The AMI Board is investigating other job opportunities, and any legal exposure of its members as they look to cover their asses from the shitstorm that is brewing.
So who is on this board? Are they going to issue the usual whitewash, or a “shocked, shocked” statement. Also, asking for a friend: does director’s insurance cover blackmail?
“…it was in good faith negotiations to resolve all matters with him.”
Good faith? Oh, ffs.
Sure. That’ll work.
Four members (including Pecker) and they’re all vulture capitalists? https://www.americanmediainc.com/about-us/board-of-directors
So, just NOW you have found out that your underlings decided to try to blackmail the richest man in the world, who buys newspaper ink by the trainload for one of the most respected investigative newspapers in the world?
Really?
To paraphrase; You are about to “Hoisted upon your own Pecker”.
“Further, at the time of the recent allegations made by Mr. Bezos, it was in good faith negotiations to resolve all matters with him…"
So that is what it’s called in polite company…
“Critical Legal Background to AMI’s New Claims”
Yep, but let’s not forget: who really cares whether AMI is in legal jeopardy in the category of someone leaking Bezos’ info from the gov’t. In THAT scenario, it will be most important to get that leaker and determine whether the gov’t was being used by the POTUS as a revenge machine on private citizens.
It’s certainly possible here that one or more people were simply in on this shit and it was an organized pro-Trump mini-conspiracy, but keep in mind that the Enquirer has been around for a long time. That doesn’t happen with the kind of nonsense and trash they peddle, often explicitly directed at people and their reputations, unless they have VERY good lawyers and very good systems in place for making sure they aren’t crossing the lines and are staying under the 1st Amendment umbrella. If this was leaked by some Trump KKKult mole in our intel apparatus, it may very well have been under circumstances that leave AMI in the clear, without having conspired to obtain it AND allowing them to protect their source while we’re forced to find another way to determine that person’s identity.
Really, that should be interesting.
Remind me again, AMI Board, where it says threatening people with the publication of embarrassing personal photos of a sexual nature is a hallmark of good faith negotiations.
“We’re shocked - shocked I tell you! - that one of our publications may have engaged in this kind of extortionate behavior!”
Maybe they got sloppy, thinking they’d never be prosecuted under a Trump administration.
I am just catching up on this story but the way you put it really boils it down. Nice
Rachel mentioned last night that AMI recently published a whole magazine extolling the virtues of “The New Saudi Arabia” and MBS. Hmmmm?
Saw the headline somewhere: “Bezos Exposes Pecker”. Sums it all up.
Remember Josh made a few posts about the Cohen crisis toolkit? That with Falwell and of course stormy and the bunny…even to the point where Cohen was working Chump (skimming from every transaction), the victim, and even picking the victim’s lawyers?
Throw in the Russian kompromat angels and the Invasive Pecker…you have possibly the best run machine Chump ever helmed. I have always marvelled how such a sloppy idiot like Chump always had at hand some fairly devastating dirt on whomever picked a fight with him…from Rosie O’Donald to Bezos.
For those who may think that AMI is protected by the First Amendment here —
That might be true under ordinary circumstances. But AMI has already acknowledged crimes that form a pattern of extra-legal, politically motivated actions. That fact pattern is probably enough to overcome any First Amendment claims in this instance.
AMI may have been around for a long time, but four plus years ago it almost declared bankruptcy, until an 80% stake was sold to Chatham Asset Mgmt. In other words, Pecker works for Chatham, and Chatham has two other members on the four member AMI board. (The fourth is a former Trump casino flunky).
AMI has been unprofitable in 4 of the last five years, and just last month had to refinance $460 in debt Funny thing is, that although there are a number of stories about AMI’s success in finding new funding, none of those stories mention where the money came from.
Saudi Arabia, perhaps?