Connect with us

Politics

We’re Close To Finding Out Who Was BuzzFeed’s Trump Dossier Source

Published

on

(Via The Daily Caller)

A lawyer for a Russian businessman suing BuzzFeed over the infamous dossier suggested on Thursday that the website’s source for the salacious document has finally been identified.

Val Gurvits, a lawyer for Russian tech businessman Aleksej Gubarev, made the revelation in response to a federal magistrate judge’s ruling in favor of BuzzFeed.

Magistrate Judge John J. O’Sullivan ruled in a Miami court on Thursday that BuzzFeed was protected by reporter’s privilege from having to identify the person who provided it with the dossier.

Gubarev’s lawyers have battled for months to figure out who gave BuzzFeed the unverified document, which was written by former British spy Christopher Steele and published on Jan. 10.

The attorneys have sought to find out what BuzzFeed’s source said about the veracity of the dossier. If the source told BuzzFeed that the allegations in the report were unverified, shaky or false, Gubarev’s attorneys would argue that the website was negligent in publishing Steele’s allegations.

The final memo of the dossier — dated Dec. 13, 2016 — alleges that Gubarev and two of his tech companies hacked into the DNC’s computer systems. Gubarev vehemently denied the allegations and filed suit in February. BuzzFeed apologized to Gubarev and redacted his name from the version of the dossier that it published online.

BuzzFeed has argued that it is protected by the First Amendment from having to reveal confidential sources.

O’Sullivan’s ruling backed up that argument in a move praised by BuzzFeed.

“We’re pleased the judge has reaffirmed the right of news organizations to safeguard the identities of sources — a right that is protected under both state and federal law,” BuzzFeed spokeswoman Katie Rayford told TheDC of O’Sullivan’s ruling.

But the ruling is moot, says Gurvits.

“What the Court really said here is that before BuzzFeed could be required to tell us its source, we had to try to get the information from other places,” he told The Daily Caller.

“As it turns out, we were able to get the information we wanted and were actually in the process of withdrawing the Motion when this decision issued.”

“And while I cannot as of yet reveal this information, it is certainly not something I would celebrate if I was BuzzFeed,” he added.

Gurvits was unable to identify BuzzFeed’s source because of a gag order imposed on the case, he said.

Asked for a response to Gurvit’s remarks, Rayford shot back, saying that “the First Amendment gives plaintiffs every right to try to spin a loss as a win, but in this case it will not work.”

“The issue before the court was about protecting sources and the judge ruled clearly in BuzzFeed’s favor,” she said.

While Gurvits said he is as yet unable to reveal the BuzzFeed source, the universe of people who handled the document is exceedingly small.

Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that hired Steele, had access to the report. But its lawyers have denied in court filings that the company provided the dossier to BuzzFeed.

Steele has denied in court filings in London, where he is being sued by Gubarev, that he gave the dossier to BuzzFeed. Arizona Sen. John McCain has also denied being BuzzFeed’s source. The Republican was provided a copy of the dossier last December.

One person known to have handled the dossier who has not publicly denied being BuzzFeed’s source is David Kramer, a former State Department official who served as an executive at the McCain Institute.

McCain dispatched Kramer to London on Nov. 28, 2016 to meet with Steele. During the meeting, Kramer and Steele agreed that the retired spy would provide McCain with the dossier. Steele has revealed in court filings that Kramer and McCain obtained the document through Fusion.

Kramer had avoided commenting on his handling of the dossier for months, dodging media questions and subpoena requests from Gubarev’s lawyers. But, he was finally deposed by Gubarev’s legal team earlier this month. He was also interviewed by the House Intelligence Committee earlier this week.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Iowa

Chad Pelley Lawsuit in Shambles – Free Speech Win Relieves Bailey Symonds, Strips Injunction

Published

on

In a pivotal legal ruling issued on May 14, 2025, the Iowa District Court in Linn County struck down nearly all of the speech-restricting injunctions in the high-profile case of Chad Pelley v. Dustin Mazgaj et al. The decision significantly weakens Pelley’s attempt to silence critics through civil court orders—and raises fresh questions about where the case goes from here.

Chad Pelley Injunction Dissolved Bailey Symonds by Populist Wire


Symonds Cleared, Mazgaj Partially Restricted

At the heart of the ruling is a clear rejection of Pelley’s broad effort to restrict speech. The court fully dissolved the injunction against Bailey Symonds, stating that Pelley failed to prove she caused harm or was likely to in the future. As of now, Symonds is under no legal restrictions, restoring her full right to speak about the case, attend public meetings, and post freely online.

In the case of Dustin Mazgaj, who operates under the name Butt Crack News Network, the court issued a narrowed injunction: Mazgaj is now only prohibited from publicly referring to Chad Pelley as a:

  • “Pedophile”
  • “Drug user”
  • “Drug dealer”

All other parts of the injunction—including no-contact orders and broad bans on speech or proximity—were dissolved.


Melissa Duffield Confirmed Unrestricted

The court also clarified that Melissa Duffield, another named defendant, was never placed under an injunction at any point. Attempts by Pelley’s legal team to restrict her speech in a separate post-trial filing were also rejected, with the judge referencing potential First Amendment concerns.


BCNN Not a Company, Just a Username

In a notable clarification, the court determined that Butt Crack News Network is not a separate business or legal entity—it’s simply the name of Mazgaj’s YouTube account. As such, any restrictions on BCNN are effectively just extensions of those on Mazgaj personally.


Skylar Price Still in Limbo

One original defendant, Skylar Price, has not responded to the lawsuit and was found in default. The court did not revisit the injunction as it applies to Price, meaning the original restrictions may still technically be in effect—but without any new legal activity or defense.


