There are no recorded chains of authorization. No way to prove that Biden actually said "yes" to each use, much less that he actually was aware of each use. These are forgeries, if there is no substantiation of authorization.
Also, pardons are only exculpations of pre-existing named offenses. They are not omnibus grants of immunity from offenses yet to be identified. Only Congress has a power to make a grant of immunity, in regard to testimony and self-incrimination.
🪢 some how you take a rope parallel three rows then at the bottom you go around 13 times and at the top there’s a loop you place the end of the 13 wraps place in the loop and tighten wa la hang man’s tie
I asked AI in depth about the autopen pardons and the results are not very encouraging.
Here is a summary of the key legal and historical points discussed in this thread:
Scope of Presidential Pardons
No Specificity Required:
The U.S. Constitution gives the president broad clemency powers. Pardons do not have to name a specific crime.
Precedents: Historical examples include Gerald Ford’s blanket pardon of Richard Nixon for any crimes he "may have committed" and Jimmy Carter’s generalized amnesty for Vietnam War draft evaders.
Legal Validity of the AutopenIntent Over Mechanics:
An autopen signature is legally valid if the president explicitly authorized its use for that document. It becomes invalid only if staff use it without the president's knowledge or directive.
No Physical Signature Mandate: The Constitution does not explicitly require a pardon to be written or signed by hand. The legal test is whether it reflects the actual will of the executive.
The Doctrine of Ratification:
Even if staff used an autopen without permission initially, a president’s subsequent public statements claiming ownership of the choice legally validates the action retroactively. Joe Biden did this with regards to Fauci.
The Current Autopen Controversy
The Dispute: President Donald Trump and House Republicans challenged the validity of former President Joe Biden’s end-of-term pardons (including Dr. Anthony Fauci's), claiming they were invalid because they were stamped via autopen.
The Evidence: Biden's authorization is backed by official White House press announcements, formal DOJ pardon warrants, internal White House signing logs, and Biden's own verbal confirmations to the media.
Current Status: No active court cases exist. A federal criminal probe into Biden's autopen use was quietly shelved by prosecutors due to a lack of a viable criminal case. The dispute remains a political and legislative debate in Congress.
Historical PrecedentWidespread Use: Joe Biden is not unique in using the machine. Nearly every modern president—including Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, Gerald Ford, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump—has utilized mechanical or digital signature duplication to handle high-volume or last-minute executive paperwork and pardons.
We are getting to the exciting part of the movie! 🎞️🍿
There are no recorded chains of authorization. No way to prove that Biden actually said "yes" to each use, much less that he actually was aware of each use. These are forgeries, if there is no substantiation of authorization.
Also, pardons are only exculpations of pre-existing named offenses. They are not omnibus grants of immunity from offenses yet to be identified. Only Congress has a power to make a grant of immunity, in regard to testimony and self-incrimination.
Supreme Court?
Dream on?
Just send him to El Salvador or better yet, send him to Russia where millions died!
The alligators at Alligator Alcatraz firmly disagree.
🪢 some how you take a rope parallel three rows then at the bottom you go around 13 times and at the top there’s a loop you place the end of the 13 wraps place in the loop and tighten wa la hang man’s tie
Since braindead wasn't legitimate president, it doesn't stand anyway.
I asked AI in depth about the autopen pardons and the results are not very encouraging.
Here is a summary of the key legal and historical points discussed in this thread:
Precedents: Historical examples include Gerald Ford’s blanket pardon of Richard Nixon for any crimes he "may have committed" and Jimmy Carter’s generalized amnesty for Vietnam War draft evaders.
No Physical Signature Mandate: The Constitution does not explicitly require a pardon to be written or signed by hand. The legal test is whether it reflects the actual will of the executive.
The Doctrine of Ratification: Even if staff used an autopen without permission initially, a president’s subsequent public statements claiming ownership of the choice legally validates the action retroactively. Joe Biden did this with regards to Fauci.
The Evidence: Biden's authorization is backed by official White House press announcements, formal DOJ pardon warrants, internal White House signing logs, and Biden's own verbal confirmations to the media.
Current Status: No active court cases exist. A federal criminal probe into Biden's autopen use was quietly shelved by prosecutors due to a lack of a viable criminal case. The dispute remains a political and legislative debate in Congress.