CNN anchor in the dark about Sam Brinton, the infamous, nonbinary ex-Biden nuclear official
CNN anchor Pamela Brown insisted she knows absolutely nothing about Sam Brinton, the infamous, nonbinary former Biden administration official who was famously charged with multiple thefts of suitcases filled with women's clothing from airports.
Brinton first made headlines in mid-2022 after being appointed to lead nuclear waste policy at the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy as a nonbinary gender-fluid person who uses they/them pronouns. Brinton stayed in the news as the luggage theft scandal played out, but Brown apparently missed the entire ordeal.
During a heated segment on Tuesday, Brown said the Trump administration was "trying to claw back several employees who oversaw nuclear weapons," when Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., reminded her about Brinton.
Gop Lawmaker Clashes With Cnn Host Over Trump And Musk, Takes Shot At Network Ratings
"You talk about nuclear secrets, you had a person who was in charge of nuclear secrets, a man, who dressed up as a woman, would go into the airport and steal women's luggage, was overseeing those nuclear secrets under the Biden administration and I never heard y'all say a peep about that," Burchett said.
Brown shot back, "I don't know anything about that, I'll be transparent."
Read On The Fox News App
Burchett told the CNN anchor she should "look up" the Brinton story.
Brown might be in the dark because CNN largely ignored the Brinton story, publishing an online story headlined "Top Energy Department official no longer employed after luggage theft accusations," in December 2022.
The story was covered on-air by CNN only once, according to a search of Brinton's name via Grabien Media, when a December 2022 report on "The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer" downplayed his ties to Biden.
Non-binary Ex-biden Official Sam Brinton Was On Secret Taxpayer-funded Trip At Time Of Luggage Theft
"Several House Republican lawmakers jumped on the case to claim this incident in the case of the Biden administration prioritized wokeness over competence hiring Brinton in the first place. But we should note, Brinton was not a Biden appointee instead hired as a senior civil service official," CNN's Jeremy Diamond told viewers.
The comment by Brown really showed her "ignorance," according to Fox News host Greg Gutfeld, who noted it was a "huge story" outside the liberal bubble.
"If you're a news anchor at CNN, I guess you overlooked anything that revealed the incompetence and sheer insanity of the Biden administration," he said on "Gutfeld!"
"It should be the new motto for CNN, 'We know nothing, but at least it's transparent," Gutfeld joked.
CNN did not immediately respond to a request for comment about Brown not knowing the Brinton story.
In December 2022, the DOE announced Brinton had departed the agency but declined to comment on the reason.
Police Find Female Designer's Stolen Clothes In Ex-biden Official Sam Brinton's Home
In October 2022, police charged Brinton with stealing a traveler's baggage worth a total of $2,325 from the luggage carousel at the Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport after flying in from Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 16 of that year.
And in early December 2022, Las Vegas prosecutors charged Brinton with grand larceny of an item valued between $1,200 and $5,000. Police accused Brinton of stealing a suitcase with a total estimated worth of $3,670 on July 6, 2022, at Harry Reid International Airport in Las Vegas. The bag contained jewelry valued at $1,700, clothing worth $850 and makeup valued at $500.
Brinton was on an official taxpayer-funded trip to the Nevada National Security Site in Las Vegas at the time of the alleged Las Vegas theft.
Then, in February 2023, following reports of those two cases, a female Tanzanian fashion designer based in Houston told Fox News Digital that some articles of clothing Brinton had been photographed wearing were in her luggage that she reported missing in Washington, D.C., in 2018. Brinton was arrested by Maryland and Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority police officers related to Khamsin's allegations.
Brinton was able to escape jail time in all three instances.
Brinton agreed to enter an adult diversion program during a hearing on the Minnesota charge. Under the adult diversion program, Brinton was required to have a mental health evaluation, write a letter of apology to the victim, return any stolen property and complete three days of community service.
Brinton was ordered to pay $3,671 to a victim and $500 in additional fees, including a criminal fine, in the alleged Las Vegas theft. Clark County Judge Ann Zimmerman then handed Brinton a 180-day suspended jail sentence, a sentence that doesn't need to be served, and ordered Brinton to "stay out of trouble."
The Washington Free Beacon reported last year that Brinton "pleaded guilty to petit larceny as part of a sweetheart deal that will see him serve no jail time after facing felony charges that carried a sentence of up to 20 years" in the Khamsin case in D.C.
