
No Thank You, Mr. Pecker - coloneltcb
https://medium.com/@jeffreypbezos/no-thank-you-mr-pecker-146e3922310f
======
slg
It seems like a lot of people are not reading between the lines of this post.
Bezos apparently believes that he was hacked by either the US or Saudi
government and that now one or both of those governments are using the
National Enquirer as an attack dog against him. That accusation is much bigger
than any other piece of this story.

EDIT: Here [1] is a reporter from the Washington Post backing that up. The
Bezos' camp believes this is a politically motivated attack and the data was
acquired by a "government entity" (logically the US or Saudis).

[1] -
[https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/109371533307931853...](https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/1093715333079318530)

~~~
toephu2
>"hacked" by either the US or Saudi government

You think the U.S./Saudi government can remotely grab pics from an iPhone?

Apple has disclosed lots of security info saying even they cannot do this. The
iPhone/iOS wasn't built in that way.

I think the leak likely comes from someone close to Ms. Sanchez, or she fell
victim to a phishing attack (or account recovery hack).

~~~
thecatspaw
Remember the fappening? It doesnt need to be remote grabbing, people just
upload their nudes to the icloud. Maybe jeff did as well.

While apple says they are end to end encrypted, I also assume they work with
the FBI/whoever to catch owners of illegal content, so they probably would
have a way to get the unencrypted content.

~~~
fauigerzigerk
Photos and files stored in iCloud are not end to end encrypted:
[https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT202303](https://support.apple.com/en-
gb/HT202303)

~~~
thecatspaw
Oops, I actually looked at that page, but misinterpreted it

------
Balgair
Whatever you think about Jeff, this is the correct way to handle such things.
We should all have the same character in such a situation (despite how the
situation arose; in this case via an affair). Jeff has MANY other issues of
moral disfortitude (we all do to some degree, though not at these scales).
However, this particular event is to be applauded and emulated.

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
> this is the correct way to handle such things.

Yes, _with conditions_.

Bezos himself writes, in the article we're discussing:

 _I asked him to prioritise protecting my time since I have other things I
prefer to work on and to_ proceed with whatever budget he needed _to pursue
the facts in this matter._ \- emphasis mine.

And that:

 _On that point, numerous people have contacted our investigation team about
their similar experiences with AMI, and how they needed to capitulate because,
for example, their livelihoods were at stake._

Thus making it plain, simple, and obvious, that he recognises that having a
net worth up around the US$137 billion[1] mark _has it 's perks_.

1\.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Bezos](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Bezos)

Edit: inconsequential grammar improvement

~~~
coryfklein
But if humanity as a whole enforced social norms that rewarded blackmail-
refusals, then the value of blackmailing would drop so low as to be not worth
it and extremely uncommon.

Essentially we could develop a herd immunity to blackmail.

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
The solutions to a great majority of the issues facing us begin with:

 _But if humanity as a whole..._

As far as I’ve been able to determine, much to my chagrin, in many of the ways
that matter most, humanity isn’t a coherent whole.

And I’ve got no idea what to do about it.

------
danso
> _Well, that got my attention. But not in the way they likely hoped. Any
> personal embarrassment AMI could cause me takes a back seat because there’s
> a much more important matter involved here. If in my position I can’t stand
> up to this kind of extortion, how many people can?_

Can’t remember the last time I’ve seen a prominent person post the details of
a personal extortion attempt out of defiance for all to see.

~~~
kumarvvr
AMI picked the wrong person. Jeff, literally, has tons of money, extremely
respected in the business world.

Forget about the embarrassment, if he secretly capitulates to this, then the
real blackmail material would be the capitulation, not the photos. Cause if
the owner of Washington Post bowed down to blackmail, every article published
in the article will be called into question.

And who gives a shit if a billionaire cheated on his wife or sent dick pics. I
don't care. Did he murder someone? Did he not divorce his wife by parting with
half his fortune?

~~~
int_19h
Looking at descriptions of those photos, I honestly don't understand why it's
even such a big deal. And I suspect that it's not nearly as big of a deal to
Bezos as the blackmailers thought it would be. Perhaps a little projection at
play.

~~~
kumarvvr
It's a big deal because buckling to blackmail will hurt his credibility
immensely more.

I think AMI was looking forward to either damage WaPo or want JB to relinquish
control of it. The game is WaPo, not JB.

------
rdiddly
Thought experiment: Try taking them at their word for a sec.

 _"...an exploration of Mr. Bezos’ judgment... is indeed newsworthy and in the
public interest."_

Wonderful! Looking out for my interests! My heroes, fightin' for me against
all the bad judgment! So grateful!

But then, if he'll agree to comply with their demands, suddenly it's not
newsworthy anymore.

 _" AM agrees not to publish, distribute, share, or describe unpublished texts
and photos (the “Unpublished Materials”)."_

What?! Sellouts! Traitors! What about the public interest?! All the bad
judgment!??!?

So yeah, not only do they blackmail public figures; by their willingness to
bury the story they also show that they can't be counted on to hold public
figures accountable when the time comes. He's right, real journalists don't
act like this. (Not that I ever believed that shit; like I said, it was just a
thought experiment.)

All you need is a bit of dirt on them, and you're safe from being exposed.
Actually that might be the one thing that made this case different and turned
it into a blackmail attempt instead of just another in the thousands of sleaze
stories over the years.

~~~
adrianmonk
Yes. When they say it's newsworthy, the only reason they care about that is
the legal protection it could offer them if they did publish the photos.

They clearly don't care about using journalism to benefit the public good.
They've already admitted to that much when they openly acknowledged they
helped bury the Karen McDougal / Trump story. (
[https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/12/national-
enq...](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/12/national-enquirer-
trump-payments-david-pecker-catch-and-kill) ) If it's important for
shareholders to know about a sex scandal involving Bezos, then it's important
for voters to know about sex scandal involving Trump.

------
andrewstuart
"proceed with whatever budget he needed to pursue the facts in this matter"

That's the richest guy in the world saying "I don't give a XXXX what it costs,
find out who did it."

It's also the moment in your life when, if you get the result that guys wants,
he'll be glad to write you a cheque for $20,000,000 and will be happy to do so
and he won't be interested in why the number is that high.

