Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

FBI Chief Sues The Atlantic $250M

Published

on

FBI Chief Sues The Atlantic $250M

Kash Patel news broke Monday as the FBI Director filed a $250 million defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic and reporter Sarah Fitzpatrick in US District Court in Washington, alleging the magazine published “false and obviously fabricated allegations” in a story that reported Patel had alarmed colleagues with episodes of excessive drinking, unexplained absences, and behavior described as erratic during his tenure as FBI director.

Summary

  • The suit alleges The Atlantic acted with “actual malice” and gave the FBI less than two hours to respond to 19 detailed allegations before publishing, calling the deadline “arbitrary and unreasonable.”
  • The Atlantic said it stands by its reporting and called the lawsuit meritless, noting the story was based on interviews with more than two dozen people including current and former FBI officials, congressional members, and political operatives.
  • The 19-page filing cites 17 specific claims it calls false, including allegations that Patel drank “to the point of obvious intoxication” and that meetings were rescheduled because of his alcohol-fueled nights.

Kash Patel news on Monday centers on the FBI director taking direct legal action against one of the country’s most prominent news organizations over a story that triggered immediate Democratic calls for his resignation. The lawsuit, filed in US District Court in the District of Columbia, seeks $250 million in damages from The Atlantic and Fitzpatrick personally, framing the article as a coordinated attempt to destroy Patel’s reputation and force him out of office.

“They were given the truth before they published, and they chose to print falsehoods anyway,” Patel said in a statement. “I took this job to protect the American people and this FBI has delivered the most prolific reduction in crime in US history.”

Advertisement

The Atlantic responded directly: “We stand by our reporting on Kash Patel, and we will vigorously defend The Atlantic and our journalists against this meritless lawsuit.”

Fitzpatrick’s story, published last week, reported that colleagues had grown alarmed by Patel’s conduct, describing excessive drinking and unexplained absences. The filing specifically challenges 17 claims, including that Patel was known to drink “to the point of obvious intoxication” at Ned’s Club in Washington, that early meetings were rescheduled because of alcohol-fueled nights, and that his security detail had difficulty waking him, in one instance requesting breaching equipment because Patel was “unreachable behind locked doors.”

Patel’s lawyers allege that The Atlantic was “expressly warned, hours before publication, that the central allegations were categorically false” and that the magazine “failed to take even the most basic investigative steps” that would have refuted the claims. The suit also argues Fitzpatrick could not get a single named source to support the core allegations, relying entirely on anonymous sources the filing describes as “highly partisan with an ax to grind.”

Advertisement

The Atlantic has said the story was thoroughly reported, based on interviews with more than two dozen people across government, Congress, the hospitality industry, and political operations.

The Legal Standard Patel Must Meet

As FBI director and a public figure, Patel faces an extremely high legal bar. Under the 1964 Supreme Court ruling in New York Times v. Sullivan, a public figure must prove the publisher acted with “actual malice,” meaning the publisher either knew the content was false or showed reckless disregard for whether it was true or false.

First Amendment lawyer Adam Steinbaugh described the complaint as allegations that “don’t even hit the backboard” in meeting the actual malice standard. He noted the suit’s likely primary effect: making other media outlets weigh the cost of defending against even a meritless lawsuit before publishing stories about powerful government officials. Defamation lawsuits against news organizations are frequently dismissed before reaching discovery, the stage at which both sides would exchange evidence and take sworn testimony.

What the Suit Signals About Press Freedom

The lawsuit arrives alongside FBI Director Patel’s Sunday statement that arrests over the 2020 election are coming “this week,” a comment that has drawn its own attention about the direction of the bureau. Together, the two actions reinforce a posture of aggressive legal and institutional action against institutions the administration views as hostile.

Advertisement

For the broader political environment affecting crypto reform, each confrontation between the administration and press or political opponents consumes attention and political capital that would otherwise be available for legislation. The CLARITY Act markup, the stablecoin bill, and broader digital asset regulation all depend on a Senate calendar that is already competing with the Iran ceasefire negotiations, reconciliation, FISA, and now a federal-state ballot standoff in Michigan. High-profile legal actions by senior administration officials add another variable to an already crowded environment.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Brent Surges 5% on Hormuz Crisis

Published

on

Brent Surges 5% on Hormuz Crisis

Oil price news Monday showed Brent crude jumped 4.3% to $94.18 and WTI rose 5.6% to $88.54, reversing Friday’s 9% collapse as Iran reimposed Strait of Hormuz restrictions over the weekend, the US Navy seized the Iranian cargo vessel Touska, and Kpler maritime data recorded zero tanker crossings of the strait on Sunday.

Summary

  • Iran’s IRGC fired on two vessels attempting to transit Saturday before declaring the strait closed until the US lifts its naval blockade.
  • The USS Spruance fired several rounds at the Touska after it ignored six hours of warnings, then US Marines boarded and took custody of the ship.
  • Iran’s Foreign Ministry said Monday it has “no plans” for the Pakistan talks, leaving the ceasefire that expires Wednesday without a diplomatic path forward.

Oil price news opened the week with a sharp reversal of Friday’s optimism. Iran’s foreign minister had announced Friday that the Strait of Hormuz was completely open, sending Brent crude crashing 9%. By Saturday, Iran had reimposed restrictions, its gunboats were firing on tankers, and by Sunday the US had seized an Iranian-flagged cargo ship in the Gulf of Oman. The physical market confirmed the reversal: Kpler data recorded no oil tankers crossing the strait on Sunday.

