‘Autopen signature’ used on many official WH docs. Who "auto-signed" and was Joe even aware?

[Valletta]

Biden used ‘autopen signature’ on many official WH docs, raising concerns over his awareness

Dozens of executive orders signed by former President Joe Biden were authorized with identical autopen signatures — raising crucial questions about whether he was fully aware of what he was signing…

nypost.com

This is deeply concerning and I think the courts may have to eventually rule on how many of these signatures are legitimate.

 

[NxNW]

Suddenly autopen is illegal? Says who?

 

[Valletta]

Suddenly autopen is illegal? Says who?

More Democrats have come forward about Joe's real mental state and it is unclear who was making various decisions. Did Joe actually approve the specific signatures?

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Biden used ‘autopen signature’ on many official WH docs, raising concerns over his awareness

Dozens of executive orders signed by former President Joe Biden were authorized with identical autopen signatures — raising crucial questions about whether he was fully aware of what he was signing…

nypost.com

This is deeply concerning and I think the courts may have to eventually rule on how many of these signatures are legitimate.

As long as he authorized it, it is completely legal.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Really? People are upset about this?

Lyndon Johnson allowed photographs of his autopen to be taken while he was in office, and in 1968 the National Enquirer ran them along with the front-page headline "The Robot That Sits In For The President."[14]

 

[Valletta]

Really? People are upset about this?

Lyndon Johnson allowed photographs of his autopen to be taken while he was in office, and in 1968 the National Enquirer ran them along with the front-page headline "The Robot That Sits In For The President."[14]

The question here is if Joe Biden was aware of what was being signed and competent enough to have approved the signatures.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

The question here is if Joe Biden was aware of what was being signed and competent enough to have approved the signatures.

A ridiculous suggestion. Anyone who has seen Biden in public making spontaneous remarks knows that while he might stutter and trips over words and makes gaffes now and then because he's 82, he has no issues forming coherent thoughts and carrying on conversations.

This is just a pretext for MAGA to start the erasure of a past democratic president they didn't like so they can make up literal history of the country in Trump's image.

Pathetic and disgusting.

 

[ozso]

A ridiculous suggestion. Anyone who has seen Biden in public making spontaneous remarks knows that while he might stutter and trips over words and makes gaffes now and then because he's 82, he has no issues forming coherent thoughts and carrying on conversations.

This is just a pretext for MAGA to start the erasure of a past democratic president they didn't like so they can make up literal history of the country in Trump's image.

Pathetic and disgusting.

I had to laugh at that considering how much more Trump is attacked in comparison.

 

[NxNW]

More Democrats have come forward about Joe's real mental state

There has never been any evidence that Biden lacked mental capacity.

 

[NxNW]

The question here is if Joe Biden was aware of what was being signed and competent enough to have approved the signatures.

There is no such question.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

There has never been any evidence that Biden lacked mental capacity.

So, should we not believe our "lying eyes" then?

Anyone who has a memory longer than 10 years sees the decline.

We heard all of the excuses
"Oh, well, he was always a gaffe machine, so this is nothing new"
--no he wasn't, in fact, he was a very good public speaker, and very alert, and could put on a commanding performance back in the day, the videos below will prove that

"It's because he had a stutter"
--oh really? The kind that goes away for 65 years, then miraculously comes back with a rapid onset when he turns 79? (and isn't even really a stutter)


Here's a bit of a "throwback" just to refresh everyone's memories.

Here's Joe back in the day (Peak Biden):

Here's Joe as recently as the 2012 Vice Presidential Debate. (still a very solid speaker)

Here was the Joe we saw over the past few years (confused, rambling, losing his words, and looking like a deer in the headlights)

What surprises me is that people are acting like it's a "wild theory" or "controversial" to suggest that he was experiencing cognitive decline.

Studies suggest that 40-45% of people experience cognitive decline when they reach age 75. That percentage goes even higher at age 80. It's not as if people were suggesting some sort of 1 in a million edge case scenario here. They were just suggesting that he was experiencing something that half of people his age experience.


