Latest news with #FacetheNation
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump Wants $25 Million To Settle His Meritless 60 Minutes Lawsuit (opinion)
President Donald Trump is currently suing one of the largest media companies in the country because one of its subsidiaries lightly edited an interview with his political opponent. This week, he apparently declined a settlement offer, even though the lawsuit itself is completely frivolous and arguably an abuse of his power as president. "Paramount Global in recent days has offered $15 million to settle," The Wall Street Journal reported this week. "Trump's team wants more than $25 million and is also seeking an apology from CBS News." The whole affair stems from an October 2024 interview that 60 Minutes conducted with then-Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic candidate for president. (Trump declined the chance to sit for a 60 Minutes interview of his own.) In the interview, correspondent Bill Whitaker asked about Israel's war in Gaza. CBS—the broadcast network owned by Paramount—aired separate portions of Harris' answer, one on the 60 Minutes broadcast and a longer snippet on its Sunday morning show Face the Nation. Trump seized on the different clips and accused CBS of doctoring Harris' answer to make her look better. "Her REAL ANSWER WAS CRAZY, OR DUMB, so they actually REPLACED it with another answer," he wrote on X. "They took the answer out in its entirety, threw it away, and they put another answer in," he later said at a campaign rally. "And I think it's the biggest scandal in broadcasting history." Trump sued CBS for $10 billion in "compensatory damages"—amended to $20 billion after he won the election and reassumed the presidency—under a Texas law against deceptive consumer practices. The lawsuit accused CBS of "unlawful acts of election and voter interference." The lawsuit was flawed from the start: Journalists editing interviewees' answers for time or clarity is both routine and protected by the First Amendment. And Harris' answer in either clip is not exactly Churchillian: "Harris did not come across as especially forthright, articulate, or intelligent in either version, although the one that 60 Minutes showed was a little more concise," Reason's Jacob Sullum observed. If CBS were trying to do her a favor by swapping out her answer, one imagines they could have done a better job. Besides, Trump won the election; it's hard to believe he suffered any damages, much less millions of dollars worth. But in a filing this week, Trump's lawyers argued the interview "led to widespread confusion and mental anguish of consumers, including [Trump]." CBS released the full unedited video and transcript of Whitaker's interview with Harris in February, conclusively demonstrating the scandal was bullshit all along: CBS aired one part of Harris' response on 60 Minutes and another part on Face the Nation. Despite Trump's insistence, nobody "replaced" any part of her answer with another, separate answer. But instead of defending its journalists by pressing on and letting a judge laugh the lawsuit out of court, Paramount has been negotiating a settlement. CBS News staffers opposed a settlement, fearing the precedent of a journalistic outlet caving to pressure from the powerful interests it covers. Since negotiations began last month, the producer of 60 Minutes and the executive in charge of CBS News each resigned. But Paramount is in the process of being acquired by Skydance Media, and the transaction requires approval from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Around the same time as Trump's lawsuit, the Center for American Rights, a conservative nonprofit, also filed an FCC complaint for "news distortion" over the interview. And FCC Chair Brendan Carr, whom Trump elevated to the job and who has demonstrated unabashed loyalty to the president, has indicated that approval depends upon the resolution of the complaint, which he is in no hurry to get through. "It would be entirely inappropriate to consider the complaint against the '60 Minutes' segment as part of a transaction review," FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez told the Los Angeles Times. Indeed, the lawsuit—especially when paired with the FCC merger approval—smacks of corruption, with Trump trying to cow a disfavored media outlet into silence. Trump's effort is so blatant that Paramount executives reportedly worried they could be prosecuted for bribery of a public official if they settled the lawsuit. Of course, this puts Paramount, CBS, and 60 Minutes in a perilous position: If Paramount—which has been struggling for years—hopes to save itself through a merger with Skydance, it must win over the FCC, whose current head apparently delights in being referred to as "Trump's media pit bull." Doing so will apparently require bending the knee and paying a fee for hurting Trump's feelings, even though by all accounts, 60 Minutes violated neither the law nor journalistic ethics. And if Paramount does cave and pay $25 million or more—worse still, if it apologizes for the sin of doing basic journalism—it will set a dangerous precedent that powerful people can openly and unabashedly bully the journalists who cover them into silence. The post Trump Wants $25 Million To Settle His Meritless 60 Minutes Lawsuit appeared first on
