David Pecker Testifies at Trump's Criminal Trial, Revealing Hush Money Scheme

Former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker testifies against Trump in criminal trial, revealing hush money scheme to influence 2016 election. Testimony directly implicates Trump, with significant political implications for his 2024 presidential bid.

Nitish Verma
Updated On
New Update
David Pecker Testifies at Trump's Criminal Trial, Revealing Hush Money Scheme

David Pecker Testifies at Trump's Criminal Trial, Revealing Hush Money Scheme

David Pecker, the former publisher of the National Enquirer, took the witness stand on April 25, 2024 at Donald Trump's criminal trial in New York. Pecker's highly anticipated testimony shed light on his involvement in suppressing stories about Trump's alleged extramarital affairs with Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 presidential election.

Pecker described the "catch and kill" scheme in which American Media Inc. (AMI), the parent company of the National Enquirer, paid $150,000 to McDougal for the rights to her story about an alleged year-long affair with Trump. However, AMI never intended to publish the story. Pecker testified that Trump's then-lawyer Michael Cohen assured him that "the boss," referring to Trump, would reimburse the company for the payment.

When adult film star Stormy Daniels was looking to sell her story of a 2006 sexual encounter with Trump, Pecker alerted Cohen. Pecker testified that he did not want to be involved with a porn star and advised Cohen to handle the payment himself. Cohen eventually paid Daniels $130,000 to keep quiet, which is at the center of the criminal trial.

Why this matters: The testimony from Pecker, a key witness, directly implicates Trump in the hush money scheme. Prosecutors allege that the payments were part of an illegal attempt to influence the 2016 election by suppressing damaging stories about Trump's personal life.

Pecker also revealed that he had a similar arrangement with Arnold Schwarzenegger, the former governor of California, to quash negative stories about Schwarzenegger's past interactions with women. In exchange, Schwarzenegger served as an editor-at-large for AMI's fitness magazines. This testimony aimed to demonstrate the standard operating procedure between politicians and the media to promote their image and win elections.

Under questioning, Pecker acknowledged that the primary purpose of suppressing McDougal's story was to influence the 2016 election. He also admitted to being aware that such expenditures by a corporation made at the request of a candidate were unlawful.

Trump, who has denied the affairs and pleaded not guilty, watched intently as Pecker testified. The former president's lawyers tried to portray the hush money deals as standard practice in the tabloid industry. However, the prosecution sought to show that the payments were part of a scheme to deceive voters and illegally influence the election.

Pecker's testimony is a critical component of the Manhattan district attorney's case against Trump. The trial, the first of a former U.S. president, carries significant political risks for Trump as he mounts another bid for the White House in 2024. Trump also faces three other criminal indictments in separate cases.

As Pecker's testimony concluded, he expressed no ill will towards Trump, whom he still considers a friend and mentor, despite not having spoken to him in some time. The trial continues with further witnesses expected to take the stand in the coming days. The outcome of this historic case could have far-reaching implications for Trump's political future and the American presidency itself.

Key Takeaways

  • David Pecker, ex-National Enquirer publisher, testified against Trump in criminal trial.
  • Pecker described "catch and kill" scheme to suppress stories about Trump's affairs.
  • Pecker revealed similar arrangement with Arnold Schwarzenegger to quash negative stories.
  • Pecker acknowledged payments to influence 2016 election were unlawful corporate expenditures.
  • Pecker's testimony is a critical component of Manhattan DA's case against Trump.