In the Bullseye Podcast: Women’s Basketball HC Kristen Sharkey on her vision for the new look Bulls

Trump administration officials are slamming their colleagues in the Pentagon after a new report downplayed casualty counts from recent military strikes, per a new report.

The Department of Defense turned over an annual report to Congress with a tally of civilian casualties from military strikes in 2025, and one anonymous Trump administration official called it "a f------ joke," according to reporting by The Intercept.

The report addresses allegations of civilian harm during 2025 military attacks in Somalia and Yemen, as well as boat strikes in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean, where the Pentagon insists it's fighting drug trafficking, The Intercept reported.

However, the report asserts that U.S. attacks killed no civilians during military boat strikes, despite reports that those strikes killed more than 120 civilians, according to The Intercept. A second Trump administration official called the report "a total whitewash" and "sickening," adding that the Pentagon has "absolutely no credibility."

The Intercept noted that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gutted civilian harm mitigation and response programs in the Pentagon. Although the report, which has only been released to Congress but not to the public, denied civilian deaths from the boat strikes, it found that U.S. attacks in the Middle East likely killed or wounded hundreds of civilians, The Intercept reported.

However, the second official said that the report offered "lowball numbers" for civilian casualties from U.S. attacks in Yemen. The report estimated U.S. air and naval strikes in Yemen killed 153 civilians and wounded almost 250, but the Yemen Data Project estimated that 238 civilians were killed and 467 were injured by U.S. attacks.

Both anonymous officials also pointed out that the Pentagon is still reviewing 15 cases of attacks on civilians in Yemen and that the 10-person civilian harm mitigation team at CENTCOM has been reduced to one person. The first official said it "doesn't bode well for the war in Iran," adding, "How will they get through hundreds of cases for Iran if their one civilian harm person still hasn't finished in Yemen?"

FBI Director Kash Patel has five days to respond to a motion arguing his own public record proves The Atlantic's drinking allegations are 'inherently plausible.'

Judge Emmet G. Sullivan set the Aug. 17 deadline after granting a joint extension request, according to the court docket. The Atlantic filed its motion to dismiss on July 27.

The Atlantic's April story, "The FBI Director is MIA," reported that Patel drank to excess, missed work, and posed a national-security risk. Patel called it false and sued for $250 million.

"Print it, all false, I'll see you in court—bring your checkbook," Patel told the magazine through his spokesman before it published.

The Atlantic's lawyers argue Patel cannot meet the legal standard required of public officials in defamation cases. That standard — called actual malice — requires proof that a publisher knew a story was false or strongly suspected it was, according to the filing.

"The Complaint does not come close to satisfying this demanding constitutional standard," the filing said. "It does not allege a single fact showing that any statement in the Article is false, much less that Defendants had 'serious doubts' or 'actual knowledge of falsity' for any of these statements."

The filing goes further, arguing Patel's own public behavior undercuts his suit, according to the motion.

"The Article itself shows that the Allegedly Defamatory Statements are not implausible," the filing said, "but rather inherently plausible."

The filing said reporter Sarah Fitzpatrick spoke to more than two dozen sources, according to the motion. They included current and former FBI officials, members of Congress, and hospitality workers.

Six sources confirmed that briefings had to be rescheduled because of Patel's alcohol-fueled nights, the motion said.

Nine sources confirmed he panicked when a computer malfunction led him to believe he had been fired, according to the filing.

The story described officials telling Fitzpatrick that Patel's security detail had difficulty waking him on multiple occasions, and that a request was made for specialized breaching equipment — tools normally used by SWAT teams — because he was unreachable behind locked doors, according to the filing.

The filing noted that Patel's drinking was already a matter of public record before the story ran.

In February, Patel was filmed chugging beer in the U.S. men's Olympic hockey team's locker room in Milan. FBI headquarters was simultaneously managing a cartel violence outbreak in Mexico, CNN reported.

Days after The Atlantic published, a 2005 letter from Patel's Florida Bar application — obtained by The Intercept — disclosed he had been arrested twice on alcohol-related charges, once for public intoxication in 2001 and once for public urination after leaving a bar in 2005.

The story's fallout reached Capitol Hill the following month, according to Senate records.

At a May budget hearing, Patel agreed to take an alcohol use disorders test after Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) demanded it. Patel called the allegations "a total farce."

The Atlantic suit is the latest in a long line, according to the motion.

A federal judge in Texas dismissed Patel's defamation suit against MS NOW analyst Frank Figliuzzi the day after Patel filed against The Atlantic. The judge called Figliuzzi's comment about Patel's nightclub visibility "rhetorical hyperbole."

None of Patel's five defamation suits has succeeded, according to the filing.

Patel's response is due Aug. 17. The Atlantic's reply is due Aug. 31.