TexAg1987 said:
You can turn off signatures, btw
Quote:
Judge Juan Merchan is on the bench and court is in session.
Former tabloid executive David Pecker is expected to return to the stand to testify in the hush money trial.
The defense will continue questioning Pecker and try to poke holes at the former tabloid executive's testimony for the prosecution after establishing Thursday that the practice of "catch-and-kill" long predated the run up to election.
Pecker has testified for more than seven hours so far, including direct and cross examination.
Court will be in session for a full day and is expected to adjourn at around 4:30 p.m. ET. There is no court on Monday.
Quote:
Judge Juan Merchan officially noted that the hearing over the Donald Trump's gag order violations has been changed to Thursday at 9:30 a.m. ET.
Yesterday, the judge had said the hearing would occur on Wednesday.
Thanks Hawg. Was just wanting to make sure I wasn't misreading how the cross went. Appreciate your updates on this thread.aggiehawg said:They always have been.4stringAg said:
Maybe its just me but seems like Bove did a good job of questioning Pecker there in raising the notion that these kinds of catch and kill tactics are commonplace in the industry, and positive stories about Trump were done going all the way back to the 90s.
Geez, anyone ever heard of Citizen Kane? That was about Hearst. And how Hearst created and curated news.
Quote:
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass is asking whether the judge will instruct the jury about misleading Pecker about his FBI interview and whether Hope Hicks was in the August 2015 Trump Tower meeting.
Trump attorney Emil Bove says he will apologize to Pecker at the start of testimony for not being clear enough yesterday, and direct him to the relevant part of the FBI interview.
The judge agrees this is sufficient.
Steinglass has also asked the judge to additionally give the jury a curative instruction about how they should consider the references to Pecker's meetings with prosecutors ahead of trial.
Steinglass also asked that Bove be clear when distinguishing between federal prosecutors and state prosecutors in questioning Pecker.
Hmm. Jury members already getting tired of Steinglass' antics?Quote:
Bove begins by saying there was some "confusion" in the questioning on whether Hope Hicks had come up in his FBI interview in 2018.
"I wanted to apologize and move on from that," Bove says.
He added, "If I ask a bad question, Mr. Steinglass will probably tell me but you can as well," he says to Pecker.
The statement drew smiles from several members of the jury.
Bove notes that Hicks was in and out of the August 2015 meeting and did not speak at the meeting.
"That's absolutely correct," Pecker says.
Before Bove began, the judge read the jury instructions that a witness can meet with prosecutors and review prior testimony.
Quote:
Bove is asking Pecker about the negative stories about Trump's primary opponents in the National Enquirer.
Bove confirms with Pecker that it's "standard operating procedure" for the National Enquirer to recycle content from other outlets.
He shows the jury five headlines about Ben Carson, an exhibit prosecutors used earlier in the week
"There was already negative information in the public domain about Ben Carson, and so you ran it in the National Enquirer, right?" Bove asks. "Yes," Pecker says.
Quote:
Bove has moved on to the National Enquirer articles about Marco Rubio.
Bove says these articles are also based on information "not exclusive" to the National Enquirer. "Yes," Pecker confirms.
Quote:
Defense attorney Emil Bove is questioning ex-publisher David Pecker about the National Enquirer's practice of publishing stories based on other news organizations' reporting, as he continues a line of questioning around the tabloid's coverage of Trump's political foes.
"The National Enquirer was recycling information from other publications because it was cost-efficient and made business sense?" Bove asks. "Yes," Pecker testifies.
Bove notes that the tabloid's work included cultivating a network of sources. "But that's not what was happening" with these articles, he says.
"Yes," Pecker says.
Quote:
Bove is showing the Wall Street Journal story about Karen McDougal published just before the 2016 election, saying it shows that American Media Inc.'s help for Trump was out there.
Bove cites a line in the story that said that since last year, the National Enquirer "has supported Mr Trump's presidential bid, endorsing him and publishing negative articles about some of his opponents."
Bove asks Pecker to confirm that the concept of "catch and kill" was not discussed at the August 2015 meeting at Trump Tower.
