Dem Rep Made Heinous Accusation Against GOP Witness, Mocked Him for Not Responding - He Just Filed a $10M Libel Suit

Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove, a Democrat from California, may not yet be a household name among the 435 members of the House, but that could be about to change — and not for reasons she’d likely prefer. She’s now at the center of a high-profile defamation case, and if it proceeds to trial, she may end up as the latest symbol of what some are calling the “smug libel defendant.”

It’s a familiar archetype: think CNN, think Amber Heard. While Kamlager-Dove hasn’t previously commanded the same level of public attention, her recent actions may change that — particularly if the court agrees she’s “elevating a serial sexual harasser” without evidence.

The controversy erupted during a House Foreign Affairs subcommittee hearing earlier this week. The witness? Journalist Matt Taibbi, once a fixture in progressive media and a former Rolling Stone contributor. These days, Taibbi is better known as one of the lead reporters on the “Twitter Files,” a project that delved into alleged government influence over online censorship — an endeavor that has effectively exiled him from left-leaning circles and turned him into a hero of the censorship-skeptic right.

Taibbi was entrusted by Elon Musk with internal communications from the platform now known as X, and despite a later rift between the two, he remains a prominent voice in debates over free speech and state influence in digital media. Unsurprisingly, Democrats haven’t exactly rolled out the red carpet — and some, like Kamlager-Dove, are turning up the heat.

In most cases, harsh criticism during a congressional hearing wouldn’t raise legal eyebrows. Thanks to the Constitution’s Speech and Debate Clause, lawmakers have wide latitude to say what they please within Congress without fear of legal retribution. But Kamlager-Dove may have stepped outside those boundaries.

During the hearing, she accused Republicans of “elevating a serial sexual harasser as their star witness” — a reference to Taibbi. The remark was also republished across her official channels, including her congressional website and social media accounts. And that’s where her legal shield may fall short.

Taibbi has responded by filing a $10 million libel lawsuit in federal court, alleging that Kamlager-Dove’s actions — particularly the republication of her statement outside of Congress — were defamatory and fall outside the protection offered to lawmakers. According to the suit, “republications on X, BlueSky and Defendant’s website, made outside the scope of her legislative duties, are not protected by the Speech and Debate Clause and are thus actionable.”

At the hearing, Kamlager-Dove dismissed the session's focus entirely, expressing dismay that the committee was not discussing more conventional foreign policy concerns. Instead, she said, lawmakers were “wasting taxpayer time and resources on … the so-called ‘censorship-industrial complex.’” She doubled down with a sweeping condemnation of the hearing’s premise: “The majority is relitigating a made-up conspiracy theory about a part of the State Department that no longer exists … and elevating a serial sexual harasser as their star witness in the process.”

To clarify, she was referring to the now-defunct Global Engagement Center (GEC), a State Department agency previously involved in countering online “disinformation.” Though nominally shuttered, the GEC’s staff and mission are believed to have been quietly redistributed throughout the government — hence the “air quotes” around its closure.

But it’s Kamlager-Dove’s “serial sexual harasser” accusation that drew the strongest backlash. On social media, she noted, “After this, Republicans gave Matt Taibbi time to defend himself. It’s telling that he didn’t.”

Here’s where things get murky. It’s not entirely clear what her claim is based on. One possible source: Taibbi’s long-ago association with The eXile, a satirical Russian newspaper he co-founded in the '90s with Mark Ames. Their 2000 book, The eXile: Sex, Drugs, and Libel in the New Russia, included darkly comic passages — written by Ames — about office antics, including jokes involving sexual harassment. However, when controversy resurfaced years later, the women mentioned in those stories publicly confirmed that none of it actually happened.

There’s also the colorful-but-unsubstantiated story of Taibbi allegedly throwing coffee on a Vanity Fair reporter who brought up The eXile. Yet, even that tale seems shaky — the article itself didn’t lead with it, nor did it include evidence of injury or outrage that one might expect if the incident had occurred as claimed.

Other criticisms of Taibbi’s behavior over the years have centered more on his aggressive writing style and acidic takes, not misconduct. For example, feminist writer Erica Jong once claimed that Taibbi’s jab at Hillary Clinton’s “flabby” arms stemmed from an Oedipal complex. Taibbi’s response in HuffPost, “Erica Jong Thinks I Want to Do My Mother: A Response,” noted that he’s often harsher toward male politicians — see his description of Mitt Romney as “[An] utter tool…a poll-chasing stuffed suit…a tie-clad, sweat-resistant cross of Roy Hobbs and Rosemary’s Baby.”

In short: there's no confirmed history of sexual harassment tied to Taibbi. So his legal team is arguing that this accusation is not only baseless but damaging.

“There is not much a person like me can say to a member of Congress hiding behind the protections of the Speech and Debate clause of the Constitution,” Taibbi wrote on Racket News, his newsletter. “One can however respond to a member arrogant enough to repeat those claims on social media. I’ve now done so, in the form of a $10 million libel lawsuit filed today in a New Jersey federal court,” he added.

“Rep. Kamlager-Dove, no woman has ever accused me of engaging in sexual harassment once, let alone serially. See you in court. Please do not evade service.”

The complaint also notes that Kamlager-Dove submitted outdated eXile-related material into the congressional record and relied on information that, according to the lawsuit, had been thoroughly discredited by legal settlements and public corrections.

Her reliance on this material, the suit alleges, shows she “either knew the statements were false or acted with reckless disregard for their truth.”

Kamlager-Dove may not be as well-known as other figures who’ve faced defamation suits, but she now finds herself in a position many have before her: accused of making bold, legally risky statements under the assumption that the “censorship-industrial complex” or political privilege will provide cover.

Whether she chooses to settle quietly or fight the lawsuit outright remains to be seen. But one thing’s certain: when accusations this serious are made without solid backing — and repeated outside protected legal venues — the consequences can be more than just political.