this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2026
241 points (99.6% liked)

politics

29778 readers
2106 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Kash Patel has filed a lawsuit over a profile piece. But, by suing, the FBI director only brings more light to allegations about his behaviors and risks future embarrassment

FBI Director Kash Patel's $250 million defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic did little to dampen the disturbing allegations in what he calls its "hit piece" against him — and instead sparked a firestorm of broadsides from his critics.

Patel's federal court filing - which included a plethora of typos - summarized the report's nearly 2,200 words of somewhat dense prose into a concise list of 17 easy-to-read sentences about the damning information provided by more than two dozen anonymous sources, some of them current and former FBI officials or staffers at law-enforcement and intelligence agencies.

The allegations cited include that Patel "is known to drink to the point of obvious intoxication, in many cases at the private club Ned’s in Washington, D.C., while in the presence of White House and other administration staff," that he's "also known to drink to excess at the Poodle Room in Las Vegas, where he frequently spends parts of his weekends" and that "members of his security detail had difficulty waking Patel because he was seemingly intoxicated" multiple times over the past year.

top 41 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] etherphon@piefed.world 47 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

This guy seems cooked, did they tell him to sue so this would happen, directly under the bus? This idiot seems like one of the guys who would go out and spend a bunch of money after a big bank robbery.

[–] homes@piefed.world 41 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

This is a guy who would live stream the bank robbery

[–] Hideakikarate@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 weeks ago

"20 subs and I jump up on the counter and fire wildly into the air"

[–] etherphon@piefed.world 3 points 3 weeks ago
[–] UnspecificGravity@piefed.social 5 points 3 weeks ago

His dumb filing even confirms half of the claim that The Atlantic made in its article, which he would deny in a presser like 2 hour later.

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Daddy Trump gets to sue anyone he wants and gets paid off, Pattel is expecting to be able to do the same

[–] etherphon@piefed.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

It's a bold strategy, cotton let's see how it works out for him.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 31 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Patel's federal court filing - which included a plethora of typos - summarized the report's nearly 2,200 words of somewhat dense prose into a concise list of 17 easy-to-read sentences about the damning information provided by more than two dozen anonymous sources, some of them current and former FBI officials or staffers at law-enforcement and intelligence agencies.

They should make some kind of computer program that could find misspelled words and alert you to them. Of course, if you were shitfaced and on ambien it might not work anyway.

[–] GalacticSushi@piefed.blahaj.zone 16 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

In his most prolific writing era, Stephen King would wake up, chug a bottle of NyQuil, snort a fat line of coke, and write and drink the rest of the day (peppering in some additional drug use throughout the day, of course). He doesn't even remember writing entire books but they came out in a coherent form. It's almost like even if the magic spell checking software doesn't work, you can just hire a sober editor to make check your work.

[–] UnspecificGravity@piefed.social 6 points 3 weeks ago

Kinda amazingly, the work he has absolutely no memory of writing was Cujo, which was written before he purchases a word processor and was therefore written entirely on a typewriter.

[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

magic spell checking software

My brain immediately went to Clippy popping out of a wand and saying “It looks like you are trying to cast a spell, do you need help with that?”

[–] CannedYeet@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Trying to cast aspell

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

Newsweek also made a point of finding a series of spelling errors in the filing: "feable" instead of "feeble," "politices" instead of "policies" and "dicussed" instead of "discussed." 

"The presence of simple typos in the complaint does not undermine its legal claims, but it does stand out in a filing that centers on alleged journalistic negligence," the magazine said. "Court filings are typically reviewed by multiple attorneys before submission, making such errors notable — particularly in a high‑profile case involving the director of the FBI and one of the country’s most-prominent magazines."

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 20 points 3 weeks ago

Only the best... the best drunks, fraudsters, rapists, dead beats... the best

[–] lividweasel@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

That Director Patel “recently expressed frustration with the look of FBI merchandise, complaining that it isn’t intimidating enough.”

🤦‍♂️

[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago

The FBI sells merchandise?

[–] kmartburrito@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago
[–] stoly@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I always find it amazing how the more insecure/narcissistic types out there seem to be incapable of learning the Streisand Effect.

[–] SparroHawc@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

They're too used to being able to get whatever they want by whining and threatening loud enough.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

a concise list of 17 easy-to-read sentences

It would be nice to actually see those sentences. But, I can't even find this filing that apparently contains those 17 bullet points.

[–] anon6789@lemmy.world 19 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Full Complaint

  1. The Article included numerous false and defamatory statements of fact concerning Director Patel, including but not limited to:

a. That Director Patel “is known to drink to the point of obvious intoxication, in many cases at the private club Ned’s in Washington, D.C., while in the presence of White House and other administration staff.”

b. That Director Patel “is also known to drink to excess at the Poodle Room in Las Vegas, where he frequently spends parts of his weekends.”

c. That “[e]arly in his tenure, meetings and briefings had to be rescheduled for later in the day as a result of his alcohol-fueled nights.”

d. That “[o]n multiple occasions in the past year, members of his security detail had difficulty waking Patel because he was seemingly intoxicated, according to information supplied to Justice Department and White House officials.”

e. That “[a] request for ‘breaching equipment’—normally used by SWAT and hostage-rescue teams to quickly gain entry into buildings—was made last year because Patel had been unreachable behind locked doors.”

