Forgery is a crime we don’t hear much about anymore since few people write checks and instead rely on electronic payment methods. It can take many forms, such as signing a check or document in someone else’s name without their permission or knowledge.
Creating a false document like a driver’s license was once a teenage rite of passage, but it was much easier in my day when the license was a piece of paper rather than a hardened piece of plastic containing myriad anti-fraud provisions.
ChatGPT
A skilled painter could forge a masterpiece, and who knows how many forgeries are displayed in museums while the original resides in some wealthy person’s library?
Forgery can be a state or federal crime depending on the circumstances. ChatGPT summarizes the differences.
Most forgery cases — such as forging checks, personal documents, or signatures — are prosecuted under state laws. Each state defines and penalizes forgery differently, but it’s typically a felony if the document has legal or financial significance.
Forgery becomes a federal offense when it involves:
· Federal documents (e.g., passports, immigration papers, military IDs)
· U.S. currency or Treasury checks
· Interstate commerce or communication (e.g., forging checks used across state lines)
· Federal institutions (e.g., IRS, Social Security)
This leads us to the title of this essay and President Autopen. This system is ripe for forgery depending on how the autopen is utilized.
An autopen is not inherently bad.
It has its uses, as Wikipedia summarizes:
An autopen, or signing machine, is a device used for the automatic signing of a signature. Prominent individuals may be asked to provide their signatures many times a day, such as celebrities receiving requests for autographs, or politicians signing documents and correspondence in their official capacities. Consequently, many public figures employ autopens to allow their signature to be printed on demand and without their direct involvement.
President Trump uses the autopen “only for very unimportant papers,” like signing letters in response to the many letters he receives.
President Obama used the autopen on one occasion, “when he signed an extension of the Patriot Act. Obama was in France on official business and, with time running out before the law expired, he authorized the use of the autopen to sign it into law.”
Those are key words, “unimportant papers” and “authorized.”
What is the legal basis for the autopen?
The Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice authored an opinion in 2005.
Specifically, they advised:
The President need not personally perform the physical act of affixing his signature to a bill he approves and decides to sign in order for the bill to become law. Rather, the President may sign a bill within the meaning of Article I, Section 7 by directing a subordinate to affix the President’s signature to such a bill, for example by autopen.
We emphasize that we are not suggesting that the President may delegate the decision to approve and sign a bill, only that, having made this decision, he may direct a subordinate to affix the President’s signature to the bill. (emphasis mine)
Now, let’s connect all of this back to President Autopen (Biden).
The Heritage Foundation claims that, “Biden’s name was signed using an autopen on nearly every executive order and official document during his four-year tenure.”
Did he delegate the decision to approve and sign, or did he direct someone to use the autopen on his behalf? If so, why couldn’t he sign these documents himself?
President Trump signed 143 executive orders during the first 100 days of his second term, setting a record; most of these signings took place in front of the media and were video recorded.
Why couldn’t President Biden do the same? If he was unable to sign his name, was he also improperly and potentially illegally delegating that authority to others? Furthermore, was he capable of serving as president?
These are legitimate questions, as summarized by The Hill:
Did he personally grant broad (and possibly unconstitutional) pardons for family members, members of the January 6 Committee and Anthony Fauci, or did someone else make the decision? Was he responsible for all the executive orders issued under his name, or did White House personnel make those decisions?
Biden’s cognitive decline and prostate cancer likely predate his presidency. Cancer treatment may cause “chemo brain,” which, combined with progressive dementia, may explain Biden’s difficulty in signing documents.
But it also questions his ability to understand what he was directing, if he even was, regarding subordinates signing. Who are these subordinates? Are they the vice president or other cabinet members under the presidential order of succession?
No, these are unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats: “three key White House aides – Annie Tomasini, Anthony Bernal, and Ashley Williams – who ran interference for President Biden.” Did they also operate the autopen?
Trump’s cryptocurrency and artificial intelligence czar David Sacks alleged, “Elizabeth Warren controlled the autopen during that administration.”
Likely-to-be-ousted DNC Vice Chair David Hogg admitted that, “Jill Biden’s Chief of Staff, Anthony Bernal, was running the Biden White House.”
Was he doing Dr. Jill’s bidding? Did Hunter Biden use the autopen to issue his own pardon? Given what we now know, these are legitimate questions.
Rep. Tim Burchett alleged that Biden’s autopen staff may have accepted bribes for autopen-signed pardons.
These are serious allegations and warrant investigation.
Fortunately, Rep. James Comer and the House Oversight Committee are investigating and interviewing Biden’s handlers, asking questions such as, “Who was making the decisions? Who was authorizing his signature? Was it him?”
If Biden couldn’t sign his name, how could he carry out the other responsibilities of being president? Who was actually running the country for the past four years?
If his handlers were signing “federal documents” without authorization, that’s forgery — a federal crime that Attorney General Pam Bondi should investigate.
The final question is whether forged documents hold validity. If a contract is signed fraudulently, it is null and void. Presidential pardons are considered deeds since a pardon must be accepted by the individual receiving it.
Was Biden aware of the autopen’s usage? Did he authorize it and approve what was being signed? There should be contemporaneous communications confirming this. Was Biden asleep or out of it from chemotherapy when the documents were signed? These signatures and the President’s activities are both timestamped and logged.
If these are forgeries, the forgers should face criminal prosecution. Furthermore, the documents are null and void.
As Trump posted on Truth Social:
The “Pardons” that Sleepy Joe Biden gave to the Unselect Committee of Political Thugs, and many others, are hereby declared VOID, VACANT, AND OF NO FURTHER FORCE OR EFFECT, because of the fact that they were done by Autopen. In other words, Joe Biden did not sign them but, more importantly, he did not know anything about them!
Once a concealer and enabler, now a revealer and whistleblower, Jake Tapper admits that Democrats’ cover-up of Biden’s cognitive decline may be “worse than Watergate.” Let the investigations begin!
Brian C. Joondeph, M.D., is a physician and writer. Follow me on Twitter @retinaldoctor, Substack Dr. Brian’s Substack, Truth Social @BrianJoondeph, LinkedIn @Brian Joondeph, and email brianjoondeph@gmail.com.
Jesus Christ is King
Comments are closed.