The strait normally carries roughly 20% of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas. ADNOC CEO Sultan Al Jaber put the cumulative supply loss at nearly 600 million barrels over approximately 50 days of the crisis, a figure that does not normalize quickly even under a genuine ceasefire.

Advertisement

“Markets are trading in a world where there is plenty of spin, statements, and speculation, but very little information of substance,” UBS Global Wealth Management chief economist Paul Donovan wrote in a Monday morning note. “Events over the weekend have reversed some of that optimism.”

Iran announced Saturday it was reimposing restrictions on the strait, accusing the US of failing to lift its naval blockade despite the April 8 ceasefire terms. IRGC gunboats fired on two India-flagged vessels attempting to transit. The UK Maritime Trade Operations Centre reported a tanker approached and fired upon with no prior radio warning.

The US Navy destroyer USS Spruance fired several rounds from its 5-inch gun at the Iranian-flagged cargo vessel Touska on Sunday after the ship ignored six hours of warnings to comply with the blockade. US Marines then rappelled from helicopters and took custody of the vessel. Trump announced the seizure on Truth Social, calling it a situation that “did not go well for them.”

Advertisement

Iran’s military called the seizure “maritime piracy” and warned retaliation would follow once the safety of the crew and their family members aboard was confirmed.

The Market’s Read and What Comes Next

The ceasefire expires Wednesday. Iran has declared it has no plans to attend a second round of Pakistan talks. The US delegation led by Vice President JD Vance is heading to Islamabad regardless. That asymmetry, Washington traveling for talks while Tehran publicly refuses to show up, defines the next 48 hours as the highest-risk window since the original ceasefire was struck.

Wholesale gasoline prices rose over 3% Monday and heating oil futures, a proxy for jet fuel, spiked 4%. S&P 500 futures fell 0.5% while Nasdaq futures dropped 0.6%, signaling that energy-driven inflation fears are once again bleeding into broader equity risk pricing.

For oil bitcoin dynamics, Monday’s Brent print at $94 returns crude to the level where oil inflation expectations begin to suppress Federal Reserve rate cut prospects and compress risk appetite simultaneously. Tracking prior week sessions shows that each Hormuz escalation has produced a progressively smaller BTC drawdown, suggesting institutional demand is absorbing the selling pressure even as the macro headwind persists.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Aave Pitches Two Solutions to Resolve Kelp DAO Hack Dilemma

Published

on

Aave Pitches Two Solutions to Resolve Kelp DAO Hack Dilemma

Decentralized lending platform Aave’s risk management provider has outlined two scenarios on how bad debt from the Kelp DAO exploit over the weekend could impact the ecosystem, depending on how the losses are allocated.

The incident began on Saturday when hackers stole 116,500 Kelp DAO Restaked ETH (rsETH) tokens worth $293 million from Kelp DAO’s LayerZero-powered bridge and used them as collateral on Aave V3 to borrow wrapped Ether (wETH).

On Monday, LlamaRisk modeled two possible scenarios for how this “bad debt” could materialize on Aave, noting that the final decision rests with Kelp DAO.

The incident highlights the contagion risk in DeFi, where a single bridge exploit can trigger liquidity crunches and mass withdrawals across interconnected protocols like Aave, which has seen nearly $10 billion in value leave the protocol since the Kelp DAO exploit took place.

Advertisement
Source: Aave

Two scenarios and potential paths forward

The first scenario would see losses spread across all rsETH token holders on Ethereum mainnet and Ethereum layer 2s, resulting in roughly $123.7 million of bad debt on Aave while risking a 15% depeg in rsETH relative to Ether (ETH).

LlamaRisk said this first scenario would spread losses more thinly across all chains, while noting that wrapped Ether (wETH) would be “absorbing the bulk in absolute terms but barely noticing it relative to its reserve depth.”

Aave could also use its Umbrella security model to cover losses in wETH under the first scenario, noting that 18,922 Aave Wrapped ETH (aWETH) tokens worth nearly $43.7 million have entered the unstaking cooldown phase.

The second scenario would shift the entire shortfall to Ethereum layer 2 networks, such as Arbitrum and Mantle. However, the bad debt would be significantly higher at $230.1 million.

LlamaRisk also noted that Aave has around $181 million in its treasury that could be used to address a potential bad debt shortfall.

Advertisement
Scenario comparison of LlamaRisk’s two scenarios. Source: Aave

Related: Aave DAO backs V4 mainnet plan in near-unanimous vote

On Monday, Kelp DAO said it is still assessing the financial impact of the exploit and how to safely unpause the protocol, adding that it is working with Aave, LayerZero and other stakeholders on a path forward.

Kelp DAO sheds more light on the exploit

Kelp DAO also shared more details about the incident, saying that two nodes tied to the LayerZero bridge were compromised, while a third was hit with a distributed denial-of-service attack.

The attacker forged a seemingly valid transfer message that the system approved, allowing 116,500 rsETH to be minted on one of LayerZero’s bridges.

Kelp said it paused all relevant contracts on Ethereum and Ethereum layer 2s and blacklisted all wallets tied to the exploiter shortly after, preventing them from stealing another 40,000 rsETH worth $95 million.

Advertisement

Magazine: Are DeFi devs liable for the illegal activity of others on their platforms?