• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

The auto-pen scandal is going to be massive

GoldenBoy89

We're Still Here
Sep 25, 2012
25,371
27,873
LA
✟616,285.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Members of the Biden Administration need to go to prison for decades over this.


The House Oversight Committee’s investigation into Biden’s autopen abuse isn’t just political theater—it’s a constitutional reckoning. Bank records show $30M funneled through Biden family shell companies while executive actions like the LNG export pause were signed without his awareness. When Speaker Johnson confronted Biden, he denied his own policy, proving he wasn’t steering the ship.

The Oversight Project’s findings confirm pardons issued via autopen batch signatures lack legal legitimacy if Biden didn’t personally authorize them. This isn’t about partisan grudges—it’s about whether unelected aides committed forgery on presidential documents. Subpoenas for Tomasini, Bernal, and O’Connor are the first step.

Biden’s testimony isn’t optional; it’s mandatory for validating two dozen EOs and pardons that reshaped policy. The clock’s ticking, but the swamp’s still blocking transparency.
Whatever happened with Obamagate?

Remember Obamagate?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Fantine
Upvote 0

Beth77

Active Member
May 11, 2025
339
136
47
Oaxaca
✟4,677.00
Country
Mexico
Gender
Female
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
1000029233.jpg
 
Upvote 0

A2SG

Gumby
Jun 17, 2008
9,478
3,629
Massachusetts
✟160,060.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Kangaroo Court.
No, it was a real court. With lawyers, a judge and jury, and everything.

Not a unanimous verdict.
It was a unanimous verdict, all 12 jurors agreed.

Made-up crime.
Nope, a crime on the NY state books since 1986. NY 175.10

Corrupt, far-left, Deep State, judge.
And you base your accusations on what evidence, exactly? The tens of dollars he contributed to democratic candidates? The same judge who, after the jury found Trump guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of all 34 felonies, sentenced him to an unconditional discharge, imposing no penalties or punishments whatsoever?

The Washington Establishment has been robbing us blind for decades. Why do you love corrupt, Washington, millionaire, elites, more than you love poor and middle-class Americans?
Where on earth did you get that from? Man, you're making baseless assumptions after baseless assumptions, is there no end to them?

But, I'm confused. You're more than willing to accept that a crime was committed by someone on President Biden's staff without even a hint of evidence, but with Trump, despite massive amounts of evidence, and a jury trial where his guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt...you don't believe it.

-- A2SG, gee, partisan much?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Aryeh Jay

Living the dream, experiencing the nightmare.
Site Supporter
Jul 19, 2012
17,526
16,156
MI - Michigan
✟657,873.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married
I fully believe anything that a newt says because he went after a sitting president having an affair while having his own affair. A beacon of integrity and morals.
 
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Leading a blameless life
Jul 14, 2015
14,296
8,724
52
✟373,500.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Members of the Biden Administration need to go to prison for decades over this.


The House Oversight Committee’s investigation into Biden’s autopen abuse isn’t just political theater—it’s a constitutional reckoning. Bank records show $30M funneled through Biden family shell companies while executive actions like the LNG export pause were signed without his awareness. When Speaker Johnson confronted Biden, he denied his own policy, proving he wasn’t steering the ship.

The Oversight Project’s findings confirm pardons issued via autopen batch signatures lack legal legitimacy if Biden didn’t personally authorize them. This isn’t about partisan grudges—it’s about whether unelected aides committed forgery on presidential documents. Subpoenas for Tomasini, Bernal, and O’Connor are the first step.

Biden’s testimony isn’t optional; it’s mandatory for validating two dozen EOs and pardons that reshaped policy. The clock’s ticking, but the swamp’s still blocking transparency.
I’m sure that when all the evidence is presented it will sort itself out.

Oh wait. America. Nothing happens to rich white men who clearly break the law.

Oh wait. I think we are talking at cross purposes.
 
