Jerry Falwell Jr. to get $15 million payout after Liberty University sex scandal
Falwell took over as president following the 2007 death of his father Jerry Falwell Sr., a massively influential figure within America's modern right-wing Christian movement who founded the university in 1971.
Falwell Jr. resigned in 2020, and a settlement was announced in 2024, but the terms were not disclosed.
But recently filed tax documents reveal the university is paying Falwell more than $15 million to 'settle certain claims and close certain transactions.' USA Today first reported the disclosures.
Falwell has also agreed to pay the university $440,000 to settle 'disputed expenses' with the university. The filings did not include details of the payments.
In total, Falwell is set to receive roughly $5.5 million to settle the lawsuits along with $9.7 million as part of his retirement package, according to tax filings.
The Independent has requested comment from Liberty.
Falwell told USA Today that he was 'very pleased with the outcome of the settlement negotiations and with the final settlement.'
In its 2024 statement, the university said it had reached a 'global resolution agreement' with its Board of Trustees 'settling all outstanding disputes on both legal and personal matters' with Falwell.
'This agreement is grounded in a firm commitment to protecting and preserving Liberty's original mission of developing Christ-centered men and women with the values, knowledge, and skills essential to impact the world,' according to the statement.
Falwell took over the university in 2007 after the death of his father, the Rev. Jerry Falwell Sr., who founded the college. Thirteen years later, Falwell – who shook the evangelical Christian and Republican establishments with his 2016 endorsement of then-candidate Donald Trump — was placed on indefinite leave in August 2020 after posting, then deleting, a provocative Instagram photo in which he wraps his arm around a woman while they both have their pants unbuttoned, revealing their bare midriffs.
The university announced his resignation a few weeks later, following the publication of allegations that Falwell and his wife had engaged in a years-long sexual relationship with another man.
In a lengthy statement at the time, Falwell claimed that the man had tried to blackmail the family and accused him of threatening to reveal the relationship "to deliberately embarrass my wife, family, and Liberty University unless we agreed to pay him substantial monies."
'Over the course of the last few months this person's behavior has reached a level that we have decided the only way to stop this predatory behavior is to go public,' he said at the time.
Giancarlo Granda, who shared messages with Reuters as part of the outlet's investigation into his relationship with the couple, denied the allegations against him.
Granda said he was in his early 20s when he first met Falwell and his wife Becki while working as a pool attendant at a Florida hotel. He reportedly began a sexual relationship with Becki Falwell in 2012, which continued through 2018, during which Falwell would watch, according to Reuters.
The Falwells had meanwhile financed a Miami beach hostel, in which Granda also had invested, according to Reuters. The Falwells filed a lawsuit over its ownership in 2015, which was dismissed, and they refiled in 2017.
Reuters and The New York Times also reported in 2019 that in 2015, Falwell sought Trump's attorney Michael Cohen — who at the time had arranged for hush-money payments on the president's behalf to pay for the silence of women who alleged affairs with the president — to get rid of photos that Cohen allegedly claimed should be kept 'between husband and wife.'
After leaving the university, Liberty launched an investigation into his alleged conduct and a wave of litigation followed. Falwell sued for defamation, but the complaint was dropped. Liberty then sued Falwell in 2021 alleging breach of contract, and in 2023, Falwell filed a lawsuit over his retirement package and another against the use of his father's image.
Those claims were dropped by July 2024, when the university announced a settlement was reached.
The settlement 'is based on a mutual understanding regarding the amount Liberty University will pay its former president in authorized retirement and severance under the various disputed agreements' as well as 'the conditions under which the university will make use of Dr. Jerry Falwell, Sr.'s name, image, and likeness,' Liberty said at the time.
Falwell, university and its board 'sincerely regret the lengthy and painful litigation process, and each take responsibility for their part in the disputes,' according to the statement.
'Falwell acknowledges and apologizes for the errors in judgement and mistakes made during his time of leadership,' the statement aThe Board of Trustees acknowledge and apologize for the errors and mistakes made on their part as well. The Trustees and Falwell are committed to move forward in a spirit of forgiveness and with the hope of reconciliation in a Christ honoring manner.'