Beau Bish and Flex Your Freedoms Not Bound

Though Pelley filed a second motion earlier this year to add Beau Bish and the media group Flex Your Freedoms to the injunction, the court noted that they have not yet been formally served. As a result, they remain unrestricted by the court at this time.


Where Does Pelley’s Case Go From Here?

The judge’s ruling sends a clear signal: courts will not issue broad gag orders unless the speech in question is proven to be false and harmful—and even then, only in narrowly tailored ways.

Pelley may still pursue defamation claims, but without the broad powers of a speech-restricting injunction, he faces a steeper road. The ruling emphasizes the high bar courts place on prior restraint, especially when it involves criticism of someone involved in public matters like real estate development, civic boards, and local politics.

As for the remaining claims—libel, false light, and emotional distress—they will now move toward a full trial. But the public gag orders Pelley once used to silence his critics have been largely rolled back, and the spotlight on his case is only getting brighter.

Continue Reading

Politics

President Donald Trump 45 – 47

Published

on

Donald Trump’s political journey over the last eight years has been a vivid illustration of modern populism, defying conventional political odds. Starting with his 2016 presidential campaign, Trump, a real estate mogul and reality TV star, harnessed populist sentiments to propel his candidacy. His message resonated with many Americans feeling left behind by globalization and economic shifts, promising to restore jobs, combat what he described as unfair trade deals, and prioritize American interests over international cooperation. This populist wave was marked by his direct communication style, bypassing traditional media to connect with voters through rallies and social media, where he spoke of “draining the swamp” in Washington, suggesting a deep-seated distrust in the political establishment.

The struggle of Trump supporters has mirrored this populist movement, characterized by a sense of alienation from what they perceive as a detached political and cultural elite. This group, often labeled pejoratively by some in the mainstream, found in Trump a voice for their frustrations with immigration policies, economic policies favoring global trade over local jobs, and cultural shifts they felt were imposed without their consent. The Trump family, from Melania’s fashion choices to Ivanka’s political involvement, became symbols of this populist resistance against the perceived elitism of politics. The criticism they faced only deepened the solidarity among Trump’s supporters, who saw in his family a reflection of their own battles against the establishment.

The alt-media ecosystem was instrumental in this populist surge, serving as both a battleground and a bastion. Outlets like Breitbart and Infowars, and later platforms like Parler and Truth Social, became the echo chambers where Trump’s narrative of being a victim of political witch hunts and media bias was amplified. These platforms didn’t just report news; they crafted a narrative where Trump’s every move, from policy to personal tweets, was framed as part of a larger fight against a corrupt system. This interaction between Trump, his supporters, and the alt-media has redefined political discourse, showcasing how populism can harness media, both traditional and digital, to challenge and reshape political norms. Trump’s journey has thus not only defied odds but has also redefined what political success looks like in an era where populism can sway elections and influence policy discussions at the highest levels.

Continue Reading

Politics

President Trump Returns to Butler to FIGHT for America First

Published

on

Trump’s Return to Butler, PA: A Symbol of Tenacity and Defiance

Today, former President Donald Trump makes a symbolically charged return to Butler, Pennsylvania, the site where his resilience was tested in an unprecedented manner. This visit, on October 5, 2024, is not just another campaign stop but a poignant reminder of his enduring “FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT” mantra, which has become emblematic of his political persona.

A Historical Backdrop

On July 13, 2024, Butler was thrust into the national spotlight when an assassination attempt was made on Trump during a rally. Surviving with a mere graze to his ear, Trump’s immediate response was to raise his fist, a moment captured in what has now become an iconic image, symbolizing his defiance against adversity. This incident didn’t just scar him physically but also galvanized his supporters, turning Butler into a shrine of sorts for Trump’s resilience.

The Symbolism of the Return

Trump’s decision to return to Butler is laden with symbolism. Here’s why this visit resonates deeply with his campaign ethos:

  1. Defiance in the Face of Danger: Returning to the site where his life was threatened underscores Trump’s narrative of not backing down. It’s a physical manifestation of his “FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT” ethos, showcasing his refusal to be intimidated by violence or political opposition.
  2. Political Theatre and Momentum: This rally serves as a masterstroke in political theatre, aiming to convert the attempt on his life into a rallying cry for his supporters. It’s an attempt to reignite the fervor seen in the immediate aftermath of the incident, where his campaign saw a surge in support, portraying him as a fighter against all odds.
  3. Uniting the Base: By revisiting Butler, Trump not only honors the victims of the incident but also uses the location to unify his base. The rally is expected to be a blend of remembrance and a call to action, emphasizing themes of perseverance, security, and defiance against the establishment’s perceived failures.
  4. A Message of Strength: For Trump, every appearance since the assassination attempt has been an opportunity to project strength. Returning to Butler amplifies this message, suggesting that neither personal attacks nor political challenges will deter his campaign or his message.

The Broader Impact

The “FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT” mantra has transcended its initial context, becoming a broader call against what Trump describes as systemic failures, from immigration policies to disaster response, as seen in his critiques of the current administration’s handling of events in North Carolina, echoed in his and his allies’ posts on X.

This return to Butler isn’t just about revisiting the site of a traumatic event; it’s a strategic move to encapsulate his campaign’s spirit in one location, making it a pilgrimage of sorts for his supporters. It represents Trump not just as a politician but as a symbol of resistance and persistence, key themes in his narrative of reclaiming America.

In sum, Trump’s rally in Butler today is more than a campaign event; it’s a testament to his campaign’s core message: a relentless fight against adversaries, be they political opponents, critics, or even those who threaten his life. This event is poised to be a significant moment in the 2024 presidential race, leveraging trauma, resilience, and defiance into political capital.

Continue Reading

Trending

Donate to Populist Wire

*Note: Every donation is greatly appreciated, regardless of the amount.