~~~
Pharmakon
That gave me chills, and the phrase, _If you’re going to shoot the king, you’d
better be goddamned sure you’re going to kill him_ flashed through my mind.
Well, they missed spectacularly, and now the man who has a rocket company for
fun is clearly pissed.

~~~
exolymph
You come at the king, you best not miss.

Also, never take notes on a criminal fucking conspiracy ;P

~~~
weston
It’s amazing how many people in Trump’s inner circle love quoting mob movies,
calling people “rats” and “stoolies” but can’t seem to get down even the
basics of being a half-decent criminal. I mean, Roger Stone literally told
people to lie to Congress via an email.

One can quote mob movies all day but that doesn’t make them a smart criminal.

~~~
Jgrubb
I mean, they've lived in an era when being a white collar criminal is
basically without legal penalty (as long as you're a white guy). It's really
no wonder so many of them are so completely stupid, they would've had nothing
to fear if their guy hadn't gotten himself elected.

~~~
rhizome
Said another way, the underprosecution of white-collar crime provides an
advantage to career criminals.

Go where the cops ain't.

------
notatoad
Apparently AMI and David Pecker's non-prosecution agreement for the Michael
Cohen stuff is contingent on them not continuing to do crime. So i guess
that's out the window now.

[https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1093654471157170177](https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1093654471157170177)

~~~
fisherjeff
Depends on the analysis I suppose. This one makes it sound unlikely that the
agreement will be voided:

[https://twitter.com/renato_mariotti/status/10936583665834229...](https://twitter.com/renato_mariotti/status/1093658366583422978)

~~~
bilbo0s
Only analysis that matters in the end is the judge's. That's why when you're
operating with something like that hanging over your head, you should keep
your nose clean.

You wouldn't believe the number of people who sidestep trouble with a deal
like that, and then go right out and burn it up like idiots. I just don't get
it?

~~~
komali2
Perhaps because they haven't had the opportunity to learn that actions
sometimes have consequences?

------
rblion
I respect him even more now.

We are all human. Nobody wins this 'moral crusade' that takes up so much
airtime.

We should be much more focused on the existential threats that the entire
biosphere is dealing with, not the 'dick pics' of the world's richest man.
He's just another dude at his core it seems, happens to be founder of Amazon
though.

------
minimaxir
Important note: This is written by _Jeff Bezos himself_.

Normally, the Bezos affair story would be gossipy, but this _alleges
extortion_ , extraordinarily.

(Also, why is Jeff Bezos using Medium? He owns a newspaper.)

~~~
woodruffw
> (Also, why is Jeff Bezos using Medium? He owns a newspaper.)

Using his stake in the WaPo to boost a personal rebuttal would be a
_tremendous_ ethical lapse.

~~~
darkpuma
Serious question: What if he bought a full page ad at the market rate? Would
that be unethical because he was paying himself (sort of) for that ad?

~~~
floatingatoll
It would be unethical because any media outlet he owns is an inappropriate
place to select to air his personal business. Whether or not he pays for it is
immaterial.

------
andrewstuart
Having read the whole thing, man Jeff Bezos has a great deal of courage.

It helps to be backed by untold wealth but here is a guy who stands tall in
the face of ghastly behaviour and in the face of deep personal embarrassment.

+1 Bezos.

~~~
hn_throwaway_99
I'm going to push back against this characterization as "ghastly personal
behavior". For one, it's not clear if he and his wife were already separated,
at least at a personal level, before this affair. But this general idea that
it's somehow "ghastly" to send a paramour love notes and sexually suggestive
pictures is a sad remnant of our puritanical history, and the sooner we rid
ourselves of this notion, the better.

~~~
auganov
The status of his marriage is the key thing here. And there's plenty
indicating he is very much a classical cheater.

Whatever the right adjective is, I'd definitely pick a negative one.

The way he cheated only makes an already dirty act so much nastier.

~~~
rsynnott
If they're separated, then the status of their marriage is irrelevant.

------
ineedasername
What struck me was how brazen AMI was about the blackmail. Then I realized:
they were comoftable doing it that way, putting it in writing, because in
nearly every other time they've done this, it worked.

~~~
dleslie
I wonder how this appears in their financial filings? I hardly think they have
a line item for extortion.

~~~
6nf
They're not asking for money

------
minimaxir
Granted, this strategy is _very_ high risk unless you're one of the richest
people in the world.

~~~
stupidcar
The problem I have with most super rich people is that they consider genuine
risk far less important than potential embarrassment. E.g. they won't dare
taking a stand politically because of the chance that someone will go public
with some scandalous nonsense. Bezos on the other hand seems willing to
calculate differently. I have to say, this has changed my opinion of him a
_lot_ in his favour. On the very remote chance you're reading this Jeff, good
on you!

~~~
monkeydreams
I agree.

One thought did occur to me is that he is basically daring AMI to release the
pictures. What if he knows the providence of these pictures, knows how they
got into AMI hands, and knows that if AMI publish them he can sue them, Gawker
(not Buzzfeed) style, into the ground?

~~~
function_seven
Gawker style?

~~~
collinmanderson
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollea_v._Gawker](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollea_v._Gawker)

------
AndrewKemendo
If you ever find yourself with scandalous or incriminating material on someone
remember this: Blackmail will always fail in the long run.

It's commonnly known in espionage tradecraft that it's an absolute last resort
or totally off limits tool. The risk you take with coercive trade craft are
insanely high.

As proven here.

