The American Cable Association has called on the Justice Department to open an antitrust investigation into Comcast-NBCUniversal. It would be a way to keep Justice overseeing the company after the conditions it imposed on the merger expired earlier this year. ACA is saying the government still needs a leash on the company, rather than unleash. The ACA said the problems Justice saw in 2011 when it imposed the conditions are still problems.

Comcast-NBCU said the ACA's call is meritless and "constitutes an inappropriate attempt to gain leverage in the commercial marketplace."

But President Donald Trump, who is no fan of NBC News or most big media companies with news operations that have reported critically on him, took note of the ACA letter in a tweet:

[embed]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1062045654711713792[/embed]

ACA was not complaining about the additional spotlight, thanking the President for his input. A spokesman for the group said they did not know how the President became aware of the letter, though his Tweet came after it was reported by Multichannel News and others.

ACA wanted Justice to extend the conditions, but that didn't happen, though antitrust chief Makan Delrahim has signaled that one of the reasons he favors spin-offs over behavioral conditions like those put on the merger is that it is hard to enforce them. He also said Justice would keep an eye on the company now that the conditions have sunset. But ACA suggests it needs to do more than monitor to keep the company in line, plus monitoring alone may not be enough to protect the rivals who have information about the company's business practices that they want to share.

ACA also asked the FCC to toughen its program access rules given that the conditions were going away, but the FCC has not done so.

Related: ACA Says Deal Conditions Should Last Longer

ACA has long complained that large program suppliers force bundled carriage and impose unfair terms due to their size and market power on the smaller entities it represents.

"By opening a formal investigation, the DOJ will demonstrate seriousness of purpose and give it the ability to collect sufficient information to determine whether Comcast-NBC is acting anticompetitively," ACA said.

ACA's letter seeking the investigation was addressed to Delrahim and offered ACA's cooperation, including providing some info on Comcast-NBCU's business practices. ACA has long said the merged company has the incentive and opportunity, and willingness, to inflict anticompetitive harms given its size relative to the smaller cable and broadband operators ACA represents.

"NBCU has shown a willingness to harm rivals, even while being subject to the 2011 DOJ and FCC conditions," said ACA President Matt Polka. "In light of these concerns, which also have been expressed by members of Congress and a diverse array of stakeholders, the Antitrust Division should immediately open an investigation into the firm’s behavior."

"In 2011, the DOJ and FCC recognized that the combination of programming and distribution assets within Comcast-NBCU created such serious competitive problems that the transaction could only be approved with robust remedies. Since that time, as demonstrated herein, Comcast-NBCU’s dominant position in the market has not lessened, and in fact, it is even greater-and the 2011 remedies are no longer in effect. As a result, Comcast-NBCU is unleashed, and consumer and rivals are bound to suffer harm."

"The video programming and distribution markets are incredibly competitive," Comcast countered in a statement. "New programmers and distribution platforms are offering consumers increasing choices on what and where to watch. At Comcast NBCUniversal, we are competing in this dynamic environment the way we always have – by continuing to innovate and conducting our business in compliance with antitrust laws and other legal requirements. Among other things, Comcast Cable has brought Netflix and YouTube to our X1 platform. And NBCUniversal has provided content to Hulu, Netflix, and hundreds of other traditional and over-the-top providers."

One of Delrahim's big issues with the AT&T-Time Warner deal, which Justice sued to block because AT&T would not agree to spin-offs rather than behavioral conditions, is that he saw it as incentive and opportunity for that merged company to disadvantage over-the-top rivals by limiting their access to either the company's programming or distribution network.

Discovery Communications said the U.S. Department of Justice has completed its investigation of its pending merger with Scripps Networks Interactive.

Discovery agreed to purchase Scripps Networks in July in a deal valued at about $14.6 billion. The closing of the proposed transaction remains subject to completion of review in Ireland and other customary closing conditions, which are expected to be compelted ebfore the end of he first quarter.

