News
'Catch-and-kill' to be described to jurors as testimony resumes in hush money trial of Donald Trump
NEW YORK (AP) — A longtime tabloid publisher was expected Tuesday to tell jurors about his efforts to help Donald Trump stifle unflattering stories during the 2016 campaign as testimony resumes in the historic hush money trial of the former president.
David Pecker, the former National Enquirer publisher who prosecutors say worked with Trump and Trump’s lawyer, Michael Cohen, on a so-called “catch-and-kill” strategy to buy up and then spike negative stories during the campaign, testified briefly Monday and will be back on the stand Tuesday in the Manhattan trial.
What to know about Trump’s hush money trial:
Also Tuesday, prosecutors are expected to tell a judge that Trump should be held in contempt over a series of posts on his Truth Social platform that they say violated an earlier gag order barring him from attacking witnesses in the case. Trump’s lawyers deny that he broke the order.
Pecker’s testimony followed opening statements in which prosecutors alleged that Trump had sought to illegally influence the 2016 race by preventing damaging stories about his personal life from becoming public, including by approving hush money payments to a porn actor who alleged an extramarital sexual encounter with Trump a decade earlier. Trump has denied that.
“This was a planned, long-running conspiracy to influence the 2016 election, to help Donald Trump get elected through illegal expenditures to silence people who had something bad to say about his behavior,” prosecutor Matthew Colangelo said. “It was election fraud, pure and simple.”
Former president Donald Trump, center, awaits the start of proceedings at Manhattan criminal court, Monday, April 22, 2024, in New York. (AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura, Pool)
A defense lawyer countered by attacking the integrity of the onetime Trump confidant who’s now the government’s star witness.
“President Trump is innocent. President Trump did not commit any crimes. The Manhattan district attorney’s office should not have brought this case,” attorney Todd Blanche said.
The opening statements offered the 12-person jury — and the voting public — radically divergent roadmaps for a case that will unfold against the backdrop of a closely contested White House race in which Trump is not only the presumptive Republican nominee but also a criminal defendant facing the prospect of a felony conviction and prison.
The case is the first criminal trial of a former American president and the first of four prosecutions of Trump to reach a jury. Befitting that history, prosecutors sought from the outset to elevate the gravity of the case, which they said was chiefly about election interference as reflected by the hush money payments to a porn actor who said she had a sexual encounter with Trump.
“The defendant, Donald Trump, orchestrated a criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 presidential election. Then he covered up that criminal conspiracy by lying in his New York business records over and over and over again,” Colangelo said.
Trump faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records — a charge punishable by up to four years in prison — though it’s not clear if the judge would seek to put him behind bars. A conviction would not preclude Trump from becoming president again, but because it is a state case, he would not be able to pardon himself if found guilty. He has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing.
The case brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg revisits a years-old chapter from Trump’s biography when his celebrity past collided with his political ambitions and, prosecutors say, he scrambled to stifle stories that he feared could torpedo his campaign.
Republican presidential candidate and former President Donald Trump sits in the courtroom at his criminal trial at Manhattan state court in New York, Monday, April 22, 2024. (Brendan McDermid/Pool Photo via AP)
The opening statements served as an introduction to the colorful cast of characters that feature prominently in that tawdry saga, including Stormy Daniels, the porn actor who says she received the hush money; Cohen, the lawyer who prosecutors say paid her; and Pecker, who prosecutors say agreed to function as the campaign’s “eyes and ears.”
In his opening statement, Colangelo outlined a comprehensive effort by Trump and allies to prevent three separate stories — two from women alleging prior sexual encounters — from surfacing during the 2016 presidential campaign. That undertaking was especially urgent following the emergence late in the race of a 2005 “Access Hollywood” recording in which Trump could be heard boasting about grabbing women sexually without their permission.
“The impact of that tape on the campaign was immediate and explosive,” Colangelo said.
Within days of the “Access Hollywood” tape becoming public, Colangelo told jurors that The National Enquirer alerted Cohen that Daniels was agitating to go public with her claims of a sexual encounter with Trump in 2006.
“At Trump’s direction, Cohen negotiated a deal to buy Ms. Daniels’ story to prevent American voters from hearing that story before Election Day,” Colangelo told jurors.
But, the prosecutor noted, “Neither Trump nor the Trump Organization could just write a check to Cohen with a memo line that said ‘reimbursement for porn star payoff.’” So, he added, “they agreed to cook the books and make it look like the payment was actually income, payment for services rendered.”
Those alleged falsified records form the backbone of the 34-count indictment against Trump. Trump has denied having a sexual encounter with Daniels.
Blanche, the defense lawyer, sought to preemptively undermine the credibility of Cohen, who pleaded guilty to federal charges related to his role in the hush money scheme, as someone with an “obsession” with Trump who cannot be trusted. He said Trump had done nothing illegal when his company recorded the checks to Cohen as legal expenses and said it was not against the law for a candidate to try to influence an election.
