David Pecker, longtime publisher of the National Enquirer, appears to be increasingly in hot water over his gossip rag’s handling of private text messages taken from Amazon chief Jeff Bezos’ personal phone. The wealthiest person in the world, Bezos has a security team investigating the breach, and his lead security expert believes a “government agency” may be responsible for the hack. He did not name any specific U.S. agency, and experts say it is more likely to have been a foreign government’s.
Nonetheless, the publication of the texts between Bezos and his mistress, Lauren Sanchez, have now set into motion an investigation that David Pecker may come to deeply regret. As Bezos’ team began to dig, Pecker and executives at his company, American Media, Inc., demanded that Bezos stop the investigation, threatening that if he didn’t, they would release further damaging information, including embarrassing nudes or other compromising private photos of Bezos and Sanchez. To stop them in their tracks and eliminate the possibility of blackmail, Bezos blew the whole thing up and published the full details.
David Pecker is probably going to rue the day he set off down this road, because he and AMI were involved in the hush-money scheme with Michael Cohen to silence women who had affairs with Donald Trump. Pecker and AMI admitted to buying the rights to former Playboy model Karen McDougal’s story, which included her claim of a longtime affair with Trump in the months before and after Melania gave birth to their son. Pecker and the National Enquirer promptly buried her story as a favor to Trump, in a practice known as “catch and kill.” But in the course of the criminal investigation of the allegations, U.S. attorneys gave David Pecker immunity for his testimony against Michael Cohen, and AMI a “non-prosecution agreement” that specifically said that if AMI committed any crimes after the signing of the agreement, AMI executives could be prosecuted for past crimes as well.
Bloomberg reports federal prosecutors are now looking at whether the Bezos extortion attempt was a crime or whether it was heavy-handed negotiation. Former U.S. attorney Renato Mariotti went on a Twitter tear about why this is a complicated issue. You can see that thought-provoking thread below, but any way you slice it, this isn’t great news for David Pecker or American Media, Inc. They may have put themselves at great risk of exposure.
1/ In the Medium post contained in the tweet above, Amazon founder (and Washington Post owner) Jeff Bezos explains how the parent company of the National Enquirer engaged in what Bezos characterizes as "extortion and blackmail" towards him. It is worth reading.
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) February 7, 2019
3/ In the Medium post, Bezos explained that he hired someone to conduct an investigation of the National Enquirer and its parent company. He notes that there are "now several independent investigations looking into this matter," suggesting there are criminal investigations.
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) February 7, 2019
5/ Specifically, the parent company of the National Enquirer told Bezos that it had many compromising photos and texts that it had not published but would publish if he did not agree to certain terms, which it sent to Bezos, who included them within the Medium post.
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) February 8, 2019
7/ In the proposed terms, among other things, both sides (Bezos and AMI) agreed to release each other of any legal claims, Bezos agreed to state that AMI's coverage of Bezos was not politically motivated, and AMI agreed not to publish any of the private material.
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) February 8, 2019
9/ So is this extortion or blackmail, as Bezos claims?
Yes, given the ordinary meaning of those terms. But whether this is actually a *crime* is much more complicated than that.
Situations like this are common and I have represented clients in a situation similar to Bezos.
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) February 8, 2019
11/ This situation is more complex than that. Bezos has potential legal claims against AMI, if AMI engaged in wrongdoing against Bezos. Also, the AMI Chief Content Officer hinted that they believe the Washington Post will publish a false story about AMI.
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) February 8, 2019
13/ AMI would also argue that the agreement calls for both sides not to publish damaging information about the other side, and that the descriptive email from the Chief Content Officer was merely part of its settlement negotiations, to show Bezos that their offer had value.
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) February 8, 2019
15/ To make this out as an extortion case, prosecutors would have to argue that the claims Bezos had against AMI constituted "money or property" of Bezos and that the whole settlement proposal was merely window dressing for the extortion of Bezos by AMI.
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) February 8, 2019
17/ So what about the AMI Non Prosecution Agreement with the Southern District of New York federal prosecutors? (Link below.) The agreement would obligate AMI to fully cooperate with a SDNY investigation of this matter. https://t.co/f0TokNT3aJ
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) February 8, 2019
19/ AMI would certainly challenge that in court, but the standard would not be the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard that they would be entitled to in a criminal trial. That said, for the reasons above, I don't think federal prosecutors will go down that road.
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) February 8, 2019
21/ As I mentioned earlier, moves like this are fairly common when there are legal disputes between people or companies as a way for one side to gain leverage over the other. It is despicable but I have had no success convincing federal prosecutors to bring charges. /end
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) February 8, 2019