f. That Director Patel’s alleged alcohol consumption has negatively impacted various law-enforcement investigations, including the Charlie Kirk murder investigation.

g. That Director Patel “recently expressed frustration with the look of FBI merchandise, complaining that it isn’t intimidating enough.” h. That on April 10, 2026, Director Patel “panicked, frantically calling aides and allies to announce that he had been fired by the White House,” and that his behavior was a “freak-out.”

i. That Director Patel is “often away or unreachable, delaying time-sensitive decisions needed to advance investigations,” and that on several occasions, Director Patel’s “delays resulted in normally unflappable agents ‘losing their shit.’”

j. That Director Patel’s “drinking has been a recurring source of concern across the government.”

k. The false implication that Director Patel violated DOJ’s ethics rules prohibiting “habitually using alcohol or other intoxicants to excess.”

l. That Director Patel has used his position to improperly “target political or personal adversaries of the president.”

m. The false implication that Director Patel abuses alcohol, thereby making him vulnerable to exploitation or coercion by foreign adversaries.

n. The false implication that this alleged alcohol abuse “has become a threat to public safety,” including in the context of “a domestic terrorist attack,” and constitutes a national-security vulnerability.

o. That Director Patel “is deeply concerned that his job is in jeopardy.”

p. That Director Patel has had a problem with “unexplained absences,” and “spotty attendance at the office,” thereby falsely implying that Director Patel has been derelict in his duties.

q. That Director Patel left the country vulnerable because “Days before the United States launched its war with Iran, Patel fired members of a counterintelligence squad that was devoted, in part, to Iran."

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

That's excellent. A perfect summary of his (alleged) flaws. Where did you find the original?

[–] anon6789@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I tried skimming some other article on him filing to see if anyone else linked it, but they did not. Then I tried "kash patel court filing pdf" and after a few sites I found the site I shared that seems to be an insider law news site and they had it.

AboveTheLaw.com

Kash Patel’s $250 Million Defamation Lawsuit Looks Better With Beer Goggles

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Nice. I searched for similar things but didn't include "pdf", so that must have helped.

[–] anon6789@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Yup, that's what did the trick. A lot of legal things I try to hunt embed the pdf, so I tried that, and I think the link was the 5th search result.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 weeks ago

Thanks again for finding it.

[–] Grass@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 weeks ago

for point m I don't think any one in the current US government needs alcohol for that to be a concern

[–] TryingToBeGood@reddthat.com 8 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

NPR was talking about the DOJ suit against the SPLC, and they played a clip of Patel ranting about paid informants or some such sh*t and I just burst out laughing. This man has no credibility anymore.

[–] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago

When exactly did he have ANY?

[–] UnspecificGravity@piefed.social 5 points 3 weeks ago

Hilariously, his own filing confirmed that his email access had been turned off, which was the predicating incident cited by the Atlantic article and also something that Kash himself would deny at a presser later despite it appearing in his own filing.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

He's probably too drunk to look up "Streisand Effect".

He'll withdraw it the second he has to be depositioned. Networks should countersue immediately to keep it rolling.

[–] artyom@piefed.social 2 points 3 weeks ago

Seriously. The Atlantic is probably grateful for the opportunity to continue making headlines about it.

[–] WesternInfidels@feddit.online 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I guess the lawsuit claims are always fiction, aren't they? Still, I'm trying to conjure up the imaginary fairy-tale future where Patel could have earned US$250 million if only the darn meany newspapers hadn't laughed at him. I'm not coming up with a lot.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

US civil law is a joke. anyone can start a suit for any number.

Most countries don't allow this and have loser pays laws.

[–] artyom@piefed.social 1 points 3 weeks ago

I mean I don't know anything about those other countries but it seems like that would dissuade people from filing legitimate complaints. Similar to "false rape" laws that might dissuade victims from pressing charges against an abuser for fear of retribution.

In the US you can simply counter sue for legal fees and time. Many contracts also include a "loser pays" clause.

[–] j4k3@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I don't think Trump is capable of real management of any kind. I believe his reigns are, "did they word fuck my godhood", and "did the news I watched seem credibly embarrassing enough that I wish to deny they ever word fucked me". With the added corrupting caveat of, "how many word fuck whores are currently ready to slut into the position".

If I told you the country was run by Fox, I don't think it could be disproved. How else do you reconcile recruiting their news anchors. He is the holotype of why the nepotism of gross inherited wealth is a terminal cancer. Pass on as many upper middle class trust funds for life as you would like, but no other wealth is transferrable in any way. Foreign held funds by the deceased are a crime of sedition, and forfeiture of citizenship. That does not cause collapse, filters every problem name you know now if it had existed, and will eventually fix the real problem. Japan already has this in place. Intelligence is not hereditary in humans, but wealth is. This is the succession crisis of monarchy, at a new stage where the elite of the Royal court have the same power and influence as the age of monarchies, and we have the same problem again. •»ÀīÙ¬§¬¶¬×

The country IS run by Fox. Most of Trump's talking points are things he heard on Fox the night before.

[–] MeatPilot@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago
[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

In a way, I can understand him. Or can you expect him to stand Trump and stay sober?

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Bet he's fired within 30 days.

[–] quick_snail@feddit.nl 2 points 3 weeks ago

I don't think you understand why he was hired. It was for this exact purpose..