~~~
Aeolun
And if you are going to do it. For fucks sake, do _not_ put it in writing...

~~~
prawn
Are there any repercussions for accredited lawyers involved in this? Or are
they safe if they act purely at the discretion of a client?

------
1nvalid
Guess where Mr. Pecker is hosting!
[https://twitter.com/ryanhuber/status/1093665718464327680](https://twitter.com/ryanhuber/status/1093665718464327680)

~~~
a13n
[https://www.nationalenquirer.com](https://www.nationalenquirer.com) is now
down

~~~
piker
Interestingly up, but responding with 403. Being unfamiliar with AWS' web
hosting platform, is there a service that would fall back to denying access if
certain sub-modules or instances were pulled?

------
bArray
This is literally the best thing he could have done. Would love to hear more
about other people who have been black-mailed too - perhaps there is something
much larger afoot. Hell, if they are this bold about taking on Bezos,
potentially the other black-mail-ees are some very influential big hitters
(billionaires, politicians, etc).

As others have pointed out, the big story is that he's directly accusing them
of political motivation (US and/or Saudi), with them threatening him almost
confirming that this is correct. For them to show their hand so badly hints
strongly towards some guilt. Digging further seems like the last thing they
want, so I think it's what should be done.

Would just like to add - regardless of how embarrassing the photos may or may
not be, any "news" agency that publishes them goes straight to the top of my
shit list and hopefully everybody elses too. Would be good if there was some
organized way to show solidarity against black mail of this kind.

~~~
sonnyblarney
I don't agree.

He's taking an ostensibly 'strong stand' \- but he's also furthering the
public furor.

Before he was a 'somewhat well known person' but now he's really, really going
to be famous, and probably not for the right reasons. And by the way, most
people probably don't know how he is yet. That's hard to grasp because _we_
certainly do - but if you walk out your door right now, take a stroll and ask
people if they know how 'Jeff Bezos' is, surprisingly fewer people will know
who is is than you'd imagine.

You know Maroon 5? They were a 'famous' band with hit albums and singles. But
since the lead singers role on 'the Voice' \- their popularity has skyrocketed
into mainstream. Listen to Zuck's sister Randy talk about the history of 'The
Social Network' film - apparently the film caused a huge upsurge in FB
accounts so it was a blessing. But who among us hadn't heard of Maroon 5
before 'The Voice'? Or Facebook before 'The Social Network'. 'We' are not
normal folks. Normal folks have a variety of interests that may not include
hearing about Maroon 5, or Facebook in it's early years, or Jeff Bezos.

Bezos is entering a new realm of pop culture, the news cycle in a very ugly
landscape, and he's opening himself up for trouble.

'The truth' is the first thing lost in the fog of war, and certainly in pop
culture war as well.

It might have been a better move to simply shut up about it, or at least be
low key. Newsrooms work on the fuel of tidbits of facts, actions, and create
narratives - without fuel, these issues just fade in the background because
other , more clickworthy stuff is always happening.

Personally, I would have made a public statement through a rep. which possibly
included the extortion notes, just for public record, but I wouldn't for a
second make it personal or do things in my name, give interviews etc. etc..

Finally, and something that people have not denoted - but this 'scandal' has
it's essence partly in sneaky photos - but mostly in the notion that 'Bezos,
supposedly family man, was caught cheating on his wife'. I don't know the
details of what happened, but this perception can actually be damaging. Even
among those who are more liberal on such issues ... the idea of a rich
billionaire guy, philandering around with some woman while his wife and kids
are at home ... this is a bad image irrespective of what reality is.

The only winners in media storms are those for whom it's a way of life, i.e.
'their only value' \- like newsrooms and media creations like Donald Trump.

I feel Bezos might be getting sucked into a storm he may not be able to get
out of.

There are very few things that could risk his tenure as CEO of Amazon, but a
wrong turn in the public eye is surprisingly easy, and it could cause trouble.
People lose their CEO jobs often not because the board things some real
wrongdoing has happened, but because public opinion is just up in a fuss about
something.

Edit: If he is making ostensible claims that the US or Saudi's are actively
spying on him, this could hurt him. True or not, it just sounds wildly
conspicuous and conspiratorial, and it could easily turn into fodder for those
who might not want to treat him well. It could also hurt his position among
regular business people who might see it as a wild claim, irrespective of what
the truth is.

~~~
kumarvvr
I am curious, if you were in Jeff Bezos place what would you do? I mean, what
would you do after you get that email from NE lawyer?

~~~
sonnyblarney
I said in my post I would probably make a carefully worded statement through a
spokesperson for the public record, possibly including the email, and avoid in
any way creating something the press or anyone else could buy into as
clickbait narrative. Stay out of the public eye entirely, no photos, personal
quotes, attacks etc..

Bezos will not win if this blows up. He'll win in the eyes of a few people,
and lose in others, and it will only create a stain on his record.

Think of the legacy of Bill and Melinda Gates. It's relatively unscathed.

~~~
kumarvvr
>He'll win in the eyes of a few people, and lose in others, and it will only
create a stain on his record.

This will happen even if he does what you said.

> Think of the legacy of Bill and Melinda Gates. It's relatively unscathed.

Yeah, that's because they did not do anything wrong. Here, Jeff cheated on his
wife and he is facing the consequences. BTW, Bill gates was very much reviled
during the early Microsoft days. People tend to see beyond his past actions
due to his tremendously useful social work he has undertaken since he left MS.

------
basil-rash
Slightly off topic, but does anyone know why this is so low on HN? It has more
votes and is more recent than anything except the "How I didn't make a billion
dollar company" post, but is at rank 11.

[https://imgur.com/a/bifDABu](https://imgur.com/a/bifDABu)

~~~
elihu
The title isn't something that I would have had any idea what it was about or
why I should read it if I hadn't been linked here from a comment thread with a
more informative title.

~~~
acheron
Yep. I don't read medium posts as a general principle, and the title meant
nothing to me so I skipped right over it. Only saw it in another thread.

------
40acres
The elite are really the only members of society who can successfully
dismantle tabloid media like AMI, see: Peter Theil v. Gawker.

