Biden Autopen Scandal: NYT Exposes Questions of Presidential Fitness and Authority

Autopen Scandal and Presidential Authority

• 💡 New evidence suggests Biden staffers, not Biden himself, approved controversial pardons using an autopen.
• 🎯 Over 4,200 pardons were issued during Biden's term, with a striking 96% occurring in his final year.
• 🔑 This raises serious questions about Biden's mental fitness and who was truly in charge of the executive office.
• ⚠️ The New York Times has begun covering the scandal, indicating its growing significance.

Legal and Constitutional Implications

• ⚖️ The Constitution explicitly grants the power to pardon federal crimes solely to the President, not to staff or advisors.
• 🚫 An email exchange shows an assistant approving the use of the autopen for pardons, with a counselor stating, "I approve," rather than the President.
• 🏛️ This practice challenges the efficacy of constitutional government and the role of the executive office.
• 🚨 If this type of action is permissible, it could render the office of the president a hollow shell used by the administrative state.

The Role of the New York Times

• 📰 The New York Times' coverage of the autopen scandal is seen as a significant development, even by those on the right.
• 📈 This indicates the story has "legs" and is likely to persist, forcing engagement even from those who might prefer to ignore it.
• 🗣️ The Times is now asking Joe Biden questions about the scandal, suggesting a shift in narrative.

Comparison to Past Presidencies

• 📊 FDR granted approximately 3,796 clemencies over 12 years, while Biden issued 4,245 in four years, with the vast majority in his final year.
• ⏳ The sheer volume and timing of these pardons, especially in the final year, suggest a lack of direct presidential oversight.
• 🧐 The discussion questions how much time Biden could have realistically spent on each pardon, given the numbers and his perceived cognitive state.

Broader Implications for the Presidency

• 👤 The scandal suggests an attempt to make the office of the president an "empty box" through which staff and the administrative state can push their agendas.
• 👥 This shifts power away from a single executive decision-maker to a "committee of everyone" operating through the office.
• 📉 The argument is made that this undermines the "credential part of politics" and the principle of one person being in charge.
• 🚀 The hope is that the indefensible nature of this situation will lead to a broader public acknowledgment of wrongdoing.