logo
We're finally learning the awful truth about who ruled America under Biden

We're finally learning the awful truth about who ruled America under Biden

Telegraph14-07-2025
The autopen may be mightier than the sword – or the law – but it's not a shield. The latest revelations about the extent to which Joe Biden's staff affixed his signature to pardons and commutations in his name, using a device to replicate his handwriting, is further damning evidence of who was really running his White House.
The joke is that the autopen was in charge. The sad reality is that Biden's unelected staff and family were exercising the constitutional powers of the presidency without the obvious supervision of an elected leader.
Say what you will about the erratic nature of Donald Trump's decisions and public statements; when the 79-year-old does or says something, there's no mistaking his signature (although he has said he's used the autopen for 'very unimportant papers').
Not so with Biden. A report in Sunday's New York Times, including a brief telephone interview with the 82-year-old former president, discloses some new details about the scale of the auto-pardons, but it is full of cautions about how much the authors may not know. The Times piece is transparently an effort by Biden's team to use a sympathetic outlet to get a favourable spin on the facts ahead of investigations by Congress and the Justice Department. Readers will notice how far into the article one must get before encountering the facts. But even the facts we know are hard to whitewash.
The scale of Biden's pardons was unprecedented. Presidents have previously used blanket pardons in the military context to grant amnesty to Vietnam-era deserters and draft dodgers and Confederate soldiers. But nobody has come close to the more than 4,000 criminal-law pardons and commutations for individuals that were issued from the Biden White House between the election and Biden's departure from office. Biden's name was affixed to more pardons in 10 weeks than Franklin D Roosevelt issued in 12 years.
The most controversial of these are probably the ones that Biden actually thought through: scandalously broad pardons for Biden's family members and for polarising political figures such as Dr Anthony Fauci, alongside an across-the-board decision to clear out death row by commuting all but three of the current federal death sentences. But there were thousands more beyond that.
Confirming that all of those pardons and commutations were justified in such a short time would be a Herculean labour. Biden and his team now say that he authorised the autopen to be used 25 times, some of them covering whole categories of hundreds of people based on general criteria. But who decided that each of these was a proper use of a power that the Constitution reserves personally to the president?
For example, Biden mass-commuted sentences of people given home confinement during the pandemic. Some of them committed notorious abuses of public trust that harmed large numbers of people. Did the president know he was doing that?
The 'process' apparently involved oral 'blurbs' from the often-incoherent elderly chief executive, which were then reported to the staff secretary controlling the autopen as authorisation for staff to give her lists of names purportedly meeting criteria signed off on by Biden. According to the New York Times, the lists sometimes changed slightly after the meetings without the president necessarily being aware.
Everyone involved is lawyering up. Even Biden's doctor is pleading his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent to avoid self-incrimination. The entire spectacle is dramatic proof of how presidential power can be abused when the president's mental faculties are fading to match his ethical standards and nobody in the room has to worry about facing the voters ever again.
Biden's allies are now trying to shift the public's focus to the narrow legal issue of whether the pardons and commutations are invalid. That's a daunting standard for his critics to meet, one without precedent in American legal history. So long as there is some basis to argue that the president authorised a pardon, there's nothing in the law that requires his personal signature. Trump's Justice Department may well decide that it's not worth the effort to fight the pardons in court.
But what the law allows to happen is far from the biggest issue: it's that the pardon machine went into overdrive while the president was barely awake at the switch. The pardon power is the most absolute of all presidential powers, one modelled more closely on the power of a king than anything else the president does. The major check on its abuse is surely supposed to be that the president himself signs off on every pardon as an act of personal clemency.
If even that power was falling into the hands of the staff, what does that tell us about the many other presidential powers that were wielded in Joe Biden's name while he was napping?
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

US, EU trade talks bolstered by Trump's agreement with Japan
US, EU trade talks bolstered by Trump's agreement with Japan

