“Never forget this name: Shari Redstone. Sold out the country and media for her billions.”
So thundered former Republican Rep. Adam Kinzinger on X, calling out the controlling shareholder of Paramount Global—and connecting her to what looks like a brazen quid pro quo between Donald Trump and Paramount’s legal settlement.
The controversial “60 Minutes” settlement
On July 1, 2025, Paramount Global agreed to pay $16 million to Trump’s future presidential library. The payment resolved his staggering $20 billion lawsuit. Trump had sued over allegedly “deceptive editing” in a 2024 60 Minutes interview featuring then-presidential candidate Kamala Harris.
Trump had accused CBS of airing two different versions to mislead voters by trimming Harris’s remarks on U.S.–Israel influence. Paramount denied wrongdoing, emphasizing that funds would go to Trump’s library, not to Trump personally. As part of the deal, transcript release policies for future candidate interviews were added, without apology.
The settlement was reached just before Paramount’s shareholder meeting and shortly ahead of a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) decision on the proposed $8.4 billion Skydance merger, a deal championed by Paramount’s chairperson, Shari Redstone.
Opponents, including lawmakers, journalists, and media advocates, warned that Paramount had capitulated under political pressure—and that this cash settlement might amount to bribery in plain sight.
Allegations of a bribe
Some saw the timing as more than a coincidence. Senators Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Ron Wyden publicly cautioned that settling just as the smaller powerhouse Skydance merger awaited Trump-appointed FCC chairman Brendan Carr could violate bribery statutes.
Deadline also reported that Redstone and other top Paramount executives could come under investigation over whether the settlement was arranged to win Trump’s backing for the Skydance merger, raising the specter of a full-scale quid pro quo scandal. Reports even hinted at looming civil or criminal inquiries, exploring whether Redstone steered the settlement to facilitate the deal.
Editorial independence in peril
Inside 60 Minutes, the backlash was fierce. Executive producer Bill Owens resigned in April, citing a loss of “independent decisions” amid mounting pressure during the Trump‐FCC‐merger juggernaut. Correspondent Scott Pelley slammed Paramount Global on‑air, warning that corporate interference was compromising journalistic integrity.
Kinzinger’s scathing X callout
Now, Kinzinger has dropped a bomb. With searing rhetoric, he accuses Redstone of auctioning off both the network’s press freedom and the nation’s trust to secure a windfall via the Skydance merger.
Paramount insists the settlement is “unrelated to the merger” and plans to uphold First Amendment values. But credible voices question the optics. Critics warn that letting a politically connected corporation essentially purchase presidential favor sets a dangerous precedent—and threatens to erode the line between journalism, business, and raw political power.
With lawmakers calling for bribery investigations—and investigations already hinted at by Deadline—the scandal may spiral well beyond boardrooms and cable news studios. If any laws were bent or broken, it could lead to serious legal peril for Redstone and Paramount’s leadership. And as Kinzinger’s explosive charge echoes through the media, the story threatens to redefine the battle lines between political power, media influence, and corporate ambition.
Published: Jul 2, 2025 02:30 pm