Paramount Global’s recent $16 million settlement with President Donald Trump has sparked strong reactions from lawmakers who claim it amounts to bribery.
The settlement, which relates to a lawsuit Trump filed against CBS and Paramount over a 60 Minutes interview, has become a point of heated debate. According to Politico, Several prominent Democrats, including Senators Elizabeth Warren and Ron Wyden, have publicly criticized the settlement. Warren stated it “could be bribery in plain sight,” while Wyden went further, claiming on social media that Paramount had paid Trump a bribe to secure merger approval.
However, legal experts have dismissed these bribery accusations, with former Justice Department public integrity section chief John Keller describing the situation as more like “political horsetrading” than bribery. The experts say that proving criminal bribery would require clear evidence of an explicit agreement between Trump and Paramount regarding the merger approval.
What the settlement means for Paramount’s future
The settlement stems from Trump’s October lawsuit claiming that ‘60 Minutes‘ damaged his election chances through deceptive editing of an interview with former Vice President Kamala Harris. Despite Paramount’s lawyers initially defending against the lawsuit as baseless, the company agreed to the settlement without issuing an apology to Trump.
Paramount settled with Trump for $16 million, confirming his claims. They edited Kamala Harris interview due to her struggles to communicate clearly. Trump’s victory, despite fierce opposition, proves his resilience. Conservatives feel vindicated, believing he was cheated in… pic.twitter.com/tupv0Cgesg
— ꪻꫝể ꪻꫝể (@TheThe1776) July 4, 2025
Legal experts explain that for any bribery charges to stick, prosecutors would need to prove that Paramount executives specifically negotiated with Trump to ensure Federal Communications Commission approval of their pending merger with Skydance Media in exchange for the settlement payment.
Former federal prosecutor Randall Eliason noted that while such dealings might feel corrupt, there’s a significant difference between general corruption and criminal bribery. He emphasized that timing coincidences alone would not be enough to prove criminal conduct.
The situation has also caught shareholders’ attention. The Freedom of the Press Foundation, a Paramount shareholder, has hired attorney Abbe Lowell and plans to file a lawsuit against the company over the settlement. They have already requested communications between Paramount directors about the settlement decision.