Reuters

time23 minutes ago

  • Reuters

US, EU trade talks bolstered by Trump's agreement with Japan

BRUSSELS/WASHINGTON, July 23 (Reuters) - The European Union and the U.S. are moving toward a trade deal that could include a 15% U.S. baseline tariff on EU goods and possible exemptions, two European diplomats said on Wednesday, potentially moving President Donald Trump closer to another major trade agreement on the heels of the one he just unveiled with Japan. European negotiators were hoping to reach an agreement to dodge the 30% tariff rate Trump has said he would impose on imports from the 27-nation bloc on August 1. The rate, which could also extend to cars, would mirror the framework agreement the U.S. has struck with Japan, which Trump announced late on Tuesday. There could be concessions for sectors like aircraft and lumber as well as some medicines and agricultural products, which would not face tariffs, the diplomats said. Washington does not, however, appear willing to lower its current 50% tariff on steel, they said. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro told Bloomberg News the report from the EU should be taken with "a grain of salt." As talks continued, the European Commission said it would press on with potential counter-measures in case a deal was not reached. EU member states were set to vote on 93 billion euros of counter-tariffs on U.S. goods on Thursday, European diplomats said. A broad majority of members support using anti-coercion instruments if there is no deal, they said. Trump was aiming to secure an agreement on the heels of a complicated deal reached with Japan, the largest foreign investor in the U.S. That deal included a $550 investment and loan pledges from Japan and its commitment to buy 100 Boeing airplanes and boost purchases of U.S. agricultural products. That investment - to be spent at Trump's discretion - would focus on key industries like energy, semiconductors, critical minerals, pharmaceuticals and shipbuilding, the White House said on Wednesday. Tariffs on Japan's auto sector will drop from 27.5% to 15% as part of the agreement, reviving hopes for similar treatment for European cars. Asian and European stock markets rallied as investors cheered the U.S.-Japan agreement, but U.S. stocks showed a more modest rise and earnings reports were gloomy. American businesses making everything from chips to steel reported downbeat results on Wednesday, revealing how the Trump administration's chaotic trade policy has hurt profits, added to costs, upended supply chains and weighed on consumer confidence. U.S. automakers signaled their unhappiness with the Japan deal, raising concerns about a trade regime that cuts tariffs on Japanese auto imports while leaving 25% tariffs on imports from their plants and suppliers in Canada and Mexico. "Any deal that charges a lower tariff for Japanese imports with virtually no U.S. content than the tariff imposed on North American-built vehicles with high U.S. content is a bad deal for U.S. industry and U.S. auto workers," said Matt Blunt, the president of the American Automotive Policy Council, which represents General Motors (GM.N), opens new tab, Ford (F.N), opens new tab and Chrysler parent Stellantis ( opens new tab. Automobile stocks led the climb of European shares after the Japan deal spurred hopes that the U.S. was budging over tariffs on EU cars. EU officials have previously said Washington has shown little sign of doing so. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in an interview with Bloomberg Television that Japan received the 15% rate on auto tariffs "because they were willing to provide this innovative financing mechanism" that he did not think other countries could replicate. Trump, however, has appeared open to a range of options as the U.S. negotiates trade deals. "I will only lower tariffs if a country agrees to open its market," Trump wrote in a social media post on Wednesday. The Republican president said late on Tuesday that other countries would be coming to Washington for talks this week. Governments were scrambling to close trade deals before next week's deadline that the White House has repeatedly pushed back under pressure from markets and intense lobbying by industry. U.S. and Chinese officials plan to meet in Stockholm next week to discuss extending an August 12 deadline for negotiating a trade deal. White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt on Wednesday would not discuss expectations for the meeting, but said Bessent "looks forward to continuing discussions with his Chinese counterparts."

Judge rejects Trump administration effort to unseal Epstein grand jury records in Florida
Judge rejects Trump administration effort to unseal Epstein grand jury records in Florida

The Independent

time25 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Judge rejects Trump administration effort to unseal Epstein grand jury records in Florida