Fox News Digital's Thomas Catenacci contributed to this report. Original article source: CNN anchor in the dark about Sam Brinton, the infamous, nonbinary ex-Biden nuclear official
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
8 minutes ago
- Fox News
This is putting our officers in danger, former FBI special agent says
All times eastern Kelsey Grammer's Historic Battles for America Kelsey Grammer's Historic Battles for America Kelsey Grammer's Historic Battles for America FOX News Radio Live Channel Coverage WATCH LIVE: Mayor Bass speaks as Trump deploys Marines to Los Angeles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump vs. California
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. This is an edition of The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. Under Donald Trump, the federal government is like a bad parent: never there when you need him but eager to stick his nose in your business when you don't want him to. The relationship between Trump and California has always been bad, but the past few days represent a new low. On Friday, CNN reported that the White House was seeking to cut off as much federal funding to the Golden State as possible, especially to state universities. That afternoon, protests broke out in Los Angeles as ICE agents sought to make arrests. By Saturday, Trump had announced that he was federalizing members of the National Guard and deploying them to L.A., over the objections of Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat. Americans have seen the National Guard called out to deal with the aftermath of riots in the past, but its involvement over the weekend represents a dramatic escalation. The National Guard was deployed to L.A. in 1992, during riots after the acquittal of four police officers in the beating of Rodney King. The scale of the destruction in that instance, compared with scattered violence in L.A. this weekend, helps show why Trump's order was disproportionate. (National Guard troops were also deployed in Minneapolis during protests after the murder of George Floyd, at the request of Governor Tim Walz. Trump has falsely claimed that he deployed the troops when Walz wouldn't.) In all of these recent cases, however, governors have made the call to bring out the National Guard. A president has not done so since 1965, when Lyndon Johnson took control of the Alabama National Guard from the arch-segregationist Governor George Wallace and ordered it to protect civil-rights leaders' third attempt to march from Selma to Montgomery. The situations aren't even closely analogous. Johnson acted only after local leaders had demonstrated that law enforcement would violently attack the peaceful marchers. By contrast, the Los Angeles Police Department and the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department have plenty of experience and sufficient man power to deal with protests of the weekend's size, and military forces are a riskier choice because they aren't trained as police. This morning, Newsom said he will sue the administration over the deployment. Elizabeth Goitein, a scholar at the Brennan Center for Justice who has written extensively in The Atlantic about the abuse of presidential emergency powers, told The Washington Post that Trump's order 'is completely unprecedented under any legal authority.' 'The use of the military to quell civil unrest is supposed to be an absolute last resort,' she added. Trump is doing this, as my colleague Tom Nichols writes, because he wants to provoke a confrontation with California. The president sees tough immigration enforcement as a political winner, but he also wants to use the face-off to expand the federal government's power to control states. Trump's vision is federalism as a one-way street: If states need help, they might be on their own, but if states believe that federal intervention is unnecessary or even harmful, too bad. If the president wants to shut off funds to states for nothing more than political retribution or personal animus, he believes that he can do that. (A White House spokesperson told CNN that decisions about potential cuts were not final but said that 'no taxpayer should be forced to fund the demise of our country,' a laughably vague and overheated rationale.) If states have been struck by major disasters, however, they'd better hope they voted for Trump, or that their governors have a good relationship with him. Some of these attempts to strong-arm states are likely illegal, and will be successfully challenged in court. Others are in gray areas, and still others are plainly legal—manifestations of what I call 'total politics,' in which officials wield powers that are legal but improper or unwise. This is a marked shift from the traditional American conservative defense of states' rights. Although that argument has often been deployed to defend racist policies, such as slavery and segregation, the right has also argued for the prerogative of local people to stave off an overweaning federal government. Conservatives also tended to view Lyndon Johnson as a boogeyman, not a role model. Kristi Noem, now the secretary of Homeland Security, bristled at the idea of federalizing the National Guard just last year, when she was serving as governor of South Dakota. But Trump's entire approach is to centralize control. He has pursued Project 2025's plan to seize new powers for the executive branch and to establish right-wing Big Government, flexing the coercive capacity of the federal government over citizens' lives. Tom Homan, Trump's border czar, has suggested that he wouldn't hesitate to arrest Newsom, and Trump endorsed the idea today. And Trump allies have proposed all sorts of other ways to force state governments to comply, such as cutting off Justice Department grants or FEMA assistance for states that don't sign up to enforce Trump's immigration policies, an issue where state governments do not traditionally have a role. This duress is not limited to blue states. Just last week, under pressure from the DOJ, Texas agreed to trash a 24-year-old law (signed by then-Governor Rick Perry, who later became Trump's secretary of energy) that gives in-state college tuition to some undocumented immigrants. If nothing else, the Trump era has given progressives a new appreciation for states' rights. Democrat attorneys general have become some of the most effective opponents of the Trump White House, just as Republican ones battled the Obama and Biden administrations. On Friday, Newsom mused about California withholding federal taxes. This is plainly illegal, but you can see where he's coming from: In fiscal year 2022, the state contributed $83 billion dollars more to the federal government than it received. If California is not getting disaster aid but is getting hostile deployments of federal troops, Californians might find it harder to see what's in it for them. No wonder one poll commissioned by an advocacy group earlier this year found that 61 percent of the state's residents thought California would be better off as a separate