In the recent indictment of former President Donald Trump’s organization and its CFO, Allen Weisselberg, three “catch and kill” payments were mentioned. These payments are a common practice in the media industry, but their use in politics has raised ethical concerns. In this article, we will provide an overview of the three payments mentioned in the indictment and their significance.
Firstly, let’s define what “catch and kill” means. It is a term used in the media industry to describe a practice where a publication pays for exclusive rights to a story, but then chooses not to publish it. This can be done for various reasons, such as protecting a source or avoiding negative publicity. In politics, catch and kill payments can be used to silence damaging stories about a candidate or public figure.
The first catch and kill payment mentioned in the indictment was made to Karen McDougal, a former Playboy model who claimed to have had an affair with Trump. The payment was made by American Media Inc. (AMI), the parent company of the National Enquirer, in August 2016, just before the presidential election. AMI paid McDougal $150,000 for the exclusive rights to her story but never published it. This payment was made in coordination with Michael Cohen, Trump’s former personal lawyer, and was allegedly reimbursed by the Trump Organization.
The second catch and kill payment mentioned in the indictment was made to Stormy Daniels, an adult film actress who also claimed to have had an affair with Trump. In October 2016, just weeks before the election, Cohen paid Daniels $130,000 for her silence. Like McDougal’s payment, this was allegedly reimbursed by the Trump Organization. Unlike McDougal’s payment, however, Daniels’ story did eventually come to light and became a major scandal for Trump.
The third catch and kill payment mentioned in the indictment was made to a former Trump Organization employee who had knowledge of Weisselberg’s alleged tax fraud. According to the indictment, this employee was paid $50,000 in 2015 to keep quiet about Weisselberg’s actions. This payment was also allegedly reimbursed by the Trump Organization.
So, what is the significance of these catch and kill payments? Firstly, they raise ethical concerns about the use of money to silence damaging stories or information. In politics, this can be seen as an attempt to manipulate the public and undermine democracy. Secondly, these payments could potentially be illegal if they were made with the intention of influencing an election or covering up criminal activity. The indictment suggests that the payments made to McDougal and Daniels were made in coordination with Trump’s campaign and were therefore illegal campaign contributions.
In conclusion, the three catch and kill payments mentioned in Trump’s indictment shed light on a controversial practice in the media industry that has been used in politics. While catch and kill payments are not inherently illegal, their use in politics raises ethical concerns and could potentially be illegal if made with the intention of influencing an election or covering up criminal activity. The outcome of this indictment remains to be seen, but it highlights the importance of transparency and accountability in politics.
