Regardless, the bus didn't STRIKE him - nor did he indicate that this was a defensive move. And given that HAD the bus "struck" him, "hit" him, etc., this would have aided his story.
In my reading of the article, the bus *did* strike the cyclist. Perhaps not by striking his hand in passing, but certainly once the cyclist positioned himself in front of the bus.
Until we hear from the cyclist/author, any speculation on whether the bus brushed his bar-gripped knuckles, or was simply in arm's reach, is just that: speculation.
Beyond the knuckle-scrape debate, per the author, the bus driver not only "bumped" him that first time, but then backed up, and bumped him again. Intentionally.
This, to me, is the most telling part of the story: that the driver knowingly sought to use her superior firepower (the bus) to intimidate the cyclist. Thinking that she could get away with indulging her anger, as bullies will do.
If a warm body is blocking the bus driver's path, she needs to just stop. Doesn't matter if the body blocking her path is a cyclist; a crazy nekkid person doing the watusi; a high-falutin' public official; or anyone else. Yeah, it's inconvenient and aggravating to the driver and passengers, but so are bus-breakdowns. It's part of the reality on the street.