~~~
buboard
perhas because they are also the only ones who would care to do so?

~~~
scottydelta
and have the means to put up a fight.

------
markdog12
> Bezos Exposes Pecker

HuffPo headline

~~~
kumarvvr
I find this extremely irresponsible. This is a serious issue.

I am beginning to think that this is a conspiracy by AMI to damage Washington
Post. If Jeff would have done something as requested by AMI, they would again
use that against him and start shouting that WaPo has lost credibility, since
Jeff is so easy to blackmail.

------
kawera
_" I asked him to prioritize protecting my time since I have other things I
prefer to work on and to proceed with whatever budget he needed to pursue the
facts in this matter."_

Wow!

~~~
ineedasername
Yeah I know. It's almost just slipped in there as an afterthought, but it
tells a story of Bezos saying to AMI: _" I'll spend more money on this than
your entire media 'empire' is worth, if that's what it takes... And I'll
barely notice the loss."_

------
bayesian_horse
At some point in the future we will look back at this administration and
marvel at the magnitude of criminal activities surrounding this president.

~~~
int_19h
I'm afraid that at said point, we will marvel more with the fact that the
people at the center of it all got away with it. Remember Nixon, or Iran-
Contra?

~~~
bayesian_horse
Maybe, maybe not.

The investigations against Trump and his people are already way past the scope
of Nixon or Iran-Contra.

Particularly, at the very least, Trump is on the hook for state charges in New
York about his Trump foundation. He can't get pardoned by a sympathetic
successor.

------
guilamu
I'm not a fan of the guy. He (and all the GAFAs) is killing our public
services all over Europe by not paying any taxes (legally, I know, we did this
to ourselves).

I think he did good by reacting as he did, though.

However, something is bugging me: how can you be so stupid to make dick pics
with a connected device nowadays?

I mean, the fappening happened, so much happened that you cannot ignore the
fact that nothing you're doing with an online device is private.

Anyone, any entity with enough cash, can hack into all your devices in a
glimpse.

When you're Jeff f __*ing Bezos, you must know better, come on!

------
amluto
Given that Jeff Bezos appears to be willing to spend almost unlimited money on
this, it’ll be interesting to see if a felony investigation happens.

~~~
mr_toad
Can a DA get some political mileage from prosecuting this?

My guess is yes.

------
danans
Ronan Farrow tweeted that he and anther journalist were similarly threatened
by AMI:

[https://twitter.com/RonanFarrow/status/1093690150448758784](https://twitter.com/RonanFarrow/status/1093690150448758784)

------
lawnchair_larry
This title should probably be changed to something useful. There is no
indication of what it might be in the original title.

~~~
raldi
Part of the HN charm is that when there's a story pegged to the front page
with a title like this, you can just trust that it's worth a click.

------
throwaway5752
Think what you will of Amazon or Jeff Bezos, but his conduct here is heroic. I
don't say that lightly.

------
ineedasername
On Gavin de Becker: If you've done some shady stuff, it's hard to imagine a
worse person to have investigating and digging into your activities than Gavin
de Becker. Here's a excerpt from Gavin's wikipedia entry on just a little of
his work over the years. This Bezos issue isn't even his first foray up
against a tabloid:

 _Along with the United States Marshals Service, he co-designed the MOSAIC
Threat Assessment Systems, which is used to screen threats to Justices of the
Supreme Court of the United States, members of United States Congress, and
senior officials of the Central Intelligence Agency... De Becker testified in
the successful 1994 civil case arising when The Globe tabloid accused an
uninvolved man of being the actual assassin of Senator Robert Kennedy. Globe
tried to get de Becker 's testimony thrown out by a higher court; however, it
was ultimately upheld_[0]

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_de_Becker](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_de_Becker)

------
CaliforniaKarl
He seems to be driving his point home in how, when including the email from
Dylan Howard, the mobile (cell) number in the text is redacted, but the
signature image (containing said number) is left unmodified.

~~~
abledon
probably personal cell # vs business cell #

------
Aeolun
I never thought I’d be rooting for Bezos, but I am.

------
lazybreather
Hiding in all the obvious noise surrounding this case, where Bezos is
certainly the nice guy, I can still get Gail Wynand vibes from him. The power
he holds is unprecedented.

------
radicaldreamer
Wonder what the Saudi connection is...

~~~
tptacek
The Post, along with the Times, has been pursuing and reporting a story that
David Pecker, AMI's CEO, has been working with a Saudi go-between, in part as
an effort to expand their business. More importantly, Jamal Khashoggi, who we
now know almost beyond a reasonable doubt† was targeted by Mohammad Bin Salman
before Saudi assassins murdered him in Turkey (most probably at MBS's behest),
was a Post employee.

† _Reports emerged today that there 's apparently audio of MBS himself
ruminating over having him murdered._

~~~
yourapostasy
How does that explain Pecker's rage at the WaPo digging into AMI's Saudi
connection, though?

Nearly everyone who wants funding at this scale hits up the Saudis. Describing
that AMI looked for funding with the Saudi royals doesn't strike me as a
particularly significant reveal; Musk did it relatively recently, and he
wasn't excoriated for it. How is news that AMI is doing it worthy of a push-
all-the-chips-into-the-pot move like AMI pulled?

Now if Bezos' private investigation team is getting close to some kind of
Kryptonite like Pecker personally authorized his staff to assist with
encouraging Khashoggi to visit the Saudi's Turkish embassy as a favor to the
royals to try to ingratiate himself and angle for a funding pitch, then I
could understand Pecker's reaction. Even if Pecker and AMI didn't know the
Saudi's intent, it would indeed be very awkward for AMI and the Saudis. The
other direction this could be going is the Saudis are directing AMI via cut-
outs to dissuade any deeper investigation into Khashoggi's death, and
miscalculated Bezos' mettle.

