Get the Ricochet app
Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.

The Ricochet Podcast
3 Whisky Happy Hour
Beyond the Polls
GLoP Culture
Daily Signal
The Erick Erickson Show
Federalist Radio Hour
Not Dead Yet
Heritage Explains
Chicks on The Right
3 Martini Lunch
Call Me Back - with Dan Senor
The Learning Curve
The American Idea
The Radio Free Hillsdale Hour
Hillsdale Dialogues
Madison’s Notes
Mom Wars
What the Hell Is Going On
Parsing Immigration Policy
Freedom to Learn
Conservative Crossroads with Henry Olsen
The Conservative Woman’s Guide
Law Talk with Epstein, Yoo & Cooke
Giving Ventures
Who Funds that?
The Back of the Book
The Kevin Roberts Show with Larry O’Connor
Gray Matters
The Report Card with Nat Malkus
The Glenn Show
The Libertarian
Martini Shot
The Dave Carter Show
The Powerline Show
In Dissent
Heard at Heritage
Smart Girl Politics
James Lileks’ The Diner
Case in Point: The Legal Show on the Hottest Legal Cases in Politics and Culture
JobMakers
One on One with Robert DoarRicochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.
Instead of ranting about the biggest scandal in presidential history, I want to keep this short and elicit the legal opinions of the former presidential committee signing everything in the name of Joe Biden.
It has been clear, and even more evident, that he has been out of the picture for quite some time now. Let’s do some math with information I’ve looked up since hearing a few revelations on the Trish Regan Show. It seems in pardons alone, he issued 8,064. A single pardon is a serious undertaking that only the president is allowed to do. If Biden spent five minutes on each person, learning about their injustice, and worked half of an eight-hour day just on pardons, that would result in 168 half-days on this alone.
I put the following to the legal brains here: We need a good test case against the autopen for precedence. Biden told Mike Johnson he did not sign an executive order to freeze new liquid natural gas export permits. His autopen most likely did. Would this make a justifiable case to nullify every law passed with an autopen signature?
Recommended by MembersThis post was promoted to the Main Feed at the recommendation of Ricochet's members.
Discussion (27)
CHARTER MEMBER
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
It would seem to, but the only testimony we have that he didn't sign it is his, and at this point it would be hard to make that stick.
I don't know that we'll be able to successfully invalidate any of the signatures.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Is there evidence that he WAS competent when those signatures supposedly happened, and only now is it possible to assume that he's not competent to say that he didn't?
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
I thought it was widely accepted that the 8K signatures were in fact made by autopen. Would that be contested, if an effort to overturn the orders were to be made?
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
With him being as incapacitated as he was, nobody can say with a straight face this was legit.
CHARTER MEMBER
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
It is a question involving the internal workings of another branch of government. So far, SCOTUS has left the integrity of these processes undisturbed. No quorum, that's for Congress to solve. It would be interesting, though, if Trump, whom Biden attempted to strip of executive privilege, tried to nullify the autopardons. There are still lots of bananas around.
You're seeing five of 27 comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.