Trump trial: Publisher says he suppressed negative news

[Social Media]

 

In a courtroom drama that sheds light on the inner workings of New York City's tabloid media industry, former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker took the stand to reveal a clandestine plan involving Donald Trump and his personal lawyer, Michael Cohen. Describing it as an "agreement among friends," Pecker testified about efforts to suppress negative stories about Trump during his 2016 presidential campaign.

 

According to Pecker, the trio worked together to quash unfavorable articles about Trump, with Pecker advising the former president on which stories should be removed from circulation. This testimony is crucial for prosecutors aiming to demonstrate Trump's attempts to influence the election by silencing reports of an alleged affair with porn star Stormy Daniels.

 

 

Amidst allegations of falsifying business records and attempting to cover up a $130,000 payment to Daniels, Trump maintains his innocence. However, Pecker's testimony paints a different picture, revealing a longstanding relationship between Trump and the tabloid publisher, marked by mutual benefits.

 

The collaboration between Trump, Cohen, and Pecker involved suppressing negative articles and promoting positive stories about Trump. Pecker detailed how they intervened to quash stories regarding Trump's romantic affairs, illustrating their concerted efforts to protect his public image.

 

Two specific instances highlighted by Pecker involved payments to individuals with potentially damaging stories about Trump. Despite doubts about the credibility of these stories, Pecker and Cohen agreed to pay substantial sums to prevent them from surfacing, citing potential embarrassment for Trump's campaign.

 

While these payments did not result in charges, they provide context for the hush-money agreement with Stormy Daniels. Pecker's testimony lays the groundwork for understanding the "catch and kill" scheme orchestrated to shield Trump from damaging revelations.

Legal experts view Pecker's testimony as pivotal in framing the events leading up to Daniels' payment. By elucidating the dynamics between Trump, Cohen, and the tabloid media, Pecker's account serves as a crucial piece of evidence for the prosecution.

 

However, Trump's legal team faced setbacks as the trial unfolded. A contentious hearing regarding Trump's public comments underscored tensions between his lawyers and the presiding judge. Accused of violating a gag order by attacking witnesses and prosecutors on social media, Trump's legal team struggled to maintain credibility in the courtroom.

 

Despite attempts to justify Trump's actions as responses to political attacks, the judge admonished his lawyers, warning of the consequences of further violations. This exchange highlights the challenges faced by Trump's defense team in managing their client's behavior and maintaining decorum in court.

 

As the trial progresses, Pecker's testimony and the courtroom drama surrounding Trump's public statements offer a glimpse into the complexities of legal proceedings involving high-profile figures. With the stakes high and tensions mounting, the trial promises to captivate audiences and shape perceptions of Trump's presidency and his entanglements with the media.

 

2024-04-24

Source

 

[Tug]

Mr pecker is certainly pecking away at mr trump spilling the beans big time also he talks about made up stories to slander opponents quell surprise 😮 what a dishonorable fraud of a human trump is it’s time to dump the albatross!

[thaibeachlovers]

Before Kennedy's death in 1963, the American press didn't expose his womanising, but people now don't say that was wrong. Seems that it depends on who is "in" or "out" with the American media who they cover for. Remember the media cover up of the Hunter laptop before the last election?

[thaibeachlovers]

All very well, but the case depends on whether Trump actually had an affair with Daniels. If they can't prove he did, then it didn't happen and no need for any payoff, no need to disguise any reimbursements. Trump walks, the opposition loses, again.

[mikebike]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Before Kennedy's death in 1963, the American press didn't expose his womanising, but people now don't say that was wrong. Seems that it depends on who is "in" or "out" with the American media who they cover for. Remember the media cover up of the Hunter laptop before the last election?

Are you implying that Kennedy caught and killed stories of his womanizing, then fraudulently hid his the catch/kill payments?