I wonder if AMI overplayed the "Bezos cheated in his marriage!1!1" angle, too.
If there is more or less a collective shoulder shrug that billionaire POTUS
DJT cheated on Melania, I'm not clear what AMI thought the impact would be on
Amazon's public opinion that its billionaire founder/leader is doing the same.

This will be interesting to follow.

~~~
floatingatoll
This type of response is quite common when investigating criminal masterminds:
Maximum outrage; Blatant denial; Threatening retaliation if the investigation
is not halted immediately.

Whether or not Pecker is a criminal mastermind is for the courts to say, but
his response does him no favors in the public eye and in the press.

------
usefulcat
So let me get this straight.. the owner(s) of the _National Enquirer_ are
doing this.. because they're worried about what, their journalistic
credibility? Seriously? After having published the Enquirer for decades
already?

Alternately, maybe some people just like to be bullies.

~~~
trendoid
It is possibly due to pressure from Saudi Arabia. MBS was pissed that WP is
going after him after killing of Khashoggi. Enquirer (and Pecker) are quite
close to MBS, they ran a cover story on him (how awesome he is).

It could be a bigger story than it seems at the moment.

~~~
jonknee
Not just a cover story, they created a whole glossy ad free magazine about him
and printed 200,000 copies. It's bizarre.

[https://www.thedailybeast.com/trumps-publisher-pal-puts-
saud...](https://www.thedailybeast.com/trumps-publisher-pal-puts-saudi-
propaganda-magazine-in-us-supermarkets)

> Greeting Americans on newsstands is a high-quality glossy advertisement for
> MBS, The New Kingdom. It retails for $13.99, has no ads and its 200,000
> copies can be found in venues ranging from U.S. airports to WalMart, Safeway
> and Kroger’s—raising questions about the magazine’s financing and its
> origins. The Saudis say they don’t know how it came to be. AMI, which
> publishes The National Enquirer, insists it had no outside editorial or
> financial assistance, from the Trump administration or otherwise.

~~~
trendoid
This made me just realize that MBS might fund Enquirer's legal fights with
Bezos which may reduce the possibility of Enquirer's extinction (as everyone
is hypothesizing).

------
medecau
NationalEnquirer.com redirects(302) to radaronline.com

Web Archive has snapshots from yesterday (2019/02/07) still showing the
National Enquirer website.

~~~
rnvhhynr
It just says 403 here in Europe.

------
mikeash
I look forward to seeing these scumbags becoming a smoking crater.

------
reuben_scratton
"Middle-aged man has dick, likes sex" shocker!

Kudos to Jeff for standing up to this bullshit.

------
ncmncm
Blackmail is the motivator behind practically all surveillance. It's the
essence of spycraft and much of what we call law enforcement. Most of it, as
here, doesn't directly involve money, but coercion. Getting something on a
judge's son, prosecutor's father, or administrator's husband is as useful as
on the target.

Was that decision or contract awarded by merit, or coerced? We can rarely
know. This is not academic. Why did Obama ratchet up the war on whistleblowers
in the CIA/NSA/DIA, charging them with espionage? We can only speculate.

------
ronilan
He chose Medium.

@ev is 3 out of 3 (and a podcast pivot).

~~~
theNJR
What were the other 2?

~~~
ronilan
Twitter and Blogger obviously.

~~~
theNJR
Oh I thought he meant Medium got 3/3 epic stories like this.

------
amelius
Imho, the best possible response to this kind of situation is to generate
thousands of (deep) fakes, with different parameters, and spread them. Then,
nobody will know what the real photos were. Also, with this many fakes going
around, nobody will really care anymore. And mr. Bezos certainly has the
resources to get a team of CGI artists to work on something like this.

~~~
jm4
I get the sense that his response is more about principle and not getting
pushed around by some sleazeball hack posing as a journalist than it is about
avoiding personal embarrassment. Bezos is secure in his professional life.
Whether or not more pictures come out have little bearing on the outcome of
his divorce. The biggest concern here is the reaction of his family and
friends. The ones closest to him would probably know about the extortion
attempt anyway. This is a guy who is worth $140B. That’s not normal and has
likely made relationships difficult for many years. The people he truly cares
about, the ones who are close, have already gotten past the thing that makes
him completely different from everyone else in the world. Why would they care
about something like sexting and nude pics that make him the same as most
people in the world? They don’t care. As for everyone else not close to him,
I’m sure he learned long ago how to tune out the noise.

------
redthrowaway
Now _this_ is Fuck You Money.

~~~
emilsedgh
Well in this case there's no money involved really. It's just a fuck you.

~~~
rococode
The "I asked him to prioritize protecting my time since I have other things I
prefer to work on and to proceed with whatever budget he needed to pursue the
facts in this matter" part gives off pretty strong "money is no object" vibes
haha.

------
walrus01
Quoting somebody who posted in the deleted duplicate thread:

"To modify a quote from The Dark Knight:

"Let me get this straight, you think one of the wealthiest and most powerful
men in the world, who owns the Washington Post and pays out of his own pocket
to send rockets to space, won't stand up for himself so your plan is to
blackmail this person?

Good Luck "

------
itissid
The right to publish here would be protected under the first amendment. But:

1\. An argument for the news worthiness of these pictures could be made like
in the Hulk Hogan v Gawker[1]. This is a delicate balance if a judge decides
to let this go to trial. Things could get interesting. Especially given the
written email.

2\. Could a criminal case not be made for blackmail under Title 18 [2]? Or is
it that now Jeff has published the letter it is no longer considered blackmail
as long as they don't publish the picture?

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollea_v._Gawker](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollea_v._Gawker)

[2]([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackmail#United_States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackmail#United_States))

------
Eloso
Interesting attempt to blackmail someone (who in this case happens to be, you
know, the richest man in the world), with information that is generally public
already. All that would have been added were a few additional pictures. How
much extra public embarrassment is going to come from that?

------
cooperadymas
For all the times Hacker News criticizes personal "anecdata", nitpicks the
tiniest flaw in methodology, and demands statistical significance for every
trivial matter, when it comes to politics they sure are willing to run the
gossip mill without an ounce of critical thought.

