David Pecker: Lawbreaker Or Master Manipulator?

David Pecker, the former CEO of American Media Inc. (AMI), was the first witness in former President Donald Trump's criminal hush-money trial. Pecker, a longtime friend of Trump, was given immunity from prosecution in 2018 by the Department of Justice. In his testimony, Pecker revealed that he had agreed to act as the eyes and ears for Trump's campaign, purchasing the rights to stories to suppress them and even fabricating negative stories about Trump's opponents. While Pecker was not formally charged with any wrongdoing, his actions raise questions about the legality of his involvement in the `catch-and-kill` schemes aimed at protecting Trump.

Did David Pecker break the law by engaging in catch-and-kill schemes?

In April 2024, David Pecker, the former president and CEO of American Media Inc. (AMI), the parent company of the tabloid the National Enquirer, testified in former President Donald Trump's hush money trial. Pecker was the first witness in the trial, in which Trump was accused of falsifying business records related to reimbursement of $130,000 paid to adult-film actress Stormy Daniels. Daniels intended to go public with claims that she had an affair with Trump ahead of the 2016 election.

Pecker testified that he aided Trump in numerous "catch-and-kill" schemes to bury negative stories about the then-presidential candidate as he ran for office in 2016. He admitted to jurors that he had worked with Trump and his associates to manipulate coverage on Trump's behalf.

In one instance, Pecker and Dylan Howard, former editor-in-chief at the National Enquirer, coordinated with the Trump campaign to pay model and former Playboy model Karen McDougal $150,000 to purchase the rights to her claim that she engaged in a relationship with Trump. AMI paid McDougal for the rights to her story, which claimed an affair with Trump, and then kept it under wraps.

In another instance, Pecker and Howard paid Dino Sajudin, a former doorman at one of Trump's properties, $30,000 for the rights to his story that Trump had fathered an illegitimate, unacknowledged love child. Sajudin's claims were ultimately proven false, but Pecker purchased the story to prevent potential embarrassment to Trump and his campaign.

Pecker also testified about the National Enquirer's practice of "checkbook journalism," where the publication had a policy of paying sources directly for exclusive rights to their stories. He also described how the publication would publish bogus stories about Trump's rivals and embellish stories based on information provided by Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen.

While Pecker's actions may have violated journalism ethics and standards, it is unclear whether he broke the law by engaging in catch-and-kill schemes. Manhattan prosecutors argued that while Pecker did not commit a crime, he formed an integral part of a "conspiracy" to "influence the presidential election." Pecker was granted immunity from prosecution in 2018 by the Department of Justice and entered into a non-prosecution agreement.

Did Pecker's actions as CEO of American Media Inc. constitute a violation?

As the former Chairman, President, and CEO of American Media Inc. (AMI), David Pecker was the first witness in former President Donald Trump's criminal hush-money trial.

Pecker's actions as CEO of AMI have been described as "shocking" and "underhanded." He admitted to agreeing to act as the "eyes and ears" for Trump's campaign, purchasing the rights to stories to suppress them, and fabricating negative stories about Trump's opponents.

Pecker also testified about AMI's use of "checkbook journalism" and "catch-and-kill" tactics, where the company would pay sources directly for exclusive rights to their stories and then bury the stories. In one instance, AMI coordinated with the Trump campaign to pay Karen McDougal $150,000 to purchase the rights to her claim that she had an affair with Trump. AMI admitted that this payment was "substantially more" than they would typically pay for a story.

Legal experts and journalists have argued that these actions are flagrant violations of basic journalism tenets and the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics. Paying for stories, fabricating stories, and striking secret deals to support political campaigns are considered unethical and are prohibited by many news outlets' internal ethics policies.

While Pecker was granted immunity from prosecution in 2018 by the Department of Justice, his testimony revealed a pattern of unethical and potentially illegal behavior that calls into question the credibility of the tabloid industry and undermines the entire journalism industry.

Did Pecker's testimony reveal illegal activity?

In April 2024, David Pecker, the former CEO of American Media Inc (AMI) and former publisher of the National Enquirer, testified in former President Donald Trump's criminal hush-money trial.

Pecker's testimony revealed that he had agreed to act as the "eyes and ears" of Trump's 2016 campaign, purchasing the rights to stories about Trump to suppress them and even fabricating negative stories about Trump's opponents. He also revealed that he had a private email address set up for things he didn't want his assistant to see.

Pecker's testimony established a pattern of Trump looking to buy women's silence to help his campaign. He also testified that he and others at the National Enquirer had created false stories about Trump's political challengers to further Trump's first presidential campaign, including one about Texas Senator Ted Cruz's father supposedly having ties to John F. Kennedy's assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald.

Pecker's testimony revealed that he and AMI engaged in "checkbook journalism", which involved paying sources for stories, and that he had final say over celebrity stories. He also revealed that he was aware that it was illegal to coordinate with a political campaign to make a payment to influence an election.

Legal experts and journalists have weighed in on the revelations from Pecker's testimony, with some arguing that the practices described by Pecker go beyond the already loose rules of tabloid journalism and violate basic journalism tenets.

Did Pecker's actions as publisher of the National Enquirer break any laws?

As the former publisher and CEO of American Media Inc., the parent company of the National Enquirer, David Pecker was the first witness in former President Donald Trump's criminal hush-money trial.

Pecker's testimony revealed the underhanded tactics his publication used to defend the former president, violating mainstream journalism ethics rules and even the lurid standards typical of tabloids. He admitted to agreeing to act as "'eyes and ears' for Trump's campaign, purchasing the rights to stories to suppress them, and even fabricating negative stories about Trump's opponents.

Pecker described the Enquirer's use of "checkbook journalism" and "catch-and-kill" tactics, where they would pay sources directly, mostly in cash, for exclusive rights to their stories. He also admitted to doctoring photos to invent stories, such as one linking Ted Cruz's father to Lee Harvey Oswald.

While it is not clear if Pecker broke any laws, his actions as publisher of the National Enquirer certainly violated basic journalism tenets, as codified in many news outlets' internal ethics policies and the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics.

Did Pecker's actions influence the outcome of the 2016 election?

David Pecker, the former CEO of American Media Inc. (AMI), the parent company of the tabloid the National Enquirer, was the first witness in former President Donald Trump's criminal hush-money trial.

Pecker was granted immunity from prosecution in 2018 by the Department of Justice. He testified that he had agreed to act as eyes and ears for Trump's 2016 campaign, purchasing the rights to stories to suppress them and even fabricating negative stories about Trump's opponents.

Pecker's testimony revealed that the National Enquirer used catch-and-kill tactics to bury negative stories about Trump by buying the rights to the stories and refraining from publishing them. In one instance, Pecker and Dylan Howard, former editor-in-chief at the National Enquirer, coordinated with the Trump campaign to pay model and actress Karen McDougal $150,000 to purchase the rights to her claim that she engaged in a relationship with Trump.

Pecker also testified about the National Enquirer's practice of paying sources for stories, which is largely confined to tabloids and celebrity publications and is prohibited by most mainstream news outlets.

Pecker's actions likely influenced the outcome of the 2016 election by suppressing negative stories about Trump and publishing negative and false stories about his opponents. Trump operatives and political rivals acknowledged the impact of these stories on the electorate, even if it is hard to measure.

In conclusion, Pecker's actions influenced the outcome of the 2016 election by helping to create a more favourable public image of Trump and damaging the campaigns of his opponents.

Frequently asked questions