Post New

Trump has no idea who he's pardoning. And yet there's only an uproar about "Biden's Autopen". What IS unpardonable is the media's endless "orange washing" of everything Trump does, when those same things cause weeks of controversy if done by a democratic official.

O'DONNELL: Why did you pardon Changpeng Zhao?

TRUMP: Are you ready? I don't know who he is.

O'DONNELL: His crypto exchange Binance helped facilitate a $2b purchase of World Liberty Financial's stablecoin. And they you pardoned him.

TRUMP: Here's the thing -- I know nothing about it.

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3m4osr6d...

I think you possibly misunderstand the point being made by Conservatives and Republicans about the Biden autopen scandal.

It is perfectly legitimate and lawful for a President to delegate investigation and recommendations concerning who to pardon (or not) to subordinates. Whether that be Trump, Biden, or anyone else.

But the actual Presidential/constitutional act--that of issuing the pardon itself--cannot be delegated.


Biden delegated the actual act of pardoning to his subordinates, who used the autopen technology to execute thousands of pardons. Those subordinates had no constitutional authority to do so.

There is no record that I am aware of, or that anyone else is aware of, that Biden even orally authorized any of the autopen pardons.

Both the preliminary decision making power AND the actual constitutional act of deciding who to pardon, and executing the pardons themselves, were assumed by subordinates such as Zients under the justification that Biden was effectively non compos mentos.

There is no record that I am aware of, or that anyone else is aware of, that Biden even orally authorized any of the autopen pardons.

I mean, other than Biden's personal statements that he did. And those of his staff, who provided testimony to GOP Congressional investigators that Biden authorized these decisions.

You may choose to disregard witness testimony if you like, but there does exist evidence that Biden authorized all of those pardons - and no evidence to the contrary has been provided.

I think you're mistaken, albaby. The evidence is simply that Biden told Zients et al. to decide who to pardon. There is no evidence, testimonial or otherwise, that Biden did any final review of any of the specific individuals that Zients et al. thought should be pardoned, except of course Biden's own family members (perhaps). Since Biden did not actually execute any individual pardon, and did not actually authorize any individual pardons (except perhaps his family members), at best he unconstitutionally delegated the pardon authority to his subordinates.

If you actually have any specific testimony from Biden or anyone else to the contrary, I'd be interested. As I said in my prior post, I'm not aware of any.

I believe in the Rule of Law. The pardon power is exclusively the President's and cannot be constitutionally delegated to his subordinates.

marco100: There is no evidence, testimonial or otherwise, that Biden did any final review...

Sure there is:

In an interview with The New York Times, Mr. Biden said that he had orally granted all the pardons and commutations issued at the end of his term, calling President Trump and other Republicans “liars” for claiming his aides had used an autopen to do so without his authorization.

“I made every decision,” Mr. Biden said in a phone interview on Thursday, asserting that he had his staff use an autopen replicating his signature on the clemency warrants because “we’re talking about a whole lot of people.”


https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/13/us/politics/bid...

You didn't read what I said previously--there is no "evidence" "testimonial or otherwise."

An unsworn hearsay statement to the NY Times is not "evidence."

Testimony before Congress, under oath, is "evidence."


Authenticated documentation consisting of official government records is "evidence."


A senile old man's alibiing to the NY Times is not "evidence." Especially since a special prosecutor determined Biden's ability to recall is so defective that he should not be prosecuted, even though there was probably cause to have indicted Biden for crimes committed while he was Vice President regarding unlawful retention of government records and classified information.

marco100: You didn't read what I said previously--there is no "evidence" "testimonial or otherwise."

Go away, little dopple.

ploink

I think you're mistaken, albaby. The evidence is simply that Biden told Zients et al. to decide who to pardon.

* * *

If you actually have any specific testimony from Biden or anyone else to the contrary, I'd be interested.

My understanding is that the testimony provided to congressional investigators was that all the decisions were authorized by Biden - and it's certainly Biden's statement as well.

