I do not know anything about Jeff Bezos. I do not know if he and his wife were already divorcing and started dating other people or if the news about their relationship / case triggered the divorce announcement yesterday. He is not a child in a cage on the border. But I do not think we can ignore the fact that the story was broken by The National Enquirer and that the Enquirer served as a personal attack vehicle for the current president for a few decades.
One of the guys who now has a cooperation agreement with New York prosecutors about secret payments is one of the highlights of Bezos's story. (That's Dylan Howard.) Bezos, because he owns the Washington Post, is one of Trump's top enemies. He attacked him repeatedly on Twitter and many other times in other settings.
One would surely think that the Enquirer's staff would be wary of making Trump's proposals if they were in the middle of a major criminal investigation, even if they had immunity. It makes me question the theory to some degree. But I'm not sure if it's really any reason to think they'd stop their usual practices. There is no campaign. Presumably, there is no money exchange.
Can I prove that this was done at the instigation of Trump or on behalf of Trump? No. I have nothing more than an obvious supposition, the most logical of inferences. Now, it is certainly true that the Enquirer has a case histories business. Maybe it just fell on their lap. But I think we should be very suspicious.
Here's Trump laughing about Bezos's divorce this morning.
Trump in the Bezos case / divorce: "I wish you good luck. It will be a beauty."
The story was broken by publication that served as Trump's attack vehicle for two decades. pic.twitter.com/dzYf4HyII1
– Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) January 10, 2019