The university and its board promised no further statements on the settlement.
That same year, President Joe Biden's administration sought $16 million from the university following allegations that students were afraid to report sexual abuse, which included a $14 million fine and $2 million pledge from the university 'for on-campus safety improvements and compliance enhancements.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
14 minutes ago
- Reuters
India confident of meeting oil needs despite potential sanctions on Russian imports, minister says
July 17 (Reuters) - India is confident of meeting its oil needs from alternative sources if Russian supplies are hit by secondary sanctions, oil minister Hardeep Singh Puri said on Thursday. Earlier this week, U.S. President Donald Trump warned that countries purchasing Russian exports could face sanctions if Moscow fails to reach a peace agreement with Ukraine within 50 days.
Reuters
14 minutes ago
- Reuters
Whatever happened to tax simplification?
NEW YORK, July 17 (Reuters) - Once upon a time, the idea of simplifying the federal tax code enjoyed widespread bipartisan political support. Times have changed in this regard, and not for the better. That's bad news, and not just because of the headaches it causes taxpayers each April. Conservatives and liberals in the U.S. argue about many aspects of the tax code, but reducing complexity usually is not one of them. According to the Brookings Institution, 'The notion that taxes should be simpler is one of the very few propositions in tax policy that generates universal agreement.' The center-left think tank lists several benefits of simpler taxes, including reducing the expense, time, and mental anguish involved in complying with the U.S. tax system. To help quantify that, the Tax Foundation estimates that U.S. taxpayers in 2024 will spend more than 7.9 billion hours filing their taxes at an estimated annual cost of $413 billion, based on average hourly compensation, using projections by the Internal Revenue Service and Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. For context, total U.S. consumer expenditures on medicine, including prescription drugs, were roughly $450 billion in 2023, according to the National Health Expenditure Accounts of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. All those hours and dollars represent significant deadweight loss, or reduced economic efficiency resulting from a suboptimal use of resources, a drag on America's potential growth. Former Republican President Ronald Reagan made tax simplification the central focus of his second presidential term's domestic policy agenda. At the time, discussions of tax reform were influenced by the concept of a flat tax, i.e., a single rate that would replace the existing system involving several income-based brackets. The legislation that eventually emerged from Reagan's efforts, the Tax Reform Act of 1986, did not go that far, but it did reduce the number of brackets. The law, which was passed with the vital support of Democratic Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill, also eliminated several itemized deductions while increasing the standard deduction. Based on economic theory, this should have reduced deadweight loss, as taxpayers who elect the standard deduction spend much less time filing their returns, or, in the case of those hiring professionals, much less money, compared to those who itemize. Another positive effect of this tax reform was curtailing the use of abusive tax shelters that steered capital away from its most productive uses within the economy. The law reduced the abusive tax shelters' appeal by limiting several deductions, credits, and exclusions. Tax simplification remained part of the political discussion in the following decades. Flat tax proposals were put forth by presidential contenders Jerry Brown, a Democrat, in 1992, and Steve Forbes, a Republican, in 1996. In fact, simplification was a prominent part of the agenda as recently as 2017, when Congress enacted, and President Donald Trump signed, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The Tax Foundation reports that this legislation's near doubling of the standard deduction caused the percentage of tax returns claiming itemized deductions to plummet from 30.6% in 2017 to 11.4% in 2018. This brings us to the recently enacted One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The legislation's ungainly name should be a signal that it was not designed with simplification in mind. Consider, for example, the new law's elimination of tax on tips and overtime. A worker deriving income from either of those sources will now pay less tax than someone earning the equivalent amount solely in the form of salary. In effect, OBBBA has created new tax brackets. To be fair, OBBBA did further increase the standard deduction. It also made permanent the termination of most miscellaneous itemized deductions and established a new limit on all itemized deductions. At the same time, however, the legislation created many new wrinkles in the tax code. For instance, it granted one particular exemption to fishers from villages in western