 

If yes, all that proves is Kennedy was a much smoother operator than 45. And that he should have been prosecuted as well 😂

[mikebike]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

All very well, but the case depends on whether Trump actually had an affair with Daniels. If they can't prove he did, then it didn't happen and no need for any payoff, no need to disguise any reimbursements. Trump walks, the opposition loses, again.

No it does not. The crime is the cover up, not the affair. Even if there was no affair, the crime, as charged, of fraudulent campaign financing, still exists.

[Walker88]

41 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

All very well, but the case depends on whether Trump actually had an affair with Daniels. If they can't prove he did, then it didn't happen and no need for any payoff, no need to disguise any reimbursements. Trump walks, the opposition loses, again.

Your logic, as well as your alternative facts, are wrong.

 

You probably don't want to know how Stormy and McDougal will "prove" they had an affair with small hands donny. A payment was made, as there is evidence of that, phone recordings, plus book entries and cancelled checks.

 

Let's take your argument that no affairs took place (unlikely, but for the sake of argument). trump still has to explain why he paid to squelch the story, thereby influencing the election, and then made fake entries in his company's books. Thus, the payment is actually more key than the affair, but if need be, the prosecution will prove the affair in ways trump will not like. There is no way Stormy or McDougal should know what trump's junk looks like, but they may be asked to describe it, and then the prosecution could call trump's 2nd wife Marla Maples and ask her to do the same. Only a current wife is free from testifying against her spouse.

 

As for "opposition loses, again", this is the first criminal court case, so zero losses so far. In the civil cases, trump is 0 for 3, as in guilty of bank and insurance fraud, guilty of sexually assaulting E Jean Carroll, and guilty of defaming E Jean Carroll.

 

In his various court filings to try to overturn the election, trump is 1-59, with the 1 a minor technical issue.

[jerrymahoney]

1 hour ago, Walker88 said:

but if need be, the prosecution will prove the affair in ways trump will not like. There is no way Stormy or McDougal should know what trump's junk looks like, but they may be asked to describe it,

Sure there is -- some girl who actual did have sex with Trump told them.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, jerrymahoney said:

Sure there is -- some girl who actual did have sex with Trump told them.

There are some very strong rumors on the matter of Trump with girls and of course his attendance at parties at the Epstein residence, but I would draw the line short of making that particular claim.

[riclag]

It doesn’t much matter what the bias BBC says!

Im listening to the 

experts, 

Dershowitz: Awful Prosecution

Turley: Its a embarrassment ,It really brings home something that bothers a lot of Americans, including people don't particularly like Trump, that this is the weaponization of the criminal legal system. It's something we should all be able to condemn.

McCarthy :‘Hush money’ is not a crime, and Bragg has no case against Trump.

 Barr: Former AG Barr rips 'political' Trump hush money case, says 'real threat' to democracy is progressive left.

All claim its political persecution.

 

 

https://www.foxnews.com/live-news/april-22-trump-hush-money-trial-opening-statements

 

https://nypost.com/2024/04/22/opinion/hush-money-is-not-a-crime-and-bragg-has-no-case-against-trump/

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/former-ag-barr-rips-political-trump-hush-money-case-says-real-threat-democracy-progressive-left
 

The judge wouldn’t even be able to qualify as a juror in his own NY court room. His daughter raised millions.

 

https://nypost.com/2024/03/30/us-news/dem-clients-of-daughter-of-judge-in-trump-trial-raised-90m-off-case/

 

Edited April 24 by riclag

[Walker88]

3 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

Sure there is -- some girl who actual did have sex with Trump told them.

I guess I have a child's faith that the members of the jury are not idiots, and when they are read the transcript of trump's Access Hollywood tape (it is being entered as evidence), they will know trump is a regular sleazeball and the women are telling the truth.

 

McDougal had a 10 month affair (she claims) and was escorted regularly into trump's various hotels by "Keith", trump's former bodyguard. If need be, he can be called as a witness, which at worst would repeatedly place McDougal overnight in trump's hotel rooms. The jury is unlikely to think donny must have slept on the couch.

