FBI Director Kash Patel sued The Atlantic to clear his name over an article about his conduct as director — and by pressing to keep the case moving, he may have handed the magazine the keys to his phone, according to legal analyst Michael Popok.

On his MeidasTouch program Legal AF, Popok examined Patel's latest move in the $250 million defamation suit, which stems from an April article alleging excessive drinking, unexplained absences and episodes of being unreachable. Patel has called the claims "unequivocally categorically false."

The Atlantic has asked Judge Emmet Sullivan to dismiss the case and to pause discovery until he rules, arguing the dispute can be decided on the pleadings alone. Patel opposed a stay and pushed to keep the case moving — a decision Popok described as a gift to the magazine, because discovery is exactly what could hurt Patel most: depositions under oath, imaged phones and interviews with his own security detail.

The dynamic is a familiar one in media law. Under Supreme Court precedent dating to New York Times v. Sullivan in 1964, a public official like Patel must prove the magazine published the claims with "actual malice" — knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth. And in civil litigation, discovery cuts both ways: a plaintiff who demands records and testimony opens his own devices and communications to examination as well.

"This is like a drowning man asking for another anchor to be thrown at him," Popok said.

If the case proceeds, The Atlantic could comb through the records behind its reporting — material one former prosecutor predicted is "unlikely to be pretty." The immediate checkpoint is Sullivan's ruling on the dismissal motion; the scope of any discovery — depositions, devices, security-detail testimony — depends on the case clearing that threshold.

"You know who really wants discovery? Which is depositions and questions under oath and documents and emails and text messages and all of that. You know who loves and is rubbing their hands in glee at Kash Patel opposing a motion to stay discovery brought by The Atlantic? The Atlantic Magazine and its writer. I mean, I'm sure there were champagne corks that were popping when Kash Patel would not agree to stay discovery," Popok said.

The magazine has signaled it is prepared.

"If Director Patel did not want to face this process, he should not have filed this suit," editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg said.

The Atlantic's motion describes its allegations as "inherently plausible," citing more than two dozen sources. Among the reported claims: Patel's detail once requested SWAT-style breaching equipment to reach him behind locked doors, and he panicked when he wrongly believed he had been fired. Patel denies all of it as a fabricated smear.

The Atlantic noted that this is at least Patel's fifth defamation suit against a news outlet, and that he has yet to win one — a record that plays out against a legal landscape in which the actual-malice standard has long made libel claims by public officials difficult to sustain.

Watch: "Trump Sweats as Kash Patel Demands "Discovery" to Prove He's Not a Public Drunk?!" by Legal AF

Source: Raw Story