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Mike Johnson is wrong: Millions could lose SNAP benefits under GOP bill, analysts find
Statement: 'We are not cutting' the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. As the Senate reviews the Trump administration-backed "big, beautiful bill," Republican lawmakers insist it will not reduce Americans' benefits. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said the bill won't affect the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, which helps low-income people buy food. An average of 42.1 million people participate in the program each month. "We are not cutting SNAP," Johnson said in a May 25 episode of CBS News' "Face the Nation." "We're working in the elements of fraud, waste and abuse. SNAP for example, listen to the statistics, in 2024, over $11 billion in SNAP payments were erroneous." There were about $10.5 billion estimated improper SNAP payments for fiscal year 2023 — payments made in the wrong amount or that should not have been made — according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. That comes to about 11.7% of the program's payments. But the bill does more than tackle waste and fraud. Three detailed, independent analyses of the reconciliation bill found it would cut the number of program beneficiaries by millions of people. When asked for comment, Johnson spokesperson Griffin Neal referred PolitiFact to the speaker's full "Face the Nation" comments, in which he also said, "What we're doing is strengthening Medicaid and SNAP so that they can exist, so that they'll be there for the people that desperately need it the most, and it's not being taken advantage of." Based on different provisions of the bill, analysts estimate roughly 1.3 million to 11 million people losing SNAP benefits. The Congressional Budget Office, Congress' nonpartisan economic and budgetary analysts, projected that a provision that expands work requirements would lead to an estimated 3.2 million people losing SNAP benefits in a given month. "If enacted, this would be by far the largest cut to food assistance in history," said Katie Bergh, senior policy analyst on the food assistance team at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal think tank. The group's analysis said the bill would cut federal funding for SNAP by about 30% altogether."We estimate that more than 2 million children live in low-income households that would lose SNAP entirely or see their food benefits substantially cut," Bergh said. The average monthly SNAP benefit per person as of fiscal year 2024 was $187.54. Multiple provisions in H.R. 1, or the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act," would affect SNAP. For one, the bill would allow only citizens and lawful permanent residents to receive SNAP benefits. It would also freeze increases to the Thrifty Food Plan. That plan establishes the average cost of a nutritious, home-prepared meal and is used as the basis for calculating households' maximum SNAP benefit amounts. By not allowing increases to the Thrifty Food Plan, households' SNAP benefits are less likely to keep pace with retail prices and inflation, and would in effect become cuts. The bill also expands work requirements for SNAP eligibility. Currently, able-bodied recipients ages 18 to 54 with no dependents must work 80 hours per month to obtain SNAP benefits. The bill would raise the upper age limit to 64 for people who don't live with dependents and people who live with children ages 7 and older. It also gives states less leeway to waive work requirements in areas with high unemployment rates, and it requires that they pay a share of SNAP benefit costs beginning in 2028. SNAP is currently fully funded by the federal government; under the bill, states would have to fund from 5% to 25% of SNAP costs, depending on their payment error rates. Error rates are calculated based on how accurately states determine eligibility and benefits. In a May 22 letter, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said the bill's provisions would "reduce spending on SNAP by $285.7 billion" over the next nine years, from 2025 to 2034. The office estimated that the bill's work requirement expansion, coupled with the measure restricting states' ability to waive work requirements, would lead to an average of 3.2 million people in a given month losing SNAP benefits in the same nine-year period. As for states' response to the newly mandated contributions, the CBO also estimated that "states collectively would reduce or eliminate benefits for about 1.3 million people in an average month" in the same period. Allowing only citizens and lawful permanent residents to participate in SNAP would reduce $4 billion in spending, the office estimated. Meanwhile, failing to increase the Thrifty Food Plan would bar increases to monthly SNAP benefits based on actual food prices and "reduce the federal government's direct spending by $37 billion" from 2027 to 2034, the CBO said. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, based on its analysis published before the House passed the bill, had a higher estimate for the effect of the proposed work requirement expansion, saying it could cause nearly 11 million people to lose SNAP benefits. It said that SNAP's "deepest cuts" would come from the federal government pulling back on its funding by 5% to 25% and demanding states supply that instead. "If a state can't make up for these massive federal cuts with tax increases or spending cuts elsewhere in its budget, it would have to cut its SNAP program (such as cutting eligibility or making it harder for people to enroll) or it could opt out of the program altogether, terminating food assistance entirely in the state," the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities' analysis said. The Urban Institute, a Washington D.C. think tank, in a May 21 analysis estimated a more limited effect from the proposed work requirement expansion, but it still said millions of families would be affected. That provision "would result in 2.7 million families and 5.4 million people losing some or all of their family's SNAP benefits in a month, with an average loss of $254 per family per month," it said. Johnson said the tax reform bill is "not cutting SNAP." Analyses by the Congressional Budget Office, the Urban Institute and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities show that millions of people could be removed from SNAP if the bill is enacted. We rate Johnson's claim False. CBS News, Transcript: House Speaker Mike Johnson on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," May 25, 2025 Email exchange with Griffin Neal, spokesperson for House Speaker Mike Johnson, May 27, 2025 Emailed statement from Katie Bergh, senior policy analyst for food assistance at Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, May 28, 2025 H.R.1 - One Big Beautiful Bill Act Government Accountability Office, Improper Payments: USDA's Oversight of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, Sept. 26, 2024 USDA Economic Research Service, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) - Key Statistics and Research, accessed May 28, 2025 USDA Food and Nutrition Service, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Participation and Costs, data as of May 9, 2025 Congressional Budget Office, Potential Effects on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program of Reconciliation Recommendations Pursuant to H. Con. Res. 14, May 22, 2025 Urban Institute, Expanded SNAP Work Requirements Would Reduce Benefits for Millions of Families, May 21, 2025 USDA Food and Nutrition Service, SNAP and the Thrifty Food Plan, accessed May 28, 2025 USDA Food and Nutrition Service, SNAP Quality Control, accessed May 29, 2025 USDA Food and Nutrition Service, USDA Food Plans, accessed May 29, 2025 Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, By the Numbers: House Republican Reconciliation Bill Takes Food Assistance Away From Millions of People, updated May 23, 2025 Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Expanded Work Requirements in House Republican Bill Would Take Away Food Assistance From Millions: State and Congressional District Estimates, May 13, 2025 The Urban Institute, Expanded SNAP Work Requirements Would Reduce Benefits for Millions of Families, May 21, 2025 The Washington Post, Some in GOP want big cuts to food assistance in Trump's tax bill. Committee chairs say no., May 1, 2025 The New York Times, What's Going On in This Graph? | SNAP 'Thrifty Food Plan', Oct. 7, 2021 Center for American Progress, RELEASE: The House Republican SNAP Cuts Would Take Food From Hungry Families, May 12, 2025 Politico, House budget bill would cut millions of people from food aid, CBO says, May 22, 2025 The New York Times, Here's What's in the Big Domestic Policy Bill to Deliver Trump's Agenda, May 22, 2025 This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Millions could lose SNAP benefits under GOP bill, analysts find
2 days ago
- Business
Trump suffered 'mental anguish' from disputed CBS News interview with Harris, lawyer says