 

Still, the felony case is based on a payoff made to prevent Stormy from airing her claims, true or not, so the felony charges exist regardless of any affair. All that needs to be proven is that trump authorized the payoffs to keep any claim from surfacing before the election, and he signed off on the accounting fraud.

 

I thought the defense would choose to admit the affair but claim the payoff was done to protect Melania. If trump denies the affair---as his defense has now done---but the prosecution convinces the jury both affairs took place, then trump loses all credibility, and conviction becomes much more likely that everything was done to influence the election (the felony).

[Walker88]

 

58 minutes ago, riclag said:

It doesn’t much matter what the bias BBC says!

Im listening to the 

experts, 

Dershowitz: Awful Prosecution

Turley: Its a embarrassment ,It really brings home something that bothers a lot of Americans, including people don't particularly like Trump, that this is the weaponization of the criminal legal system. It's something we should all be able to condemn.

McCarthy :‘Hush money’ is not a crime, and Bragg has no case against Trump.

 Barr: Former AG Barr rips 'political' Trump hush money case, says 'real threat' to democracy is progressive left.

All claim its political persecution.

 

 

https://www.foxnews.com/live-news/april-22-trump-hush-money-trial-opening-statements

 

https://nypost.com/2024/04/22/opinion/hush-money-is-not-a-crime-and-bragg-has-no-case-against-trump/

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/former-ag-barr-rips-political-trump-hush-money-case-says-real-threat-democracy-progressive-left
 

The judge wouldn’t even be able to qualify as a juror in his own NY court room. His daughter raised millions.

 

https://nypost.com/2024/03/30/us-news/dem-clients-of-daughter-of-judge-in-trump-trial-raised-90m-off-case/

 

 

LOL "political persecution"

 

Perhaps if trump hadn't filed endless motions to stall his Georgia RICO case, his stolen documents case, and his obstruction/insurrection/fake elector case, the hush money trial would have been put on hold and the much more serious criminal charges would be being heard in court now.

 

I wonder what Epstein's regular Lolita Express passenger Dershowitz, along with Turley and Barr, would say about those. Trying to overthrow democracy and jeopardize national security are hardly trivial matters.

Edited April 24 by Walker88

[jerrymahoney]

7 hours ago, Walker88 said:

I guess I have a child's faith that the members of the jury are not idiots

If you hadn't made the statement "There is no way Stormy or McDougal should know what trump's junk looks like", I wouldn't have bothered to respond.

[Tug]

I find it amusing that trump and his ilk are famous for screaming fake news fake news and here we have it in factual verifiable form as to who the author is and to who’s benefiting………and I believe the women perhaps trump will have to show his junk to the jury 😂 

[charleskerins]

22 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Before Kennedy's death in 1963, the American press didn't expose his womanising, but people now don't say that was wrong. Seems that it depends on who is "in" or "out" with the American media who they cover for. Remember the media cover up of the Hunter laptop before the last election?

the Hunter laptop ?   you give the phrase grasping at straws new life

JFK   was 60 plus years ago and he   wasn't on trial  was he?         "remember the the media coverup of the Hunter laptop before the election"   Nope hard to remember something that didn't happen.

[charleskerins]

15 hours ago, Walker88 said:

 

 

LOL "political persecution"

 

Perhaps if trump hadn't filed endless motions to stall his Georgia RICO case, his stolen documents case, and his obstruction/insurrection/fake elector case, the hush money trial would have been put on hold and the much more serious criminal charges would be being heard in court now.

 

I wonder what Epstein's regular Lolita Express passenger Dershowitz, along with Turley and Barr, would say about those. Trying to overthrow democracy and jeopardize national security are hardly trivial matters.

"bias BBC"  these folks are pathetic 

[charleskerins]

8 hours ago, Tug said:

I find it amusing that trump and his ilk are famous for screaming fake news fake news and here we have it in factual verifiable form as to who the author is and to who’s benefiting………and I believe the women perhaps trump will have to show his junk to the jury 😂 

donnie already admitted it but   it's fake news

[charleskerins]

He already admitted to paying her hush money.

