor a registered Republican. In my 40 years of voting, I have pulled the lever for candidates of both parties. As a government official, I have always been silent about my preference for president.
No longer. On Nov. 8, I will vote for Hillary Clinton. Between now and then, I will do everything I can to ensure that she is elected as our 45th president.
Two strongly held beliefs have brought me to this decision.
First, Mrs. Clinton is highly qualified to be commander in chief. I trust she will deliver on the most important duty of a president — keeping our nation safe.
Second, Donald J. Trump is not only unqualified for the job, but he may well pose a threat to our national security.
I spent four years working with Mrs. Clinton when she was secretary of state, most often in the White House Situation Room. In these critically important meetings, I found her to be prepared, detail-oriented, thoughtful, inquisitive and willing to change her mind if presented with a compelling argument.
I also saw the secretary’s commitment to our nation’s security; her belief that America is an exceptional nation that must lead in the world for the country to remain secure and prosperous; her understanding that diplomacy can be effective only if the country is perceived as willing and able to use force if necessary; and, most important, her capacity to make the most difficult decision of all — whether to put young American women and men in harm’s way.
Mrs. Clinton was an early advocate of the raid that brought Bin Laden to justice, in opposition to some of her most important colleagues on the National Security Council. During the early debates about how we should respond to the Syrian civil war, she was a strong proponent of a more aggressive approach, one that might have prevented the Islamic State from gaining a foothold in Syria.
I never saw her bring politics into the Situation Room. In fact, I saw the opposite. When some wanted to delay the Bin Laden raid by one day because the White House Correspondents Dinner might be disrupted, she said, “Screw the White House Correspondents Dinner.”
In sharp contrast to Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Trump has no experience on national security. Even more important, the character traits he has exhibited during the primary season suggest he would be a poor, even dangerous, commander in chief.
These traits include his obvious need for self-aggrandizement, his overreaction to perceived slights, his tendency to make decisions based on intuition, his refusal to change his views based on new information, his routine carelessness with the facts, his unwillingness to listen to others and his lack of respect for the rule of law.
The dangers that flow from Mr. Trump’s character are not just risks that would emerge if he became president. It is already damaging our national security.
President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia was a career intelligence officer, trained to identify vulnerabilities in an individual and to exploit them. That is exactly what he did early in the primaries. Mr. Putin played upon Mr. Trump’s vulnerabilities by complimenting him. He responded just as Mr. Putin had calculated.
Mr. Putin is a great leader, Mr. Trump says, ignoring that he has killed and jailed journalists and political opponents, has invaded two of his neighbors and is driving his economy to ruin. Mr. Trump has also taken policy positions consistent with Russian, not American, interests — endorsing Russian espionage against the United States, supporting Russia’s annexation of Crimea and giving a green light to a possible Russian invasion of the Baltic States.
In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.
Mr. Trump has also undermined security with his call for barring Muslims from entering the country. This position, which so clearly contradicts the foundational values of our nation, plays into the hands of the jihadist narrative that our fight against terrorism is a war between religions.
In fact, many Muslim Americans play critical roles in protecting our country, including the man, whom I cannot identify, who ran the C.I.A.’s Counterterrorism Center for nearly a decade and who I believe is most responsible for keeping America safe since the Sept. 11 attacks.
My training as an intelligence officer taught me to call it as I see it. This is what I did for the C.I.A. This is what I am doing now. Our nation will be much safer with Hillary Clinton as president.
Michael J. Morell was the acting director and deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency from 2010 to 2013.