A judge on Wednesday rejected a Trump administration request to unseal transcripts from grand jury investigations of Jeffrey Epstein years ago in Florida, though a similar request for the work of a different grand jury is pending in New York. U.S. District Judge Robin Rosenberg in West Palm Beach said the request to release grand jury documents from 2005 and 2007 did not meet any of the extraordinary exceptions under federal law that could make them public. The Justice Department last week asked the judge to release records to quell a storm among supporters of President Donald Trump who believe there was a conspiracy to protect Epstein's clients, conceal videos of crimes being committed and other evidence. In 2008, Epstein cut a deal with federal prosecutors in Florida that allowed him to escape more severe federal charges and instead plead guilty to state charges of procuring a person under 18 for prostitution and solicitation of prostitution. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche had asked judges in Florida and New York to unseal transcripts from grand jury proceedings that resulted in indictments against Epstein and former girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell, saying 'transparency to the American public is of the utmost importance to this Administration.' Federal grand juries hear evidence in secret and then decide whether there is enough for an indictment. Experts say the transcripts likely would not reveal much because prosecutors typically are trying only to present enough material to get charges and don't introduce the entire investigation. Epstein, a wealthy financier, years later was arrested in 2019 on federal sex trafficking charges, while Maxwell was charged with helping him abuse teenage girls. Epstein was found dead in his cell at a federal jail in New York City about a month after he was arrested. Investigators concluded he killed himself. Maxwell later was convicted at trial and sentenced to 20 years in prison. The case attracted attention because of Epstein and Maxwell's links to famous people, including royals, presidents and billionaires. It also led to some of the biggest conspiracy theories animating Trump's base. The furor over records has been stoked by the Justice Department. In February, far-right influencers were invited to the White House and provided with binders marked 'The Epstein Files: Phase 1' and 'Declassified.' The binders contained documents that had largely already been in the public domain. The department on July 7 acknowledged that Epstein did not have a list of clients. It also said no more files related to his case would be made public. A two-page memo that bore the logos of the FBI and Justice Department, but that was not signed by any individual, said the department determined that no 'further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted.'

Trump's freeze on $6 billion in education funds could lead to school closures, lawmakers warn
Trump's freeze on $6 billion in education funds could lead to school closures, lawmakers warn

The Independent

time25 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Trump's freeze on $6 billion in education funds could lead to school closures, lawmakers warn

Democratic and Republican Lawmakers are asking the Trump administration to unfreeze nearly $6 billion in federal education funding, voicing concern that it could force some school districts to close. In a rare bipartisan push across local, state, and federal lines, officials have asked the administration to release billions in federal funding that support essential K-12 and adult education programs – particularly for low-income and English as a second language students. So far, 10 Republican senators and 18 Democratic governors have sent letters to Education Department Secretary Linda McMahon and Office of Management and Budget Secretary Russell Vought encouraging them to release funding. Among the Republicans is Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who told ABC News she was concerned about schools in her home state that have already struggled to stay open. "Many of our school districts have already made really hard decisions about closing schools," Murkowski said. "I wish I could say that we were really solid on the state level, but we're not. And now there's questions on the federal level as well.' On June 30, the Department of Education informed school districts across the country that it would not release $6.9 billion that would typically be done on July 1. The department said it was reviewing federal funding because it had been 'grossly misused to subsidize a radical left-wing agenda.' Nearly two weeks later, on July 18, the administration said it would release $1.3 billion in those federal frozen funds allocated toward after-school programs – but the other $5.5 billion remains in limbo. The Independent has asked the Department of Education and the Office of Management and Budget for comment. Already, school districts are looking at making cuts as they struggle to prepare for the upcoming school year. In Tallahassee, Florida, Leon County School District Superintendent Rocky Hannah said the possibility of school closures is on the table to solve the school district's financial issues – which have only been made worse by federal funding cuts. 'We're going to look at enrollment data and school zones to see if that could potentially be of financial benefit to us,' Hanna told the Tallahassee Democrat. 'Of course, we do not want to do that, but all options are on the table, including the merging of school sites.' A spokesperson for the Palm Beach County School District told WPTV that the 'ongoing delay in releasing these funds poses significant challenges and could necessitate the elimination of essential services for our students and educators.' In their letter to McMahon and Vought, Republicans said freezing funds was 'contrary' to President Donald Trump's desire to shut down the Department of Education in order to return education to the states. 'The decision to withhold this funding is contrary to President Trump's goal of returning K-12 education to the states. This funding goes directly to states and local school districts, where local leaders decide how this funding is spent, because as we know, local communities know how to best serve students and families. Withholding this funding denies states and communities the opportunity to pursue localized initiatives to support students and their families,' the 10 Republicans wrote. Multiple school districts in Murkowski's home state have sued the Trump administration for withholding funds, arguing that it violates the Impoundment Control Act, among other constitutional provisions. Murkowski told ABC News she is 'very worried.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store