Alaska. The act also increased the previous $10,000 deduction for certain Alaskan whaling captains to $50,000. Those features, likely included in the bill to win the support of Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski, were by no means OBBBA's only special-interest provisions. Farmers, who notoriously enjoy overrepresentation in Congress thanks to the Constitution's allocation of two senators to both the most populous and least populous states, won the unique right to pay capital gains taxes on the sale of farmland on an installment plan. That's not all. Interest on loans secured by agricultural real estate will now be partly excluded from taxation. OBBBA also increased the existing rebate on rum produced in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. If tax simplification can reduce economic inefficiency and potentially garner bipartisan support, then why is it no longer a prominent objective of tax reform? This may partly be because certain tax preferences aimed at achieving social objectives – such as those associated with Social Security – enjoy voter support across a broad ideological spectrum. The rise of economic populism on both sides of the aisle has also likely made anything as extreme as a flat tax a nonstarter. However, tax complexity could be reduced substantially without something as dramatic as eliminating progressive taxation or doing away with the most popular exemptions. For starters, this could include consolidating related tax incentives and eliminating sunset provisions, or expiration dates, for some OBBBA innovations. While we cannot know when or if politicians will resume the fight for tax simplification, what we can assume with some certainty is that groups from all political persuasions will keep pushing for special preferences, making the economy less efficient along the way. (The views expressed here are those of Marty Fridson, the publisher of Income Securities Advisor., opens new tab He is a past governor of the CFA Institute, consultant to the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, and Special Assistant to the Director for Deferred Compensation, Office of Management and the Budget, The City of New York). Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI),, opens new tab your essential new source for global financial commentary. ROI delivers thought-provoking, data-driven analysis of everything from swap rates to soybeans. Markets are moving faster than ever. ROI,, opens new tab can help you keep up. Follow ROI on LinkedIn,, opens new tab and X., opens new tab
Telegraph
14 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The extraordinary story of the foreign volunteers fighting for Ukraine
Russia's war against Ukraine is one of the most documented in human history. And yet, often the experience of soldiers on the frontline is the least mentioned aspect of its story, with most books focusing either on broad battle histories or the experience of civilians. Former Telegraph chief foreign correspondent Colin Freeman's excellent new book, The Mad and the Brave, remedies this imbalance from a unique angle: it's a historical account of Russia's invasion, told from the perspective of a rag-tag group of overseas volunteers. Most came to Ukraine following Volodymyr Zelensky 's impassioned call for foreign fighters, three days into the full-scale invasion. In those early weeks and months, thousands of men (and a smaller number of women) – from the UK, the USA, the Baltic States, Australia, South America and everywhere else imaginable – packed their bags and joined the queues of aid trucks loaded with nappies, hand sanitiser and drones, all making their way to Ukraine. Arriving with the intention to fight alongside Ukrainians, this small cast was and is part of a much bigger movement; one on a scale unseen since the Spanish Civil War. Rumour has it, Freeman reveals, that Zelensky issued this call without taking advice from anyone else in his government, not even his military chiefs – who lacked both the capacity to train this concentration of foreign troops; and, frankly, the need for them, given the sheer quantity of Ukrainian volunteers. The success of the strategy is still in question: Freeman quotes the Danish Institute for International Studies, who stated, rather diplomatically, that 'it remains unclear if the strategic benefits of such recruitment efforts ever came to outweigh the costs.' Throughout the book, Freeman pulls no punches in describing the various shortcomings of the Ukraine Foreign Legion (a catch-all term here to describe all foreign fighters in Ukraine); even once the least competent of the would-be legionnaires had been weeded out by spring 2022, the group that remained was beset with corruption, in-fighting and incompetence. At least one legionnaire, he tells us, has died at the hand of one of his comrades. Yet, despite this uncertainty, the individual stories of heroism still clearly deserve to be told. This is Freeman's focus, but his overarching tale is not one of conventional heroes: yes, there are a few members who have previously fought alongside the Kurds in Syria against Isis, but there are also adrenaline