Former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker took the stand Thursday in Donald Trump’s hush money trial in New York and recalled receiving a telephone call from Former President Donald Trump during the tabloid’s pursuit of former Playboy model Karen McDougal’s claims of an extramarital affair. “When I got on the phone, Mr. Trump said to me, ‘Karen is a nice girl. Is it true that a Mexican group is looking to buy her story for $8 million?’” Pecker said. “I said, ‘I absolutely don’t believe there’s a Mexican group out there looking to buy her story for $8 million.’” Trump then asked Pecker what he should do, the ex-publisher said. Pecker testified that he told Trump, “I think you should buy the story” and keep it quiet. “I believed the story was true,” Pecker explained. “I thought it would be very embarrassing to himself and to his campaign.”
Here’s the latest:
Quick Read
- Court Appearance and Witness Testimony: Donald Trump returned to court as the witness testimony in his hush money trial entered its third day. The focus was on veteran tabloid publisher David Pecker, who testified about his long-standing relationship with Trump and his role during the 2016 presidential campaign.
- Supreme Court Deliberations: Concurrently, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments over Trump’s claim of immunity from prosecution for actions taken during his presidency. This discussion is separate but related due to the timing and overlapping legal questions concerning presidential conduct.
- Pecker’s Testimony: David Pecker, former publisher of the National Enquirer, testified about the “catch-and-kill” strategy to suppress negative stories about Trump during the 2016 election. He discussed specific interactions regarding a story about Karen McDougal, affirming his belief that the story was true and should be bought to avoid embarrassment to Trump’s campaign.
- Media Coverage: The simultaneous legal proceedings provided a unique split-screen media moment, with major news outlets strategizing how to cover both the Supreme Court arguments and the hush money trial. This highlighted the intense public and media interest in these cases.
- Legal Implications: The trial in New York, where Trump faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to hush money payments, marks the first-ever criminal trial of a former U.S. president and could have significant consequences for his future political aspirations.
- Details from the Trial: Pecker provided insights into the financial arrangements and his hesitations due to past legal troubles, highlighting the complexities of the hush money transactions and the involvement of multiple parties including Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen.
The Associated Press has the story:
David Pecker believed McDoughal’s story about affair with Trump was true
Newslooks- NEW YORK (AP) —
Donald Trump returned to court Thursday morning as witness testimony in his hush money trial entered a third day.
The trial resumed at the same time that the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments in Washington over whether he should be immune from prosecution for actions he took during his time as president.
At his trial in Manhattan, veteran tabloid publisher David Pecker took the stand earlier in the week, testifying about his longtime friendship with the former president and a pledge he made to be the “eyes and ears” of Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. Pecker returned to the stand Thursday.
The testimony was sought to bolster prosecutors’ premise that Trump sought to illegally influence the 2016 election through a “catch-and-kill” strategy to buy up and then spike negative stories. Key to that premise are so-called hush money payments that were paid to porn actor Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal, along with the doorman.
Prosecutors say Trump obscured the true nature of those payments and falsely recorded them as legal expenses.
He has pleaded not guilty to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records.
The case is the first-ever criminal trial of a former U.S. president and the first of four prosecutions of Trump to reach a jury.
EX-PUBLISHER SAYS HE BELIEVED MCDOUGAL AFFAIR STORY WAS TRUE
Former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker took the stand Thursday in Donald Trump’s hush money trial in New York and recalled receiving a telephone call from Trump during the tabloid’s pursuit of former Playboy model Karen McDougal’s claims of an extramarital affair.
“When I got on the phone, Mr. Trump said to me, ‘Karen is a nice girl. Is it true that a Mexican group is looking to buy her story for $8 million?’” Pecker said. “I said, ‘I absolutely don’t believe there’s a Mexican group out there looking to buy her story for $8 million.’”
Trump then asked Pecker what he should do, the ex-publisher said. Pecker testified that he told Trump, “I think you should buy the story” and keep it quiet.
