Dustin Hurst, former Idaho Freedom Action lobbyist fined by Attorney General, People United for Privacy
The Publisher

Dustin Hurst

He co-published a smear campaign built on a secretly recorded phone call. He was fined for lobbying without registration. Before the stalking injunction hearing he polled his followers on whether to mock the filing publicly, announced he would challenge it and win, then broke down and pleaded with the judge not to issue the order. The judge found at least three stalking incidents from Hurst's own posts and issued the injunction anyway.

← Back to The Network

Dustin Hurst served as vice president of the Idaho Freedom Foundation for nearly a decade. During that time, he was the registered agent not only for the IFF but also for Idaho Freedom Action, the IFF's 501(c)(4) electioneering arm, and briefly registered two additional California-linked organizations, the Respect America Foundation and Respect America Inc., through Idaho's Secretary of State. He also co-hosted the Freedom Bros Podcast with Greg Pruett, the IFF-adjacent gun rights organizer who co-published the smear campaign against Gregory Graf.

In 2020, Hurst co-authored a multi-part article series on Keep Idaho Free using a secretly recorded phone call of Gregory Graf that had been forwarded to Greg Pruett by Chad Christensen the day after it was made. The articles framed Graf as attempting to have Christensen fired, a framing Hurst repeated on Twitter, comparing Graf to Jussie Smollett to discredit his account. The series was designed to damage Graf's reputation and cost him his job at Melaleuca. Text messages recovered in discovery in Case No. CV10-21-1197 document the coordination between Hurst, Pruett, and other network participants in preparing the articles, making clear this was not independent journalism, but a coordinated operation to silence a critic.

Hurst's own Twitter posts document the nature of the campaign. He repeatedly used the nickname "Greasy Graf", a slur Graf documented as racist, explaining that "Greasy" is what white kids called his Mexican immigrant mother. In one direct exchange with Graf on Twitter, Hurst went further: "I should have called up your boss, made up a bunch of lies about you, and told your boss I'm the FBI's guy in Idaho", an explicit statement of what the campaign was designed to look like.

Fined for Lobbying Without Registration

In July 2021, the Idaho Attorney General's Office sent Hurst a formal letter of violation for lobbying on Idaho's higher education budget without first registering as a lobbyist. As reported by the Idaho Capital Sun, Hurst had properly registered as a lobbyist for the Idaho Freedom Foundation for the 2021 legislative session, but failed to register for Idaho Freedom Action before spending money. The AG letter, signed by Deputy Attorney General Robert A. Berry, noted that Hurst had disclosed $14,316.69 in advertising expenditures related to the higher education budget bill (SB1179) for Idaho Freedom Action before his April 15, 2021 registration date.

That advertising campaign targeted Idaho's public universities over unproven claims of "critical race theory" instruction. The IFF later took credit for the Legislature's $2.5 million cut to the higher education budget that session. The lobbying violation resulted in a $250 fine from the Idaho Secretary of State's Office. Reached for comment, Hurst declined.

Attorney General Violation: Idaho Freedom Action Lobbying
Hurst spent $14,316.69 in advertising on SB1179 (higher ed budget) before registering as a lobbyist for Idaho Freedom Action.
Registration date: April 15, 2021  |  Fine: $250
Source: Idaho Capital Sun, July 1, 2021

Under Oath

Hurst was deposed on August 2, 2023. What followed across 61 pages was a sustained exercise in not remembering. He did not recall when he first met Chad Christensen. He did not recall how he learned about the recording. He did not recall how the recording came into his possession — he testified that he had "honestly searched" his memory and come up empty. He did not recall who obtained the Doyle Beck quote published under his co-authorship. Asked about the article's claim that Christensen stood accused of being "a sexual predator," he could not recall what in the audio had led him to write it, could not recall whether Christensen had ever denied it, and confirmed he had never attempted to verify it.

