Here is:

One of the greatest criminal conspiracies ever perpetrated on the American people.

They knew he was a vegetable by Day 5. By 2022, they knew he was an utterly incapacitated one at that.

They began using the autopen on Day 5 of Biden’s installation into the White… pic.twitter.com/FDBdpTysps

— 🇺🇸RealRobert🇺🇸 (@Real_RobN) October 28, 2025

Just unbelievable stuff, but not really. Biden was the Trojan horse for the Democrat Socialists and Obama. Now they need to look at all of his time on the beach and see how many things were signed. I guarantee they got sloppy.

I don't think the issue was using autopen, it was that there was concern it was used in the final days without his complete knowledge. However, if his advisors asked "hey can we pardon X,Y, and Z" and he mumbled "ya that's fine" and then used autopen then it's 100% valid. ****ty, but valid.

The rest:

Quote:

---

They began using the autopen on Day 5 of Biden's installation into the White House, and by June 2021, its use had skyrocketed.

In other words, he was so incapacitated they had to automate the presidency while pretending everything was normal.

This wasn't just political theater; it was a coordinated deception a criminal conspiracy carried out by unelected handlers within the government, Congress, and the intelligence community.

---

Which raises a question for me. A few questions. Did he sign those EOs rescinding Trump's EOs or not? Did he sign his nominations for his Cabinet? For judgeships?

Water is wet. Biden probably got paid 100M to let Barry run the country the last four years. Do you honestly think kumala spent 1.5B in 100 days??? I hope you're not that naive.

Teslag said:

---

I don't think the issue was using autopen, it was that there was concern it was used in the final days without his complete knowledge. However, if his advisors asked "hey can we pardon X,Y, and Z" and he mumbled "ya that's fine" and then used autopen then it's 100% valid. ****ty, but valid.

---

Yeah the diff here isn't the validity of docusign it's the fraudulent use of it to sign for someone else without their knowledge and by extension outside of the purview of the President and therefore not decisions executed by the will of the people through their democratically elected leader..with global, life and death implications.

I'm kind of in agreement with TeslAg. I don't see how you undo any pardons or EOs without at least a couple of insiders willing to confess and rat out the rest of Biden's aids. How can you prove Biden didn't give the ok on all the autopen actions?

They already know that some of the pardons were signed at times that he would not likely have been awake, and when he was out of town.

Not sure that you do. But you scare the hell out of anyone who might try it again.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Not sure that you do. But you scare the hell out of anyone who might try it again.

---

Agreed. I'm all for pushing this scandal for maximum political damage.

Hill08 said:

---

Water is wet. Biden probably got paid 100M to let Barry run the country the last four years. Do you honestly think kumala spent 1.5B in 100 days??? I hope you're not that naive.

---

There were actually reports written about Bidens staff consulting with Obama after hours. I won't go so far as to say he got paid, but he was definitely involved in governing to some degree.

Biden was so incapacitated that I'm sure they were using him for guidance at a minimum.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

They already know that some of the pardons were signed at times that he would not likely have been awake, and when he was out of town.

---

This doesn't help either. They could just say he gave the go ahead and they autopenned the signature later. And all Biden has to say is that's what happened.

dp

To me, the autopen is a bit of a side show.

The bigger question - for all that time, who was the chief executive of the United States? Don't say Obama - he wasn't at the White House and wasn't involved om the day to day operations of the government.

I'm guessing a committee of Dr. Jill, Ron Klain then Jeff Zients, and Mike Donilon.

YouBet said:

---

Hill08 said:

---

Water is wet. Biden probably got paid 100M to let Barry run the country the last four years. Do you honestly think kumala spent 1.5B in 100 days??? I hope you're not that naive.

---

There were actually reports written about Bidens staff consulting with Obama after hours. I won't go so far as to say he got paid, but he was definitely involved in governing to some degree.

Biden was so incapacitated that I'm sure they were using him for guidance at a minimum.

---

I don't think there's any doubt Biden was out of it and had no idea these things were being signed on his behalf. But this is a legal question with constitutional implications. And the only legal method to invalidate a President's actions by incapacitation is the 25th amendment and that was never done. Not court is going to go back an null things based on later accusations of incapacitation. That would open up a can of worms no one wants to deal with.

