FBI Director Kash Patel took an L on July 25 when a federal judge in Nevada dismissed his defamation lawsuit against blogger Jim Stewartson, wiping out a $250,000 default judgment Patel had won against him less than a year earlier. The ruling marks yet another courtroom blowback for the MAGA podcaster-turned-federal-law-enforcement chief, who’s been caught in a cycle of filing sweeping lawsuits he can’t seem to win.
Patel and his nonprofit, the Kash Foundation, sued Stewartson in June 2023 over posts on X and Substack calling Patel a “Kremlin asset” who helped plan the January 6 Capitol riot. Stewartson accused Patel of “sedition,” suggesting he had “helped ensure the Capitol was undefended” ahead of the Jan. 6 riot, and calling Patel a “blatantly incompetent chud” who should be in custody. For context: “chud” is a derogatory term popular in online circles for describing MAGA supporters. Patel originally sought $10 million in damages. Big swing. Bigger miss.
Here’s where it gets wild. Chief Judge Andrew Gordon entered a default judgment against him in August 2025, awarding Patel $200,000 and the foundation $50,000—because Stewartson initially didn’t respond to the lawsuit. Stewartson later moved to undo that judgment, arguing Patel’s team had never properly served him and that he had no meaningful ties to Nevada, where he doesn’t live. Gordon agreed. On the jurisdictional grounds that you can’t sue someone in a state where they don’t have “meaningful ties” just because you’re mad online—which, honestly, should be tattooed on the internet’s forehead.
Stewartson marked the win with a jab on X, saying he wanted to “commend the judge for including ‘googly-eyed Kremlin b—-‘ in his ruling,” pointing to a footnote where Gordon quoted one of Stewartson’s own posts about Patel. Stewartson wrote: “PSA: Now that my case is settled, you are free to refer to Kash Patel as a ‘chud,’ a ‘googly-eyed Kremlin b—h,’ and a ‘traitor’ without fear of legal repercussions! You’re welcome.” The internet ate that up. Deservedly.
But here’s the bigger picture: Patel isn’t slowing down with the legal aggression. Patel has filed six defamation lawsuits against journalists in just seven years. Patel recently filed a $250 million lawsuit against The Atlantic for reporting on his excessive drinking at work. That case is still pending. Patel has filed five defamation lawsuits against media organizations in recent years without prevailing, which means the pattern is clear: he’s using lawsuits as a sledgehammer against press freedom, not as a legitimate legal tool. It’s a SLAPPy move straight out of the Trump playbook—sue to intimidate, lose in court, repeat.
What makes this Stewartson victory especially poignant is that a federal judge was basically saying, “Yeah, those insults you hurled were spicy, but they’re protected speech, and Patel can’t bully you in a Nevada courtroom for saying them online.” The judge even quoted the insult in the ruling. That’s judicial shade.
Patel’s approach to libel law reads like someone who got too comfortable having his lawsuits taken seriously by partisan outlets. Real First Amendment protection doesn’t evaporate when you’re in power—it gets more important. Stewartson understood that. Patel apparently didn’t.
The 16BARS take: Kash Patel keeps losing these cases because using the courts as a SLAPP is not the same as having a real legal case. A judge literally quoted calling him a “googly-eyed Kremlin bitch” to dismiss him. That’s not just a loss—that’s a message. File away.
