A key witness in the trial against Donald Trump over hush money for a porn actress has confirmed that he helped the former US president eliminate unpleasant stories before the 2016 US election.

The former editor of the pro-Trump tabloid National Enquirer, David Pecker, said in court in New York that he took part in a meeting with Trump and his lawyer Michael Cohen in mid-August 2015. There, Pecker promised to immediately report any negative rumors about Trump or "about women who want to sell stories" to lawyer Cohen. In doing so, Cohen was able to “eliminate” potentially damaging reports. According to Pecker, it was about supporting Trump's election campaign. That's why he published a series of insulting articles about his competitors.

The indictment accuses Trump of wanting to influence the outcome of the 2016 US presidential election by paying $130,000 in hush money to sex actress Daniels. The transaction itself was not illegal, but when returning the money to his lawyer Cohen, Trump falsified business documents to conceal their actual purpose, according to the allegations.

Process could influence US election campaign

This is the first criminal trial against an ex-president in US history. Trump could face several years in prison if convicted; However, the sentence could also be suspended. A fine would also be possible. The case could influence the US election campaign. Trump (77) wants to be re-elected president in November. He has pleaded not guilty.

By questioning Pecker, the prosecution wants to support its claim that Trump's goal was to protect his campaign from negative reports in order to have a better chance of voting in November 2016. This is intended to counteract a possible argument by the defense that Trump's payment to porn star Daniels was simply about preventing damage to his family and that it was simply a private payment with no connection to the US election.

Ex-editor: Story bought - and suppressed

Pecker also confirmed the National Enquirer's $30,000 payment to an employee at Trump Tower in New York who claimed he knew about Trump's paternity of a child out of wedlock. The former editor said he bought the exclusive rights "because of the potential embarrassment" the story would have caused Trump's campaign - and had no intention of publishing the story at the time. Cohen then told him that the boss would be “very happy” about the story being suppressed.