NEW YORK -- President Donald Trump suffered 'mental anguish' from CBS News' editing of a '60 Minutes' interview with Democratic opponent Kamala Harris last fall, his lawyers are arguing in court papers. Trump's status as a 'content creator' was also damaged by attention given to the interview, lawyers said. It was part of their argument opposing CBS parent Paramount Global's effort to dismiss the president's $20 billion lawsuit against the company, filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Amarillo, Texas. Trump has claimed the editing was done to advantage Harris, which CBS rejects. Even with the effort to dismiss the case, Paramount is engaged in settlement discussions with Trump. The prospect of a settlement has so rattled CBS News that two of its top executives have resigned in protest. Trump, who did not agree to be interviewed by '60 Minutes" during the campaign, has protested editing where Harris is seen giving two different answers to a question by the show's Bill Whitaker in separate clips aired on '60 Minutes' and 'Face the Nation' earlier in the day. CBS said each reply came within Harris' long-winded answer to Whitaker, but was edited to be more succinct. Trump's lawyer, Edward Andrew Paltzik, said that 'this led to widespread confusion and mental anguish of consumers, including plaintiffs, regarding a household name of the legacy media apparently deceptively distorting its broadcasts, and then resisting attempts to clear the public record.' Because they were misled, voters withheld attention from Trump and his Truth Social platform, Paltzik argued. Trump, described as a 'media icon' by his lawyers, was 'forced to redirect significant time, money and effort to correcting the public record,' he said. Paramount and controlling shareholder Shari Redstone are seeking the settlement with Trump, whose administration must approve the company's proposed merger with Skydance Media. CBS News' president and CEO, Wendy McMahon, and '60 Minutes' executive producer Bill Owens, who both opposed a settlement, have resigned in recent weeks. Meanwhile, the Freedom of the Press Foundation, a media advocacy group that says it is a Paramount shareholder, said that it would file a lawsuit in protest if a settlement is reached. Seth Stern, the foundation's advocacy director, said a settlement of Trump's 'meritless' lawsuit 'may well be a thinly veiled effort to launder bribes through the court system.' U.S. Sens. Ron Wyden, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren have said they are investigating whether a settlement would violate bribery laws.
India Today
2 days ago
- Business
- India Today
Trump's legal team blames CBS interview for his ‘mental anguish'
President Donald Trump suffered 'mental anguish' from CBS News' editing of a '60 Minutes' interview with Democratic opponent Kamala Harris last fall, his lawyers are arguing in court status as a 'content creator' was also damaged by attention given to the interview, lawyers said. It was part of their argument opposing CBS parent Paramount Global's effort to dismiss the president's $20 billion lawsuit against the company, filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Amarillo, Texas. Trump has claimed the editing was done to advantage Harris, which CBS with the effort to dismiss the case, Paramount is engaged in settlement discussions with Trump. The prospect of a settlement has so rattled CBS News that two of its top executives have resigned in protest. Trump, who did not agree to be interviewed by '60 Minutes' during the campaign, has protested editing where Harris is seen giving two different answers to a question by the show's Bill Whitaker in separate clips aired on '60 Minutes' and 'Face the Nation' earlier in the day. CBS said each reply came within Harris' long-winded answer to Whitaker, but was edited to be more lawyer, Edward Andrew Paltzik, said that 'this led to widespread confusion and mental anguish of consumers, including plaintiffs, regarding a household name of the legacy media apparently deceptively distorting its broadcasts, and then resisting attempts to clear the public described as a 'media icon' by his lawyers, was 'forced to redirect significant time, money and effort to correcting the public record,' he and controlling shareholder Shari Redstone are seeking the settlement with Trump, whose administration must approve the company's proposed merger with Skydance Media. CBS News' president and CEO, Wendy McMahon, and '60 Minutes' executive producer Bill Owens, who both opposed a settlement, have resigned in recent the Freedom of the Press Foundation, a media advocacy group that says it is a Paramount shareholder, said that it would file a lawsuit in protest if a settlement is Stern, the foundation's advocacy director, said a settlement of Trump's 'meritless' lawsuit 'may well be a thinly veiled effort to launder bribes through the court system.' U.S. Sens. Ron Wyden, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren have said they are investigating whether a settlement would violate bribery Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday that Paramount has offered $15 million to settle but that Trump wants more money — and an apology. A company representative would not comment on the Watch
