Biden AutoPen Signature scandal

[SunnyinBangrak]

Help me understand the forum lefts outrage against Trump over this.

 

An unknown person gave corrupt politicians pre-emptive and all encompassing pardons for crimes not charged yet going back over a decade, using some automated pen.

 

And Trump is the problem??

 

[Yagoda]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

Still waiting for the powerful evidence and arguments you apparently  believed you had.

I already made you look like a fool, guess you still cant understand the issue or the argument 

[Yagoda]

36 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Help me understand the forum lefts outrage against Trump over this.

 

An unknown person gave corrupt politicians pre-emptive and all encompassing pardons for crimes not charged yet going back over a decade, using some automated pen.

 

And Trump is the problem??

 

It would be really cool to enpanel a grand jury though.  Begin with the pardon office. Joe of course would have to affirm, under oath, that he personally pardoned each person and directed that same be reduced to writing. Of course he wouldnt remember.

 

Take Milley: How did he end up on the pardon list? Who talked to him?

[SLOWHAND225]

3 hours ago, Purdey said:

Several presidents have used an autopen. It isn't illegal. 

However, any president who magically declassifies documents by just saying, "I hereby declare you declassified!" Is in trouble. 

Get out of the sun......... 
Nobodies saying using an auto pen is illegal, at all. 
They're saying that his staffer used the pen to sign things poopypants didn't know about.

Actually, the President does have that authority. You should spend just a little bit of time reading about EO # 13526
You should also read about Original classification authorities and derivative classifiers so you know the difference.
And not to put too fine a point on it but documents are not classified, the information on them is.

[placeholder]

31 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

I already made you look like a fool, guess you still cant understand the issue or the argument 

As usual, instead of engaging with the issues attempting a rational refutation of the specific points I raised, All you can do is engage in name calling.

[Yagoda]

6 minutes ago, placeholder said:

As usual, instead of engaging with the issues attempting a rational refutation of the specific points I raised, All you can do is engage in name calling.

OK, here: You still cant understand the issue or the argument. Why dont you reread.

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Yagoda said:

OK, here: You still cant understand the issue or the argument. Why dont you reread.

Or maybe the problem is that you just don't write very well. At any rate You're still offering the same refusal to engage in specifics.

[rough diamond]

27 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Or maybe the problem is that you just don't write very well. At any rate You're still offering the same refusal to engage in specifics.

I thought you would have known by now that it is impossible to have a logical discussion/exchange of views with Yagoda as it only responds to it's own/only line of thought.

I no longer interreact with it as it is a waste of time as you must be realising by now.

[riclag]

2 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Help me understand the forum lefts outrage against Trump over this.

 

An unknown person gave corrupt politicians pre-emptive and all encompassing pardons for crimes not charged yet going back over a decade, using some automated pen.

 

And Trump is the problem??

 

I like the way you explained it too.

 

Here’s Missouri AG  explaining the purpose behind voiding the pardons.

 

Legal minds are approaching the Autopen pardons through questioning Bidens mental acuity ! 

 

 

 

[Yellowtail]

4 minutes ago, rough diamond said:

I thought you would have known by now that it is impossible to have a logical discussion/exchange of views with Yagoda as it only responds to it's own/only line of thought.

I no longer interreact with it as it is a waste of time as you must be realising by now.

Rather than constantly discussing/attacking other members, why do you not try to come up a comment of you own?

[Yagoda]

38 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Or maybe the problem is that you just don't write very well. At any rate You're still offering the same refusal to engage in specifics.

Well let me help you.

 

Do you think the existence of a pardon can be challenged by the Gov, if raised by a person as a defense to a criminal charge?

 

[placeholder]

6 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Well let me help you.

 

Do you think the existence of a pardon can be challenged by the Gov, if raised by a person as a defense to a criminal charge?

 

This is right wing revenge porn. Has there ever been a Federal prosecutor ever anywhere who has attempted to overturn a presidential pardon? I couldn't find any examples.

