As promised, FBI Director Kash Patel has filed a civil complaint for defamation against The Atlantic and its journalist Sarah Fitzpatrick in the U.S. District Court of D.C. Fitzpatrick, in conjunction with The Atlantic, published an anonymously-sourced, fact-devoid hit piece on Patel on Friday.
Defamatory speech is not free speech, and it is an honor to represent Kash Patel in this lawsuit seeking accountability for The Atlantic article's malicious falsehoods.https://t.co/Ju0fgf6wPU
— Jesse R. Binnall (@jbinnall) April 20, 2026
From the 19-page complaint:
Kashyap P. Patel, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, brings this lawsuit to hold Defendants The Atlantic Monthly Group LLC and its staff writer, Sarah Fitzpatrick, accountable for a sweeping, malicious, and defamatory hit piece published on April 17, 2026. Defendants are of course free to criticize the leadership of the FBI, but they crossed the legal line by publishing an article replete with false and obviously fabricated allegations designed to destroy Director Patel’s reputation and drive him from office. Indeed, Fitzpatrick could not get a single person to go on the record in defense of these outrageous allegations, instead relying entirely on anonymous sources she knew to be both highly partisan with an ax to grind and also not in a position to know the facts. Defendants published the Article with actual malice, despite being expressly warned, hours before publication, that the central allegations were categorically false; despite having abundant publicly available information contradicting those allegations; despite obvious and fatal defects in their own sourcing; despite The Atlantic’s well-documented, long-running editorial animus toward Director Patel; despite a request for additional time to respond that Defendants refused to honor; and despite deliberately structuring the pre-publication process to avoid receiving information that would refute their narrative. Defendants cannot evade responsibility for their malicious lies by hiding behind sham sources.
Patel is demanding $250 million in compensatory, special, and punitive damages.
As RedState reported, The Atlantic gave the FBI Office of Public Affairs two hours' notice that it would publish its purported "bombshell" article alleging that Patel was in fear of being fired, drank excessively, and that Patel's behavior and lapses in judgment were a threat to national security. Litigator Jesse R. Binnall, who also filed the lawsuit against The Atlantic and Fitzpatrick, wrote a detailed letter to Fitzpatrick and the publication to warn them that if they proceeded to publish the article without the requested corrections, they would be subject to a lawsuit.
As my colleague Brad Slager reported, despite this clear signal to slow their roll, Fitzgerald blithely went on MS NOW's "The Briefing" with Jenn Psaki and said, "I stand by every word of this reporting. We have excellent attorneys."
Read More: Another Day, Another Journalist Steps on a Rake in an Attempt to Take Out FBI Director Kash Patel
The Atlantic’s Kash Patel Hit Piece Is Backfiring - Badly
Now Fitzpatrick gets to defend her work in deposition or on the witness stand, depending on how far The Atlantic wants this to go. The publication issued a blanket double-down, stating they stood by their journalist and her trash reporting.
Statement from The Atlantic: pic.twitter.com/ZoIldjSbzl
— The Atlantic Communications (@TheAtlanticPR) April 20, 2026
Statement from The Atlantic:
"We stand by our reporting on Kash Patel, and we will vigorously defend The Atlantic and our journalists against this meritless lawsuit."
Star News media mogul Michael Patrick Leahy and Tennessee Star lead reporter Tom Pappert discussed Patel's lawsuit on Leahy's radio show on Monday, and asserted that Patel "meets the high legal threshold required for public figures to prevail."
Leahy and Pappert honed in on The Atlantic's ambush-style request for comment, which, RedState also affirmed, is outside the realm of journalistic standards.
“It is completely absurd to give the FBI director less than two hours to respond to the Atlantic’s 10,000-word magazine article,” Pappert said, noting how the typical rule of thumb is giving parties 24 hours to respond to media requests for comment.
Because Patel is a public figure, his case hinges on the standard established in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, which requires proof of “actual malice” – that false statements were published knowingly or with reckless disregard for the truth.
Leahy argued that the standard may be met in this case.
“I think Kash Patel has a very strong case here for defamation. It requires a false and defamatory statement of fact, not pure opinion, publication to a third party. They have actual malice, which includes reckless disregard for the truth,” he said.
When it comes to President Donald Trump and his administration, if "Malice" were a cereal, then it seems The Atlantic pours milk on it and gobbles it down daily. From The Atlantic's "Signalgate" scandal that wasn't, to the "suckers and losers," lie they peddled during the first Trump administration, this publication regularly traffics in antipathy toward Trump and anyone connected to him, actual facts be damned.
Editor’s Note: The mainstream media isn't interested in the facts; they're only interested in attacking the president. Help us continue to get to the bottom of the massive blue-state fraud epidemic by supporting our truth-seeking journalism today.
Join RedState's VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member