junkies and depressives fleeing failing marriages. One legionnaire, Stephen Wilson, is described as being 'dressed for the barracks, built for the bar'. Another, Douglas Cartner, made the decision to fight based on a random shuffle of his Spotify playlist – when 'Seven Nation Army' came on, he knew it was a sign. Not all of the legionnaires turned up at the start of the full-scale invasion. British military medic John Harding, for example, moved to Ukraine in 2018 after a stint fighting Isis in Syria. He joined the infamous Azov Battalion, at the time based in a mansion seized from the deposed Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych, in the port city of Mariupol. Given Azov's reputation as far-Right and neo-Nazi, Harding – a bisexual socialist from Sunderland – may have seemed a strange addition to their ranks; but Harding found that, in reality, the extremism was minimal. His reasons for staying in Mariupol – aside from a fear of arrest in the UK, as a result of his time fighting Isis with the Kurds – included a love for the cultural life of the port city, its opera and the ease with which he could access a decent glass of red wine. Nonetheless, by early 2022, aged 60, he decided that it was time to retire back home. On the morning of February 24, his bags were packed when his Ukrainian roommates woke him: the Russians had just crossed the border. What followed was one of the bloodiest and most brutal sieges of the 21st century. Thousands of civilians and soldiers were killed by Russia's indiscriminate flattening of the city. Harding spent months in Azovstal Plant, several storeys underground, and Freeman describes these episodes with blunt honesty: Harding holds his injured comrades down whilst they have limbs removed without anaesthetic ('We're going to cut your leg off, mate, it's going to f------ hurt.') Then, that spring, all the soldiers in the Azovstal plant were ordered to surrender to Russian captivity. Harding subsequently endured months of torture before being exchanged in a prisoner swap, brokered by Saudi Arabia. In his introduction, Freeman notes that since most of us are lucky enough never to experience the horrors described by the legionnaires, the vocabulary to describe them is sparse. This may be true, but Freeman nonetheless succeeds with a careful balance of sensitivity and honesty, as well as a dash of dark humour. This is particularly striking in the case of one of Harding's cellmates, Alex Drueke, a US army veteran who came to serve in Ukraine as a 'kill-or-cure' for the PTSD he'd suffered in Iraq. While held in a Russian-run prison, he's told 'We are going to kill you' by an official; later, it transpires that said official is his defence lawyer. And then there's Drueke's friend, the prison handyman Artyom, in whom, 'if one overlooked his cadaverous face, faded Nazi tattoos, and rotten, curiously misshapen teeth, there were positive qualities to be found.' These positive qualities – mostly the fact that Artyom was not directly involved in the prisoners' torture – are somewhat undermined when Drueke finds out that, several years previously, Artyom murdered and ate three people. There are more conventionally heroic stories, though, and one of the most powerful is that of the Briton Christopher Perryman. After having joined the army at 16, Perryman went on to serve in Iraq, Somalia and Bosnia. By 2022, however, he was working as a security guard for an HS2 building site. After watching the tanks roll into Kyiv on the news that February, Perryman took a week to consider his next steps. With a young son at home, the decision to go and fight in somebody else's war was not an easy one. But, he reasoned, with so many Ukrainian fathers having to make the same decision, most of them without a shred of the military experience he had accrued, Perryman decided that he really had no choice but to put that experience to good use. Once in Ukraine, he served in several different units, amassing a large social media following thanks to his running commentary on the war, posted directly from the frontlines. In the autumn of 2023, he was sent on a mission to Snake Island, a small patch of rocky land off the coast of Odesa, which became famous early in the war when Ukrainians stationed there refused to surrender to Russian troops, telling them to 'go f---' themselves. Perryman was killed by an artillery strike not long afterwards. Several of these men were killed, others returned home and began the process of dealing with their PTSD, and some remain in Ukraine. In 2021, few of this book's heroes would have been worthy of the title. Freeman's work here, however, proves that they undoubtedly now are. And yet ultimately – as Freeman himself notes – whether these heroes came to escape failing marriages or to seek one last adrenaline hit, 'the war didn't really care why people came to fight, only that they did so.' Ada Wordsworth is director of KHARPP, a charity providing aid in Ukraine. The Mad and the Brave: The Extraordinary Story of Ukraine's Volunteer Fighting Force is published by Mudlark at £22.00. To order your copy for £18.99, call 0330 173 0523 or visit Telegraph Books
