DimWit Politics

Bezos’s Post versus Pecker’s Enquirer

 Breaking News
  • The GOP needs less Moore Alabama’s perennial – and most controversial – politician is Judge Roy Moore.  He was controversial long before his 2018 Senate race.  Prior to 2018, Moore had Republican nominations and offices...
  • The Hope Hicks hearing was more political charade Following the reports on Hope Hicks’ closed-door hearing before Congressman Jerry Nadler’s House Judiciary Committee, I was reminded of the Henry Mancini theme song for the old movie “Charade.”  The...
  • Howard Schultz vanished … and no one noticed The is an old philosophical question: Does a tree that falls in the forest make a noise if no one hears it?  That inquiry could be applied to Howard Schultz. ...
  • Historian: California Is ‘America’s First Third-World State’ Historian Victor Davis Hanson, appearing Monday night on Fox’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” had an ominous description of his home state of California, referencing the “Golden State as America’s first “Third...
  • The Attack of the 50 Foot Candidates As is my habit, I generally relax my thought process by watching an unchallenging – or even bizarre –movie as I head into the arms of Morpheus.  This Saturday, it...

Bezos’s Post versus Pecker’s Enquirer

Bezos’s Post versus Pecker’s Enquirer
February 12
21:27 2019

First a disclaimer. I have never liked the National Enquirer. Even worse. I found it disgusting and refused to make it even part of my media consumption. I would celebrate its demise as a step forward for the profession of journalism.

It appears that I may be on the verge of getting my wish. It is possible that the Enquirer will go down in the type of scandal that they traditionally hype with mendacious front-page headlines. Enquirer owner and operator David Pecker was deeply embroiled in ethical – and perhaps criminal – activities associated with President Trump and his accuser, porn performer Stormy Daniels.

In that case, Pecker is accused of having “purchased” the rights to the Daniels story of her alleged affair with the pre-President Trump – not to publish it, but to prevent it from ever coming out in public. Pecker would be doing a BIG favor for his friend Trump – and have a lot of dirt on the President in his office safe in case he someday needed a favor from the guy in the White House.

That little transaction – apparently detailed to Special Counsel Robert Mueller by a former Trump attorney – has forced Pecker and his company into a cooperation agreement with Mueller. In that agreement, Pecker & Co. will be immune from criminal prosecution as long as they fully cooperate fully with the Special Counsel – holding nothing back and telling no lies — AND to refrain from any and all illegalities in the future. The agreement is so tight, that Pecker’s immunity could theoretically be canceled for fixing a parking ticket.

Now cometh America’s number one billionaire, Jeff Bezos. He is on the do-not-invite list of both Trump and Pecker. He is also the owner of the Washington Post, which he may have purchased as a weapon against Trump.

Bezos is by far not the most likable guy on the Forbes 400 list – and a sloppy affair resulting in a big-ticket divorce has not improved his image. But he does have money – enough to carry on any level of public and legal battle.

This is where the plot thickens, as they say.

It seems Bezos’ newspaper has been aggressively investigating the Trump-Pecker-Daniels relationship (if you will pardon the double entendre). In return, the Enquirer has been investigating Bezos’ pre-divorce affair – and they dug up embarrassing photos and emails.

Rather than splash them across the front page of the Enquirer, Pecker & Co. decided to see if they could strike a deal with Bezos. The Enquirer buries the Bezos file in return for the Post easing up on its investigation. The problem is that one person’s deal is another person’s bribe.

This has become more of some unsubstantial claims by one or the other. No. No. No. It seems the folks at the Enquirer put the deal in writing in the form of emails. Hold on! We are to believe that people at the Enquirer offered up a bribe in writing? As incredibly stupid as that may seem, that is apparently exactly what they did.

They must have assumed that Bezos would do anything to protect himself from public scandal. If that was the case, they were wrong. Bezos decided to shed light into his own dark corner rather than succumb to the bribe. Essentially, he confirmed all the salacious stuff in the Enquirer file and then exposed what he claimed to be a bribe. In a sense, he out-enquired the Enquirer. Not only does this enable the Post to pull out all stops in going after the Enquirer, but it may put that cooperation agreement with Mueller at risk if the prosecutors determine that the deal offered up by Pecker was, in fact, a bribe.

Where this will all lead, we can only guess, but this political soap opera is likely to be running for a long time.

So, there ‘tis.

About Author

Larry Horist

Larry Horist

Larry Horist is a conservative activist with an extensive background in economics, public policy and politics. Clients of his consulting firm have included such conservative icons as Steve Forbes and Milton Friedman, as well as the White House. He has testified as an expert witness before legislative bodies, including the U. S. Congress, and lectured at major colleges and universities. An award-winning debater, his insightful and sometimes controversial commentaries appear frequently on the editorial pages of newspapers across the nation. He can be reached at lph@thomasandjoyce.com.

Related Articles

2 Comments

  1. Chelemark
    Chelemark February 14, 12:34

    The National Enquirer, trash right from the beginning, so it could not happen to a better piece of trash then what they have been. It gets to be a real question as to why people still read and believe the junk that comes from this weekly deposit of mental genocide. It will be a real pleasure to see this episode lead it to dying in a pile of flames.

    Reply to this comment
    • Doug C.
      Doug C. March 12, 18:19

      There’s nothing — repeat: NOTHING — illegal about paying off a news, entertainment or information outlet to bury a story. NOTHING whatsoever.
      .
      Therefore it can be inferred that the National Enquirer is not at risk for any acts believed to have been committed in the pursuit of suppressing any claims by Stormy Daniels.
      .
      Larry has totally bobbled this column by suggesting differently
      .
      Now, the threat to publish dirt unless Bezos withholds articles of his own is probably NOT legal. But that would not or at least should not have been part of the Mueller probe.
      .
      As far as the Enquirer being trash, that publication is an uncorruptible exemplar of journalism compared with CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC and the NY Times.
      .
      Buy Chelemark already knew that.

      Reply to this comment

Write a Comment

Special Offer

Latest Comments

Sounds "spot on" to me, NavyJR! "No Nads" Nadler is a petty, pathetic example...

All these hearings in the House are nothing but political posturing and Nadler's efforts at...

"Three Maryland individual" seems like suffering from too much of free time..or a brain decay.....

Take a Look!

Don’t Miss This!

12174 - DimWit Politics - Display - 300x250 B - [WEB].txt Displaying 12174 - DimWit Politics - Display - 300x250 B - [WEB].txt.