National Enquirer vs. Jeff Bezos

[SilverFang01]

Earlier Jeff Bezos' legal team released the following: https://medium.com/@jeffreypbezos/no-tha...6e3922310f

They received a couple of lawyer letters from the National Enquirer saying that unless Bezos makes a public statement denying that the Enquirer's stories on Bezos are politically motivated the Enquirer would publish a set of photos of Bezos' junk.

So the Enquirer is trying to extort a man who can build his own inter-regional ballistic missiles.

[Sits down with gourmet popcorn] This is going to be fun.

[classicdrogn]

Hm... On the one hand, this is starting a fight with a man who buys his ink by the barrel. On the other, it's the guy who sells the ink.

Hmm.

Also the popcorn, so I guess I'll sit on his side of the court while I watch it play out.

[Bob Schroeck]

I'm just disappointed Bezos didn't say "Publish and be damned!" <grin>

[Labster]

Looks like David Pecker just lost his Prime membership. Enjoy a lifetime of 14 day shipping, bro.

[nemonowan]

Funny that a man called Pecker makes a habit of threateaning people with dick pics...

[robkelk]

Hm... On the one hand, this is starting a fight with a man who buys his ink by the barrel. On the other, it's the guy who sells the ink.

Hmm.

Also the popcorn, so I guess I'll sit on his side of the court while I watch it play out.

Bezos owns the Washington Post, so both sides in the fight buy ink by the barrel. Which means this boils down to which paper you trust more: the Washington Post or the National Enquirer.

I'm just disappointed Bezos didn't say "Publish and be damned!" <grin>

I have to disagree here. By publishing it himself, Bezos took the initiative and put the attempted blackmailers into a reactive position instead of their previous proactive position.

[LynnInDenver]

Hm... On the one hand, this is starting a fight with a man who buys his ink by the barrel. On the other, it's the guy who sells the ink.

Hmm.

Also the popcorn, so I guess I'll sit on his side of the court while I watch it play out.

Bezos owns the Washington Post, so both sides in the fight buy ink by the barrel. Which means this boils down to which paper you trust more: the Washington Post or the National Enquirer.

I'm just disappointed Bezos didn't say "Publish and be damned!" <grin>

I have to disagree here. By publishing it himself, Bezos took the initiative and put the attempted blackmailers into a reactive position instead of their previous proactive position.

I find it interesting (and disgusting) that they're attempting to use his personal indiscretions to deliberately undermine any journalistic integrity that the Washington Post happens to have through attempted blackmail. Not that I have any great love for Bezos, but I didn't think my opinion of the National Enquirer as a bottom feeder could progress to, "...that's an insult to bottom feeders to compare them."

[hazard]

It'd be interesting if Bezos makes a complaint to the police. Blackmail and extortion are still blackmail and extortion even if you're a tabloid rag. The moment Bezos can deliver a recording and/or letter and/or email with that threat? Things can get interesting.

[SilverFang01]

Well, someone is having fun at the New York Post

[Black Aeronaut]

Well, someone is having fun at the New York Post

TOP

EFFIN'

KEK

[Bob Schroeck]

I'm guessing that's a twitter embed, since I can't see it here at work. <sigh>

EDIT: Checked my cell phone. <snrk>

[Black Aeronaut]

Working at the New York Post must be an absolute scream some days.

[Bob Schroeck]

Oh, and Bezos has turned over all the emails and communications to Federal prosecutors.

[classicdrogn]

...

Here's a non-embedded link to that, for those of us whom embeds never, ever work for.

[Labster]

New York Post++. Amazing headline, both meanings true.

If this is determined to be criminal conduct by the Enquirer, then it nullifies the plea agreement that Pecker made with prosecutors in regards to the Stormy Daniels coverup, so he can be prosecuted for that, or any other criminal conduct he confessed to in those depositions. Is it that these people can't learn? Or is it that these people's whole business model is supported by crime? (Blackmail: still less scummy than links by Taboola)

[hazard]

I'm not entirely sure, but there's a good chance that if Pecker's behaviour here is deemed criminal that the Enquirer as a whole can be considered a criminal conspiracy to commit blackmail. At which point the best decision for the average employee is going to be trading everything they know for immunity from prosecution. Conspiracy laws in the USA can be kind of harsh, but if there's one thing the Dutch legal system is missing it's ways to pressure groups of people for committing crimes together.

[Rajvik]

let me say first, i am not a lawyer.
secondly, if a lawyer sent a letter that could be considered blackmail or extortion, they need to be disbarred as they are too stupid to continue their practice.
third, National Enquirer, Weekly World News and some others, (the Onion?) are tabloids and in my mind about as newsworthy as toilet paper. A libel suit usually will shut them up, (unless of course what they are saying is true) and are generally just a step above blackmail at their best.
finally, even with no love for Bezos, i don't think he deserves to have his private life splattered all over creation, (and yes i think the same thing for people i hate,) unless what you are doing/have done is illegal then its your private business and to hell with what the world thinks

[Matrix Dragon]

I'd say the Onion isn't a tabloid Rav. It's a comedy website that uses the tabloid style.

[Bob Schroeck]

Yeah, the Onion is no more a news site than the National Lampoon Sunday Newspaper Parody was a real newspaper. (Although the number of people who forward stories from it thinking it is, is hugely amusing.)

[classicdrogn]

While true, being a parody news site doesn't mean they can't also be accurate behind the humourous twist. There were at least a couple of times I recall The Daily Show beat the major news networks to a breaking story, though the actual events escape me. Frankly, I'm more inclined to trust sources like them in the broad strokes, as it's easier to see and filter out a bias toward humour than political agendas as such.

[Rajvik]

That's why the Onion was listed with a question mark, I wasn't sure about it.

[Labster]

Weekly World News wasn't really tabloid news either. It always seemed more like what I would call kayfabe news. "How dare you challenge the veracity of our Bat Boy stories. They were based on research conducted at Miskatonic University."

[Epsilon]

New York Post++.  Amazing headline, both meanings true.

If this is determined to be criminal conduct by the Enquirer, then it nullifies the plea agreement that Pecker made with prosecutors in regards to the Stormy Daniels coverup, so he can be prosecuted for that, or any other criminal conduct he confessed to in those depositions.  Is it that these people can't learn?  Or is it that these people's whole business model is supported by crime?  (Blackmail: still less scummy than links by Taboola)

Ah, but there is the rub.

The Post was sniffing around about possible politically motivated hit pieces from the Enquirer and other related chicanery which is what caused the Enquirer to try and extort Bezos in the first place.

In other words, the whole reason that Pecker chose to go after Bezos is because if the Post revealed the Enquirer was engaged in some illegal political stuff than that would jeopardize their immunity agreement. Which kind of makes you think that they had, in fact, violated their agreement and the Post was on to something. Which triggered this.

The fed also recently ruled to keep a bunch of stuff in that initial investigation that the Enquirer was a key witness to redacted because their was an "ongoing investigation" and quickly moved some witness testimony to later this month after this story broke.

So yeah...