It’s been reported that among the minnows hauled up in the government’s outrageous fishing expedition that seized President Trump’s attorney Michael Cohen’s privileged communications with his legal clients was the revelation that the National Enquirer paid for a salacious story about an alleged Trump love child and didn't run it. There were also reports that investigators might demand to know why the paper didn’t run it. Did Cohen pay them off? Is this an illegal in-kind contribution to help Trump win? Collusion!! Conspiracy!!! IMPEACHMENT!!!!
Well, two points: First of all, I know it’s considered as old fashioned as button shoes these days to mention the Bill of Rights, but there’s this clause right at the top of it that says the government has no say over what someone with a printing press does with it. It's no more the government's business to ask why the Enquirer didn't run a negative Trump story than it is to ask the Washington Post or the New Time Times why they run nothing but. But I guess if the government can ignore the 4th Amendment, it can ignore the 1st one, too.
Second, maybe the Enquirer didn’t run the story because they decided that the source, a NYC doorman, was not completely credible after his ex-wife described him as a pathological liar who “makes things up,” and who has claimed to have seen a chupacabra, Bigfoot and the ghost of a dead friend walking down the street.
Say, maybe Robert Mueller could expand his investigation to see if Bigfoot colluded with the Russians on behalf of Trump. He might have more luck finding evidence of Bigfoot existing than he’s found so far of Russian collusion.
PLEASE LEAVE ME A COMMENT. I READ THEM!
OR IF YOU WOULD PREFER TO SEND ME A MESSAGE, GO HERE.