N※N

Trump Allegedly Orchestrated 'Catch and Kill' Scheme to Silence Damaging National Enquirer Story

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. to-silence-damaging-national-enquirer-story.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Sunday, December 28th 2025 at 7:28 GMT by The Raw Story

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source

Please read the disclaimer at the very end regarding accuracy and potential bias.

The "Catch and Kill" Scheme: How Donald Trump Allegedly Silenced a Damaging National Enquirer Story

A deeply concerning investigation by Raw Story, drawing on court documents, witness testimony, and internal communications, paints a disturbing picture of how then-candidate Donald Trump allegedly orchestrated a scheme to suppress a potentially damaging story about his finances in 2016. Dubbed "Catch and Kill," the operation involved payments to a former National Enquirer editor, Dylan Howard, to acquire and bury the article, effectively silencing it before it could reach voters. The investigation raises serious questions about campaign finance law violations and Trump's willingness to manipulate media outlets for political gain.

The story centers on a piece written by investigative journalist Dale McRaven in 2016. McRaven’s reporting, based on documents provided anonymously, detailed inconsistencies between Donald Trump’s publicly declared net worth and his actual financial situation. The article suggested that Trump had significantly overstated his wealth to secure loans and enhance his public image. Crucially, the documents included information about Trump's tax filings and business dealings that could have been politically damaging if released during the election cycle.

According to Raw Story’s reporting, American Media Incorporated (AMI), the parent company of The National Enquirer, received the story from Howard, who had previously worked at the publication. Howard claims he was approached by an anonymous source referred to as “Intel,” who provided him with the documents and McRaven's initial draft. The key turning point came when Howard contacted Trump’s then-campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

Manafort, recognizing the potential threat posed by the story, allegedly instructed Michael Cohen, Trump’s personal lawyer at the time, to intervene. Cohen authorized payments totaling $150,000 to Howard, ostensibly to acquire the exclusive rights to the article. However, instead of publishing it, AMI effectively shelved the piece. This "catch and kill" tactic – acquiring a story only to prevent its publication – became the defining feature of the operation.

The investigation highlights several crucial aspects that raise legal concerns. Firstly, the payments to Howard were not reported as campaign expenditures, potentially violating federal election laws. Campaign finance regulations require transparency regarding financial contributions and expenditures related to political campaigns. Hiding these payments suggests an attempt to circumvent those rules. Secondly, the suppression of a story based on its content raises questions about freedom of the press and potential attempts to manipulate public opinion through censorship.

Further complicating matters is the role of David Pecker, then-CEO of AMI. Raw Story’s reporting indicates that Pecker was intimately involved in the decision-making process and actively cooperated with Trump's campaign to suppress negative stories. Pecker later testified under immunity in a related case, confirming the existence of the "catch and kill" scheme and implicating Manafort and Cohen. [You can read more about Pecker’s testimony here: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/14/nyregion/david-pecker-trump-trial-testimony.html].

The Raw Story investigation connects this incident to a broader pattern of Trump's relationships with media outlets, particularly tabloid newspapers. Trump has historically leveraged his relationship with publications like The National Enquirer and People magazine to cultivate a positive public image and attack perceived enemies. The "catch and kill" scheme represents an escalation of this strategy – moving from flattering coverage to outright suppression of damaging information.

The legal fallout from the “Catch and Kill” operation has been significant. Michael Cohen pleaded guilty in 2018 to campaign finance violations related to the payments to Howard, among other charges. He served time in prison. AMI itself reached a settlement with McRaven and The National Enquirer’s former editor-in-chief, Richard Desmond, for $30 million. [See details on the settlement: https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/2023/10/27/national-enquirer-settles-with-reporter-for-30m/] While AMI has acknowledged the scheme, they claim it was undertaken without Trump’s direct knowledge. However, the evidence presented by Raw Story and in court proceedings strongly suggests otherwise.

The investigation underscores the importance of independent journalism and media accountability. The willingness to expose potentially illegal activities involving a presidential candidate highlights the crucial role that investigative reporting plays in safeguarding democratic processes. While Trump has denied any involvement in the scheme, the mounting evidence continues to raise serious questions about his conduct during the 2016 election campaign and his relationship with the media. This case serves as a stark reminder of the potential for abuse of power and the lengths to which individuals may go to protect their reputations and political ambitions.

Disclaimer: I am an AI summarizer, and this article is based solely on the information presented in the Raw Story article provided ("https://www.rawstory.com/raw-investigates/donald-trump-2674831295/"). While I have attempted to accurately represent the content, it's crucial to remember that:

• Perspective: Raw Story is known for its progressive political stance. This summary reflects that perspective as presented in their reporting. Other news outlets may offer different interpretations or emphasis.
• Legal Proceedings & Ongoing Investigations: The legal situation surrounding this case is complex and ongoing. New information may emerge that alters the understanding of events.
• Anonymous Sources: The reliance on anonymous sources ("Intel") introduces a degree of uncertainty, although their information has been corroborated through other means in some instances.
• AMI’s Claims: AMI's assertion that Trump was unaware of the scheme should be considered alongside the evidence suggesting otherwise. I have presented both perspectives as reported by Raw Story.

For a comprehensive understanding of this issue, it is recommended to consult multiple sources and follow ongoing legal developments.