Hush-money trial live: Trump appears to repeat call for lifting of gag order after Pecker testimony ends – as it happened
Ex-president rails against ban on attacking key people connected to the trial; longtime Trump assistant asked whether boss distracted while signing checks. This blog is now closed.
Donald Trump attends his trial for allegedly covering up hush-money payments linked to extramarital affairs on Friday. Photograph: Michael M Santiago/EPA
Donald Trump attends his trial for allegedly covering up hush-money payments linked to extramarital affairs on Friday. Photograph: Michael M Santiago/EPA
Bove has grilled Pecker about the non-prosecution agreement between AMI and federal prosecutors reached in September 2018. Before that month, Pecker was trying to sell the National Enquirer to Hudson News.
“In addition to the unpleasantness of sitting with the FBI, that put some pressure on the negotiations,” Bove intimated of Pecker’s discussions with federal authorities. “It would add on to the stress of the transaction?” Bove also asked: would the federal investigation have to wrap before the National Enquirer could be sold?
The implication, of course, is that Pecker might have been a little bit hasty in ascribing so much responsibility to Cohen and Trump in his chats with the feds. Bove’s line of questioning is implying that AMI entered into a non-prosecution agreement under duress – undermining Pecker’s statements to authorities that the company was involved with the payoff scheme.
Trump lawyer trying to create distance between Pecker and Stormy Daniels payoff
Victoria Bekiempis
The court is now taking a short break. But before it did, Bove cross-examined Pecker about Stormy Daniels, the adult film actor who is a prominent player in this case.
Bove is trying to create distance between Pecker and the Daniels payoff, which would again potentially undermine a conspiracy.
Pecker confirmed that he’d had a phone call from Howard in which he learned about Daniels’ account.
“You told Mr Howard that you wanted no involvement with the story, is that correct?” Bove asked.
“That’s correct,” Pecker replied.
“You did not consider Stormy Daniels’ story to be part of any agreement you had in August 2015?” was Bove’s next question. “That’s right,” Pecker replied. Bove then hammered his point: ”You wanted nothing to do with it.”
Bove has been asking about Keith Davidson, McDougal’s and adult film actor Stormy Daniels’ former attorney, and his relationship with Dylan Howard, the National Enquirer’s editor-in-chief at the time of the alleged scheme.
Pecker confirmed to Bove that Davidson was a “major source” for Howard.
“He was also friends with Cohen, correct?” Bove asked. Pecker again said yes.
But “you didn’t learn about the Cohen-Davidson connection” until AMI brokered a non-prosecution agreement with federal prosecutors in September 2018 – about one month after Cohen pleaded guilty to various crimes, including charges related to campaign contributions. Pecker said that was correct.
“And you don’t know what Cohen and Davidson were doing on the side, do you?” Pecker said he did not.
It seems that Bove is trying to downplay to jurors Pecker’s role in any purported conspiracy. By suggesting that Cohen and Davidson engaged in backroom dealing, this seems to sap Pecker of his power to control the narrative by controlling people’s stories. And if Pecker didn’t hold the cards because of any surreptitious discussions, his potential to influence the election seems less likely.
Bove also tried to undermine any idea that Trump had reason to be concerned about McDougal.
He asked Pecker about Trump’s call to his office sometime after word of McDougal’s story.
Pecker told Trump he didn’t think it was true that a Mexican media group had offered to buy the account of an alleged affair for $8m.
“As you sit here today, do you remember during that conversation, you said to President Trump: ‘It is my understanding that she doesn’t want her story published’?”
“Yes, I did, I remember saying that,” Pecker said.
Biden makes surprise visit to Manhattan as Trump sits in court
Joe Biden just made an unscheduled stop in midtown Manhattan, about four miles from the courthouse where his rival Donald Trump is on trial.
Biden’s motorcade pulled into Sirius XM’s studios for a live interview with Howard Stern, a former shock jock who has in recent years adopted a more sober style.
Biden arrived in the city yesterday after attending a campaign event in the suburbs. He’s scheduled to return to the White House this afternoon. The president has said little about Trump’s four criminal cases, including the charges related to falsifying business documents brought against him by the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg.
Biden does not do very many interviews or press conferences compared with his predecessors. He is also locked in what is expected to be a tight re-election race against Trump, who regularly interacts with the press. The two candidates will face off at ballot boxes nationwide in November.
Bove then asked whether “it was standard operating procedure” for the National Enquirer to repackage news in the public domain.
He pointed to the tabloid’s coverage of medical malpractice suits against Ben Carson, a rival Republican presidential candidate in 2016.
“In May 2015, long before any articles on this [National Enquirer] page, the Guardian had covered this issue?” Bove noted that the Guardian’s article referenced seven malpractice claims against Carson before the National Enquirer published content on Carson’s scorecard as a physician.
The point of Bove’s questioning here might be to show that Pecker wasn’t going out of his way to publish content that helped Trump’s presidential aspiration, but rather that it was just a good business practice. By discussing the regurgitative process of using others’ content for the scandal sheet, Bove is trying to undermine the strength of any alleged conspiracy.
Trump lawyer questions David Pecker on motive for running Clinton stories
Victoria Bekiempis
Bove’s line of questioning is probing whether Pecker determined content because of a desire to help Trump – such as damaging articles about his opponents – or because it was beneficial to him directly, and asking about just how much work he actually put into these efforts.
“Let’s talk a little about what was said during the August 2015 meeting – you said on your direct that there was discussion of Bill and Hillary Clinton, correct?”
“Yes,” said Pecker, who testified that the Enquirer ran negative stories about the Clintons.
Bove pressed: were these negative articles running before the meeting?
“That’s correct,” Pecker said.
“And that’s because you’d made a business decision that it was good for the National Enquirer to run those stories, correct?” Bove asked.
“Yes,” Pecker replied.
“And so before the August 2015 meeting, you had decided that it made sense for the business of AMI to run articles about Bill and Hillary Clinton?”
“Yes,” Pecker said.
“And those articles were negative?”
“Yes.”
“Was running those beneficial for AMI?”
Pecker again: yes.
“There wasn’t much new content in those stories, was there?” Bove asked.
“I would have to read those stories to answer that question.”