Pecker confirms to Bove that Trump and Cohen did not pay AMI any money in connection with the Dino Sajudin story. Sajudin was a former doorman at Trump Tower.
Pecker also confirms that AMI has executed "hundreds of thousands" of source agreements like the ones used for Sajudin and McDougal "over the years."
Just like the way developers finance their new projects was a standard practice in the property valuation trial. Nothing at all nefarious here.W00chang said:
im watching CNN and they are losing it over Pecker basically normalizing everything the prosecution tried so hard to prove. they (CNN hosts and pundits) truly only have 1 thing in common, pure TDS.
So other candidates weren't as good or thorough at minimizing negative press lolaggiehawg said:Quote:
Bove is asking Pecker about the negative stories about Trump's primary opponents in the National Enquirer.
Bove confirms with Pecker that it's "standard operating procedure" for the National Enquirer to recycle content from other outlets.
He shows the jury five headlines about Ben Carson, an exhibit prosecutors used earlier in the week
"There was already negative information in the public domain about Ben Carson, and so you ran it in the National Enquirer, right?" Bove asks. "Yes," Pecker says.
Steinglass being a little b****.Quote:
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass has objected repeatedly when Bove has referred to Donald Trump as President Trump as he discusses events about 2016.
"He wasn't President Trump," Steinglass said
The judge sustained the objection.
Trump did not react at all during this back and forth. He is leaned back in his chair, his head cocked to look at Pecker, as he's answering questions.
Quote:
Bove is moving on to former Playboy model Karen McDougal's agreement now.
Pecker confirms that when an amended agreement was signed giving AMI exclusivity rights in perpetuity, Pecker still thought there was a small chance it could be true.
Bove asks, "You could not walk away from that possibility" that it was true, "however small it might be?" Pecker agrees.
Bove is emphasizing that McDougal's main interest was that she didn't want her story published. Pecker agrees.
Quote:
Defense attorney Emil Bove asks ex-National Enquirer publisher David Pecker whether a story from Dino Sajudin, a Trump Tower doorman who was selling information about Donald Trump allegedly fathering a son, could have been "the biggest National Enquirer article ever."
Pecker agrees that it could have been.
Bove then asks, "So if this story was true you were going to run it right."
Pecker answers, "Uh, yes."
Well damn, there must just be a ton of conspiracies out there since it seems such NORMAL practiceaggiehawg said:Quote:
Defense attorney Emil Bove is questioning ex-publisher David Pecker about the National Enquirer's practice of publishing stories based on other news organizations' reporting, as he continues a line of questioning around the tabloid's coverage of Trump's political foes.
"The National Enquirer was recycling information from other publications because it was cost-efficient and made business sense?" Bove asks. "Yes," Pecker testifies.
Bove notes that the tabloid's work included cultivating a network of sources. "But that's not what was happening" with these articles, he says.
"Yes," Pecker says.Quote:
Bove is showing the Wall Street Journal story about Karen McDougal published just before the 2016 election, saying it shows that American Media Inc.'s help for Trump was out there.
Bove cites a line in the story that said that since last year, the National Enquirer "has supported Mr Trump's presidential bid, endorsing him and publishing negative articles about some of his opponents."
Bove asks Pecker to confirm that the concept of "catch and kill" was not discussed at the August 2015 meeting at Trump Tower.
Pecker confirms to Bove that Trump and Cohen did not pay AMI any money in connection with the Dino Sajudin story. Sajudin was a former doorman at Trump Tower.
Pecker also confirms that AMI has executed "hundreds of thousands" of source agreements like the ones used for Sajudin and McDougal "over the years."
Quote:
Ex-National Enquirer boss David Pecker has been asked to recount a phone call with Donald Trump in which Trump asked about former Playboy model Karen McDougal, who alleged she had an affair with the former president.
In June 2016, Pecker left a company meeting when he was informed by his assistant that he got a call from Trump.Trump attorney Emil Bove asks if the former publisher recalls telling Trump, "She doesn't want her story published."Quote:
On the call, Trump said, "I spoke to Michael (Cohen) and I want to talk to you about Karen McDougal," Pecker testifies.