Biden has publicly disputed that, saying he made all decisions on clemency personally:

In an interview with The New York Times, Mr. Biden said that he had orally granted all the pardons and commutations issued at the end of his term, calling President Trump and other Republicans “liars” for claiming his aides had used an autopen to do so without his authorization.

“I made every decision,” Mr. Biden said in a phone interview on Thursday, asserting that he had his staff use an autopen replicating his signature on the clemency warrants because “we’re talking about a whole lot of people.”

https://archive.is/Bgusp#selection-705.0-713.224

There is not (again, AFAIK) any evidence to the contrary.

IMO, Stephen Miller and the Project 2025 dude (forget his name) are running the show. The Felon just does what they tell him. So, of course he "doesn't know anything about it".

There is not (again, AFAIK) any evidence to the contrary.

What is this thing… “evidence”… of which you speak?

A senile old man's alibiing to the NY Times is not "evidence."

Speaking of a lack of evidence…

I think you possibly misunderstand the point being made by Conservatives and Republicans about the Biden autopen scandal.

I think you misunderstand the facts, which is not surprising since they mirror the right-wing conspiracies being promoted on your favorite choice of media.

Biden, like nearly all other Presidents before him, used assistants and subordinates for the preliminary vetting of pardon requests. The Biden White House says that all pardon requests were specifically and individually approved in staff meetings and witnessed by others before being executed.

There is no evidence otherwise, nor even contravening testimony from others involved.

The use of the auto-pen goes back decades; the current version was used by Harry Truman. Thomas Jefferson used a version during his Presidency at the beginning of the 1800’s.

We have entered the Sgt. Schultz presidency.

At this point, we know that Biden was virtually non compost mentos by the end of his term of office, when most of these pardons were granted.

He wasn't making any "decisions."

The fact that Biden is willing to lie about that, and that his underlings may be willing to participate by lying themselves, doesn't change that fact.

Biden and his administration lied to the American people about his mental capacity right up until he was exposed during the debate with Trump.

Fool me once, shame on you....

See link to Axios report relevant to this discussion:


axios.com/2025/09/06/biden-pardon-autopen-concerns

Fool me once, shame on you....

Fool me always, I must be a MAGA.

At this point, we know that Biden was virtually non compost mentos by the end of his term of office,

Horseshit.

Or road apples if you prefer.

At this point, we know that Biden was virtually non compost mentos by the end of his term of office, when most of these pardons were granted.

Is that a thing we know? Do you think that you could, today walk into a court of law and have Joe Biden involuntarily committed to a facility or declared incompetent to make his own judgments and decisions?

I don't believe so. I certainly believe that there is a vast gulf between "being minimally competent to avoid being declared legally incapacitated" and "being able to do perform well in the hardest job on earth" - but I don't believe that Joe Biden today meets the legal standard for being non compos mentis. Which is probably what you'd have to be able to prove in order for his pardons to be legally insufficient. Which means you'd need actual evidence that he was not legally competent - which I think you would concede you don't have.

There is no record that I am aware of, or that anyone else is aware of,

Are you saying that you think testimony given to a GOP investigation is not a record?

Aide Testimony: Depositions and testimony from former Biden aides, used in a House Republican report, did not include concrete evidence that aides enacted policies or pardons without Biden's knowledge. Instead, White House officials testified that the President authorized every executive action, pardon, and use of the autopen. Some aides did invoke the Fifth Amendment regarding other matters, which was highlighted by Republicans, but not on the direct authorization of pardons.

What about the emails? They appear to be contemporary evidence. Are they not considered records? They're acceptable in court


"White House emails show senior aides, including Zients, were in attendance at meetings where Biden made these decisions.
Zients' assistant forwarded a final list of individuals to be pardoned, and Zients approved the use of an autopen for the execution of those pardons after Biden had made the final decisions."

Signing any document can be delegated to an agent. The only people with standing to complain are those to whom the document applies. Conservatives should be quiet about this, because they are REALLY gonna need pardons, and the more ways to shoot them down the more conservatives are going to wish for free lubricant in the lockups.

Hochizen!

OK so Trump can delegate nuclear bombing authority to someone else.

Post New

Berkshire Hathaway FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.