Blanche challenged the notion that Trump agreed to the Daniels payout to safeguard his campaign, characterizing the transaction instead as an attempt to squelch a “sinister” effort to embarrass Trump and his loved ones.
“President Trump fought back, like he always does, and like he’s entitled to do, to protect his family, his reputation and his brand, and that is not a crime,” Blanche told jurors.
Former president Donald Trump leaves Trump Tower on his way to Manhattan criminal court, Monday, April 22, 2024, in New York. (AP Photo/Stefan Jeremiah)
The efforts to suppress the stories are what’s known in the tabloid industry as “catch-and-kill” — catching a potentially damaging story by buying the rights to it and then killing it through agreements that prevent the paid person from telling the story to anyone else.
Besides the payment to Daniels, Colangelo also described arrangements to pay a former Playboy model $150,000 to suppress claims of a nearly yearlong affair with the married Trump. Colangelo said Trump “desperately did not want this information about Karen McDougal to become public because he was worried about its effect on the election.”
He said jurors would hear a recording Cohen made in September 2016 of himself briefing Trump on the plan to buy McDougal’s story. The recording was made public in July 2018. Colangelo told jurors they will hear Trump in his own voice saying: “What do we got to pay for this? One-fifty?”
Pecker is relevant to the case because prosecutors say he met with Trump and Cohen at Trump Tower in August 2015 and agreed to help Trump’s campaign identify negative stories about him.
He described the tabloid’s use of “checkbook journalism,” a practice that entails paying a source for a story.
“I gave a number to the editors that they could not spend more than $10,000” on a story without getting his approval, he said.
___
Tucker reported from Washington.
___
Follow the AP’s coverage of former President Donald Trump at https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump.
News
School board member who hugged teen and called her ‘hot’ is charged with assault
A Tennessee school board member who hugged a teenage girl and called her “hot” at a public meeting last month has been charged with assault, court records show.
The charge of assault — physical contact stems from an incident on April 2, when Keith Ervin put his arm around the girl, a student member of the board, hugged her from the side and told her, “God, you’re hot,” after she had just wrapped up asking questions about career and technical education.
A lawyer who could speak on Ervin’s behalf was not listed in Washington County court records, and Ervin did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment Tuesday night.
During the public comment part of a May 7 meeting, the student called the adult members of the school board “cowards” for what she characterized as their “failure to act.”
“To begin, I want to address Ervin’s actions, which were not only unwelcome, but sexist and derogatory,” she said, standing at a podium in front of the members, including Ervin, who sat with his arms crossed as she spoke. “I know this because he has not behaved this way with any of our male members, nor do I believe that he ever would.”
Following public outcry, Ervin apologized for his actions. At an April 8 meeting, he said his calling the girl “hot” was intended to mean “she was on a roll” and had nothing to do with her appearance.
The board censured Ervin, a member since 2006, at that meeting. In a statement Tuesday to NBC affiliate WCYB of Bristol, it said that because Tennessee law dictates school board members are independently elected officials, it does not have the authority to remove them, including Ervin.
“The Board reiterates that Mr. Ervin’s actions do not reflect the standards, policies, or values of the school district,” the statement said. “The Board will defer to law enforcement and the judicial system for the resolution of these charges.”
In her public comments, the teen told the board members that she does not accept “your fake apologies used to protect yourselves. I do not believe that you deserve that peace of mind.”
The members did not respond to her and moved on to other meeting agenda items.
Ervin’s first court appearance is scheduled for August.
News
Video: Tornado Rips Through Rural Community in Nebraska
new video loaded: Tornado Rips Through Rural Community in Nebraska
By Jackeline Luna
May 19, 2026
Watch Today’s Videos
Severe Weather Threatens Tens of Millions in Midwest
0:39
A Hunger Crisis in Somalia Is Being Worsened by the Middle East War
1:21
Tornadoes and Thunderstorms Damage Hundreds of Buildings in Mississippi
0:16
Severe Storm Pummels Texas With Golf Ball-Sized Hail
0:32
Deadly Storm Brings Tornadoes and Severe Weather to North Texas
1:02
Tornado Strikes an Air Force Base in Oklahoma
0:52
Today’s Videos
U.S.
Politics
Immigration
NY Region
Science
Business
Culture
Books
Wellness
World
Africa
Americas
Asia
South Asia
Donald Trump
Middle East Crisis
Russia-Ukraine Crisis
Visual Investigations
Opinion Video
Advertisement
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT
News
Minnesota becomes first state to ban prediction markets
Minnesota has enacted the most far-reaching crackdown on massively popular services like Kalshi and Polymarket.
Steve Karnowski/Associated Press
hide caption
toggle caption
Steve Karnowski/Associated Press
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz has signed the nation’s first law banning prediction market sites from operating in the state, and in response, the Trump administration has sued, teeing up a legal battle over the most far-reaching crackdown on popular services like Kalshi and Polymarket.
It comes as states confront a growing standoff with the Trump administration over how to regulate the industry, which allows people to bet on virtually anything.