“I believed the story was true,” Pecker explained. “I thought it would be very embarrassing to himself and to his campaign.”
A SPLIT-SCREEN MOMENT FOR NEWS OUTLETS
Former President Trump’s hush money trial in New York and his lawyers’ arguments about presidential immunity before the U.S. Supreme Court provided news outlets with an extraordinary split-screen moment Thursday.
“To put it plainly, there is a lot going on,” said MSNBC’s Jose Diaz-Balart shortly before the Supreme Court arguments started.
MSNBC, Newsmax and NewsNation concentrated fully on the Supreme Court arguments as they were taking place. As they began, Fox News Channel covered them with a small box on its screen giving a live view outside the Manhattan courtroom where Trump was on trial, but it quickly dropped the box.
CNN tried to capture both, its audio carrying the Supreme Court arguments, while a live written blog with details of what was going on in the New York trial took up about one-third of its screen.
The New York Times’ website carried live blogs of both trials side by side under the headline, “Keeping track of Trump’s legal woes.” News sites for both The Washington Post and The Associated Press also had two live blogs but gave the Supreme Court case more prominence than the hush money trial.
Trump left the New York courtroom after a break from the morning’s testimony, giving a thumbs up to reporters who shouted questions, but he didn’t say anything.
PECKER SAYS HE BELIEVES TRUMP KNEW ABOUT MCDOUGAL CONTRACT
Former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker testified Thursday at Donald Trump‘s hush money trial in New York that he believes Trump was aware of a contract with Karen McDougal as she sought to sell her story about claims of an affair.
Asked by a prosecutor whether he knew if anyone other than former Trump lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen was aware of the Enquirer’s contract with McDougal, Pecker said: “I believe that Donald Trump did.”
Pecker testified he was leery of paying McDougal on Trump’s behalf because of trouble he ran into with an earlier arrangement benefiting Arnold Schwarzenegger during the movie star’s run for California governor in 2003.
McDougal’s contract gave American Media Inc., which owned the Enquirer and several fitness magazines, exclusive rights to her story on any relationship with a married man. Pecker said that clause was specifically about Trump.
Based on his experience with Schwarzenegger, Pecker said he “wanted to be comfortable that the agreement that we were going to prepare for Karen McDougal met all the obligations with respect to a campaign contribution.”
But he said the real purpose of the deal was to keep McDougal’s story from becoming public and potentially influencing the 2016 presidential election.
TRUMP LISTENS INTENTLY AS PECKER TESTIFIES
Former President Donald Trump listened intently Thursday at his hush money trial as longtime friend David Pecker testified in detail about the National Enquirer’s efforts to buy and kill unflattering stories related both to Trump and other celebrities.
He passed along notes to the two attorneys on either side of him.
Pecker testified that Karen McDougal demanded $150,000 — plus writing assignments and other business opportunities — for the rights to her story about claims of an affair with Trump. But according to Pecker, it wasn’t clear who was going to pay for it.
Pecker said Trump’s former lawyer and fixer, Michael Cohen, initially asked him to front the costs: “I said, ‘Michael, why should I pay? I just paid $30,000 for the doorman story. Now you’re asking me to pay $150,000 for the Karen story, plus all of these other additional items that she wants to do.’”
When asked how he would be reimbursed, Pecker said, Cohen assured him: “Don’t worry about it. I’m your friend. The boss will take care of it.”
PROSECUTORS FLAG TRUMP’S RECENT REMARKS IN HUSH MONEY CASE
Quick Read
- Prosecutors claim Trump violated a gag order again in his hush money trial, raising the possibility of contempt charges and fines.
- Assistant District Attorney Christopher Conroy cited new instances where Trump allegedly made improper comments about key witnesses and the jury.
- Trump was denied permission to skip the New York proceedings to attend a Supreme Court session discussing his potential immunity from prosecution regarding his actions during his presidency.
- The Supreme Court case and Trump’s ongoing criminal trials in New York are interlinked, presenting complex legal and political challenges.
