Get the Ricochet app

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

Download on the App StoreGet it on Google Play

Become a member.

Tired of the toxicity of social media? Why not join Ricochet for just $5/month? Think of it as an online bar. Come in, have a drink, hang out, say whatever you want. But don’t badger, bully, or berate the other drinkers. That's our only rule.

President Otto Penn

Chowderhead
@Podunk
Join to bookmark23likesJoin to like27comments

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?

This post was promoted to the Main Feed at the recommendation of Ricochet's members.

Discussion (27)

  • kedavis@kedavis
    ReplyingtoPercival

    Percival (View Comment):

    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.

    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?

  • Barfly@Barfly
    ReplyingtoPercival

    Percival (View Comment):

    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.

    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?

  • Chowderhead@Podunk
    ReplyingtoBarfly

    Percival (View Comment):

    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.

    Barfly (View Comment):

    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?

    With him being as incapacitated as he was, nobody can say with a straight face this was legit.

  • Sisyphus@Sisyphus

    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.

Scroll for later comments
+22 more comments
Join the conversation

You're seeing five of 27 comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.