~~~
naval-gazer
This is not anecdotal information.

This is public person directly involved laying down criminal blackmail attempt
accusation whose goal was to stop him from investigating the source of the
information. If Besoz is lying, Pecker and AMI can sue him for false
accusations and win handsome sum of money.

Things that make this interesting case:

Pecker was not worried about himself, because National Enquirer has right to
publish pictures they get. He wanted to hide source of the information. That's
weird.

Pecker surely is not worried about the wellbeing of some paparazzi or low
level information source. Attempted a blackmail and exposing himself to
criminal liability means that there is something there.

------
ddoran
Today's NY Post had fun with this. The cover headline:

"Bezos exposes Pecker"

[1] [https://nypost.com/cover/covers-for-friday-
february-8-2019/](https://nypost.com/cover/covers-for-friday-february-8-2019/)

------
apo
_Here’s a piece of context: My ownership of the Washington Post is a
complexifier for me. It’s unavoidable that certain powerful people who
experience Washington Post news coverage will wrongly conclude I am their
enemy.

President Trump is one of those people, obvious by his many tweets. Also, The
Post’s essential and unrelenting coverage of the murder of its columnist Jamal
Khashoggi is undoubtedly unpopular in certain circles._

Is Bezos implicating Trump himself in this scheme?

~~~
patrickg_zill
Bezos essentially got paid by the CIA to buy the WashPost ($600 million
contract from the CIA, next thing you know, Bezos buys the paper).

Let's not kid ourselves about his altruism - the purpose of owning a large
paper like the Post is political power... this has been true since at least
the time of Lord Beaverbrook.

~~~
fxfan
I didn't downvote- can you please elaborate more?

------
m0zg
With iPhones on both ends, I'm having a hard time believing the "hack"
accusation. Apple has learned their lessons from The Fappening debacle, and
you you can't as much as sneeze without triggering 2FA if you're accessing
stuff from the device not already tied to the user.

More likely this was leaked either by Sanchez herself or by someone who had
access to her Apple Photos photostream (such as on e.g. a Mac or a shared
iPad) where all of this stuff would pop up unless they were using something
like WhatsApp with "save images" setting set to off.

Less sophisticated users probably don't even know this setting exists, and
it's on by default.

------
jonknee
> I prefer to stand up, roll this log over, and see what crawls out.

It's going to be fascinating to see what he uncovers. David Pecker has been
playing this extortion game for decades (frequently on behalf of his buddy Don
Trump). Now Bezos has given a blank check to drain the swamp.

> To lead my investigation, I retained Gavin de Becker. I’ve known Mr. de
> Becker for twenty years, his expertise in this arena is excellent, and he’s
> one of the smartest and most capable leaders I know. I asked him to
> prioritize protecting my time since I have other things I prefer to work on
> and to proceed with whatever budget he needed to pursue the facts in this
> matter.

------
seanwilson
I'm impressed he didn't censor out the text that says what the photos contain.
The post would have had a similar impact either way I think. Nobody should
have to be embarrassed about harm-free personal activities though.

~~~
peteretep
Is there anything particularly embarrassing about them? All sounds pretty
vanilla to me?

~~~
seanwilson
If they have no value in causing embarrassment, what value would they have as
blackmail material?

There's nothing embarrassing about being naked but I'm sure most people
wouldn't want naked photos of themselves made public.

~~~
floatingatoll
If he was a woman, releasing those photos could end his career as a C-level
executive at any US corporation.

~~~
ralph84
Many more men than women have had their career as C-level executives ended by
sexual indiscretions. That's of course because there are many more men than
women in C-level executive positions, but your "if he was a woman" is a non
sequitur.

~~~
peteretep
I feel like there’s value in drawing a line between “sexual indiscretion” and
harassment/assault. Using the expense account to take your mistress out,
paying your strip bar bill with the company card, or banging your consenting
coworker on your boss’s desk during the Xmas party is sexual indiscretion.

Abusing a position of power to get sexual favours from a coworker is something
quite different, and I don’t think anyone benefits from conflation of the two.

------
crawfordcomeaux
I have done things in my past that people could and may publicly shame me for.
I was worrying TODAY about what I could do to try to avoid a possible future
where my research gets derailed from some kind of extortion. It's my
understanding that reciprocal altruism can spread easily through a competitive
community, but extortion can overcome altruism when information is kept
private.

This is Jeff Bezos helping us figure out useful language for standing up to
extortion, which is important if we want reciprocal altruism to be a new
cultural norm. Transparency is the anti-extortion pattern.

Thank you for your contribution, Jeff!

------
intopieces
What’s kind of weird about this move by National Enquirer is that it seems so
poorly thought out. Bezos’ “affair” was known to his wife and they parted
amicably; sending genital photos is probably the least embarrassing thing you
could catch a billionaire doing, and in fact it kind of humanizes him.

In the age of privacy conversations, I can’t see how this is supposed to end
up positive for the paper. They oversold it here and seem to have opened
themselves up to some tough questions in the process.

------
pylus
Not surprised the whole mainstream media attacks him recently. This guy
doesn't agree with them, so he gets consequences. The left has a vast corrupt
media support it. I wonder which one is the next victim of this party. Apple
and Walmart have been consistently threatened, and the past year has been
Facebook (the left likes FB a lot and even not disclosing some bad things of
this company until 2017 ).

