Attorney. "Cultish right wing hack" - Norman Ornstein.
United States
Joined July 2008
- Tweets99.4K
- Following4.9K
- Followers2.9K
- Likes416K
Joe Bingham retweeted
🚨 EXCLUSIVE: The migrant accused of attempting to hijack a United Airlines flight this week claimed to be transgender to get a “fast pass” into the U.S.,@realDailyWire has learned.
His trans claim is what allowed the suspect to stay in the country after two prior deportations:
dailywire.com/news/exclusive…
Joe Bingham retweeted
Yes very much in this camp. I am perfectly willing to believe Trump and family have enriched themselves in inappropriate ways but find a dearth of trustworthy reporting on the subject that isn’t TDS-tainted, that will properly place the level and substance of alleged corruption in context of DC baseline.
Has anyone tried to put together a good-faith accounting of the admin's corruption as compared to say Biden, Pelosi, or Clinton? Most of us acknowledge there's "something" there but I have no concept of the scope of the self-dealing and how it stacks up against "politics as usual" and I don't trust NPR or The Bulwark to be reasonable about it. When you press libs to articulate why they think Trump is so bad, given that the policies aren't too diff from '90s Demonrat, they always come back to "Oh he's enriching himself to the tune of billions, the crypto schemes, insider trading, etc." They act like he's Boss Tweed, but does this stuff actually amount to much?
Quite a doozy of an error here from @nytimes.
Wow, the entire NYT piece by @mmcintire claiming a Blackstone misquotation by Scalia in Heller (using "or" instead of "and" is based on misunderstanding citation signals. Scalia uses the "See" signal to hit a large variety of sources indicating it's not direct quotation when he says "or," but the article is premised on direct quotation…
How did they get the pubic hair to say his name in the first place
Russell Brand’s Pubic Hair Removed From London Museum After Rape Conviction, Curator Says 'I Have No Desire to Hear His Name Again' variety.com/2026/global/news…
6
435
Joe Bingham retweeted
The White House Counsel is correct that the incoming Dem congress has explicitly promised retribution on the grounds of "gay pettiness" but simply assumes that gay pettiness is not a valid legislative purpose.
Joe Bingham retweeted
We now see playing out in real time the thesis of my op-eds for the Federalist and Fox News. A lot of attention was paid to comments about investigating the comments from Congressman Garcia. The larger point is highlighted in this letter. The full scope of Congress’ compulsory process has never been tested but as WHC Scharf’s letter makes clear, Congress can only utilize it for legitimate legislative purposes and not harassment. If Democrats keep up their rhetoric, they will force SCOTUS to have to pull back Congress’ institutional power.
🚨JUST IN🚨
The White House has sent a warning letter to incoming House Oversight Committee chair Rep. Robert Garcia warning that some of the new Democratic majority’s investigations could cross into criminal behavior.
The letter, penned by WH counsel Will Scharf, seems to be taking an aggressive stance which likely means the White House intends on getting aggressive for Democratic oversight when they take the majority.
The letter asserts that the Democratic probes will be aimed at harassing the WH rather than serve any valid legislative end.
"We are monitoring the abusive and capricious threats that are now proliferating from Democrat legislators who seek to abuse the legislative process to intimidate and to interfere with the lawful functioning of government. Recent public statements underscore these concerns. You and your congressional colleagues have asserted that they will issue subpoenas to harass, threaten, and deter dedicated members of the Administration from further service."
SOURCE: Punchbowl News
Joe Bingham retweeted
Very important post from Eric. District judges are issuing orders that are unlawful and then sanction career AUSAs because they allegedly misrepresented the scope of the injunction in another case. Yet there are no consequences for the district court judges who issue unlawful orders.
Joe Bingham retweeted
Court holds that I win because plaintiff didn’t show I broke the law. The media:
JUST IN: Judge Cobb rules that @DHSGenCounsel put a man in danger by publicizing his asylum paperwork claiming to be gay — and then mocking him for it. But she denies the man’s emergency motion for one reason: it’s not clear if DHS Secretary Mullin authorized the disclosure.
Lee deserved better.
BREAKING: REPUBLICAN Sen. Boozman's refusal to support Lee Rudofsky to the 8th Circuit has tanked his nomination by the Trump admin, a source tells me. Trump will go with the senator's preferred choice, AR Justice Cody Hiland.
Rudofsky has issued a statement:
"I will be forever grateful to President Trump for the honor of his nomination. But under our Constitution—which I believe is the most ingenious document in the history of the world—the President’s nomination must be confirmed by the Senate. And the reality is that, without the support of my home-state Senators, confirmation is simply not a practical possibility in today’s Senate. So I understand completely the President’s decision to withdraw my nomination. Cody Hiland is a solid jurist and a good friend. I look forward to working with him in the federal judiciary.”
143
Joe Bingham retweeted
Fantastic nomination. There’s nobody better than @ElliotGaiser and his leadership of OLC over the past year shows it. I look forward to his speedy confirmation!
Joe Bingham retweeted
I still get angry thinking that at one point ONE EIGHTH of DOJ man-hours were being wasted on this low-IQ tabloid drivel. Could’ve been suing universities, investigating serious fraud, litigating election integrity, suing educational institutions for anti-white discrimination, or literally any other important priority. Bringing up Epstein means I immediately file you in the idiot bin.