The DNC realized this as well. If "Biden is fine" was the prevailing thought among the DNC, they wouldn't have pushed him aside to swap him for Harris a few months before the election.

What, do you think that the DNC's first choice was to have to switch candidates at the last minute with very little prep time?

 

[BPPLEE]

As long as he authorized it, it is completely legal.

The world may never know

 

[Valletta]

There is no such question.

I've just asked it.

 

[ozso]

So, should we not believe our "lying eyes" then?

Anyone who has a memory longer than 10 years sees the decline.

That doesn't matter anymore. There has to be data. You have to be able to find a chart on the internet with bars and or squiggly lines showing Biden's decline.

 

[RileyG]

More Democrats have come forward about Joe's real mental state and it is unclear who was making various decisions. Did Joe actually approve the specific signatures?

Sad! I hope his family is proud.

 

[RileyG]

So, should we not believe our "lying eyes" then?

Anyone who has a memory longer than 10 years sees the decline.

We heard all of the excuses
"Oh, well, he was always a gaffe machine, so this is nothing new"
--no he wasn't, in fact, he was a very good public speaker, and very alert, and could put on a commanding performance back in the day, the videos below will prove that

"It's because he had a stutter"
--oh really? The kind that goes away for 65 years, then miraculously comes back with a rapid onset when he turns 79? (and isn't even really a stutter)


Here's a bit of a "throwback" just to refresh everyone's memories.

Here's Joe back in the day (Peak Biden):

Here's Joe as recently as the 2012 Vice Presidential Debate. (still a very solid speaker)

Here was the Joe we saw over the past few years (confused, rambling, losing his words, and looking like a deer in the headlights)

What surprises me is that people are acting like it's a "wild theory" or "controversial" to suggest that he was experiencing cognitive decline.

Studies suggest that 40-45% of people experience cognitive decline when they reach age 75. That percentage goes even higher at age 80. It's not as if people were suggesting some sort of 1 in a million edge case scenario here. They were just suggesting that he was experiencing something that half of people his age experience.


The DNC realized this as well. If "Biden is fine" was the prevailing thought among the DNC, they wouldn't have pushed him aside to swap him for Harris a few months before the election.

What, do you think that the DNC's first choice was to have to switch candidates at the last minute with very little prep time?

Considering his age and mental state, I’m grateful he didn’t run for re-election and is now a private citizen. He deserves a break for however many years he has left.

God bless him.

 

[Richard T]

Look on the bright side, maybe those pardons are not so ironclad after all.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

That doesn't matter anymore. There has to be data. You have to be able to find a chart on the internet with bars and or squiggly lines showing Biden's decline.

Yeah, it's really astonishing how there have become two sets of "proof standards" depending on how much they like or hate a person in question with regards to being willing to accept an uncomfortable truth about someone.


For example, if they hate "Dave" and like "Steve"....

"2 anonymous sources told us Dave drove a vehicle drunk 9 years ago, some of their stories conflicted and the accounts from the two sources didn't line up on all the details, but they were willing to swear that he did it so long as we didn't reveal their names"
- Well, that proves it! Dave is definitely a drunk driver!


"Hey, we have all of these videos of Steve at the Christmas party, you can clearly see him down 4 shots of whiskey while yelling "Jameson rules!", threw up on himself, and then staggered to the car, and then hit another car in the parking lot, it looks like Steve was driving drunk"
- You have no proof! This is just an anti-Steve talking point. Snopes said that the videos were lacking context. Do you have any peer-reviewed reports from a toxicologist we approve of to back up your claims???

 

[BPPLEE]

A ridiculous suggestion. Anyone who has seen Biden in public making spontaneous remarks knows that while he might stutter and trips over words and makes gaffes now and then because he's 82, he has no issues forming coherent thoughts and carrying on conversations.

This is just a pretext for MAGA to start the erasure of a past democratic president they didn't like so they can make up literal history of the country in Trump's image.

Pathetic and disgusting.

"We finally beat Medicare"

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

There has never been any evidence that Biden lacked mental capacity.

"I beat Medicare".