During the ongoing trial, Trump attorney Todd Blanche vehemently dismissed the notion that President Trump and David Pecker, the former CEO of American Media Inc., believed stories in the National Enquirer could sway the outcome of the 2016 election. Blanche labeled such a belief as 'preposterous' and argued that it was implausible for individuals as 'sophisticated' as Trump and Pecker to think positively spun stories in the tabloid could influence such a significant event.
Blanche highlighted the fact that the National Enquirer had a circulation of 350,000 at the time, a relatively small number compared to the millions of voters in the 2016 election. He emphasized that the idea of a meeting in 2015 at Trump Tower having the power to impact the election results was illogical given the scale of the electoral process.
Furthermore, Blanche pointed out that the National Enquirer often repurposed stories from other media outlets. He argued that the notion of the tabloid criminally influencing the election by simply rehashing existing stories was unfounded and urged the jury to consider the lack of logic in such a proposition.
The defense's stance, as presented by Blanche, underscores the skepticism regarding the alleged influence of the National Enquirer on the 2016 election. The trial continues to unfold as both sides present their arguments and evidence in the case.
