The Autopen Scandal

Will We Ever Know

Who Ran Biden's Government?

Is It All Legal

Who Kept The "Signature Card?

Contact

Your Senator

Contact

Your Congressman

Autopen Scandal

Whoever controlled the autopen, controlled the presidency

Ukraine has been garnering all the headlines this week, but there's a very weird story bubbling right under the surface, the "Autopen" scandal.

Were all of Joe Biden’s official actions constitutional?

The "autopen scandal" refers to a controversy that's beginning to boil that centers on claims that nearly all official documents signed by Joe Biden during his presidency -- such as executive orders, pardons, and legislation -- bore an autopen signature rather than his personal handwritten one.

The only exception, according to this narrative, was the letter announcing Biden’s withdrawal from the 2024 presidential race, which allegedly carried his actual signature. This revelation has sparked questions about who was truly in charge of the White House during Biden’s term, especially amid longstanding concerns about his cognitive decline.

An autopen is a device that mechanically reproduces a signature, commonly used by public figures to handle high volumes of documents.

The story gained traction following an investigation by the Heritage Foundation’s "Oversight Project," which reportedly examined documents bearing Biden’s signature and found consistent use of an autopen -- except for Biden's withdrawal letter.

Critics argue this suggests Biden may not have been actively involved in decision-making, pointing to incidents like House Speaker Mike Johnson’s claim that Biden couldn’t recall signing an executive order on Liquid Natural Gas exports.

Now, the use of autopens isn’t new -- presidents since Eisenhower have employed them, and Obama famously used one to sign a bill in 2013. Legal precedent, like a Bush-era memo, holds that autopen signatures are valid if authorized by the president. However, what’s unclear in Biden’s case is whether he knowingly delegated this authority, particularly as his mental sharpness came under scrutiny.

So, the issue is whether unelected staff or others controlled the autopen -- and thus the presidency -- potentially rendering Biden’s official actions constitutionally questionable, if he lacked the capacity to authorize them.

The deeper question is what if some of "Biden’s official actions" were authorized without his knowledge or consent. We may never know.

Here are two documents. The one on top is dated, August 11, 2022, and the one on the bottom is dated, December 30, 2024. That's 16 months apart, yet, look at the signatures. They are identical. There are other copies on other dated documents floating all over social media and the signatures are exactly the same.

Now, here is the signature from Joe Biden's letter withdrawing him from the presidential race. Biden signed this document in front of people. This signature is real, and so far, this is the only document found with a real Joe Biden signature.

The story raises big questions. The Heritage Foundation’s claim that nearly every document (except his withdrawal letter) was autopen-signed is troubling. If Biden wasn’t signing, who was operating the autopen? Staff like Jill Biden, Hunter Biden, or aides such as Jake Sullivan or Joe Podesta? Nobody knows!

Without concrete data, like the names of those who had access to the autopen, it’s a mixed bag of intriguing speculation and unproven bombshell.

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey has already called for a DoJ investigation into whether Biden’s cognitive state allowed unelected officials to run the government, suggesting actions signed via autopen could be void if he was incapacitated.

It's a larger issue than the autopen

While past presidents used autopens, Biden’s situation is distinct because of persistent questions about his mental decline, which weren’t as prominent with predecessors like Eisenhower, Obama, or Bush.

The autopen is a tool -- legally sanctioned and widely used. Eisenhower deployed it for efficiency, Obama signed a bill remotely with it, and Bush’s administration even got a DoJ memo blessing its use for executive actions. The difference lies in perception and context. Those presidents weren’t dogged by widespread, public concerns about dementia and what his handlers were juicing him up with (watch this clip full screen and count the blinks -- esc returns).

Biden’s case amplifies the scandal because of his 82 years and the and visible struggles we all saw near the end of his term. Clips of him stumbling over words, forgetting names (like calling Kamala Harris “Vice President Trump”), or trailing off mid-sentence have fueled speculation for years.

The 2024 Hur Report, from the special counsel investigating Joe Biden's handling of classified documents, didn’t charge him as they should have. Robert Hur's final report described Biden as an “elderly man with a poor memory,” noting he couldn’t recall key details of his vice presidency.

Critics latch onto this, arguing that if he couldn’t remember signing documents or even authorizing the autopen, then who was really calling the shots?

The Heritage Foundation’s claim that nearly every document (except his withdrawal letter) was autopen-signed feeds the narrative of a president potentially too impaired to govern, with aides or family running the show -- like this Cabinet Meeting being conducted by Jill Biden.

Democrats say gaffes aren’t a diagnosis, and Biden’s team could say he approved the autopen lucidly, just as past presidents did. No law requires a president to hand-sign every document, and mental decline doesn’t automatically mean someone else was puppeteering.

Still, the optics hurt. Unlike his predecessors, Biden’s frailty invites the question. Without proof of who controlled the autopen or his mental state, it’s a gap filled by suspicion, not precedent.

While the autopen itself is just a tool, the real question is who had control of the "Signature Card," especially as Biden’s decline became more apparent. Near the end of his term, with his public appearances dwindling and cognitive concerns mounting, it’s plausible that aides or unelected officials could’ve slipped anything past him, autopen or not. The autopen, itself, isn’t the scandal. It’s the potential lack of oversight and accountability.