Upvote 0

Desk trauma

The pickles are up to something
Site Supporter
Dec 1, 2011
21,871
17,835
✟1,384,554.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
View attachment 365515

"Biden" gave out pardons and commutations like they were after-dinner mints. How many of them did he personally sign? Is there any evidence that he even personally considered the cases individually? We all know that, aside from Hunter, Joe Biden wasn't the one approving or signing those pardons.
6,500 of those were for federal simple marijuana possession convictions. Putting the righting of that wrong to one side his total is in line with the two administrations that proceeded him.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

NxNW

Well-Known Member
Nov 30, 2019
6,555
4,550
NW
✟243,734.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Were members of the Biden Administration selling pardons?
No, that was Trump, and the price was $2M. Rudy's unpaid employee caught it all on tape, when he wasn't raping her. It's all listed in the court documents.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

NxNW

Well-Known Member
Nov 30, 2019
6,555
4,550
NW
✟243,734.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I fully believe anything that a newt says because he went after a sitting president having an affair while having his own affair. A beacon of integrity and morals.
Yes, but now we're talking about Donald Trump, who has been totally faithful to all every single one of his wives and mistresses.
 
Upvote 0

Maria Billingsley

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 7, 2018
10,933
8,992
65
Martinez
✟1,114,392.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
View attachment 365515

"Biden" gave out pardons and commutations like they were after-dinner mints. How many of them did he personally sign? Is there any evidence that he even personally considered the cases individually? We all know that, aside from Hunter, Joe Biden wasn't the one approving or signing those pardons.
With a bit of research, it was widely announced that Joe Biden granted pardons to almost 7000 individuals for simple possession of marijuana. This accounts for 80% of his figure.

No controversy here.

 
Upvote 0

Beth77

Active Member
May 11, 2025
339
136
47
Oaxaca
✟4,677.00
Country
Mexico
Gender
Female
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
No, it was a real court. With lawyers, a judge and jury, and everything.

Nope. Kangaroo Court.

Skip to Main Content





CPAC USA 2026


Top News: Navy SEAL Andrew ‘Sully’ Sullivan Reflects On Memorial Day And The True Meaning Of Sacrifice →











All PostsAll PostsHuman TraffickingEventsGivingRegulatory FreedomLegislative WatchCriminal Justice ReformAction CenterCPAC InternationalHealthcareCPAC NowFrom the StageElection UpdatesCombating AntisemitismOp-Eds


Juan Merchan is a Democrat Political Operative Masquerading as a Judge; Calling His Courtroom a Kangaroo Court Does a Disservice to Kangaroos​


  • David Safavian
  • May 31, 2024




“No one is above the law.” That is what we hear from Leftists and their accomplices in the media in justifying the Trump persecution. But no one is beneath the law either. Everyone deserves a fair playing field. Indeed, that is the primary responsibility of judges – to protect the rights of the accused from an all-powerful prosecutor. In the case of New York vs. Donald J. Trump, “Judge” Merchan (and I use the term “judge” loosely) didn’t just fail in his duty to ensure a level playing field, he was essentially an arm of Prosecutor Alvin Bragg’s team. Nearly every ruling, big or small, went against the President. There are more than sufficient grounds to reverse this travesty on appeal. It is doubtful, however, that President Trump will be vindicated by Election Day, which was the goal of the judge and prosecutor all along.



Merchan should never have been selected to be the judge in the Trump case in the first place. He contributed to Democrat candidates (and was sanctioned for violating the judicial ethics rules for doing so). His daughter, another left-wing activist, was fundraising off of the Trump persecutions. Merchan had at least an apparent conflict of interest, if not an actual one. Had Merchan had any integrity, he would have recused himself. Had the judicial system of New York been fair and competent, it would have forced him to step aside. Of course, in deep blue Manhattan, neither happened. But that is only the beginning of a trail of illegitimate decisions by this judge. In the long list of transgressions, here are a few examples of Merchan’s blatant bias:



  • He eliminated observant Jews, who are far more conservative than the average New Yorker, from the jury pool by holding keeping the court in session on Fridays. (Tellingly, he did not hold court on Wednesdays. Hmmmm… I wonder why?)



  • Merchan allowed for graphic testimony from a porn star. This case wasn’t about illicit sex. It was about how money was accounted for. Courts are supposed to prevent highly prejudicial testimony to come into evidence if it doesn’t add to the ability of a jury to find the truth behind the criminal charge.



  • The judge let prosecutors go far and wide in presenting their case, including putting a convicted perjurer on the stand who was caught in blatant lies. But when the Trump defense team wanted to put their own witnesses on to rebut the charges, Merchan either severely limited what they could say, or excluded them from the trial altogether.



Yet, most damaging were the jury instructions, which have a huge impact on the outcome of any case. This judge allowed jurors to use a cafeteria approach to finding guilt. A key element of the felony charges was that Trump had to have made accounting errors in furtherance of other unlawful activity. The prosecution was never required to identify what other conduct formed the basis of that underlying activity to obtain (or defend against) a felony conviction. Indeed, the judge said that if four jurors determined that the accounting was to commit tax evasion, and four found that was to commit federal election fraud, and another four found it was in furtherance of state election crimes, that would be ok. Unanimity wasn’t required.