Q. Do you recall how you first learned about the recording?

A. I don't.

Q. No recollection at all?

A. Nope.

Hurst Deposition, p. 19

Q. That isn't what Mr. Graf actually claimed, is it?

A. I don't recall what was in the audio that made that claim.

Q. When did Christensen vigorously deny it?

A. I don't recall.

Q. Do you recall that he told you that he denied that?

A. This was years ago. I don't recall.

Q. I can safely assume that he, in fact, said it?

A. I don't recall.

Hurst Deposition, pp. 41-43

Q. Did you do anything to try to confirm whether or not Mr. Christensen had tendencies of a sexual predator?

A. No.

Q. You didn't ask him about it?

A. I don't recall.

Hurst Deposition, p. 43

Q. You have no idea how you came into possession of the call?

A. I honestly have searched my memory. I have no idea how I came into possession of the call or how I came into possession of the knowledge that this happened.

Hurst Deposition, p. 54

The articles were published in 2020. The deposition was three years later. Hurst's explanation for the gaps was consistent: "This was years ago." Discovery had produced nearly 80 pages of his tweets about Graf, covering that same three-year window. He acknowledged writing them. He could not recall specific ones when asked. He estimated he had spent "probably less than ten" hours on the articles themselves. He had spent considerably more time than that on Twitter. The written record of that time survived. His sworn account of it did not.

The Stalking Injunction

In September 2023, Gregory Graf sought a civil stalking injunction against Hurst in Davis County, Utah. Before Hurst had even been served, he found out about it and announced it publicly on Twitter. He posted a poll asking his followers whether he should "tweet out every page" of Graf's private legal filing. Eighty-eight percent of respondents voted yes. He then broadcast his reaction to being served to his entire audience.

After being served, Hurst posted on Twitter: "Just got served. Holy wow this thing is full of lies. I almost can't believe it's real. We will challenge it and we will win."

He did not win.

The hearing was held on September 12, 2023, before Judge E. Blaine Rawson. Hurst came in with a legal argument: the Utah stalking statute requires more than one qualifying incident, and he contended Graf could only identify one — Hurst posting Graf's home address publicly online. Hurst apparently believed that conceding one incident of stalking while arguing the statute required more was a winning position.

The judge reviewed the evidence. Hurst's own social media posts were in the record. The judge told Hurst that by his count, he could identify at least three separate stalking incidents, all drawn from Hurst's own public posts. The court found that publishing Graf's home address online constituted stalking, that a reasonable person would fear for the safety of their family given the history of animosity and Hurst's threats, and that the Respondent is the stalker. Those are the court's words, not Graf's.

At that point, Hurst broke down. The man who had polled his followers on whether to publicly mock the filing, who had announced to thousands of followers that he would challenge it and win, pleaded with the judge not to issue the order. The judge issued it anyway, two days later, on September 14, 2023.

The Civil Stalking Injunction carries a Personal Conduct Order and a No Contact Order. It is valid in all U.S. states and territories. Violation is a criminal Class A Misdemeanor. A second violation can result in more severe penalties. The order expires September 12, 2026.

Court Document: Civil Stalking Injunction — Findings and Orders (p. 2 of 3)
Civil Stalking Injunction findings page showing court determination that Dustin Hurst is the stalker, with Personal Conduct Order and No Contact Order checked, Case No. 230700967, Davis County Utah
Civil Stalking Injunction, p. 2 of 3. Case No. 230700967, Davis County 2nd District, Utah. Hearing date: September 12, 2023. Court finding: "the Respondent is the stalker." Personal Conduct Order and No Contact Order both issued.
Court Document: Civil Stalking Injunction — Signed Order (p. 4 of 3)
Civil Stalking Injunction signed by Judge E. Blaine Rawson, September 14, 2023, expires September 12, 2026, Case No. 230700967, Davis County Utah
Civil Stalking Injunction, signed by Judge E. Blaine Rawson. Date issued: September 14, 2023. Order expires: September 12, 2026. Valid in all U.S. states and territories.

Hurst was represented in CV10-21-1197, the Christensen v. Graf defamation case, by Bryan Smith of Smith, Driscoll & Associates. Smith is an IFF board member and vice chair. The same network that published the articles provided Hurst's legal defense in the case that followed.

After the IFF

In early 2023, Hurst left the Idaho Freedom Foundation after nearly a decade as its vice president. He moved to a national role as Senior Director of Development at People United for Privacy Foundation, an organization focused on opposing donor disclosure laws. He continued co-hosting the Freedom Bros Podcast with Pruett, and continues producing political commentary in the same ideological lane.

Sources