"Yes, I remember saying that," Pecker said.
Pecker hesitated at times in the testimony, appearing to lose his train of thought, and explained after one long pause that he "just wanted to make sure" he remembered.
And then in turn encourages more shakedowns. McDougal and Stormy had the same lawyer who was approaching the Enquirer for hush money.Quote:
Pecker is recounting his previous testimony, where Pecker says that Trump told him he did not buy stories because that "always gets out."
Quote:
Bove is now showing Pecker the AMI agreement with former Playboy model Karen McDougal.
Bove confirms with Pecker that while he testified on direct examination that the promised articles and cover photo provisions were meant to "hide" the actual intention of the agreement to suppress her story, AMI was still on the hook for following through on the legitimate work product.
Quote:
Pecker is acknowledging that Karen McDougal was interested in restarting her career.
There was a video presentation that discussed promotional opportunities for McDougal. Money was not discussed at the meeting, Pecker agrees.
Bove also asked Pecker to confirm, "Ms. McDougal was not focused on cash."
Pecker after a long pause says, "money cash wasn't the primary portion of the agreement."
She cared more about the other provisions that would help relaunch her career, he confirmed. Pecker agreed there was a legitimate business purpose to the agreement.
Quote:
In summer 2016, then-Trump attorney Michael Cohen told National Enquirer publisher David Pecker he was looking to work with business mogul Mark Cuban, Pecker testified.
Cohen asked Pecker to send paparazzi to a meeting the attorney had with Cuban, Pecker says.
Defense attorney Emil Bove pushes Pecker to agree that photographing such a meeting would "put a little pressure" on Trump by elevating Cohen. Pecker says Cohen never told him that, but he agrees that it would have been a consequence.
Remember: Cohen's testimony is expected to play a key role in the hush money criminal case, and prosecutors has warned the jury that the defense will "go to great lengths to get you to reject his testimony" by highlighting his past wrongdoing.
Quote:
Michael Cohen's attempt to get photographed with business mogul Mark Cuban shows how Trump allies tried to "make themselves look bigger and better" to gain favor with the former president, CNN's Kaitlan Collins said.
Cohen wanted a job in the administration, and though he didn't get one, Collins would see him at the White House.
"We always see the jockeying in Trump's orbit of people trying to elevate themselves in his eyes for whatever their purpose was," Collins said.
Quote:
Defense attorney Emil Bove is revisiting previous testimony from David Pecker about consulting a campaign attorney and his company's general counsel about the tabloid's agreement with Karen McDougal, the former Playboy model who alleged she had an affair with Donald Trump.
Bove asks Pecker if when he told then-Trump attorney Michael Cohen the agreement was "bulletproof," he was conveying "there were no legal ramifications." "That's correct," Pecker says.
The Trump attorney then asks Pecker several follow-up questions confirming the then-tabloid boss meant what he said to Cohen, because he had received legal advice about the agreement, to which Pecker agreed.
Pecker says he didn't withhold any information from the attorneys when they reviewed the agreement.
The prior testimony in question: Bove and Pecker are talking about testimony from 2016, when the former National Enquirer publisher described consulting an election law attorney and the in-house counsel at American Media Inc., his parent company, about the "catch and kill" contract the tabloid reached with McDougal to bury her story about Trump.
Well she was a porn star. Would she sell papers just on her own?Quote:
Bove confirms Pecker wanted nothing to do with it. "That's right," Pecker says.
When Pecker told former National Enquirer editor-in-chief Dylan Howard he wanted nothing to do with it, Bove asks Pecker to confirm he was "speaking for the company and for yourself."
"Yes," Pecker says.
Quote:
Bove is revisiting Pecker's January 6, 2017, meeting with Trump at Trump Tower.
Bove walks through Pecker's previous testimony that Reince Priebus, Mike Pompeo, Sean Spicer and James Comey were in Trump's office standing around his desk when Pecker walked in.
