Rico case on cbs deal?

[Anonymous]

So while the orange clown has immunity, can a cbs shareholder bring a civil rico case against fcc chairman and cbs for participating in a rico shakedown of the company- pay trump a bribe, fire Colbert, now all the “free ads”….
Looks like a scheme to both monetarily shakedown the company and get free services by leveraging fcc approval. Sounds like a rico scheme to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So while the orange clown has immunity, can a cbs shareholder bring a civil rico case against fcc chairman and cbs for participating in a rico shakedown of the company- pay trump a bribe, fire Colbert, now all the “free ads”….
Looks like a scheme to both monetarily shakedown the company and get free services by leveraging fcc approval. Sounds like a rico scheme to me.

Was this an official act for which Trump would have immunity?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So while the orange clown has immunity, can a cbs shareholder bring a civil rico case against fcc chairman and cbs for participating in a rico shakedown of the company- pay trump a bribe, fire Colbert, now all the “free ads”….
Looks like a scheme to both monetarily shakedown the company and get free services by leveraging fcc approval. Sounds like a rico scheme to me.

Was this an official act for which Trump would have immunity?

The lawsuit was brought in his personal capacity before he was President, so no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So while the orange clown has immunity, can a cbs shareholder bring a civil rico case against fcc chairman and cbs for participating in a rico shakedown of the company- pay trump a bribe, fire Colbert, now all the “free ads”….
Looks like a scheme to both monetarily shakedown the company and get free services by leveraging fcc approval. Sounds like a rico scheme to me.

When I see people suggest RICO, it generally means ignore the article and assume the writer doesn't know anything about the law.

[Anonymous]

lol, CBS paramount got sued by Trump, they pad the bribe, fired Colbert.

Then, Paramount signed a $1.5B deal with SouthPark. First South Park episode aired last night and it was just an extended roast of Trump. Like, so bad.

This is going to be so fun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:lol, CBS paramount got sued by Trump, they pad the bribe, fired Colbert.

Then, Paramount signed a $1.5B deal with SouthPark. First South Park episode aired last night and it was just an extended roast of Trump. Like, so bad.

This is going to be so fun.

F#ck Sheri Redstone. She deserves all of it. Guarantee that South Park will single handedly scuttle the merger deal. It was so offensive lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol, CBS paramount got sued by Trump, they pad the bribe, fired Colbert.

Then, Paramount signed a $1.5B deal with SouthPark. First South Park episode aired last night and it was just an extended roast of Trump. Like, so bad.

This is going to be so fun.

F#ck Sheri Redstone. She deserves all of it. Guarantee that South Park will single handedly scuttle the merger deal. It was so offensive lol

And hilarious!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So while the orange clown has immunity, can a cbs shareholder bring a civil rico case against fcc chairman and cbs for participating in a rico shakedown of the company- pay trump a bribe, fire Colbert, now all the “free ads”….
Looks like a scheme to both monetarily shakedown the company and get free services by leveraging fcc approval. Sounds like a rico scheme to me.

When I see people suggest RICO, it generally means ignore the article and assume the writer doesn't know anything about the law.

+1, my experience also. The first person in a discussion to mention “RICO” is absolutely guaranteed to not understand what RICO is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So while the orange clown has immunity, can a cbs shareholder bring a civil rico case against fcc chairman and cbs for participating in a rico shakedown of the company- pay trump a bribe, fire Colbert, now all the “free ads”….
Looks like a scheme to both monetarily shakedown the company and get free services by leveraging fcc approval. Sounds like a rico scheme to me.

Was this an official act for which Trump would have immunity?

The lawsuit was brought in his personal capacity before he was President, so no.

Yep.

And to think, all this could’ve been avoided had CBS just practiced ethical, unbiased journalism in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So while the orange clown has immunity, can a cbs shareholder bring a civil rico case against fcc chairman and cbs for participating in a rico shakedown of the company- pay trump a bribe, fire Colbert, now all the “free ads”….
Looks like a scheme to both monetarily shakedown the company and get free services by leveraging fcc approval. Sounds like a rico scheme to me.

Was this an official act for which Trump would have immunity?

The lawsuit was brought in his personal capacity before he was President, so no.

Yep.

And to think, all this could’ve been avoided had CBS just practiced ethical, unbiased journalism in the first place.

Jesus Christ, Sixty Minutes could not be an hour long television program, which has run for fifty years, without editing. And they released the entire interview online. Are you also as spun up about Fox News editing Trump’s response regarding the Epstein files in their interview of him during the same campaign?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So while the orange clown has immunity, can a cbs shareholder bring a civil rico case against fcc chairman and cbs for participating in a rico shakedown of the company- pay trump a bribe, fire Colbert, now all the “free ads”….
Looks like a scheme to both monetarily shakedown the company and get free services by leveraging fcc approval. Sounds like a rico scheme to me.

I sincerely hope so.

[Anonymous]

It's worth thinking about, but the real question is whether we still have rule of law. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think we do. The Supreme Court has decided that we are now living in a dictatorship and the Congress has abdicated their leadership role as well.

[Anonymous]

Good grief, people.

Colbert was terminated because the show was losing millions. Millions of dollars. Millions of viewers. And, tons of advertisers.
This is what happens when your show becomes nothing more than a "Hate Trump" gripe session welcoming guests who only see eye-to-eye with the host.
It was not and is not funny, which is what it is advertised as - a late night COMEDY show.
Now, Colbert is playing the victim. I'm wondering if he will even make it to May 2026.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So while the orange clown has immunity, can a cbs shareholder bring a civil rico case against fcc chairman and cbs for participating in a rico shakedown of the company- pay trump a bribe, fire Colbert, now all the “free ads”….
Looks like a scheme to both monetarily shakedown the company and get free services by leveraging fcc approval. Sounds like a rico scheme to me.

Was this an official act for which Trump would have immunity?

The lawsuit was brought in his personal capacity before he was President, so no.

Yep.

And to think, all this could’ve been avoided had CBS just practiced ethical, unbiased journalism in the first place.

Jesus Christ, Sixty Minutes could not be an hour long television program, which has run for fifty years, without editing. And they released the entire interview online. Are you also as spun up about Fox News editing Trump’s response regarding the Epstein files in their interview of him during the same campaign?

Trump's editing didn't change anything.

[Anonymous]

All of late night is going to be gone soon.
Colbert was #1 in ratings but this rating would have been considered terrible 20 years ago.