 

[Yagoda]

5 minutes ago, placeholder said:

This is right wing revenge porn. Has there ever been a Federal prosecutor ever anywhere who has attempted to overturn a presidential pardon? I couldn't find any examples.

 

Avoidance much. Why cant you answer the question?

 

Do you think the existence of a pardon can be challenged by the Gov, if raised by a person as a defense to a criminal charge?

 

The whole Forum is watching.

[placeholder]

15 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Avoidance much. Why cant you answer the question?

 

Do you think the existence of a pardon can be challenged by the Gov, if raised by a person as a defense to a criminal charge?

 

The whole Forum is watching.

 

[rough diamond]

42 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Rather than constantly discussing/attacking other members, why do you not try to come up a comment of you own?

Why don't you do the same as you are becoming repetitive on this high horse subject of yours.

Go and stick your nose where it belongs.

[placeholder]

 

21 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Avoidance much. Why cant you answer the question?

 

Do you think the existence of a pardon can be challenged by the Gov, if raised by a person as a defense to a criminal charge?

 

The whole Forum is watching.

A prosecutor can try to challenge anything. What's stopping them? That doesn't mean a judge won't quash it. 

[Yagoda]

Just now, placeholder said:

 

A prosecutor can try to challenge anything. What's stopping them? That doesn't mean a judge won't quash it. 

OK. So I was right and you were wrong on that part. You want to admit that like a man or just let the folks  giggle.

 

Now try this one.

 

Do you think that there are circumstances where a Pardon can be deemed null and void ab initio?

 

By the way, you quash subpoenaes. In this case you would make a factual finding and order, thats not "quashing". Dont want you to seem even more ignorant

[Smokin Joe]

21 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

As I understand it, if the president says you're pardoned, your pardoned. 

 

In the same way that if the president says documents are declassified, they're declassed. 

 

The auto-pen is a nothing burger. That said, if it can be shown that stuff was being signed that Biden did not actually know about and or approve it could be a s-effing storm. 

 

Exactly. The folks that are making a big deal about not always having a physical or "wet" signature are just confusing the issue.

 

But I believe that many documents were signed without Biden's knowledge or participation. That's the real issue.

 

The other big issue is whether a preemptive pardon is legit. It basically gives someone permission to commit a crime and then use a preemptive pardon as a defense.

 

 

[riclag]

7 hours ago, WorriedNoodle said:

This is complete nonsense. The link clearly states: The conservative Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project uncovered the situation. This is the same outfit behind the toxic 2025 project that Trump supposedly knows nothing about.

 

Snopes fact checking site says:

 

The Oversight Project, in its X post, claimed it "gathered every document we could find with Biden's signature over the course of his presidency. All used the same autopen signature except for the the announcement that the former President was dropping out of the race last year."

 

Fox News claimed it "examined more than 20 Biden-era executive orders documented on the Federal Register's office between 2021 and 2024 and found each had the same signature." The Federal Register is the U.S. government's daily publication for executive orders and other official documents.

 

While it is true that many of Biden's executive orders carry a signature matching the one posted by the Oversight Project, the National Archives, which runs the Federal Register, said in an emailed statement that official documents published in the Federal Register use a copy of the president's signature that "comes from one graphic file."

"At the beginning of each administration, the White House sends a sample of the President's signature to the Office of the Federal Register, which uses it to create the graphic image for all Presidential Documents published in the Federal Register," communications staff at the National Archives wrote.  

 

As the Federal Register's digitized documents do not represent what the signature looks like on the original documents, the Oversight Project's claim lacks credibility.

 

Neither the project nor Fox News provided evidence that these are autopen signatures, other than the fact that the purported autopen signature looked different from the signature Biden used in a letter announcing he would drop out of the presidential race in 2024.

The Ap from their side after Hurr’s report :

Sounds like this reporter has mentioned memory issues a lot , amongst other mental deficiencies .

 

“The report described the 81-year-old Democrat’s memory as “hazy,” “fuzzy,” “faulty,” “poor” and having “significant limitations.”