~~~
pergadad
Uhh are you so deep in your conspiracy theories that you missed the whole fox
news complex? There's no left wing equivalent to that.

~~~
ggdG
> [...]the whole fox news complex? There's no left wing equivalent to that.

CNN and MSNBC easily fit that bill.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_iXfbxfwDA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_iXfbxfwDA)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgBxfHdb4OU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgBxfHdb4OU)

------
randomacct3847
I’m glad not all tech billionaires are sterile robots

~~~
CobrastanJorji
Counterpoint: this is likely how a sterile robot would respond to an extortion
attempt.

~~~
unreal37
Sterile robots don't have naked selfies floating around.

~~~
floatingatoll
One quarter of the first page of Google Images results for "humanoid robots"
are unclothed, with unprotected robot surfaces showing.

------
acjohnson55
How can any retailer carry AMI's product anymore? There is no longer plausible
deniability about their business practices.

------
vonnik
Someone at the New York Post can die now with the knowledge that their life
work is complete:
[https://twitter.com/nypost/status/1093723253934309376](https://twitter.com/nypost/status/1093723253934309376)

------
JustSomeNobody
> My lawyers argued that AMI has no right to publish photos since any person
> holds the copyright to their own photos, and since the photos in themselves
> don’t add anything newsworthy.

Wait, is this really true? If it is, then why do wedding photogs claim _they_
have copyright ownership?

------
hrez
[https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-30/behind-
tr...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-30/behind-trump-s-
tabloid-king-a-connected-and-flush-hedge-fund)

------
atulatul
Is this a good place to quote a few lines from The Godfather?

Michael Corleone: My father is no different than any other powerful man,...
like a senator or a president.

Kay Adams: You know how naive you sound?

Michael: Why?

Kay Adams: Senators and presidents don't have men killed.

Michael: Who's being naive, Kay?

------
buboard
Whatever people say about the social media, their evilness is at least
transparent. This kind of "journalism" is another level of evil and reminds me
why all traditional media should be distrusted.

------
naval-gazer
It looks like criminal blackmail attempt. In a normal case Bezos would just
forward all evidence to authorities for more investigation and prosecution. He
would issue short press release later when the case goes to court.

Because Bezos thinks there is a political angle, and he wants to really find
out who is behind this and expose them, this seems to be the best course of
action.

The sole reason for this blackmail attempt was to make Bezos to back down and
stop trying to find the source of this information. This means someone was
worried and it's not just normal paparazzi stuff. Peckers attempt has
backfired spectacularly.

With all the publicity, any individual in the government or in some telecom
company who might have illegally gained access to those records must be
panicking.

If there is foreign involvement, this will become a counterintelligence
investigation. If Trump is involved, Mueller will take a look. Pecker has
already cooperation agreement with Mueller, so Pecker is in real trouble.

------
e3pi
Yesterday evening, "NTY, Mr. Pecker" was global headline news, blowing up more
so this morning. Why is there still nothing on Google News?

------
amai
Maybe a naive question: But why does Mr. Benzos not go to the police with all
that evidence? Why did he choose to publish all this instead?

------
novaleaf
some commentary and backstory by the Seattle Times:
[https://www.seattletimes.com/business/jeff-bezos-says-
nation...](https://www.seattletimes.com/business/jeff-bezos-says-national-
enquirer-is-attempting-to-blackmail-him-with-intimate-photos/)

------
mikehines
This may someday be adapted into "A Very American Scandal".

------
RyanShook
This entire Bezos/Enquirer saga is complexifying.

------
hsnewman
Looks like Bezos will own the National Enquirer soon.

------
ben0x539
hey mods do you think you could edit the title of this submission to give some
idea what it's about or who wrote it?

------
Gupie
At least no one is threatening to release compromising photos of Trump. That
would be horrible.

------
spir
Obligatory blackmail scene from the Dark Knight
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1z6o1GIEsQE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1z6o1GIEsQE)

------
sonnyblarney
I believe people on this thread are viewing this thing in a specific way, and
that there are other ways to consider this.

1) I suggest this is not blackmail in the legal sense. AMI, whatever they are
- are not idiots. AMI probably knows better than any company in the world what
is going to constitute 'newsworthy' items, at least in the legal sense. To
suggest they would do something blatantly illegal and criminal in an email of
all things ... I think does not make sense.

They do this sort of thing for a living.

2) This is a back room deal, a pretty normal one. They are asking Bezos to
state:

"have no knowledge or basis for suggesting that AMI’s coverage was politically
motivated or influenced by political forces."

This may actually technically be true. Does Bezos actually have hard evidence
of political interference? And how would acquire this? And if he doesn't, what
is the cost of merely stating a fact?

If we move out of a moral headspace for a moment and just consider the
realpolitik of the situation - it's tantamount to a kind of 'legal blackmail'
\- superficially, it's not a bad deal at all.

This is hardball and it's not exactly uncommon in business, it's just of a
very personal nature.

3) If those pics are published, the 'courage' of Bezos' ostensible principled
stance are not going to be rewarded.

The #1 thing Bezos will be known for, for at least a decade are his 'dick
picks' and that he was 'cheating on his wife and kids'.

None of the context will really matter that much, i.e. maybe he was already
separated, maybe the 'dick picks' were totally private, nothing to do with
work, the woman did not work for him etc..

It _does not matter_.

A dick pick is all anyone will know.

Bezos is famous among us, but he's not really famous among regular people, but
this could make could really make him a 'household name' for the wrong
reasons.

Remember: the realm of pop culture nobody cares about 'principles'. Images
flashing across the screen of a blurred out penis will be 99% of the news type
thing.

This is a 'pop culture' war, not a legal war, or a war among public
intellectuals or businessmen. This is a 'Buzzfeed war' and Bezos doesn't have
any ammunition.

His penis may be seen by billions, almost nobody will read his Medium post.

4) I respect his choice - but - he has a company to worry about. If this blows
up, and it starts to affect his 'perceived credibility' \- what is he going to
tell his board? He had a 'truce agreement' on the table which seemed
ostensibly reasonable (assuming Bezos doesn't have some crazy evidence that he
really needs to provide the feds?).