“We are pleased to have passed this significant regulatory milestone on our path to acquire Scripps Networks Interactive,” Discovery Communications CEO David Zaslav said in a statement “The conclusion of the Department of Justice’s investigation is an integral step toward closing our transaction. We look forward to combining these two great companies to the benefit of our enthusiast audiences around the world.”

Until the close of the deal the companies will continue to operate as separate and independent entities.

AT&T chairman and CEO Randall Stephenson continued to hammer home that he would not sell key assets to facilitate regulatory approval of his pending deal to buy Time Warner, adding that if the agency rejects the merger, he’s ready to go to court.

“We would have to ask ourselves, is a negotiated settlement a better or worse outcome than if we litigate,” Stephenson said at the New York Times Dealbook conference Thursday. “If we feel like litigation is a better outcome, then we would litigate. If we can get a negotiated settlement, for time, and energy and money you would obviously go with a negotiated settlement.”

But he added that if the government wants to go to court, he hopes it will be soon.

“If we’re going to go to litigation, our preference would be sooner is better,” Stephenson said. “We’re prepared to litigate now.”

Stephenson seemed to chafe most at reports he had offered to sell news network CNN, the object of President Donald Trump’s unwavering consternation, to get the deal done. He added that he has not personally received any pressure from the government to sell the cable news network.

But while the emphasis has been on CNN, early reports on problems with approvals centered on DOJ requesting AT&T sell Turner Broadcasting, CNN’s parent, not just the network.

“Selling CNN makes no sense in the context of what we are trying accomplish,” Stephenson said. But when asked if he would sell DirecTV instead, he hedged a bit, adding that conversations with the DOJ are highly confidential.

“What gets discussed inside that room is highly privileged. I cannot go there,” he said. It’s so important that when you’re in these kind of negotiations with Justice, that they remain confidential because you can’t have open and candid conversations about a negotiated settlement if everything is leaking. What happens inside that room needs to stay inside that room.”

But later, he reiterated that he has no intention of selling any large assets to appease the DOJ.

“You shouldn’t expect us to sell something larger [than CNN],” Stephenson said, adding that pairing Time Warner's content with DirecTV's distribution is a key component of the deal. “It’s illogical. It’s why you did the deal. To suggest selling some of the key franchises makes no sense.”

Reports have suggested that President Trump is pressuring the DOJ to force a sale or spin-off of CNN, a network that he has repeatedly called “fake news.” At the Dealbook conference, CNN’s Reliable Sources host Brian Stelter asked Stephenson from the audience if he had any reason to believe that the problems the deal is facing at the DOJ are being caused by the President’s interference.

“I have no reason to believe that,” Stephenson said. “My only interaction with anybody in the federal government on this deal, has been with the Department of Justice.”  

Time Warner Inc. shares took a nosedive Thursday after the Wall Street Journal reported that the U.S. Dept. of Justice is considering filing a lawsuit to block the content company’s planned merger with AT&T.

Time Warner shares were down more than $6 each (6.2%) to $92.31 per share in early trading Thursday as reports surfaced that the deal, expected to be closed by the end of the year, may encounter a hiccup. The shares closed at $94.70 each, down 3.75% or $3.69 per share.

AT&T announced the deal in October 2016, a $108.7 billion (including assumed debt) pairing that would combine the largest pay TV distributor in the country with the second largest content creator. Time Warner owns the Warner Bros. movie studios and iconic networks like HBO, TBS, Cartoon Network and CNN.

While President Trump had said during his election campaign that he would block the deal, mainly because of what he believed was CNN’s harsh treatment of him, most in the cable business expected the deal to be approved with few or no conditions. AT&T executives have said in the past that because the two companies don’t compete, there is little reason to consider the deal to be anti-competitive.