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump rejects Paramount's $15 million offer to settle CBS News lawsuit, demands apology
President Donald Trump and Paramount Global are still at an impasse as they attempt to resolve his $20 billion lawsuit against the company through mediation. Fox News Digital confirmed that Trump rejected a $15 million offer to settle his lawsuit, according to a source familiar with the matter. The president's legal team is also demanding at least $25 million and an apology from CBS News. Trump's attorneys even floated another lawsuit against the company. Trump's settlement rejection was first reported by The Wall Street Journal. Trump's attorney did not respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment. Paramount declined to comment. '60 Minutes' Staff Stand By Kamala Harris Interview At The Center Of Trump's Major Paramount Lawsuit Last October, Trump sued CBS News and Paramount for $10 billion over allegations of election interference involving the "60 Minutes" interview of then-Vice President Kamala Harris that aired weeks before the presidential election (the amount has since jumped to $20 billion). Read On The Fox News App The lawsuit alleges CBS News deceitfully edited an exchange Harris had with "60 Minutes" correspondent Bill Whitaker, who asked her why Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wasn't "listening" to the Biden administration. Harris was widely mocked for the "word salad" answer that aired in a preview clip of the interview on "Face the Nation." However, when the same question aired during a primetime special on the network, Harris had a different, more concise response. Critics at the time accused CBS News of deceitfully editing Harris' "word salad" answer to shield the Democratic nominee from further backlash leading up to Election Day. The raw transcript and footage released earlier this year by the FCC showed that both sets of Harris' comments came from the same response, but CBS News had aired only the first half of her response in the "Face the Nation" preview clip and aired the second half during the primetime special. CBS News has denied any wrongdoing and stands by the broadcast and its reporting. '60 Minutes' Producers Rail Against Trump's 'Bulls---' Lawsuit, Dread Prospects Of Paramount Making Settlement Shari Redstone, Paramount's controlling shareholder who recused herself from settlement discussions in February, made clear that she wanted to settle Trump's lawsuit in hopes of clearing the pathway for Paramount's multibillion-dollar planned merger with Skydance Media, which seeks approval from the Trump administration's FCC. However, there has been newsroom drama in recent months involving Redstone's efforts to "keep tabs" on the network's reporting of Trump, at least until the merger closes. That led to the abrupt resignation of "60 Minutes" executive producer Bill Owens, who claimed he could no longer maintain editorial independence. Also fueling settlement rumors was last week's ousting of CBS News CEO Wendy McMahon, who cited disagreement with the company behind her departure. Cbs News Staffers Rattled By Ceo's Abrupt Exit As Trump Lawsuit Looms Over Network CBS News journalists remain defiant, including "60 Minutes" correspondent Scott Pelley, who went viral with his commencement address at Wake Forest University repeatedly slamming Trump as well as his lawsuit. "Why attack universities? Why attack journalism? Because ignorance works for power," Pelley told Wake Forest graduates. "First, make the truth seekers live in fear, sue the journalists and their companies for nothing. Then, send masked agents to abduct a college student who wrote an editorial in her college paper defending Palestinian rights and send her to a prison in Louisiana charged with nothing. Then move to destroy the law firms that stand up for the rights of others." "With that done, power can rewrite history with grotesque false narratives. They can make criminals heroes and heroes criminals. Power can change the definition of the words we use to describe reality. Diversity is now described as illegal. Equity is to be shunned. Inclusion is a dirty word. This is an old playbook, my friends. There's nothing new in this," he article source: Trump rejects Paramount's $15 million offer to settle CBS News lawsuit, demands apology
