(Hot Air)—Has anyone checked in with Scott Pelley this afternoon to see if he needs smelling salts? How about Bill Owens?
Two months ago, both men erupted in anger when Paramount’s board decided to settle an election fraud lawsuit from Donald Trump over the deceptively edited interview of Kamala Harris by 60 Minutes during the general election. Trump had filed a $20 billion lawsuit against Paramount, a big liability for a corporation attempting to close a deal with Skydance. Shari Redstone’s decision to settle infuriated CBS News figures at the time.
However, even that didn’t go easy. Paramount offered Trump $15 million for his presidential library, but with no admission of error. Trump insisted he wanted the public apology and at least $25 million. Today, a mediator offered to split the baby:
A mediator has proposed that President Trump and Paramount Global settle his lawsuit over a CBS News “60 Minutes” interview with former Vice President Kamala Harris for $20 million, according to people familiar with the matter.
The proposal would include a $17 million donation to Trump’s presidential foundation or museum, the people said. It would also include millions more in legal fees and public service announcements on Paramount-owned networks to fight antisemitism, the people said.
Trump’s team has said it wants an apology—something Paramount isn’t prepared to do, according to people familiar with the situation. It couldn’t be learned whether Trump’s team is still seeking an apology.
They don’t want to admit error, the WSJ later notes, because they don’t want to expose their news operations to further legal liability for cooked reporting and corrupt election meddling. They want the lawsuit out of the way for their merger with Skydance, likely because of the potential liability of a $20 billion claim on the balance sheet as the value of Paramount gets calculated.
Other media outlets also claim that Paramount and Redstone are worried that the FTC would intervene in the merger in retaliation, but that has never made a lot of sense. (The WSJ lays out that case near the end of that report, for those who want to read it.) There isn’t really much of a reason for an FTC intervention in this merger, as it’s not even among the more impactful consolidations in the entertainment industry of late. A federal court would make short shrift of such a move, especially these days, and maybe especially in the DC circuit.
- Read More: hotair.com