The pragmatic choice would have been to make a truce with his warring
entities.

Thankfully, Bezos has billions and ownership etc. and doesn't have a normal
CEO-board relationship, as I believe most 'regular boards' would have seen
only the realpolitik of the situation and would be aghast that he didn't make
an agreement.

So good on him for ostensibly 'doing the right thing' but I feel there is much
more to come.

~~~
rsynnott
> This may actually technically be true. Does Bezos actually have hard
> evidence of political interference?

"On December 12, 2018, the U.S. Attorney’s Office announced its agreement with
A.M.I. "AMI admitted that it made the $150,000 payment in concert with a
candidate’s presidential campaign," the press release said, so that Karen
McDougal wouldn't "publicize damaging allegations about the candidate before
the 2016 presidential election."

I mean, it's not exactly an obscure bit of news.

------
dangban
Jeff Bezos, if you're reading this:

Do a Playgirl spread, for charity. Spreadeagle.

Defang them.

\--------

Edit:

defang them (pun intended... get it? "fang") by doing Playgirl now, and
publishing those sext images alongside. And do it for some great charity.

Everybody will have a huge laugh over it, Jeff will be a hero, and National
Enquirer will have nothing to publish.

~~~
ShriekBob
I agree.

Once you've torn them limb from limb, once Pecker is rotting in a jail sell
and the only thing the National Enquirer is useful for is recycling them into
cup holders; then you walk into Playgirl and do a photo shoot of these exact
photos just to make sure they all know it was never about the pictures.

------
arrty88
Is his “gf” a plant?

------
Lazare
The title does this post a misservice. This is way, way more interesting than
you might think, and I highly recommend following the link and reading the
whole thing.

------
fxfan
Can anyone actually knowledgeable and not just rooting for one side tell me
whether it would be illegal for NE to now go ahead and publish the said pics?

As of now, all I read from knowledgeable people is that there is no case- as
is shown by the fact that mr bezos chose to make the 'evidence' public. My
question is- does there still stay no case if they publish the pictures? Or
does that change things? I'm assuming it won't because Mr bezos wouldn't risk
publicizing the evidence considering that eventualit

~~~
rsynnott
Revenge porn laws might be an issue.

But, really, what does he have to be worried about? If they publish them,
what's the actual harm to him, now that he's said they exist?

------
romanovtexas
Slightly off topic, but the fact that the world's richest man who owns a tech
giant chose to publish this on a closed platform like Medium should be
worrisome for the future of the open web. On the other hand, this might just
be the biggest brand endorsement for Medium till date.

~~~
mejari
Only HN could turn Jeff Bezos publicly outing a company attempting to extort
him with naked photos into a threat to the "future of the open web".

~~~
romanovtexas
I mean, he's talking about journalistic standards. Having an open web is
crucial for having good journalism on the web.

------
RomanPushkin
TLDR?

------
cm2187
Billionaire uses own newspaper to attack Trump. Billionaire uses own newspaper
to attack billionaire using own newspaper to attack Trump.

~~~
rsynnott
"The nasty newspaper was mean about poor little Donald by reporting on his
wrongdoing" does _not_ justify blackmail. In any way. What on earth are you
talking about?

------
ginger123
How can they publish photos which they don't own the copyrights?

~~~
mdanger007
the paparazzi exist in a 1st amendment gray area. they cover public figures
but the newsworthy nature of their salacious stories and gathering tactics are
always getting challenged in court.

~~~
unreal37
The paparazzi own their photographs though. In copyright, the person who takes
the photo owns it.

These photos were stolen.

------
martin1975
Am I the only one that thinks if Bezos never lets his personal Mr. Pecker roam
beyond his marriage bed that none of this explanation would be needed?

------
RcouF1uZ4gsC
I am glad that Jeff Bezos is aggressively going after AMI for their scummy
behavior. I was also glad that Peter Thiel aggressively went after Gawker
Media for their scummy behavior. Sometimes these badly behaving media outlets
need to have a billionaire personally invested in stopping their bad behavior.

~~~
tomjakubowski
Gawker didn't try to extort Hulk Hogan or Peter Thiel. The situations aren't
comparable.

~~~
natechols
No, they went right ahead and published revenge porn.

~~~
buboard
still i believe most people consider extortion a graver crime

------
defen
> If we do not agree to affirmatively publicize that specific lie, they say
> they’ll publish the photos, and quickly. And there’s an associated threat:
> They’ll keep the photos on hand and publish them in the future if we ever
> deviate from that lie.

They never explicitly say that, do they? I'm not enough of a lawyer to know if
what they did still counts as extortion/blackmail, but as far as I can see
they simply describe the photos, and propose an agreement that would prevent
them from publishing the photos. But they never say "Do this or we'll publish
the photos" \- perhaps they never intended to publish them in the first place.

~~~
raphlinus
Yes, they do explicitly say exactly that. Term 3 in Jon Fine's email is "AMI
agrees not to publish" and that directly follows term 2, which is Bezos
backing off his assertion that AMI is politically motivated in their coverage.
And term 6 means they get to keep the blackmail materials.

~~~
fxfan
I don't usually put myself in debates on HN but I have always thought of you
as a very rational guy so I'm surprised you make this comment-

Situation A: where none of this happened. Ami reserves the right to publish
photos. Perfectly legal.

Situation B: Present Offer- I wont publish them. But if you cheat- we go back
to situation A.

Plain and simple. I am no lawyer bit everyone I've read today says that
basically bezos has no case and his legal allowed him to publicize evidence
and comment on 'an ongoing case'\- commentary which can alter the 'case'
pretty much means there is no case. The only thing that remains to be seen (or
ignored) is when Ami will publish his photos because if they really want to
play this game- that's what their next step would be.

