It’s a big day tomorrow for the little man, and I do mean little man. He’s got to show back up in trial Monday morning and it’s already a job that he hates. But he has to be there and that’s driving him batty. David Pecker of the National Enquirer is expected to be the first witness and he could do a lot of damage. Concurrent with this happening, there are some very noteworthy developments happening in other cases, to wit: 1. Witness statements are due in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents trial; and 3. the $175M bond that Knight Surety was on board to post in the Trump Organization fraud trial may be thrown out, which would mean that Trump’s properties could be seized. The following is a thread read out from Jennifer Rubin’s Twitter feed.

I’ll be watching three legal stories unfold Monday: the real opening of the Manhattan DA’s trial; the hearing on whether to cancel Trump’s $175 million bond; & the public filing of witness statements in the MAL docs case.Image
But the thing I keep thinking about is who the first witness will be. And if I’m telling this story chronologically, the person I’d call first is this guy on the right, former American Media chairman David Pecker:Image
According to the Manhattan DA’s statement of facts accompanying the indictment, the story begins with Trump’s infamous ride down the elevator in June 2015, when he declared his candidacy for president. 
But “soon after,” in August 2015, Trump and Cohen met with Pecker, who offered to serve as the campaign’s “eyes and ears” to help Trump—and hurt his rivals—through the National Enquirer’s coverage.Image
That American Media made good on its promises is important, especially since it admitted to certain conduct through a non-prosecution agreement with DOJ in 2018 and this “conciliation agreement” with the Federal Election Commission in 2021:Image
But even more significant? Pecker can testify that Trump not only understood but heartily endorsed his publication’s offer to “catch and kill” negative stories about him, especially as they pertained to Trump’s alleged extramarital affairs. 
And given how few people outside Michael Cohen directly communicated with Trump about the scheme at issue, Pecker’s testimony could be critical in establishing Trump’s intent and knowledge. FIN. 

Meanwhile, nothing is working out the way Trump planned.

The highly telegraphed plan was for Mr. Trump to behave as a candidate in spite of the trial, using the entire event as a set piece in his claims of a weaponized judicial system.

But last week, in New York, Mr. Trump’s only political event was a stop at an Upper Manhattan bodega to emphasize crime rates in the borough. The appearance seemed to breathe life into him, but it also felt more like a stop a mayoral candidate would make than a presumptive presidential nominee. Some advisers are conscious of Mr. Trump appearing diminished, and they are pressing for more — and larger — events around the New York area.

Many in Mr. Trump’s broader orbit are pessimistic about the case ending in a hung jury or a mistrial, and they see an outright acquittal as virtually impossible. They are bracing for him to be convicted, not because they cede the legal grounds, but because they think jurors in overwhelmingly Democratic Manhattan will be against the polarizing former president.

But the shared sense among many of his advisers is that the process may damage him as much as a guilty verdict. The process, they believe, is its own punishment.

That is pretty much how I see it. Trump is miserable in court and he has no choice but to be there. He can’t just decide to go play golf or decide to campaign. He must be there. He put himself in this position and that’s also something he can’t live with.

Either way that this goes, conviction, hung jury, mistrial, this is not good for Trump on any level. Which makes it all very good news for America.

Help keep the site running, consider supporting.


  1. Process as punishment for him is a little karmic.

    But not as much as punishment after a guilty verdict based on facts, that will be karma.

  2. Just for him to make enough voters to see him for what he is and he loses in November will be the very best outcome of his trial for me! We all must vote!!!

  3. “…because they think jurors in overwhelmingly Democratic Manhattan will be against the…” dotard.

    Wow, just Wow, how much of their vaunted PROJECTION is involved in that sentence? In their world, trials are just performance to show agreement to a preconceived result. In the real world, the trial is a process with a conclusion to be reached thanks to the process.

    See the difference? They don’t.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

The maximum upload file size: 128 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop files here