'The boss would be very pleased': David Pecker reveals Donald Trump's reaction after paying $30K for doorman story

MANHATTAN, NEW YORK: In a damning testimony, David Pecker, the man behind the National Enquirer, shared how he bought a potentially damaging story for $30,000 to keep it from going public during Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

The story where Trump Tower doorman Dino Sajudin claimed that Trump had fathered a child out of wedlock was purchased not for publication but to ensure it remained out of the public eye.

The most surprising part is Trump’s reaction to the story's purchase. Trump, referred to as “the boss” by Pecker, was reportedly very pleased with the decision to buy and bury the story.

David Pecker’s motivation for buying Trump Tower doorman's story 

Pecker, who testified for the second day in hush money trial on April 23 in New York court, said that he purchased a doorman’s story claiming that Donald Trump had fathered a child out of wedlock.

He believed the story, if true and published, could have been a significant embarrassment to Trump’s campaign. 

“It would have been very embarrassing for the campaign,” Pecker said. He agreed to pay the doorman, Dino Sajudin, $30,000 for exclusive rights to the story, according to The Guardian reporters from the courtroom. 

The New York Times noted Trump was visibly displeased at the mention of the alleged out-of-wedlock child and strongly shook his head. 

Pecker had a couple of reasons for buying the story. “I thought it was very important that [Sajudin] wouldn’t be shopping the story to other media outlets,” he said.

Moreover, if the story turned out to be true, publishing it could have resulted in the biggest sale of the National Enquirer since the death of Elvis Presley, he said.

How did David Pecker learn about the doorman story? 

Dylan Howard, the National Enquirer’s editor-in-chief at the time, informed Pecker about Dino Sajudin’s attempt to sell the story.

"I asked Dylan to negotiate a price a number, to buy the story and take it off the market,” Pecker said.

"Dylan went ahead and there was two parts to this. The first part was our normal procedures is we have the source, the tipster, take a polygraph test. Steinglass interrupted not to tell about the polygraph test. We pursued the story," Pecker said.

Pecker then contacted Michael Cohen, Trump’s attorney, and described what he had been told. Cohen insisted that the account was “absolutely not true,” but promised to check it out.

At one point, Michael Cohen offered that Trump would take a DNA test that would show he was not the father because Trump is German-Irish and not Hispanic like the woman in question.

Pecker said he assured him that would not be necessary. But Cohen insisted not to release him, "until after the election.’”

How did Donald Trump respond to David Pecker taking the story off the market? 

Ultimately Pecker decided to broker an agreement with Sajudin. He negotiated a price of $30,000 and agreed to pay for it himself.

Pecker’s decision to buy the story was well-received by Trump. "I called Michael Cohen and I said that, ‘we have to go forward with the story’. He said, ‘how much?’ Dylan negotiated a price of $30,000. He said, ‘who’s going to pay for it?’ I said, ‘I’ll pay for it’," said Pecker.

“This could be a very good story, I believe that it’s important that it should be removed from the market,” Pecker told Cohen.

He added that Trump thanked him and was told “the boss would be very pleased.” When asked who he thought “the boss” was, Pecker confirmed, “The boss would be Donald Trump.”

Pecker also said he was not initially against publishing the story saying, "If the story came back true, I would have published the story shortly after it was verified."

When asked if he would have published the story, he said, "I would have published it after the election." Pecker said he later learned that the story was "100% not true."

How did the internet respond to David Pecker's testimony? 

The internet took a swipe at Pecker for his testimony which essentially will make jurours work even harder to decide their verdict. Others said it was election interference.

"Never trust someone with the last name Pecker," wrote a user on X.  "He shouldn't be on trial for any of this. It's simply election interference. If he was not running for president, none of this would be going on," wrote another. 

"This is a damn circus!!" added one more. "The goal is to keep Trump stuck in courtrooms for most of the Presidential campaign. Meanwhile, Sparky will campaign. This is the worst case of election interference in our history. Sparky the will lose," wrote one more. 

Another user wrote, "lol he even offered a DNA test," while one said, "He's not on trial for wanting or actually having stories burried. That's not the illegal part. The illegal part is the fact that he lied and manipulated tax."

This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online.