 

 

 

 

“The report from special counsel Robert Hurr resolves a criminal investigation that had shadowed Biden’s presidency for the last year. But its bitingly critical assessment of his handling of sensitive government records and unflattering characterizations of his memory will spark fresh questions about his competency and age that cut at voters’ most deep-seated concerns about his candidacy for re-election”.

https://apnews.com/article/biden-hur-garland-classified-documents-836b99fe9cbef9ba7d32602f4928efec

 

https://apnews.com/article/biden-memory-age-special-counsel-report-doj-f4232bc8316e556ed467185b67c3e0a8

[placeholder]

Just now, Yagoda said:

OK. So I was right and you were wrong on that part. You want to admit that like a man or just let the folks  giggle.

 

Now try this one.

 

Do you think that there are circumstances where a Pardon can be deemed null and void ab initio?

 

By the way, you quash subpoenaes. In this case you would make a factual finding and order, thats not "quashing". Dont want you to seem even more ignorant

No. If the prosecutors actions are ruled to have no legitimate basis, then how does that make you right? One of the hallmarks of someone who has nothing is their assertion that they have been proven to be right and/or their opponent proven to be wrong.

 

Thanks for correcting my terminology. But that says nothing about the validity of your argument.

 

But no, I don't think a pardon can be deemed null and void ab initio, As legal scholars have noted, the power of the pardon is derived from the British monarch's pardon power. And the King can do no wrong. The only exception to this might be the executive's Constitutional obligation to enforce the law. It could be argued that in that case a self-pardon might be forbidden. But that's a very limited case.

[placeholder]

7 minutes ago, Smokin Joe said:

 

Exactly. The folks that are making a big deal about not always having a physical or "wet" signature are just confusing the issue.

 

But I believe that many documents were signed without Biden's knowledge or participation. That's the real issue.

 

The other big issue is whether a preemptive pardon is legit. It basically gives someone permission to commit a crime and then use a preemptive pardon as a defense.

 

 

As noted several times above, the Supreme Court has ruled the preemptive pardons are legitimate. 

As for your beliefs, they're your beliefs. And that's all they are.

 

[Yagoda]

16 minutes ago, Smokin Joe said:

But I believe that many documents were signed without Biden's knowledge or participation. That's the real issue.

 

The other big issue is whether a preemptive pardon is legit. It basically gives someone permission to commit a crime and then use a preemptive pardon as a defense.

 

But if you raise a preemptive pardon as a defense, would not the Govt have the right to allege and prove the real issue as you framed it?

 

The issue actually becomes: Is there a pardon?

[Yellowtail]

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

As noted several times above, the Supreme Court has ruled the preemptive pardons are legitimate. 

As for your beliefs, they're your beliefs. And that's all they are.

 

I think the Supreme Court ruled that preemptive pardons are legitimate.

 

I do not think they ruled the preemptive pardons were legitimate. 

 

That said, I think the pardons will stand. 

[Yagoda]

5 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I think the Supreme Court ruled that preemptive pardons are legitimate.

 

I do not think they ruled the preemptive pardons were legitimate. 

 

That said, I think the pardons will stand. 

Unless they are shown not to be pardons at all.

[placeholder]

7 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Incoherent doubletalk.

 

Again, no analysis or reasoning offered.

 

[Yagoda]

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

Again, no analysis or reasoning offered.

 

The Forum can judge. You tried.

 

Ever hear of a forged pardon? Who is the King btw.

[Captain Flack]

A troll post has been removed.

 

@Yagoda i have told you before this forum is open to all poster, it is not for you to censor opinion, based on what you perceive their nationality.

 

 

[placeholder]

5 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

The Forum can judge. You tried.

 

Ever hear of a forged pardon? Who is the King btw.

I made a statement of fact. I didn't declare myself the winner nor you the loser.  I leave that kind of sad activity to others.

[Yellowtail]

17 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Again, no analysis or reasoning offered.

 

If it can be shown that Biden was unaware of what he was "signing", or if it can be shown that staff were using his signature, I think they could be voided. 

 

But there is no way Biden will go against his staffers. 

[Yagoda]

3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

But there is no way Biden will go against his staffers. 

He too far gone to remember.