Trump trial live: David Pecker returns to testify on ‘catch-and-kill’ payouts – The Independent

When Pecker told Cohen that the deal was off, after his conversations with counsel about the transaction, “he was very, very angry, very upset, screaming basically at me. I said I’m not going forward with this agreement.”

“Michael Cohen said the boss will be very angry with you. I said I’m sorry, I’m not going forward, the deal is off,” Pecker said. “He said I can’t believe it. I’m the lawyer, I’m your friend.”

Steinglass: “Did AMI ever get reimbursed for the money it spent to acquire the exclusive rights to Ms McDougal’s story?”

“No, it never did.”

The court is taking a short break.

Trump has been pretty relaxed, he seems to be getting used to this, and he’s been carefully watching Pecker’s testimony while only slightly slouched in his chair.

We see an invoice from Investor Advisory Service Inc to Cohen’s shell company Resolution Consultants LLC for $125,000 on 21 September 2016.

“When I spoke to Michal Cohen, he said he was creating a company to receive the lifetime rights and that would reimburse, paid, that $125,000,” Pecker says.

The invoice is for the “agreed upon ‘flat fee’ for advisory services.”

Under questioning from Steinglass, Pecker admits it was not for that at all.

“It was for the lifetime rights to the Karen McDougal story.”

Pecker said he agreed to sign over the rights, but Cohen wanted to take out $25,000 that he valued as “editorial expenses” for McDougal’s columns and cover photos.

In September 2016, Cohen told Pecker that Trump wanted to acquire the rights to McDougal’s story.

Trump also “wanted all of the content that the National Enquirer had or developed and retained on Mr Trump.”

“I told Michael that these are old files, boxes, that were in Florida. The company has been moved to New York City,” Pecker said. “He insisted he wanted those boxes, wanted that content.”

“Cohen said, ‘the boss said if I get hit by a bus … he wouldn’t want someone else to publish those stories’.”

For context: In the wake of Cohen’s plea deal with federal prosecutors and sentencing, AMI admitted that the company is subject to campaign finance laws and that such agreements are “unlawful.”

“We purchased the story so it wouldn’t be published by any other organisation … We didn’t want the story to embarrass Mr Trump or embarrass or hurt the campaign,” says Pecker.

Who is we?

“Myself and Michael Cohen.”

The invoice was billed to AMI’s “president” department, which had a much larger budget for bigger expenses compared to the editorial budget. The $30,000 for the doorman’s story was also pulled from that account.

Now we see the ledger entry for the wire transfer. A payment voucher is dated 10 August 2016, and then the payment request form, which is basically the check.

Steinglass asks if the principal purpose of buying the story was “to suppress her story as to prevent her from influencing the election?”

“Yes it was.”

Steinglass then asks whether Pecker is aware that AMI is subject to federal campaign finance laws for such arrangements made at the request of a candidate.

Bove objects and they’re now having a sidebar.

Pecker occasionally lets out a very large cackle, in sharp contrast to his soft-spoken, slow answers.

Who was aware of the agreement?

“Michael Cohen”

Anyone else?

“I believe Donald Trump did.”

Keith Davidson, McDougal’s attorney at the time, sent an invoice to AMI on 9 August 2016 for $150,000. Pecker also volunteers that the payment was then wired to an escrow account.

“We’ll get to that in a minute”

In the agreement, a two-year contract granted her a monthly column on aging and fitness for Star magazine, another for OK magazine, four posts a month on Radar Online, and that AMI would provide her with ghostwriters.

AMI also acquired “limited life story rights” that are limited to “any romantic, personal and/or physical relationship McDougal has ever had with any then-married man.”

Why give her those other provisions?

“I wanted to substantiate the $150,000 payment,” Pecker says. He says the following very carefully with a few pauses:

“With respect to campaign, uh, laws, I wanted to have the contract be a record that stipulates that for the services that she was going to perform for American Media, has a basis for it.

“So when we talked about … all of the articles she was going to run, the photos… I was looking at an amount of money that I would have to acquire or pay for freelancers or other writers or reporters or visual people to validate to come up with the $150,000.”

She also had to pay the money back if she breached the contract, and she couldn’t write any books, do interviews, or make any social media posts about her story, without the consent of AMI.