Essentially, the judge used his position to make it easy for prosecutors to convict President Trump and nearly impossible for him to prove his innocence. And that came through loud and clear yesterday. The general rule of thumb is that juries deliberate about a day for every week a defendant is on trial. So, we should have expected a verdict in five or six days if they took their obligations seriously. This jury plowed through 34 charges in less than 13 hours – or less than 20 minutes of deliberation for each count. There is zero chance a serious jury could have considered all of the evidence for each charge and come to a thoughtful conclusion based solely on that evidence in 20 minutes.



The bottom line is that this verdict has more holes than a block of Swiss cheese. It will ultimately be reversed. But by then, the political damage will be done.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: NxNW
Upvote 0

Beth77

Active Member
May 11, 2025
339
136
47
Oaxaca
✟4,677.00
Country
Mexico
Gender
Female
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Kangaroo conviction by corrupt Democrats.

Skip to main content
Mises Institute
Open Mobile Navigation
Open Search
Support Mises
Mises Wire
Don’t Listen to the Elites: Trump’s Conviction Is NOT a “Victory” for the Rule of Law
trump
ES
Lee esto en Español
Tags:
Law,
Legal System,
Politics
05/30/2024

Mises Wire

William L. Anderson
A Manhattan jury’s decision to convict Donald Trump of falsifying business records to break federal election law is being heralded by The Usual Suspects as a moment in which “no one is above the law.” Indeed, both prosecutor Alvin Bragg, who brought the charges, and Judge Juan Merchan, who acted as a member of the prosecution, have proven that they themselves are above the law and can act well outside legal boundaries because no one will set boundaries for them.

Beyond the hoopla and celebration by Democrats for this “victory” over their hated adversary, one suspects that the U.S. Supreme Court will overturn the verdict even after the appeals court and supreme court of New York State will surely uphold it. Should that happen – and I predict it will – then we will be treated to more political angst in which Democrats will claim that SCOTUS is illegitimate and nothing more than a Trump political ally willing to do his dirty work.

Beyond the rhetoric, however, we need to understand what is happening and why we should expect this kind of thing to be a future norm in our body politic. When Bragg first indicted Trump a year ago April, I wrote that his actions were reminiscent of something done in banana republics where those in power find ways to jail or kill political rivals. The events afterward confirmed my fears, as Democratic prosecutors, both state and federal, have indicted Trump for various alleged offenses, all done in state and federal districts dominated by Democratic Party voters, almost guaranteeing juries that consist of mostly, if not all, Democrats.

Before going further, I need to point out that nothing in this article is an endorsement of Donald Trump for office or even is an attempt to paint Trump as an innocent victim of Democratic Party dirty tricks. Trump has achieved something I would have thought impossible, and that is being the target of questionable criminal charges, yet still making himself appear to be an unsavory character.

As former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy has pointed out, Trump’s attorneys have been less-than-competent throughout the trial – and perhaps we should not be surprised. Despite Trump’s wealth, his overbearing personality and micromanagement style do not mesh with how good criminal defense attorneys like to present their cases. But to make matters worse, as McCarthy notes, Trump’s attorneys generally stood by while Judge Juan Merchan stacked the deck in favor of the prosecution:

With Merchan’s help, and not much resistance from defense lawyers, Bragg’s team has shrewdly conflated two very different things: (1) the knowing and intentional burying of politically damaging information through NDAs (non-disclosure agreements), which is legal, and (2) the knowing and intentional flouting of FECA (Federal Election Campaign Act) regulations — which would be illegal if prosecutors could prove it, but of which there is no evidence against Trump. (Emphasis mine)

The gist of the case was as follows: Bragg alleged that by arranging for Stormy Daniels to receive $130,000 in exchange for being quiet about her having sex with Trump (and these agreements are legal, as McCarthy has written), the way the payments were entered into his business records amounted to falsification of those records, which normally is a misdemeanor under New York State law. However, if that falsification is done to enable someone to break another law, then the falsification can be charged as a felony.

However, one must be able to prove in a proper court of law that the other law actually was broken, and here is where the case falls apart. The law Bragg alleges was broken is federal law, and the Biden Department of Justice already decided not to prosecute Trump on that charge. A state court is NOT the proper jurisdiction to determine if a federal law was broken, as a state jury has no legal standing to decide on federal law.

