Publisher testifies after heated hearing on Trump’s gag order
A key witness in Donald Trump’s criminal trial pulled back the curtain Tuesday on what prosecutors say was a conspiracy to influence the 2016 presidential election, describing how he used his tabloid to aid Trump’s campaign.
The witness, David Pecker, the longtime publisher of The National Enquirer, described a 2015 meeting with Trump and his fixer at the time, Michael Cohen. Prosecutors described the meeting, which took place at Trump’s midtown Manhattan headquarters, as the “Trump Tower conspiracy.”
Prosecutors say that meeting is where the trio hatched their efforts to conceal several sex scandals during the 2016 campaign. One of those efforts, a $130,000 hush-money payment Cohen made to porn actor Stormy Daniels, is at the heart of the case.
Before court adjourned for the day, Pecker testified that Cohen and Trump had asked him what he and his magazines could do “to help the campaign,” a crucial statement that supports the prosecution’s argument that the men were not just protecting Trump’s personal reputation, but aiding his presidential bid.
“I would be your eyes and ears,” Pecker recalled telling them, as he explained the tabloid practice of “catch and kill,” in which an outlet bought the rights to a story, only to never publish it.
Pecker is expected to return to the stand when the trial resumes Thursday. Court will not be in session Wednesday.
During roughly three hours of testimony on Tuesday, the tabloid publisher described how
In a letter to Congress this month, FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel warned that not funding the program would have widespread impact, especially for senior citizens, veterans, schoolchildren and residents of rural and tribal communities.
“Households across the country are now facing hard choices about what expenses they have to cut, including food and gas, to maintain their broadband access, with some households doubtful they can afford to keep their broadband service at all,” she wrote.
Internet service providers have their own programs for low-income households. People can enter their address on the FCC’s broadband map to find providers in their area. The California Public Utilities Commission also provides a list of providers with low-cost internet plans.
But finding a cheaper alternative can be difficult. Rural households sometimes have just one provider, and families who can’t afford it have little recourse.
Rep. Salud Carbajal, D-California, is among 228 bipartisan co-sponsors of the Affordable Connectivity Program Extension Act of 2024, which would provide an additional $7 billion to keep the program afloat for another year. Among the co-sponsors are 22 Republicans, including Rep. Young Kim of California.
“You’ve got to have your head in the sand to not understand the value of what this is doing to enhance our economy, enhance the skills and opportunities for so many Americans,” Carbajal said. Allowing the program to expire, he said, “will undo the progress we’ve made in closing the digital divide. It would take us back to the dark ages.”
But the bill hasn’t been brought for a standalone floor vote in the GOP-led House amid criticism from some Republicans who say the program subsidizes households that already had internet service. They also pointed to findings from the FCC’s internal watchdog last year that providers failed to comply with the program’s rules and improperly claimed funds.
In a statement last year, Sens. John Thune, R-South Dakota, and Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said the program was “subject to massive waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer dollars.”
In an FCC survey of 5,300 households conducted in December, more than two-thirds of respondents said they had inconsistent or no internet before joining the federal program, the majority citing affordability. About one-third of respondents said they had both mobile and home internet service.
In October, the Biden administration sent Congress a supplemental request for $6 billion to keep the program running, but it didn’t pass.
Letting the program lapse, even if it could be restarted later, would require additional spending on outreach and reenrollment, Carbajal said. He also worries that people who benefit from it will feel a sense of whiplash and lose trust in the federal government.
Carbajal said he’s optimistic something will take hold before May 1. Similar circumstances have played out favorably at the last minute, he said.