Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: RandallFlagg
I would think it’d depend on previous cases. I’m sure Biden isn’t the only former WH occupant (or state governor for that matter) who’s used an autopen to authorize governmental stuff.

Using an autopen is fine, if the President is physically in the room and is using the autopen simply to avoid writer’s cramp or something. But it is completely unconstitutional and void if the President is somewhere else and some other person is using the autopen to sign his name, even if the President authorized that person to do so. The reason is obvious: Without the President in the room when the autopen is used, there is no way to verify that his signature is actually being used with his consent and permission.

That’s the critical distinction that is being missed in most discussions about this.

8 posted on 03/15/2025 1:27:45 AM PDT by noiseman (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: noiseman

Except that it is well known that he was not present at the time. It was just a simple matter of checking the dates on the documents against his travel schedule.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-pardons-signed-autopen-on-vacation-watchdog-finds


16 posted on 03/15/2025 3:48:58 AM PDT by sipow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: noiseman

“even if the President authorized that person to do so.”

The obvious next question is where if the proof the autopen signature was authorized.

Is there a written document that authorized the person to sign everything that minute, that hour, that day, that week, forever?

If it was an oral authorization is there a recording of that to prove it was real?

It is beginning to look like we have smoke and mirrors going on here.


27 posted on 03/15/2025 4:24:07 AM PDT by cgbg (The Democrat Party is a criminal enterprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: noiseman
But it is completely unconstitutional and void if the President is somewhere else and some other person is using the autopen to sign his name, even if the President authorized that person to do so.

There was a report yesterday that pedojoe was absolutely not present - on vacation or visiting another state - when at least four EOs were signed with autopen.

44 posted on 03/15/2025 5:22:30 AM PDT by Sirius Lee ("Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: noiseman
Using an autopen is fine, if the President is physically in the room and is using the autopen simply to avoid writer’s cramp or something. But it is completely unconstitutional and void if the President is somewhere else and some other person is using the autopen to sign his name, even if the President authorized that person to do so. The reason is obvious: Without the President in the room when the autopen is used, there is no way to verify that his signature is actually being used with his consent and permission.

That’s the critical distinction that is being missed in most discussions about this.

You have hit the nail on its head.

53 posted on 03/15/2025 6:55:41 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson