The AutoPen Controversy

[Adonsa7100]

Hi, 

Articles are popping up on various websites about the use of Joe Biden's  autopen for the signing of every document except one.  However, as of now, the authors are failing to articulate the application of the legality of such signatures.  They present the situation, and nothing more.  

What they need to write about are the names of the staffers who likely had access to the autopen machine, the legalities that may apply, and the likely outcomes.  The names of Biden's staffers, ie. Anita Dunn, are public information. 

Based on their vast legal knowledge, authors need to predict the probabilities  that signatures will be either enforceable or null and void.  They then need to write about the outcomes and remedies if the latter occurs (and not just about pardons). 

Better yet,
The issue needs to be taken to a betting website, ie. Predictit and let the betters do what they do. 

Writers need to stop putting question marks at the ends of their titles or graphics, they're the experts, they need to do better. 

This article is informative but falls short of revealing likely outcomes if all the pieces of paper are null and void.

[ArMaP]

Apparently, it's all legal, if the president intended to sign it.

Source

[Adonsa7100]

Apparently, it's all legal, if the president intended to sign it.

Source

Hi ArMaP,
Thanks much for the link. That pretty much clears everything up for bills passed by congress. 
For documents other than bills passed by Congress,
things should get interesting (such as pardons)

Even more interesting might be the identity of the autopen operator
and what might be said under oath, if it comes to that. 
Thanks again!

[sahgwa]

How does one show proof of intent? Especially from/in a puppet-man such as that?

[FlyersFan]

Apparently, it's all legal, if the president intended to sign it.

Source

The problem is proving that Biden did understand what the heck he was doing over the past four years.
a case can be made that he didn't.
Speaker Johnson had a discussion with Biden and it proved that Biden didn't remember signing certain paperwork ...

[ArMaP]

How does one show proof of intent? Especially from/in a puppet-man such as that?

Only by asking the person in question.

[ArMaP]

The problem is proving that Biden did understand what the heck he was doing over the past four years.
a case can be made that he didn't.

Now it's impossible to know what he understood then.

[sahgwa]

Now it's impossible to know what he understood then.

Per your post reply to mine and this one too, well that is some sweet deniability huh

[Maxmars]

This autopen fiasco is just a clear indication that whether intended or not, the effective result is the same.  It's "done."

Chasing an aging man's perceptions is often like chasing fleas.

The idea of a President not being able to physically sign a document is far from outrageous.

But as usual, that casual acceptance gets unduly stretched when it's used as a 'default' under such circumstantial conditions over so long a period.

It raises questions about "national governance by partisan committee."  N'est-ce pas?

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

Technicality to put Liz Cheney in jail?

That's what I think the controversy is about. The ultimate end for why there is controversy.

‘Well, if he's elected, it's not that dangerous because we have all of these checks and balances,’ don't fully understand the extent to which the Republicans in Congress today have been co-opted. … One of the things that we see happening today is a sort of a sleepwalking into dictatorship in the United States.”

Dec 2023.

We must make her face justice for unfairly calling Trump out. How dare she listen to former associates and use intuition to call it a dangerous personalty cult.

Because Biden's autopen pardon's aren't valid! So sayeth the King with dwindling judicial checks or balance. Jailing that devious traitor will surely prove to the world the dictatorship thing is not at all true!