Defendants argue that reporting Wilkins's request is not defamatory "even if she did not actually make the request"
Versant Media GroupDefendants Versant Media Group, Carol Leonnig and Ken Dilanian, through their lawyers, in a memorandum filed in federal court
In their August 11, 2026 memorandum supporting a motion to dismiss or transfer, the defendants (Versant Media Group, Carol Leonnig and Ken Dilanian) argue that the article simply reports that Wilkins asked agents to drive her friend home so the friend would arrive safely. They add that reporting her request, "even if she did not actually make the request," would not subject her to hatred, contempt or ridicule. The memorandum does not say whether the request or the order occurred.
Responding to
MS NOW reported on December 5, 2025, citing three unnamed people with knowledge of the incidents, that FBI Director Kash Patel ordered, on more than one occasion, that the security detail protecting Alexis Wilkins escort one of her friends home after what the article calls a night of partying in Nashville, and that Wilkins asked agents at least two times, including once "this spring," to drive the friend home.
“It simply reports she asked FBI agents to drive her friend home so the friend would arrive safely – a statement that would not hold a person up to hatred and ridicule in society. … Reporting on her request to the FBI, even if she did not actually make the request, is simply not the kind of thing that would subject Wilkins to “hatred, contempt, or ridicule.””
Original text
Original text
Where this statement fits
Did FBI Director Kash Patel order the security detail protecting Alexis Wilkins to drive a friend home, as MS NOW reported?
On December 5, 2025, MS NOW reported, citing three unnamed people with knowledge, that FBI Director Kash Patel ordered the security detail protecting Alexis Wilkins to escort a friend of hers home after what the article calls a night of partying in Nashville, on more than one occasion. FBI spokesperson Ben Williamson told MS NOW "This is made up and did not happen." Wilkins sued Versant Media Group, which does business as MS NOW, and two reporters for defamation on May 29, 2026, and her complaint says the events did not occur and that she did not have a security detail at the time. MS NOW's president says the network stands behind its reporting. As of October 5, 2026, we found no court ruling on whether the report was accurate or on the defendants' motion to dismiss or transfer (the CourtListener copy of the docket was last updated September 15, 2026), and we did not find a named witness who says on the record that the reported events occurred.
Source and context
Original text
About this source
The defendants' memorandum arguing that the court lacks personal jurisdiction, that the case should move to the District of Columbia, and that the article is not defamatory of Wilkins. It does not say whether the reported incidents occurred. Footnote 1 says other reporting states Wilkins had FBI protection by the spring of 2025 and cites a New York Times article of November 23, 2025, while calling the timing irrelevant to the motion. Page 14 says the defendants expect to invoke the District of Columbia's reporter's privilege.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Original text
About this source
The public docket of the case as mirrored by CourtListener, which says its listings may not be current. As of October 5, 2026, its newest entry is dated September 15, 2026 and it lists no ruling on the defendants' motion to dismiss or transfer. The page does not include the exhibits to the defendants' motion, such as the declaration of a Versant officer.
Before the quotation
Wilkins's complaint, filed on May 29, 2026, says the article's account is false and defamatory. The same memorandum argues that the court lacks personal jurisdiction over the defendants in Tennessee.
After the quotation
Wilkins's lawyers opposed the motion on August 25, saying the events never happened, and the defendants replied on September 1. As of October 5, 2026, the CourtListener copy of the docket, last updated September 15, 2026, lists no ruling on the motion.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
The reference point is the proposition that, on at least one occasion, FBI Director Kash Patel ordered the FBI agents assigned to protect Alexis Wilkins to escort or drive a friend of hers home, as MS NOW reported on December 5, 2025. The defendants argue that the article reports only that Wilkins asked agents to drive her friend home so the friend would arrive safely, and that reporting a request is not defamatory "even if she did not actually make the request". This disputes the complaint's reading of the article and its legal meaning and takes no position on whether the order or the request occurred, so we used Challenged the characterization. The closest competing label is Mixed or conditional, because of the "even if" clause. It loses because the argument does not depend on that clause: it holds whether or not the request was made. Explicitly stayed out is a weaker fit because the memorandum engages with the article rather than refusing to address it.
- Recorded on
- Published here
More from this case
Read the full caseDefendants say they wrote the article "in good faith, believing everything in it was accurate"
Versant Media Group
“Defendants thoroughly and responsibly reported the article and wrote it in good faith, believing everything in it was accurate. As a result, Plaintiff will not be able to prove that any statement or implication about her was materially false, much less that Defendants published such a statement with knowledge of falsity or despite a high probability that it was false.”Read statement
MS NOW President Rebecca Kutler says the network stands "firmly behind" its reporting
“We stand firmly behind MS NOW’s reporting. As a general matter of practice, we don’t comment on ongoing legal matters.”Read statement
Wilkins's complaint says Patel never ordered any agent to escort her friends home
“This is entirely false. Director Patel has never ordered any FBI agent or member of Ms. Wilkins’ security detail to escort any of Ms. Wilkins’ friends home—inebriated or otherwise—nor did Ms. Wilkins ask any of them to do so. … No FBI agents have ever escorted any of Ms. Wilkins’ friends home. … Notably, Ms. Wilkins did not have a security detail at that time.”Read statement
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Defendants argue that reporting Wilkins's request is not defamatory "even if she did not actually make the request"
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/4653-in-their-august-11-2026-memorandum-supporting-a
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Defendants argue that reporting Wilkins's request is not defamatory "even if she did not actually make the request"". First published: 2026-10-05. Last updated: 2026-10-05. https://disputeindex.com/events/4653-in-their-august-11-2026-memorandum-supporting-a