- Trump faces 34 felony counts in the New York case related to hush money payments, with potential implications for his political future.
- At the same time, the Supreme Court is expediting its consideration of whether Trump can be prosecuted for efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.
- The outcomes of these legal battles could have significant repercussions for Trump’s ability to run for office again and for the broader question of presidential immunity.
The Associated Press has the story:
PROSECUTORS FLAG TRUMP’S RECENT REMARKS IN HUSH MONEY CASE
Newslooks- New York- (AP)
Prosecutors asked the judge Thursday as former President Donald Trump’s hush money trial resumed to consider whether he violated a gag order four more times with remarks he made outside court this week.
Among others, prosecutor Christopher Conroy flagged comments that Trump made just Thursday morning at an early-morning press event about David Pecker. Pecker, the former National Enquirer publisher who has been testifying as a prosecution witness, returned to the stand Thursday.
Trump had said Pecker has “been very nice,” which Conroy characterized as “a message to Pecker: Be nice.” He argued that it’s also a message to other potential witnesses that Trump has a platform and will use it to attack them if they aren’t kind to him.
The judge hasn’t immediately ruled on Conroy’s request to hold Trump in contempt and levy “appropriate sanctions.”
Prosecutors said Thursday that Donald Trump again violated a gag order in his hush money trial, as the criminal case resumed on the same day that the U.S. Supreme Court weighed whether he should be immune from prosecution for actions taken during his time as president.
Judge Juan M. Merchan was already considering whether to hold Trump in contempt and fine him for what prosecutors say were 10 different violations of the order that barred the GOP leader from making public statements about witnesses, jurors and others connected to the case. Then the prosecution ticked off fresh instances of suspected breaches.
Assistant District Attorney Christopher Conroy pointed to additional remarks that Trump made about key prosecution witness Michael Cohen, Trump’s former attorney, when talking to reporters outside the courtroom and in other interviews. He also noted a comment Trump made about the jury being composed of “95 percent Democrats,” among other things.
Meanwhile, with the Supreme Court arguments happening in Washington, and Trump’s former lawyers and associates freshly indicted in a 2020 election-related scheme in Arizona, the former president was again in a seemingly tight legal spot. But Trump has a long history of emerging unscathed from sticky situations — if not becoming even more popular — particularly to his loyal supporters.
Trump asked to skip the New York proceedings for the day so he could sit in on the high court’s special session, where the justices weighed whether he can be prosecuted over his efforts to reverse his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden. His request was denied by Merchan, who is overseeing the trial on the hush money scheme that was allegedly meant to prevent harmful stories about Trump from surfacing in the final days of the 2016 campaign.
“I think the Supreme Court has a very important argument before it today,” Trump said outside court. “I should be there.”
Though entirely separate cases, the proceedings were jumbled together in one big legal and political puzzle that had implications not just for the presumptive Republican presidential nominee but for the American presidency writ large.
In both instances, Trump is trying to get himself out of legal jeopardy as he makes another bid for the White House. But the outcome of the Supreme Court case will have lasting implications for future presidents, because the justices will be answering the never-before-asked question of whether and to what extent does a former president enjoy immunity from prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his time in office.
The high court’s decision may not affect the New York City case, which hinges mostly on Trump’s conduct as a presidential candidate in 2016 — not as a president. He faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in connection with hush money payments meant to stifle embarrassing stories from surfacing. It is the first of four criminal cases against Trump to go before a jury.
Trump has maintained he is not guilty of any of the charges. In New York, he says the stories that were bought and squelched were false.
“There is no case here. This is just a political witch hunt,” he said before court in brief comments to reporters. He also criticized Biden’s policies and talked about his upcoming campaign events in New York.
Trump then he walked to the defense table, stood briefly and whispered into lawyer Todd Blanche’s ear before sitting down.
The trial resumed with fresh talk over possible gag order violations. Conroy argued that in the comments about Cohen, Trump described his now-disbarred former personal attorney as a liar and a lawyer who “wasn’t very good, in a lot of ways, in his representation.” Cohen pleaded guilty in 2018 to federal charges that included lying to Congress and a bank.