Bove confirmed Pecker's testimony that he believes they were discussing a shooting in Fort Lauderdale.
Bove asks Pecker for more details about how he was let into the office while Trump was being briefed on a domestic national emergency.
"Mr Trump has a large office, and I was by the door while they were talking with Mr Trump," Pecker says.
Pecker clarified he didn't overhear the national security conversation.
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass objected and the lawyers are now at the bench.
Judge Juan Merchan sustains the objection.
Quote:
Bove says he has less than an hour left in his cross-examination of Pecker.
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass said there will be redirect.
Mine have been off for so long I had forgotten people even had signatures.Ag with kids said:Hell yeah!TexAg1987 said:DamnGood86 said:
How many more times are you going to make us scroll past your signature?
You can turn off signatures, btw
Quote:
Bove is asking Pecker about the time FBI agents came to his home in 2018.
Three agents arrived around 8 a.m. and took Pecker's phone with a search warrant, but did not search his house, the former tabloid boss testifies.
So there was a legit business reason to enter into the non-prosecution agreement. The Feds didn't care since both the FEC and SDNY were passing on filing any charges anyway but Pecker needed the matter resolved for the deal to close.Quote:
Bove again confirms with Pecker that American Media Inc. entered into a non-prosecution agreement with federal prosecutors.
Bove asks Pecker whether the meetings with FBI agents were stressful.
"You wanted it over with though, right?" he asks.
"Uh, yes," Pecker says.
At the time of the non-prosecution agreement, AMI was in talks with Hudson News Group to buy the National Enquirer and two other tabloids, Bove asks.
The proposed deal was worth $100 million. Bove asks, to finalize it, you had to resolve the investigation? "Yes," Pecker replied.
Pecker confirmed that the Hudson News Group deal included a provision that the investigations had to be resolved before the deal could be finalized.
Bove asked whether the federal investigation "put some pressure on the negotiations."
Pecker paused before answering. "From a timing standpoint, it would have added onto the stress of the transaction," Pecker says.
Quote:
Pecker confirmed there was a provision related to the federal investigations in the deal with Hudson News Group regarding the sale of the National Enquirer and two other tabloids.
The investigations had to be resolved before the deal could be finalized, he confirmed. The proposed deal was worth $100 million.
Bove asked whether the federal investigation "put some pressure on the negotiations."
Pecker paused before answering. "From a timing standpoint, it would have added onto the stress of the transaction," Pecker says.
"If AMI had been indicted that would have affected the value of its assets," Bove asked while emphasizing "indicted." Pecker agreed.
Bove asked Pecker whether there was a "price pressure" on the agreement. "To Hudson News, the federal investigation was going to reduce the earnings of those magazines," Pecker said.
Quote:
Donald Trump's attorneys cross-examined David Pecker on Friday morning, poking holes at the veracity of his comments and pointing out a discrepancy between Pecker's 2018 FBI testimony and his testimony in court this week.
Most of the questions centered around American Media Inc.'s business interests, beginning on the topic of running negative articles about Trump's foes, including the Clintons and Ben Carson. The defense was trying to establish that Pecker's actions were made in line with the company's bottom line in mind.
Here are some of the key points from the cross examination of Pecker:
- Pecker acknowledged that negative press for Trump's foes was generally good for business. Defense attorney Emil Bove elicited from Pecker that he would have run negative information about Carson even without a conversation from Trump, and that source agreements like the ones used for Karen McDougal and doorman Dino Sajudin were made all the time outside of the Trump sphere.
- Pecker said that if the false doorman allegations were true, he would have run it. The defense tried to establish it was good for business for Pecker to get the rights to the story first. Pecker also testified that there was a legitimate business purpose to the agreement between AMI and McDougal.
- Bove elicited from Pecker that "catch and kill" was not discussed at the August 2015 meeting. The meeting has become central to this case and during it, Pecker agreed to be the "eyes and ears" for Trump's campaign and flag any negative stories to Cohen.
