Enquiring minds want to know…about the National Enquirer’s support for the Trump campaign(including making payments to silence people with alleged dirt on Trump) and whether it may have crossed a line or two.
That looks like a fun line of [sic] inquiry for the investigators and lawyers to pursue. Better them than me.
I don’t think there’s any question that the stories they choose to run (or choose not to) are clearly First Amendment protected, but I don’t see how that affects payments that were made to obtain them – particularly if those payments are thinly disguised illegal campaign contributions.
I guess I’m not entirely sure what the 1st amendment issue here might be.
I have no words…
What the hell was that? Some kind of ass-covering by his legal team? That no matter what shit comes down in the future, Trump can’t say that he didn’t have adequate legal counsel?
It means Cobb is about to be fired too.
I was wondering that, too. It’s just so… lawyerly.
Except for the cheap shot at the Clintons—that was undoubtedly Trump’s only contribution.
Like John Oliver noted the other night, this is like the final episode of a TV series where we find out that all these disparate threads are all actually connected to each other!
Can we make Febuary National Libarry Month?
From Gyrate’s link:
Since the early stages of his campaign in 2015, Mr. Trump, his lawyer Michael D. Cohen and Mr. Pecker have strategized about protecting him and lashing out at his political enemies.
You ever look around to see who’s on your side?
Trump looks around: Let’s see, I’ve got Faux news, The National Enqiurer- Mr. Pecker… Yup, I’m good.
Do you remember back when George Papadopoulos was flopping around at the end of Mueller’s line? That was back in October. Doesn’t seem that long ago somehow. Anyway, you may recall that Papadopoulos was believed to have been in contact with Putin administration figures via an intermediary – a somewhat shadowy academic named Joseph Mifsud. Mifsud was contacted by reporters and denied having any contacts with the Russian government or being involved in any election shenanigans. An Italian newspaper published an interview with Mifsud on November 1 of last year.
And no one has heard from Mifsud since.
Italian prosecutors are looking for him on an unrelated charge. They can’t find him.
His fiance, who gave birth to their daughter recently, hasn’t heard from him.
He’s just … gone.
This is a lengthy article that recaps much of what’s already known about the investigation. You can probably skim or skip the first 3/4 of it to get to the best stuff about Mifsud at the end:
It could be, as this article suggests, that Mifsud got in Putin’s way somehow and wound up dead. Or, maybe Mifsud was simply called back to HQ in Moscow and given a hearty clap on the back for a job well done. Too bad about the fiance. These things happen. Spies mustn’t get too attached to the locals.
This almost sounds like he’s responding to Bannon’s attempted plan to block the investigation. Bannon is apparently trying to put forth several angles of attack, including saying Trump had incompetent counsel
Fire Mueller, go to court. Use every maneuver possible to drag out the proceedings. Postpone the inevitable and await a miracle.
There is an old joke about the Egypt/Israel war. Egypt cables Moscow, telling them about impending war, Moscow says “Don’t worry, you have the decisive strategic advantage.” A while later, Egypt informs Moscow the first assault has failed, Egyptian troops routed and in full retreat. Moscow replies retreat, don’t worry, decisive strategic advantage. Egypt informs Moscow that the Egyptian Air Force was destroyed, Israeli armor pouring over the border, help! Moscow cables back “Don’t worry. keep retreating, winter is coming”
Stories are worth more at different times.
If you want to get an exclusive on a salacious story, you’re going to have to offer up-front payment to someone not to go somewhere else before you do your research on whether the story should run or not.
At that point, the payment has been made. Then it’s up to your editorial staff to determine if it’s the right decision to run. Maybe they decide there’s not enough corroborating evidence or public interests to justifiably run according to their journalistic ethics.
At least, that’s how it would work for a legitimate news publication.
I, for one, would love to watch the court proceedings where the head editor of the National Enquirer claims that they didn’t run this story for journalistic reasons. I hope the cross goes something like:
Lawyer: (hands Nat Enquirer issue to witness) “Do you recognize this?”
Editor: It’s the issue from <date>
Lawyer: And could you read the headline.
Editor: Obama Linked To Gay Alien Sex Cult
Lawyer: Did this story meet your standards of journalism?
I hope he just keeps doing that until the judge tells him to knock it off.
Just heard an interesting point raised by Jill Wine Banks, one of the attorneys that prosecuted Watergate.
She said that even if Trump fires Rosenstein, or figures out a way to fire Mueller, or successfully manages to bury Mueller’s reports to Congress, the grand juries can issue their own reports. And they won’t be confidential.
Me likey. 
And… oh, dear… we’re just now learning there are now Cohen digital recordings. Tapes!!
Only if you are the kind of person who pays the contractor the full amount before the work is done. It is simple enough to offer a fraction of the payment with the rest coming after the story checks out.
That’s assuming you are a legitimate news organization, and that you don’t know for sure that the story is true.
But I like your court scenario.
Do legitimate news outlets pay sources now?
Maybe he’s in witness protection.
The National Enquirer helps Trump in other ways. Remember how they published a huge front page story about Ted Cruz having 5 mistresses during a critical juncture in the primary season? And Even though I don’t read them, im sure they ran about a million negative Clinton stories.
Remember the Joe and Mika “expose”? After Trump ended his friendship with MSNBC hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brezinski, the Enquirer harrassed their friends and family while in pursuit of a story on their relationship. Then Joe got calls from the White House suggesting that if Joe called Trump, Trump might be willing to have the story killed. We will never know what Trump wanted, because Scarborough said no and the story ran.
Also worth noting that Harvey Weinstein was another friend of David Pecker’s and the Enquirer repeatly purchased and killed stories about his behavior.
I’m just waiting for some right-wing nutjob to say that Hillary is responsible.