I was one of the first people to call out the Massie/Epstein grift. I wish I could show you the DMs from accounts that came after me for questioning Massie. Many let me know that they liked my videos but were now very "disappointed" in me. 😂
Unlike them, I had watched all the hearings during the Biden years when Christopher Wray was asked about the Epstein case. Massie was in some of those hearings. Wray was asked numerous times about the Epstein case and he would respond to every question with "there is nothing more to share, but I'll check and let you know if I find anything."
Wray gave that answer every time he was asked. It was a complete blowoff. Massie watched. He never one time questioned Wray about Epstein and he had no follow up questions when Wray would casually dismiss questions about Epstein. Why? Because he didn't GAF back then. Just like the Democrats and the MSM.
It's crazy that there are still some people who are still pretending that this had anything to with the "survivors" and that it wasn't completely, from the start, about trying to hurt Trump.
Massie and Khanna were to the Epstein hoax what Schiff and Swalwell were to the Russia hoax. Massie was the Schiff type, sleazily parsing his words and allegations. Khanna was the retarded Swalwell type, spouting whatever ridiculous claims entered his head.
I created and posted a video of some of the claims Ro Khanna has made about Epstein and the Epstein files. It's absolutely pure comedy. All bullshit.
Most people aren't aware of how much time these two spent on TV together from June of 2025 to July of 2026. Schiff and Swalwell TV type time, both of them making ridiculous claims and none of it turned out to be true. They didn't do that because they "care about survivors." They did it to hurt the current President. Can we all stop pretending please?
Do you know that Thomas Massie has repeatedly said during interviews that he endorsed Trump because Trump promised to be transparent about the Epstein files? That's a pretty ridiculous lie, but it doesn't stop Massie from saying it.
Massie has also repeatedly claimed that "all of Trump's friends" are part of the Epstein class. What does that even mean? That's Adam Schiff saying "Trump loves the Russians."
Remember when Massie made that post implying that Trump started the Iran War to deflect from the Epstein files? After posting that Massie went on TV and claimed that he wasn't actually saying that but that OTHER people were saying it and that's why he posted it. More Adam Schiff type talk.
In November of 2025 Massie held a press conference and made these statements as facts:
▪️There are men who have never been investigated before who are co-conspirators of Epstein's and who are guilty of rape and sexual abuse.
Never been investigated before but are guilty. How could he know that to be true? How could he have possibly made that claim unless he saw proof, which would mean that he is now covering up those cases.
He also said:
▪️There are 1,000 victims of Epstein.
▪️There are at least 20 accusations of rape and sex trafficking that the FBI is covering up.
▪️When the Epstein files are released, all these men will be exposed and will go to prison.
▪️If the names of these guilty men are not released and they are not arrested, himself, MTG, or Democrats will read the names on the House floor.
Was any of that true or was he completely full of shit?
Thomas Massie is the Adam Schiff of Trump's second term. Just watch what he's doing right now.
Joe Bingham retweeted
Just when I thought no one could be more evil than Steve Descano
🚨 They didn't lose the child's age. They were trained to leave it out.
Under federal immigration law, sexual abuse of a minor is an aggravated felony. For a noncitizen, it means mandatory detention, deportation and a permanent bar from ever coming back. In my 24 years at ICE ERO, those were the cases we never let slide.
The key element is the child's age. Take the age out of the conviction and you take out the aggravated felony.
According to the House Judiciary Committee report, the Bronx DA's 2019 plea-bargaining guide told prosecutors in these cases to "offer something that does not have the child's age as an element."
Think about what that means. A grown man commits a sex crime against a child. He pleads to something that, on paper, could have been against an adult. The record that reaches ICE no longer shows a child victim. The removal case falls apart, and he stays here.
The child didn't get a plea deal. The child gets to live with it, and maybe in the same neighborhood as him.
This came out Oct. 26. Two weeks later there's been no outrage from the Bronx DA, the AG or the networks. Nothing. @claudiatenney @JudiciaryGOP @Jim_Jordan @itsyourgov @NMalliotakis @EliseStefanik
foxnews.com/politics/house-r…
Joe Bingham retweeted
Bizarre to me how much of this discussion has centered on the personal injury to Sabatini (tbf: the actual topic of the suit he won) rather than the revelation that a professor maliciously destroyed the career of another, that she lied and withheld relevant information, and that the net result of these revelations is not only that MIT apparently ran a kangaroo court but that it has no interest in restoring a reputation it harmed, in punishing sociopaths on the faculty, or even in re-allowing a gifted and extraordinarily productive scientist to continue his work. This has much deeper implications about publicly funded science than a simple episode of workplace drama.
This is phenomenal reporting because it so clearly shows @MIT's absolute cowardice in how it is treating not only @DMSabatini personally, which is bad enough as is, but what little regard it has for integrity, academic and otherwise, seeing that it's not even bothering to reinstate him despite a jury in Boston having found that the scientist who accused him of having a "nonconsensual" sexual relationship with her defamed him. She, of course, remains employed by MIT.
Joe Bingham retweeted
You had nothing to do with it and you are an irrelevant grifter. But see you in court, repeat loser! I’m sure you’ll keep showing up to my lawsuits because you have a good grift going. Sad!
Joe Bingham retweeted
Genuinely insane that so many states haven't opted in.
It's free money from the feds! It can go to public school students! It doesn't cost the state anything!
100% pure teacher's union capture.
Over 30 states have opted into the new Federal Scholarship Tax Credit Program, but teachers' unions are still fighting it.
Rather than informing members about the program and helping them get dollars to their students, the largest teachers’ unions have tried to stop the flow of money. They keep insisting that the program is a “voucher” and refuse to explain to their members that it could benefit their students.
