Schaffer's lawyers say his wordless post did not accuse Wilkins of espionage
Elijah SchafferDefendant, through his lawyers, in a motion to dismiss filed in federal court in Florida
In a motion to dismiss filed January 5, 2026, Elijah Schaffer's lawyers argue that his caption-less repost of a true photo of Wilkins and Patel under a thread about Mossad operations does not accuse her of being a spy. They say viewers could read it as commentary on security risks when an unmarried FBI director dates, or as criticism of Patel's judgment, "without reaching any conclusion that Ms. Wilkins herself is engaged in espionage."
Responding to
Kyle Seraphin said on his podcast on August 22, 2025 that FBI Director Kash Patel "has had his own little 'honeypot' issue" and that Patel's girlfriend, Alexis Wilkins, is "a former Mossad agent in what is like the equivalent of their NSA," according to the transcript quoted in Wilkins's complaint and in the court's order denying his motion to dismiss.
“Reasonable viewers could instead understand the post, for example, as commentary on the broader security risks when an unmarried FBI Director openly dates, or as criticism of Director Patel’s judgment, without reaching any conclusion that Ms. Wilkins herself is engaged in espionage.”
Original text
Original text
Where this statement fits
Is Alexis Wilkins a foreign 'honeypot' agent, as Kyle Seraphin and other commentators suggested?
Since early 2025, online commentators have suggested that Alexis Wilkins, the country singer engaged to FBI Director Kash Patel, is an Israeli or Mossad "honeypot" sent to compromise him. Podcaster Kyle Seraphin said on August 22, 2025 that Patel's girlfriend is "a former Mossad agent" (he did not name her; a court found the remarks referred to her), Sam Parker raised the idea through questions in a February 2025 X thread, and Elijah Schaffer posted her photo under a thread about female Mossad operatives. Wilkins says she has never been an intelligence agent and has never been to Israel, and she sued all three for defamation. A Florida court let the Schaffer suit proceed, the parties then reported a tentative agreement and jointly dismissed it with prejudice, and on September 9, 2026 Schaffer posted a retraction saying she "is not, and has never been, a foreign intelligence operative"; a Utah court dismissed the Parker suit for lack of jurisdiction; the Seraphin suit is pending after the court denied his motion to dismiss. As of October 5, 2026, we found no evidence offered by anyone that Wilkins has worked for any intelligence service, and no court has ruled at trial on the claim.
Source and context
Original text
About this source
Schaffer's motion to dismiss, filed through his lawyers. It argues that a wordless repost of a true photograph cannot reasonably be read as an accusation of espionage, that the post is protected commentary, and that Wilkins is a public figure who did not plead actual malice. Its exhibits include earlier posts by other accounts, Wilkins's own July 9, 2025 post, and transcripts of her podcast interviews. The court declined to consider the exhibits.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Original text
About this source
Wilkins's complaint against Elijah Schaffer, pleading one count of defamation by implication and seeking more than $5 million. It describes a caption-less quote-post of a photo of Wilkins and Patel in reply to a thread by X user Hen Mazzig about female Mossad operatives, dated September 14, 2025 in paragraph 12 and September 15 in paragraph 21, and says the post had 1.5 million views. It does not give the post's address. A November 2025 Grayzone report (https://thegrayzone.substack.com/p/kash-patels-gf-files-5-million-lawsuit) links a Schaffer post, https://x.com/ElijahSchaffer/status/1967428439990046855, whose ID corresponds to 11:21 PM Eastern time on September 14, 2025 (03:21 UTC on September 15), which fits the complaint's two dates. The post is no longer available on X and we could not view it. The complaint is a pleading signed by lawyers, so its statements are allegations.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
Wilkins sued Schaffer on October 28, 2025 over a September 2025 post that showed a photo of her with Patel, without a caption, in reply to a thread about female Mossad operatives.
After the quotation
The court denied the motion in an order signed February 3, 2026. The parties later reported a tentative agreement and jointly dismissed the case with prejudice on August 31, 2026. On September 9, 2026, Schaffer posted a retraction on X saying Wilkins "is not, and has never been, a foreign intelligence operative, foreign asset, or honeypot of any kind."
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 Alexis Wilkins is, or was, a foreign intelligence agent, specifically an Israeli or Mossad "honeypot" in a relationship with Kash Patel to compromise him. The motion disputes the complaint's reading of Schaffer's post and offers other readings, without saying the proposition is true or false, so we used Challenged the characterization. The closest competing label is Denied. It loses because the motion argues about what the post conveyed, not about whether Wilkins is an agent. Condemned does not fit because the motion does not endorse the proposition, though it notes that others had speculated about it. Evidence level: a court filing by Schaffer's lawyers on his behalf.
- Recorded on
- Published here
More from this case
Read the full caseJake Shields responds to Schaffer's retraction: "I'm glad Elijah cleared that up"
“I'm glad Elijah cleared that up Alexis Wikins is not an Israeli honeypot and the FBI is not funding her lawsuit”Read statement
Schaffer retracts his post and says Wilkins "is not, and has never been" a foreign intelligence operative
“I apologize for that implication because it is false to suggest she is a honeypot. Alexis Wilkins is not, and has never been, a foreign intelligence operative, foreign asset, or honeypot of any kind. There is no factual basis to suggest otherwise. … I retract my September 2025 post in full. The original post has been deleted.”Read statement
Seraphin's answer calls his remarks "opinion, satire, or rhetorical hyperbole"
“Deny. Defendant explicitly defined the term “honeypot” differently than the Complaint alleges. … The statements were expressions of opinion, satire, or rhetorical hyperbole, not verifiable false assertions of fact. … Defendant accurately and off-handedly reported third party allegations.”Read statement
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Schaffer's lawyers say his wordless post did not accuse Wilkins of espionage
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/4669-in-a-motion-to-dismiss-filed-january-5
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Schaffer's lawyers say his wordless post did not accuse Wilkins of espionage". First published: 2026-10-05. Last updated: 2026-10-06. https://disputeindex.com/events/4669-in-a-motion-to-dismiss-filed-january-5