TED CRUZ SHAMED BY PORN STAR is the next exhibit, which Steinglass submits, I will note, without irony.
He would comment on them and "add content" based on information that Cohen had. Pecker can't recall if Cohen shared the headlines with "the boss" before they were published.
Stienglass focuses on one: TED CRUZ SEX SCANDAL—5 SECRET MISTRESSES I don't remember the details of it, Pecker says, but remembers it and discussing it with Cohen.
When another one hits the screen—DONALD TRUMP BLASTS TED CRUZ'S DAD FOR PHOTO WITH JFK ASSASSIN—a reporter leans over to me and says, "I remember that one."
Finally, People's 153C: 'FAMILY MAN' MARCO RUBIO'S LOVE CHILD STUNNER! SENATOR MARCO RUBIO'S COCAINE CONNECTION! SHADY LADY WHO COULD RUIN MARCO RUBIO! I wonder if Cohen told the National Enquirer to add an exclamation point to every headline.
Pecker says he was introduced to Steve Bannon in Oct 2016. Trump said he believed Pecker and Bannon "would get along very well"—Bannon liked the articles very much so far, and so Pecker boxed up some issues of the Natl Enquirer and sent them to Bannon's apartment.
Trump thought that Pecker and Bannon could work very well together, Pecker starts to say, but Bove objects, and it's sustained.
Did Bannon pitch articles to the nat'l enquirer? Objection—overruled. Yes, says Pecker, Bannon suggested that the Natl Reporter reporter who wrote some Hillary articles should go on the Hannity show. More back and forth, and Bove objects and requests a sidebar.
While I can't promise headlines as spicy as the National Enquirer has, I can promise spicy tweets. So if you're enjoying this coverage from me and @AnnaBower's, we hope you'll consider contributing to our Trump trial fundraising campaign: givebutter.com/c/trumptrials/…
Sidebar is over, and Merchan calls for a short break. Some press make a run for the doors to go to the restroom, but we're stuck in the courtroom for now.
Bove explains the objection: the government is eliciting hearsay statements from Bannon; there's been no notice that govt considers Bannon to be part of a conspiracy; theres no conspiracy charged in the indictment; these are statements by campaign staff doing normal campaign work
Steinglass says there's a misperception about the law and what this case is about: It's true there's no conspiracy charge on the indictment, but falsifying biz records in 1st degree requires it to be done in service of another crime.