Fact-Check: "It was a $16 Million bribe so the Trump admin and FEC would approve the $8 Billion merger of Larry Ellison’s Skydance acquiring Paramount."
What We Know
The claim revolves around a reported $16 million settlement between Paramount and Donald Trump related to a lawsuit he filed against CBS. This settlement has raised suspicions among some lawmakers, including Senator Ron Wyden, who suggested that it could be construed as a form of bribery to facilitate the approval of a pending $8 billion merger between Paramount and Skydance Media. According to Senator Wyden's press release, the timing of the settlement and the merger approval process has led to concerns about potential corruption and bribery within the Trump administration.
The senators, including Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, expressed that the settlement could be seen as a way to gain favor with the Trump administration, which was in a position to approve the merger. They noted that part of the settlement funds would be directed toward Trump's presidential library, which they argued could serve as a vehicle for indirect financial gain for Trump (Variety).
Moreover, there are claims that the arrangement may involve additional promotional content valued at $15 to $20 million, which could further complicate the narrative of a straightforward settlement (The Guardian).
Analysis
While the $16 million settlement is a confirmed fact, the assertion that it constitutes a bribe is more contentious. The term "bribe" implies illegal or unethical conduct, which requires substantial evidence to substantiate. The concerns raised by Wyden and his colleagues stem from the timing and nature of the settlement, which they argue could be interpreted as an attempt to curry favor with the Trump administration for the merger's approval. However, both Skydance and Paramount have publicly stated that they complied with all legal requirements and denied any wrongdoing (Fortune).
The credibility of the sources involved in this claim varies. Senator Wyden's press release is an official government communication, which lends it a degree of authority, but it also reflects a political perspective that may be biased against the Trump administration. On the other hand, reports from media outlets like Variety and The Guardian provide a broader context but may also carry their own biases depending on the outlet's editorial stance.
The assertion that the merger approval was contingent upon the settlement is not definitively supported by evidence, as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) approved the merger shortly after the settlement was reached, but the approval process is complex and involves multiple factors (CBC).
Conclusion
The claim that the $16 million settlement constitutes a bribe to facilitate the merger approval is Partially True. While the settlement is real and has raised legitimate concerns about potential corruption, the characterization of it as a bribe lacks definitive evidence. The situation involves significant political implications and interpretations, making it a complex issue rather than a straightforward case of bribery.