Related > Analysis: DOJ's New Antitrust Chief Keeping AT&T-Time Warner Options Open

“When the DOJ reviews any transaction, it is common and expected for both sides to prepare for all possible scenarios," AT&T said in a statement. "For over 40 years, vertical mergers like this one have always been approved because they benefit consumers without removing any competitors from the market.  While we won't comment on our discussions with DOJ, we see no reason in the law or the facts why this transaction should be an exception.” 

According to a report in the Journal, DOJ is considering filing a suit in the case that it decides to block the merger. The Journal also said there is another faction within the agency that is working with the companies to approving the deal, but with conditions, but those two sides are not close to a compromise.

The Journal added that it is common in deals of this nature for the DOJ to be working on two separate tracks, and stated that in recent years the agency has placed an emphasis on preparing for litigation in case talks break down.

If the DOJ decided to block the deal, it would have to present its case to a judge and prove that the union would harm competition.

AT&T shares were relatively unscathed in early trading, down 5 cents each (0.2%) to $33.50 each.      

AT&T said it has extended the termination deadline for its planned $108.7 billion purchase of Time Warner Inc. for a “short period” as the deal continues to wind its way through the federal approval process.

AT&T proposed purchasing Time Warner on Oct. 22, 2016, a deal that would combine the largest pay TV distributor in the country with the second largest content producer. At that announcement, the companies anticipated the regulatory approval process would last about one year.

The deal is still being scrutinized by the U.S. Dept. of Justice, but so far the agency has not rendered a decision.

In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission Monday, AT&T said it has extended the termination date for the merger for a “short period of time to facilitate obtaining final regulatory approval required to close the merger.”

According to the original deal documents, either party could terminate the transaction if it did not receive the necessary approvals by Oct. 22, 2017, or in the case of specia extensions, by April 22, 2018.

AT&T anticipates it will receive U.S. approval for the deal by the end of this year.

The company added in a separate statement that it has receved its final approval outside of the U.S., from Brazilian anti-trust authority Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica (CADE).

"We appreciate the hard work by CADE to review and evaluate the AT&T-Time Warner merger and approve it based on its benefits to Brazilian consumers," said AT&T senior executive vice president and general counsel David McAtee in a statement.

The approval was made with targeted conditions to address specific issues, but similar to earlier nods the transaction has received from authorities in Chile ad Mexico, the approval does not require AT&T or Time Warner to divest of any assets.

The U.S. Department of Justice is nearing a settlement with AT&T regarding a suit the agency filed last year alleging executives at the telecom giant's DirecTV unit colluded with other operators to block carriage of Charter Communication’s Los Angeles Dodgers regional sports network.

According to the Los Angeles Times, which first reported the settlement talks, the deal would not require DirecTV or its parent AT&T to carry the RSN, dubbed SportsNet LA.

In court papers filed March 8, DOJ attorneys filed a motion in support of DirecTV’s request for a continuance for a hearing to dismiss the case, stating that both sides have “engaged in productive settlement talks.”

“The requested continuance will permit the parties to engage in further settlement discussions in the hope of resolving the dispute,” the motion stated. That hearing is scheduled for March 27.

The Dodgers network was launched in 2014 by Time Warner Cable and faced immediate opposition from distributors who said the channel was too pricey. Time Warner Cable – which was purchased by Charter Communications in May – had reportedly paid the team $7 billion-to $8 billion for the rights to carry games for 25 years and guaranteed the monthly subscriber license fee, even if other distributors refused to carry the channel.

The Dodgers, which own the network that is managed by TWC, reportedly were charging $5 per month per subscriber for the channel, making it one of the priciest RSNs in the country. To date, only Charter is carrying the network.

The Justice Dept. sued DirecTV in November, alleging that the satellite carrier (which was purchased by AT&T in July 2015) had colluded with other distributors to not carry the channel. The suit singled out DirecTV vice president of programming Dan York and then-DirecTV CEO Mike White as sharing sensitive pricing information concerning the network with other distributors and agreeing not to cherry-pick customers from rivals.