Thus, at best, a New York state jury can only express an opinion as to whether they believed Trump broke federal law, and an opinion is not proof. At the very least, the charges are unconstitutional, as they cobble together federal and state law into an unwieldy set of criminal charges. In other words, Alvin Bragg engaged in legally questionable behavior because he knew that no Democratic judge (and all judges in Manhattan are Democrats) would rule against him.

In a recent column, David French of the New York Times, a staunch never-Trump writer, questioned the validity of the charges while simultaneously condemning Trump for his behavior. Wrote French:

…the underlying legal theory supporting the prosecution’s case remains dubious. The facts may be clear, but the law is anything but — and that could very well mean that the jury convicts Trump before the election, an appeals court reverses the conviction after the election, and millions of Americans, many of them non-MAGA, face yet another crisis of confidence in American institutions.

French, who also is an attorney, continued:

Mark Pomerantz, a former prosecutor in the Manhattan D.A.’s office, said that the case was “too risky under New York law” and noted that “no appellate court in New York has ever upheld (or rejected) this interpretation of the law.” Numerous legal analysts, including people who are no friends of Trump, have expressed grave reservations about the case, in large part because of the difficulty of linking the falsified records to an additional, separate crime.

If Trump were convicted, French goes on, the aftermath would be bleak no matter what happened on appeal:

To be clear, an untested legal theory is not the same thing as a weak or specious theory. If Trump is convicted, his conviction could well survive on appeal. The alternative, however, is dreadful. Imagine a scenario in which Trump is convicted at the trial, Biden condemns him as a felon and the Biden campaign runs ads mocking him as a convict. If Biden wins a narrow victory but then an appeals court tosses out the conviction, this case could well undermine faith in our democracy and the rule of law.

He wrote further:

But there are deeper issues at stake. Our court system does not exist to guarantee political results, no matter how much one might want Trump to lose the election. And defeating Trump with an assist from a criminal prosecution that falls apart on appeal would exacerbate the mistrust that helped make Trump president in the first place and sustains his hold on the Republican Party. (Emphasis mine)

This is not the only case Democratic prosecutors have brought against Trump and given the political dynamics and the makeup of potential juries, Trump well could be convicted in any or all of those cases. Furthermore, by using the criminal courts as a pure political weapon, the Democrats have opened the proverbial Pandora’s Box, as Republican prosecutors may well retaliate against Democratic office holders.

Even if SCOTUS were to overturn the New York guilty verdict, it cannot declare Trump not guilty, but only remand the case back to trial with new instructions and limitations. Given the political dynamics, one can see Bragg looking for other ways to bring criminal charges against Trump in never-ending legal warfare. I fear we are only at the beginning of a long legal and political nightmare that has no good ending.
 
Upvote 0

BPPLEE

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
15,665
7,288
61
Montgomery
✟242,726.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yes, it's being investigated, despite the fact that there is no evidence, none whatsoever, that the autopen was misused at any point, for any reason, at all. I don't know, maybe the investigation will find some evidence...but given how much they dug up on any past "questions" regarding President Biden, let's just say I'm not going to be expecting much.


I'm not expecting the full case file, but if I were a prosecutor, I would like to see evidence of a crime being committed before I start prosecution. All we have now is speculation that something might have happened. Period. Nothing more.


Hey, it worked for Trump.

-- A2SG, and at least with Trump, the crime was proven he was found guilty on all counts....something that cannot be said about President Biden or anyone in his administration....
Wasn't the guy (gal?) who stole other people's luggage in the Biden administration?

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Beth77
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
28,314
7,286
North Carolina
✟334,080.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
TYes, it's being investigated, despite the fact that there is no evidence, none whatsoever, that the autopen was misused at any point, for any reason, at all. I don't know, maybe the investigation will find some evidence...but given how much they dug up on any past "questions" regarding President Biden, let's just say I'm not going to be expecting much.
I'm not expecting the full case file, but if I were a prosecutor, I would like to see evidence of a crime being committed before I start prosecution. All we have now is speculation that something might have happened. Period. Nothing more.
Hey, it worked for Trump.

-- A2SG, and at least with Trump, the crime was proven he was found guilty on all counts....something that cannot be said about President Biden or anyone in his administration....
The voters gave their verdict on that sham. . .
 
Upvote 0