nation. Secession isn't going to happen: As journalists writing about aspiring red-state secessionists in recent years have noted, leaving the Union is unconstitutional. But the fact that these questions keep coming up is a testament to the fraying relationship between the federal government and the states. Trump's recent actions toward California show why tensions between Washington and the states are likely to get worse as long as he's president. Related: David Frum: For Trump, this is a dress rehearsal. Tom Nichols: Trump is using the National Guard as bait. Here are three new stories from The Atlantic: An uproar at the NIH The real problem with the Democrats' ground game Where is Barack Obama? Today's News President Donald Trump's travel ban is in effect, affecting nationals from 19 countries. Israel intercepted a high-profile aid ship en route to Gaza and detained those on board, including the activist Greta Thunberg. They have been brought to the Israeli port of Ashdod, according to Israel's foreign ministry. Officials from America and China met in London for a second round of trade-truce negotiations. Dispatches The Wonder Reader: Summer is heating up. Isabel Fattal compiles stories about an invention that changed the course of human life: the AC unit. Explore all of our newsletters here. Evening Read What's So Shocking About a Man Who Loves His Wife? By Jeremy Gordon The first time that someone called me a 'wife guy,' I wasn't sure how to react. If you are encountering this phrase for the first time and think wife guy surely must mean 'a guy who loves his wife,' you would be dead wrong. The term, which rose to popularity sometime during the first Trump administration, describes someone whose spousal affection is so ostentatious that it becomes inherently untrustworthy. 'The wife guy defines himself,' the critic Amanda Hess has written, 'through a kind of overreaction to being married.' The wife guy posts a photo of his wife to Instagram along with several emojis of a man smiling with hearts in place of his eyes. He will repeat this sort of action so many times that even his closest friends may think, Enough already. Read the full article. More From The Atlantic The Democrats have an authenticity gap. The Wyoming hospital upending the logic of private equity Helen Lewis: The Trump administration's nasty campaign against trans people Culture Break Read. These six books are great reads for anybody interested in the power of saying no. Examine. Money is ruining television, Sophie Gilbert writes. Depictions of extreme wealth are everywhere on the small screen, and, well, it's all quite boring. Play our daily crossword. P.S. My colleague Katherine J. Wu's latest wrenching dispatch from the dismantling of the federal scientific establishment was published today. Katherine writes about a letter from more than 300 National Institutes for Health officials criticizing the NIH's direction in the past few months. One official, who both signed the letter and spoke with Katherine anonymously, told her, 'We're just becoming a weapon of the state.' The official added, 'They're using grants as a lever to punish institutions and academia, and to censor and stifle science.' That quote struck me because it dovetails directly with the mindset that Trump demonstrates in his dealing with the states: Parts of the federal government are most valuable to him when they can be used not to provide services to citizens, but to serve as a cudgel. — David Stephanie Bai contributed to this newsletter. When you buy a book using a link in this newsletter, we receive a commission. Thank you for supporting The Atlantic. Article originally published at The Atlantic
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Dozens of environmental groups sign letter opposing return of Utah public lands sale
People rally in opposition of Utah's lawsuit attempting to take control of federal lands at the Capitol in Salt Lake City on Saturday, Jan. 11, 2025. (Photo by Spenser Heaps for Utah News Dispatch) Organizations from around the country signed a letter on Monday urging U.S. senators not to include a controversial proposal to sell thousands of acres of federal land in Congress' budget bill. The letter comes in the wake of reports that Utah Sen. Mike Lee is considering reviving an amendment to the bill originally proposed by Rep. Celeste Maloy that would dispose of nearly 11,500 acres of Bureau of Land Management land in southwestern Utah, and about 450,000 acres in Nevada. Lee, when asked by a Politico reporter last week if he intended to reintroduce the disposal, responded, 'I gotta go vote, but yes.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Lee's office did not respond to a request for comment on Monday, and it's unclear whether Utah's senior GOP senator is considering bringing back an exact copy of Maloy's amendment, or something different. But more than 100 organizations and nonprofits around the country are sounding the alarm, telling Senate leaders to 'heed how dramatically unpopular this idea is and reject any misguided attempt to get public lands sales back in this bill.' 'Decisions about the future of public lands should remain in public hands. Leaders in the House and Senate, extractive industry, and private developers are using the reconciliation process to sell off federal lands to pay for billionaire tax cuts. But such moves are deeply unpopular. Polling has repeatedly shown that the public — especially westerners — strongly believes in keeping public lands in public hands and, across partisan lines, rejects any efforts that would lead to the sale of these shared and cherished lands,' reads the letter, signed by Utah groups like the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, Conserve Southwest Utah, Save Our Canyons, Great Basin Water Network and Back Country Horsemen of Utah. Public lands sale may return to 'big, beautiful' bill with Mike Lee amendment The letter is addressed to Lee, who chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, New Mexico Democrat Martin Heinrich, the committee's ranking member, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat. Maloy's amendment was dropped from the budget bill after it received pushback from all sides of the aisle. That includes Montana Republican Rep. Ryan Zinke, who previously said selling public lands is a line he would not cross and rallied support from a bipartisan group of lawmakers to strip the proposal from the bill. 'The public had no opportunity to participate in the process of identifying these parcels, let alone time to understand the long-term effect of selling off these public lands,' the letter reads. Maloy's proposal identified parcels owned by the Bureau of Land Management to sell to Washington and Beaver counties, the Washington County Water Conservancy District and the city of St. George. The land would have been used for water infrastructure (like reservoirs and wells), an airport expansion in St. George, new and widened roads, recreation and housing. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
