During Wednesday’s “Morning Joe” segment on MSNBC, analysts discussed the surprising silence of former President Donald Trump regarding David Pecker, the former publisher of the National Enquirer, who is testifying as a prosecution witness in the hush money trial. Despite Trump’s frequent rants against other witnesses, he has noticeably avoided mentioning Pecker, leading to speculation that the former publisher may possess incriminating information against Trump. Legal analyst Andrew Weissmann described Pecker’s testimony as “devastating” to Trump’s defense, while co-host Mika Brzezinski expressed confusion over Trump’s lack of response. “I can’t think of anyone who has hurt Donald Trump’s case up to this point more than Pecker. Yet, he doesn’t post about Pecker, he doesn’t rant about Pecker,” Brzezinski remarked. Panel member Mike Barnicle suggested that Trump’s silence could stem from his fear of Pecker releasing damaging information. “Maybe Pecker has something on him that Donald knows and only Pecker knows,” Barnicle said. The discussion also highlighted the contrasting approach taken by the MAGA movement, which has been strategically stacking low-level government positions with loyalists to prepare for a long-term political dominance. According to Steve Bannon, the mastermind behind the movement, they have learned the “rules” of government and are now ready to make significant moves. This plan involves patient infiltration and a focus on local-level building blocks, as described in Bannon’s book “Finish What We Started: The MAGA Movement’s Ground War to End Democracy.” Despite setbacks in the midterm elections, Bannon believes the movement will ultimately prevail and dominate the political landscape for a century. The long-term strategy involves behind-the-scenes work rather than high-profile events like the Capitol riot or Trump’s speeches. Additionally, the movement has gained support from candidates involved in the January 6th Capitol siege, who are now running for office and using their past actions as a platform for their campaigns. Derrick Evans, who participated in the attack, is seeking a seat in the US Congress and portrays his experience as a positive attribute. Others, like Kimberly Draggo, have already lost their elections after being sentenced for their involvement in the Capitol riot. Former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker’s testimony in the hush money trial has raised eyebrows and raised questions about Donald Trump’s silence on the issue. Pecker has provided detailed information about paying off sources to prevent negative stories about Trump during the 2016 election campaign. Legal analysts believe Pecker’s testimony could significantly damage Trump’s defense, suggesting the former president may be protecting Pecker due to potential incriminating information he holds. Jurors have already heard two days of damning testimony against Donald Trump in his hush money trial, and a former prosecutor told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” she believes what had been considered his strongest defense could be knocked down. Former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker told the jury that he personally tracked down negative stories about Trump during the 2016 election campaign and paid off damaging sources to prevent them from speaking to other outlets. Politico’s deputy managing editor for politics Sam Stein floated what he believed to be the greatest weakness in the case against the ex-president. “I actually think the defense is fairly easy here, right, which is this man David Pecker ran the National Enquirer , which literally made up stories and peddled lies,” Stein said. “Why should we believe that he’s telling the truth now? Same with Michael Cohen — he’s admitted in prior iterations that he lied, why should we believe anything he says now? That, to me, seems a powerful defense — they’re admitted liars, in disinformation, you shouldn’t believe what they have to say, what should the prosecution do with that?” But Barbara McQuade, the former U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan, said it should be fairly easy for prosecutors to counter that defense and bolster the credibility of their key witnesses. “Oftentimes a prosecutor needs to use as a witness somebody who was a criminal associate of the defendant,” McQuade said. “The common statement is to say, ‘I didn’t choose the witnesses, the defendant did by associating with them very closely,'” she said. “The key is, of course, to find corroborating evidence so the jury don’t have to take their word for it. ALSO READ: A criminologist explains why Trump’s Manhattan trial is the biggest threat to his freedom “We’ll hear from people like Hope Hicks and other people who worked for the Trump Organization. We’ll see documents in the forms of checks and ledgers, we’ll hear that recording between Michael Cohen and Donald Trump about setting up essential consultants and some of the other payments.” “You can see it coming for David Pecker, for sure,” McQuade added. “It’s coming for Michael Cohen and, if she testifies, it will be coming for Stormy Daniels, as well. Very often the corroboration is enough to rehabilitate those witnesses.” Watch the video below or at this link.
Trump’s Silence on Pecker Raises Eyebrows Amid Hush Money Trial
dev