- Defense pointed out discrepancy between Pecker's testimony this week and 2018 FBI interview. Pecker testified this week that Trump thanked him for handling McDougal and Sajudin's stories during a January 2017 meeting at Trump Tower. But the defense pointed out that "Trump did not express any gratitude to Pecker and AMI" during his 2018 FBI interview. Pecker confirmed the FBI notes were inconsistent with his testimony. Bove also pointed out an error in Pecker's testimony where he mistook the year he saw a third party agreement relating to the McDougal deal.
- Defense elicited from Pecker that he wanted nothing to do with the Stormy Daniels allegations. Pecker testified his "main concern" about her not having been paid was the harm it could do to National Enquirer editor Dylan Howard's reputation.
- Defense made sure to spell out for the jurors that the McDougal deal was reviewed by an election law attorney. The defense made clear that Pecker believed there would be no legal ramifications.
Generally speaking, no. At least not the SDNY as DOJ policiy would not allow them to speak about a declination.SwigAg11 said:
Pardon my ignorance but a question I've had for a while: can the defense call reps from the FEC/SDNY as witnesses about their investigations?
Quote:
Bove is focusing on a portion of the statement of facts in a non-prosecution agreement Pecker reached with federal investigators in 2018.
It relates to an August 2015 meeting at Trump Tower.
Bove is asking Pecker about his statements about that meeting during his October 2019 interview with the district attorney's office.
Quote:
Bove is now turning to a letter from the Federal Election Commission and Michael Cohen's response that they didn't need to worry about it because Trump had former Attorney General Jeff Sessions in his pocket.
"Based on your experience Michael Cohen was prone to exaggeration?" Pecker agreed.
Bove continued: "Could not trust anything he said?" Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass objected to the question and Judge Juan Merchan sustained it.
The aim of this cross is not to attack Pecker's credibility as much as his memory. He can be credible in his answers and still be inaccurate in his recollections.Quote:
Key context: The defense is working to poke holes in Pecker's claims and raise doubt about his recollection of events regarding the National Enquirer's relationship with Trump, as he is serving as a key witness for the prosecution.
Bove has spent much of the cross-examination trying to dismantle Pecker's credibility, highlighting small inconsistencies in Pecker's statements to prosecutors over the years in comparison to his trial testimony.
And with that cross is done, Bove passes the witness for redirect.Quote:
Bove is pressing Pecker about some boxes of information held at the National Enquirer that then-Trump attorney Michael Cohen tried to get his hands on.
Pecker says he had someone review the boxes.
Bove presses him if he is suggesting there is a trove of information about Trump.
Pecker says, "There was nothing in those boxes. They were worthless."
Some context: Pecker testified Thursday that he met with Cohen at Trump Tower after the election, and that Cohen was still asking about some boxes of information about Trump. Pecker said he was not going to let Cohen go through the boxes.
Pecker assured Cohen there was nothing damaging to be worried about in the boxes, he testified.
What a load of horses*** there. Trump didn't tell Pecker to do anything about McDougal. Further McDougal's agreement with AMI was not strictly about hush money it was also about her doing work for publications owned by AMI. All of the McDougal related testimony is irrelevant as applied to Trump.Quote:
Steinglass is starting his redirect by revisiting Bove's questions to Pecker. Here are some of the things that are coming up right now:More on this: Steinglass is seeking to infer to the jury that the election law attorney reviewed the McDougal agreement without the underlying context of Pecker's secret agreement to benefit Trump's campaign.
- Steinglass is bringing up the third-party invoice prepared by the American Media Inc. consultant for Trump to repay AMI for the Karen McDougal story through Revolution Consultants. Bove had questioned whether Pecker had seen the invoice in 2016, or not until 2017.
- Steinglass has Pecker confirm that the document was kept in AMI's records in 2016.
- Steinglass is asking about the campaign lawyer that was consulted. Pecker says he never spoke directly with the lawyer.
- Steinglass asked if Pecker told AMI general counsel about the arrangement struck with Donald Trump in August 2015. "No, I never did," Pecker testified. He says the outside counsel was asked to review the Karen McDougal contract.