Paramount Settlement With Trump Would Set ‘Dangerous Precedent,’ But Likely Wouldn’t Draw Bribery Charge, Experts Say

variety.com:

Gene Maddaus Senior Media Writer Most legal observers regard President Trump’s lawsuit over the editing of a “60 Minutes” interview with Kamala Harris as frivolous.

Nevertheless, parent company Paramount Global has been angling to settle the case, given that the administration has the power to stall or block its merger with Skydance.

Doing so would likely generate backlash from CBS journalists and others who would see it as another major media organization capitulating to the president in hopes of currying favor. “These are not ‘settlements’ — they are ‘bribes’ and should be described accurately,” wrote Ian Bassin, a former associate counsel in the Obama White House, on BlueSky. “The reporting even explains that CBS executives believe this payment will help avert Trump blocking their merger.

That’s a bribe.” But even if Paramount were to offer a cash payout to the president or his library in hopes of winning merger approval, legal experts say it probably doesn’t have to worry about incurring liability for bribery. “It’s almost impossible to prosecute any of this as a quid pro quo under the bribery statute,” said Richard Painter, a law professor at the University of Minnesota and a former White House ethics counsel under President George W.