Edited April 25 by charleskerins
nm

[Purdey]

Is the National Enquirer so respected that it can influence news?

[charleskerins]

21 minutes ago, Purdey said:

Is the National Enquirer so respected that it can influence news?

only with conspiracy weirdos there are about 15 or so on here  and it just didn't deal with the NationaL Enquirer         from the article  

"Two specific instances highlighted by Pecker involved payments to individuals with potentially damaging stories about Trump. Despite doubts about the credibility of these stories, Pecker and Cohen agreed to pay substantial sums to prevent them from surfacing, citing potential embarrassment for Trump's campaign."    they were wrong about one thing -nothing is potentially damaging to him with his sycophants.

Edited April 25 by charleskerins
nm

[JCauto]

23 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

All very well, but the case depends on whether Trump actually had an affair with Daniels. If they can't prove he did, then it didn't happen and no need for any payoff, no need to disguise any reimbursements. Trump walks, the opposition loses, again.

 

This is what we call "clutching at straws". How about Karen McDougal?

[Paul Henry]

LOCK HIM UP!  Then he can grift some more. I am rich REALLY RICH. Send more money

[Dave0206]

2 hours ago, Purdey said:

Is the National Enquirer so respected that it can influence news?

Well the catch and kill that pecker implemented stopped more reputable outlets from getting the story .but let's be honest if trump was caught on camera a percentage of his base would come up with some bizarre excuses no matter what the evidence is. 🙄 if it walks like a duck blah blah 

[billd766]

11 hours ago, Tug said:

I find it amusing that trump and his ilk are famous for screaming fake news fake news and here we have it in factual verifiable form as to who the author is and to who’s benefiting………and I believe the women perhaps trump will have to show his junk to the jury 😂 

I do hope not.

 

That would be a cruel and unusual punishment to those poor innocent jurors, and I am sure that it would be against the Geneva conventions.

[thrilled]

Look where this is coming from. The National Enquirer

[rudi49jr]

26 minutes ago, thrilled said:

Look where this is coming from. The National Enquirer

So? The National Enquirer is a rag that tells porkies all the time, I’ll give you that. But Pecker is under oath, if he starts telling lies on the stand he’ll commit perjury, which the judge probably won’t take very kindly to. So I’m pretty sure that what Pecker is saying is what actually happened, a.k.a. the truth.

[Danderman123]

On 4/24/2024 at 2:55 PM, thaibeachlovers said:

All very well, but the case depends on whether Trump actually had an affair with Daniels. If they can't prove he did, then it didn't happen and no need for any payoff, no need to disguise any reimbursements. Trump walks, the opposition loses, again.

That's actually unlikely.

 

Trump's best chance is to claim there was no underlying crime. He's dead meat on the Stormy Daniels stuff.

[Danderman123]

9 hours ago, Purdey said:

Is the National Enquirer so respected that it can influence news?

Back in the day, it had a big impact on stupid people.

[G_Money]

On 4/24/2024 at 7:44 PM, Chomper Higgot said:

There are some very strong rumors on the matter of Trump with girls and of course his attendance at parties at the Epstein residence, but I would draw the line short of making that particular claim.

Similar to one of your “Royals”.

[G_Money]

9 hours ago, charleskerins said:

only with conspiracy weirdos there are about 15 or so on here  and it just didn't deal with the NationaL Enquirer         from the article  

"Two specific instances highlighted by Pecker involved payments to individuals with potentially damaging stories about Trump. Despite doubts about the credibility of these stories, Pecker and Cohen agreed to pay substantial sums to prevent them from surfacing, citing potential embarrassment for Trump's campaign."    they were wrong about one thing -nothing is potentially damaging to him with his sycophants.

You and Walker.  A match made in heaven.