Silencing Accusers: The Catch-and-Kill System, NDAs, and Legal Threats Used to Suppress Sexual Misconduct Allegations
Tier 3Documented2007-01-01 to 2022-11-12
Factual Summary
Over a period of more than a decade, Donald Trump and his associates employed a system of nondisclosure agreements (NDAs), legal threats, defamation of accusers, and a "catch-and-kill" arrangement with American Media Inc. (AMI) to suppress public disclosure of sexual misconduct allegations. The system operated across multiple accusers and involved coordination between Trump, his personal attorney Michael Cohen, and David Pecker, CEO of AMI, publisher of the National Enquirer.
The catch-and-kill mechanism was established at a meeting in August 2015 between Trump, Cohen, and Pecker at Trump Tower. Under the arrangement, AMI would identify and purchase the rights to stories that could damage Trump's presidential candidacy, then suppress those stories rather than publish them. AMI maintained a safe at its headquarters containing damaging stories about Trump and other public figures, the contents of which were later turned over to federal prosecutors.
The most extensively documented catch-and-kill transactions involved two women. In June 2016, AMI paid former Playboy model Karen McDougal $150,000 for the exclusive rights to her account of a ten-month affair with Trump, then never published the story. In October 2016, Cohen, acting through a shell company, paid adult film actress Stormy Daniels (Stephanie Clifford) $130,000 in exchange for a nondisclosure agreement regarding her account of a sexual encounter with Trump. Both payments were made shortly before the 2016 presidential election.
Beyond Daniels and McDougal, Trump used defamation and legal threats to discourage other accusers from pursuing their claims. When Summer Zervos, a former contestant on The Apprentice, publicly accused Trump of unwanted sexual contact in 2007, Trump called her a "liar" on the campaign trail. Zervos filed a defamation lawsuit in January 2017. The lawsuit was delayed for years by Trump's legal team, which argued that a sitting president could not be sued in state court. The suit was ultimately settled in November 2021 without monetary compensation, though Zervos maintained her allegations and secured the right to speak freely about her experience.
At least 26 women have publicly accused Trump of sexual misconduct ranging from unwanted kissing and groping to sexual assault. In multiple cases, women who came forward reported receiving legal threats, intimidation, or public attacks from Trump and his surrogates. The pattern extended beyond individual responses: the existence of NDAs, the catch-and-kill arrangement, and the aggressive legal posture created a chilling effect on potential accusers, establishing a system in which coming forward carried significant personal, legal, and financial risks.
AMI entered into a non-prosecution agreement with federal prosecutors in September 2018, acknowledging that the McDougal payment was made "in concert with" and "at the request and suggestion of" the Trump campaign. Cohen pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations related to the Daniels and McDougal payments in August 2018. Trump was convicted of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in connection with the Daniels reimbursement scheme in May 2024.
Primary Sources
1. AMI non-prosecution agreement with the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, September 2018
2. Criminal Information and Plea Agreement, United States v. Michael Cohen, August 21, 2018
3. Complaint, Zervos v. Trump, No. 150522/2017 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Jan. 17, 2017)
4. Stipulation of Settlement, Zervos v. Trump, November 2021
5. Indictment and verdict, People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump, Ind. No. 71543-23 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2024)
Corroborating Sources
1. Washington Post: "Former 'Apprentice' contestant Summer Zervos ends defamation lawsuit against Trump," November 12, 2021
2. New Yorker: "Donald Trump, the Playboy Model, and the System of Catch and Kill," February 2018
3. NBC News: "Trump Accuser Summer Zervos Files Defamation Suit Against President-Elect," January 2017
4. CNN: "Summer Zervos defamation lawsuit: Judge allows lawsuit against Trump to proceed," March 2021
5. Courthouse News Service: "Trump accuser settles defamation case without compensation," November 2021
Counterarguments and Context
Trump denied all sexual misconduct allegations and characterized his accusers as politically motivated liars seeking publicity. His legal team argued that NDAs are standard legal instruments used by public figures to protect their privacy and that there is nothing unlawful about entering into a confidential settlement. The catch-and-kill arrangement, while unusual, was characterized by Trump's defenders as the work of Cohen and Pecker acting independently rather than at Trump's direction, a claim contradicted by the AMI non-prosecution agreement and Cohen's testimony. Trump's public denials of the accusations are constitutionally protected speech, and calling an accuser a liar is not inherently defamatory if the underlying accusation is false. However, the Zervos litigation established that a sitting president can be sued for defamation in state court for pre-presidential conduct, and the broader pattern of using legal mechanisms to suppress unfavorable stories was documented through federal court proceedings, plea agreements, and non-prosecution agreements. The system operated not through any single transaction but through the cumulative effect of financial payments, contractual silencing, legal intimidation, and public retaliation, creating structural barriers to disclosure.
Author's Note
This entry is classified as Tier 3 because the catch-and-kill system, the NDA transactions, and the defamation litigation are documented through court filings, plea agreements, and the AMI non-prosecution agreement. The entry addresses the system by which allegations were suppressed rather than the underlying truth of the sexual misconduct claims themselves, which are addressed in separate entries. The felony conviction in the Daniels case establishes as adjudicated fact that the business records related to the suppression scheme were falsified.