The new state law makes it a crime to host or advertise a prediction market, which it defines as a system that lets consumers place a wager on a future outcome, like sports, elections, live entertainment, someone’s word choice and world affairs.
The prohibition extends to services supporting prediction markets, like virtual private networks, that could allow consumers to disguise their location and get around the ban.
It would force prediction market sites like Kalshi and Polymarket to leave the state, or face possible felony charges. The law takes effect in August.

“We as a state should decide how best and what regulations we think should attach to gambling, to protect public safety, to protect our kids,” said Minnesota Rep. Emma Greenman, the Democrat who introduced the measure.
The law has a carve-out for event contracts that serve as an insurance policy in the event of “harm, or loss sustained” and for the purchase of securities and other commodities.
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s lawsuit seeks to block the law before it starts, arguing the prediction market industry should be exclusively regulated by federal officials.
“This Minnesota law turns lawful operators and participants in prediction markets into felons overnight,” said CFTC Chairman Michael Selig. “Minnesota farmers have relied on critical hedging products on weather and crop-related events for decades to mitigate their risks. Governor Walz chose to put special interests first and American farmers and innovators last.”
Besides Minnesota, bills cracking down on the prediction market industry have been introduced in seven other states, according to the National Conference of State Legislators. Two of those states, Hawaii and North Carolina, have pending bills seeking to ban the industry statewide.

Experts say the cloud of legal uncertainty hanging over prediction markets apps have not slowed their rapid growth.
“The states are using any tactic they can to go after the prediction market companies,” said Melinda Roth, a professor at Washington and Lee University’s School of Law, who studies the industry. “But they’ve embarked on a too big to fail strategy and have become quite mainstream,” she said. “It will be hard to put that genie back in the bottle.”
A legal fight over the Minnesota ban is expected. Questions over whether states or the federal government should oversee the prediction market industry have already triggered more than 20 lawsuits. One of those cases, in Nevada, led to Kalshi pausing its sports betting in the state after a judge found it “indistinguishable” from state-regulated sports gambling.
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission has filed federal lawsuits against five states, including Arizona, Wisconsin and New York, attempting to override state regulators’ attempts to rein in the betting sites.

The CFTC has argued it has exclusive jurisdiction over prediction markets, even though former CFTC members and legal experts say bets on football games, words President Trump might say during a press conference and whether Ricky Martin will make an appearance at the Super Bowl are matters far outside its traditional scope.
In a statement to NPR, Kalshi spokeswoman Elisabeth Diana said banning prediction markets is a “blatant violation” of the law.
“Minnesota banning prediction markets is like trying to ban the New York Stock Exchange,” said Diana, adding that “this actively harms users because it reduces competition and drives activity offshore.”
A Polymarket spokesman told NPR that Minnesota’s ban runs counter to the federal government’s “established framework” for regulating prediction markets.
Tribal-owned casinos operate in Minnesota, but online gambling and sports betting are not legal in the state.
Prediction markets like Kalshi and Polymarket have given access to sports betting to people in states where the activity is prohibited, since the Trump administration regulates the sites as a type of “event contract,” rather than gambling, which typically is overseen by state gaming authorities.
Nonetheless, sports gambling powers the sites. On Kalshi, for instance, more than 85% of trading activity is related to a sporting event, some of those trades being “parlays,” high-risk wagers that multiple things, points scored, fouls, passes, will all happen.

Bettors on the sites are making billions of dollars in trades every week, even as questions around insider trading and how the markets can create perverse incentives for people to manipulate real world outcomes continue to vex the companies.
Minnesota Public Radio News reporters Dana Ferguson and Peter Cox contributed reporting to this story.
-
Los Angeles, Ca37 minutes agoSandy Fire forces evacuation of nearly 44,000 Simi Valley residents
-
Detroit, MI1 hour agoHart of Detroit Summer fest set for Juneteenth with Kash Doll and more
-
San Francisco, CA1 hour agoHeadlines, May 20 – Streetsblog San Francisco
-
Dallas, TX1 hour agoOne Surprise Dallas Cowboys Cut to Expect After OTAs
-
Miami, FL1 hour agoUnited States expected to indict Raúl Castro today. Here’s how to watch.
-
Boston, MA2 hours agoLinkedIn releases top 10 best employers for career growth in Boston
-
Denver, CO2 hours agoBattle Pussy Wants You to Know They Are Not Cute — The Denver VOICE
-
Seattle, WA2 hours agoNew Exhibition Explores Seattle Black Panther Legacy Through Art And History