Did unelected staff push through radical policy and authorize the disbursement of the billions that are being investigated by DoGE without Biden's knowing approval -- and did it even matter?

Somebody had a U. S. Treasury bank card

The real question is, who has been running the country for the past four years -- especially in the final months, as Biden’s decline became more apparent. Near the end of his term, with his public appearances dwindling and cognitive concerns mounting, it’s more than plausible that aides or unelected officials could’ve slipped anything past him, autopen or not. Many billions were disbursed from the White House in Biden's during this period.

Was some mystery person using the "signature card" to funnel $20 billion to Chase Bank for reasons unknown. That’s a massive angle. Biden’s administration oversaw trillions in spending -- $1.9 trillion from the American Rescue Plan in 2021, $370 billion for climate initiatives in the Inflation Reduction Act, $350 billion to states and localities, and billions more in executive actions like student debt relief (estimated at $500 billion+) -- and that’s not even touching foreign aid -- $113 billion to Ukraine alone by late 2024. The Democrats were distributing millions and billions just as fast as they could.

The catch is, there’s no smoking gun yet -- just circumstantial evidence. Biden’s team could argue he delegated intentionally, as presidents often do, and that disbursements followed legal channels, but the sheer volume of cash, paired with his visible frailty, fuels the suspicion that others -- Jill Biden, top aides like Ron Klain or Jake Sullivan, or even outside influencers -- had outsized sway.

Without internal records or whistleblowers, it’s a theory begging for proof.

Was Joe Biden really just a "frontman" all along?

The autopen is a symptom of something larger. Speculation about Biden’s cognitive health dates back to at least 2019–2020 based on public records. Look at the 2019 date on this document discussing Joe's dementia in the upper left corner.

Special Counsel Robert Hur’s February 2024 report, which described Biden’s memory as having “significant limitations” during 2017 interviews.

Public discourse and observations from various sources suggest that concerns about Biden’s mental acuity emerged noticeably during his 2020 presidential campaign. Biden was making verbal gaffes and behaving confused as early as 2019–2020 that were interpreted as signs of cognitive decline.

Posts on X and some media outlets, like the New York Post in March 2020, highlighted incidents such as Biden mistaking his wife for his sister, fueling speculation. Additionally, a June 2019 Democratic primary debate performance was cited by some as showing early signs of mental deterioration.

Does it matter to know who was responsible for what has happened to our country in the last four years?

After all the speculation and whatever, what the "autopen scandal" tells us is, we have no idea who was running things for the last four years. Joe would helicopter into the White House at noon on Monday, and head back to Delaware at noon on Thursday. In between, he would shake some hands and record a couple of PR things.

There was no way that Joe Biden was in command -- especially in the last year.

So who was?

The people in charge of Obama's third term

Obama has always relied on two people -- his "Tribunes" -- Susan Rice and Jake Sullivan. These two are his principle operators. Rice and Sullivan sat atop what was effectively "a coup."

Because of their roles in the Biden administration, Rice and Sullivan had complete operational control of the government.

Susan Rice was Barack Obama's prime minister, his strong right arm. Rice has been with Obama for twenty years, and she gets things done for him and she doesn't mind getting her hands dirty to do it.

Susan Rice was Barack's "guy" in the Biden regime. She served as the Director of the United States Domestic Policy Council. The Domestic Policy Council drives the development and implementation of the president's domestic policy agenda in the White House and across the Federal government. Her role was to "ensure domestic policy decisions and programs, consistent with the president's stated goals, are carried out for the American people." So, you can see how easy it was for Rice to insert Obama's vision into the policy action items that the vice president and the cabinet received.

Jake Sullivan was Obama's consiglieri. He wrote "The Narrative." Jake was also the National Security Advisor of the United States. He was the president's principle foreign policy advisor. He was the one who "advised" the president on how to handle foreign affairs. He was the constant voice in Biden's ear. Jake has been with Obama since the 2008 campaign.

Jake Sullivan grew up in a house where dad was a was a professor at the University of Minnesota School of Mass Communication, and had the equivalent of a masters degree in mass communications before he entered high school from just sitting at the dinner table. He was a champion debater. Basically, Jake was the smartest guy in every school he was ever in, won all the scholarships, and popped out the top as an Oxford Rhodes Scholar -- on the other hand, he has extensive experience as an architect of American failures in Syria, Ukraine, Iran, and Myanmar -- his biggest hit was Benghazi.

When you look out upon America and see one thing with your own eyes, but the media is telling you something else, the media is reading Jake Sullivan's script. When Joe Biden was looking into the TV camera, telling the American People that the economy was terrific while people watched their income shrink? That was Jake Sullivan.

What this trio did was to create chaos. Their real goal was always to create chaos -- everywhere -- so emergency powers could be instituted by the federal government. It wouldn't be martial law, but it would have been close.

The country dodged a bullet last November. If these three had four more years with Kamala Harris being the Democrats' face on TV it would have been all over.

All they'd really have to do is simply just cut a new "Signature Card."

Revolutions take money.