FBI Director Kash Patel wins $250,000 defamation case

FBI Director Kash Patel just landed a legal haymaker against a blogger who thought wild accusations were a substitute for facts. Patel, alongside his Kash Foundation, won a hefty $250,000 in damages in a defamation lawsuit against Substack podcaster Jim Stewartson. This isn’t just a courtroom win; it’s a signal that reckless smear campaigns have a price.

CNBC reported that Patel and his foundation triumphed in court after Stewartson lobbed baseless claims, leading to a default judgment on August 5, 2025, in a Las Vegas federal court.

Let’s rewind to the start: back in June 2023, Patel and the Kash Foundation filed suit against Stewartson for defamation, tired of his online rants painting Patel as some sort of villainous mastermind.

Stewartson accused Patel of being a foreign operative, plotting to topple the government, and even orchestrating the chaos at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. These weren’t just opinions; they were presented as cold, hard facts—and that’s where he crossed the line.

Defamation Lawsuit Targets Baseless Accusations

Stewartson, however, played hide-and-seek with the legal process, dodging service of the complaint for months, according to Patel’s attorneys.

It wasn’t until late October 2023 that someone at his California home finally accepted the paperwork. You’d think he’d at least show up to defend his claims, but nope—silence led to a default judgment.

Judge Andrew Gordon, presiding over the case in U.S. District Court in Las Vegas, didn’t mince words when he ruled in Patel’s favor. “Falsely stating as fact that a public figure ‘attempted to overthrow the government’ … inflicts real injuries,” the judge declared.

Yet, in the same breath, he noted the lack of hard proof of damage to Patel’s reputation, which makes you wonder if the progressive echo chamber even listens to these wild tales.

Indeed, Judge Gordon pointed out that despite Stewartson’s venom, Patel was still confirmed by the Senate as FBI Director. If that’s a “sullied reputation,” then most of us would take that hit any day. It’s almost as if the left’s obsession with character assassination falls flat when the target keeps rising.

The damages awarded were no small potatoes: Patel personally received $100,000 for emotional harm and another $100,000 to punish Stewartson’s malice.

The Kash Foundation, though targeted less directly, still walked away with $25,000 for harm and $25,000 in punitive damages. That’s a quarter-million-dollar lesson in keeping your accusations grounded in reality.

Judge Gordon justified the punitive hit, saying it was partly to “deter Stewartson and others from engaging in defamation.”

That’s a judicial nudge to the digital mob—think twice before you type. In an era where online outrage often outpaces truth, this ruling feels like a rare win for accountability.

Stewartson, for his part, claims ignorance, whining, “I was never served with this lawsuit.” Really? Hard to believe when court records show someone at his home accepted the complaint, but let’s give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he’s just bad at checking his mail.

Blogger’s Defense Falls Flat in Court

He doubled down, calling the lawsuit “preposterous” and vowing not to pay a dime. Stewartson even hinted at countersuing, alleging a campaign of abuse against him. Sounds like the classic deflection—when you’re caught, just cry victim and hope the narrative shifts.

Yet Judge Gordon saw through the noise, stating, “The complaint … adequately demonstrates [s] Stewartson acted with malice.” That’s not just a legal finding; it’s a reminder that words have weight, especially when they’re weaponized against public figures who’ve dedicated their careers to serving the nation.

Interestingly, the judge admitted there was little concrete evidence of actual harm to Patel or his foundation, like lost business or specific reputational damage tied directly to these statements.

Still, he accepted that at least seven donors reportedly stopped supporting the Kash Foundation, which is a tangible enough sting for a nonprofit. It’s a small but real impact in a world where perception can be everything.

Patel, ever the professional, stayed mum on the verdict, with the FBI confirming he’d offer no comment. That’s class—let the court’s ruling speak louder than any press conference. Meanwhile, Stewartson’s online tirades continue, proving some folks never learn.

This case isn’t just about one man’s vindication; it’s a broader stand against the culture of unhinged digital slander that’s become all too common. When baseless claims can spread faster than truth, especially from those pushing divisive agendas, a ruling like this draws a line in the sand. It’s not about silencing critics—it’s about ensuring criticism stays honest.