Conroy also mentioned statements Trump made just Thursday morning about the Manhattan district attorney’s first witness, David Pecker, former publisher of the National Enquirer and a longtime friend of Trump’s who pledged to be his “eyes and ears” during his 2016 presidential campaign.
When asked during a morning campaign stop what he thought of Pecker’s testimony so far, Trump responded: “David’s been very nice, a nice guy.”
Conroy characterized the comments to the judge as a warning to other potential witnesses that Trump has a platform and will use it to attack them if they aren’t kind to him. Conroy characterized the comments as “a message to Pecker: be nice.”
Trump was dismissive about the looming decision. When asked by reporters if he would pay the $1,000 fine for each of 10 posts if he so ordered, he replied, “Oh, I have no idea.” He then said, “They’ve taken my constitutional right away with a gag order.”
Meanwhile, jurors started their day with more witness testimony from Pecker, who has already explained how he and his publication parlayed rumor-mongering into splashy stories that smeared Trump’s opponents and, just as crucially, leveraged his connections to suppress seamy stories about Trump, including a porn actor’s claim of an extramarital sexual encounter years earlier.
As the 12-person panel watched attentively, with some appearing to take notes, Pecker recalled receiving a telephone call from Trump during the tabloid’s pursuit of former Playboy model Karen McDougal’s claims of an extramarital affair with Trump.
Trump, too, watched intently as his friend spoke from the witness stand.
Pecker was at an investor’s office in New Jersey, giving a presentation, when an assistant interrupted and said Trump was on the line, the ex-publisher testified.
“When I got on the phone, Mr. Trump said to me, ‘I spoke to Michael. Karen is a nice girl. Is it true that a Mexican group is looking to buy her story for $8 million?’ I said, ’I absolutely don’t believe there’s a Mexican group out there looking to buy her story for $8 million.’”
Trump then asked Pecker what he should do, the ex-publisher said. Pecker testified that he told Trump, “I think you should buy the story” and keep it quiet.
“I believed the story was true,” Pecker explained. “I thought it would be very embarrassing to himself and to his campaign.”
Pecker said she demanded $150,000 — plus writing assignments and other business opportunities — for the rights to her story. But according to Pecker, it wasn’t clear who was going to pay for it.
Pecker said Cohen, acting as Trump’s attorney, initially asked him to front the costs.
“I said, ‘Michael, why should I pay? … Now you’re asking me to pay $150,000 for the Karen story, plus all of these other additional items that she wants to do.’”
When asked how he would be reimbursed, Pecker said Cohen assured him: “Don’t worry about it. I’m your friend. The boss will take care of it.”
A conviction by the jury in the hush money probe would not preclude Trump from becoming president again, but because it is a state case, he would not be able to pardon himself if found guilty. The charge is punishable by up to four years in prison — though it’s not clear if the judge would seek to put him behind bars.
At the Supreme Court, the arguments are related to charges in federal court in Washington, where Trump has been accused of conspiring to overturn the 2020 election. The case stems from Trump’s attempts to have charges against him dismissed. Lower courts have found he cannot claim immunity for actions that, prosecutors say, illegally sought to interfere with the election results.
The high court is moving faster than usual in taking up the case, though not as quickly as special counsel Jack Smith wanted. The court’s pace has raised questions about whether there will be time to hold a trial before the November election, if the justices agree with lower courts that Trump can be prosecuted.
Currently:
— No one is above the law. Supreme Court will decide if that includes Trump while he was president
— Investigator says Trump, allies were uncharged co-conspirators in plot to overturn Michigan election
— Trump trial day 6 highlights: David Pecker testifies on ‘catch-and-kill’ scheme
— Key players: Who’s who at Donald Trump’s hush money criminal trial
— The hush money case is just one of Trump’s legal cases. See the others here
You must Register or Login to post a comment.