Teslag said:

---

I don't think the issue was using autopen, it was that there was concern it was used in the final days without his complete knowledge. However, if his advisors asked "hey can we pardon X,Y, and Z" and he mumbled "ya that's fine" and then used autopen then it's 100% valid. ****ty, but valid.

---

Again - that's IF he did while in office. At this point there's no way to know, and for the good of the office I'd like to see at least one of these forgeries invalidated so that we memorialize some level of protections against the office becoming a shared role.

Jill isn't sharp enough to do it.

Quote:

---

At this point there's no way to know

---

I agree, and that's precisely my point. In the absence of 100% proof, the deference will go to the President.

Teslag said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

They already know that some of the pardons were signed at times that he would not likely have been awake, and when he was out of town.

---

This doesn't help either. They could just say he gave the go ahead and they autopenned the signature later. And all Biden has to say is that's what happened.

---

They can commit perjury, yes.

Kasie Hunt: “‘By directing a subordinate to affix the President’s signature to such a bill, for example, by autopen.’”

Scott Jennings: “The issue is not the use of the autopen. The issue is the last thing you said, ‘directing someone.’ The president making a decision… [The… pic.twitter.com/98hzbVnn4W

— RedWave Press (@RedWave_Press) October 28, 2025

Yes, the question will be do you have to presume all of them were verbally authorized without some sort of documentation process? You either take the stance they are only valid if documented and otherwise presume the rest are not legitimate, or you presume they are all legit unless specific detailed evidence of fraudulent use of the process without the knowledge of the president emerges. I agree with Tesla that the court system would be very unlikely to find that they are illegitimate and try to impose their authority on the validity of executive branch actions to such a degree. The default will be to presume legitimacy.

You can argue the constitution only invests the individual power of the president in the president himself so the president can delegate authority to a degree, but not his individual responsibilities. The president has requirements to take actions to do things as an individual per the constitution.

Jan. 2021 to Jan. 2025 was a long 4 years.

Ooof.

This also further highlights the sheer hypocrisy of the libs before Biden, and after Biden trying to debate the 25th amendment with respect to Trump.

All the gaslighting in the world wont gloss over the fact they knew he was braindead for 99.99% of his Presidency.

Teslag said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Hill08 said:

---

Water is wet. Biden probably got paid 100M to let Barry run the country the last four years. Do you honestly think kumala spent 1.5B in 100 days??? I hope you're not that naive.

---

There were actually reports written about Bidens staff consulting with Obama after hours. I won't go so far as to say he got paid, but he was definitely involved in governing to some degree.

Biden was so incapacitated that I'm sure they were using him for guidance at a minimum.

---

I don't think there's any doubt Biden was out of it and had no idea these things were being signed on his behalf. But this is a legal question with constitutional implications. And the only legal method to invalidate a President's actions by incapacitation is the 25th amendment and that was never done. Not court is going to go back an null things based on later accusations of incapacitation. That would open up a can of worms no one wants to deal with.

---

Well, I've seen courts invalidate a Last Will & Testament upon proof of incapacity at the time the testator executed the Will, even though the testator hadn't been previously medically &/or judicially determined to be incapacitated.

So, in general, Courts have indeed retroactively nullified legal documents w/o a condition precedent, such as a prior finding of incapacity; although I agree the 25th should've been utilized, I don't think it is a prerequisite to nullify auto-pen usage IF it's shown Biden was indeed incapacitated since using the 25th is not only practically unheard of but also politically motivated. I hope the courts would see past the 25th as some obstacle &/or prerequisite.

However, the problem in this instance is the invocation of the 5th by EVERYONE connected to Biden, including Biden's physician (who also hid behind physician/ client privilege). Trump did waive presidential confidentiality (or something I'm brain-farting to recall), & if the DOJ referral has legs, it MIGHT lead to something but like you, I seriously doubt it.

Trajan88 said:

---

Jan. 2021 to Jan. 2025 was a long 4 years.

Ooof.

---

It was sheer hell on my liver and my blood pressure. I don't think I've ever been that continually enraged in my life.

Edit autocorrect

The rest:

Quote:

---

Scott Jennings: "The issue is not the use of the autopen. The issue is the last thing you said, 'directing someone.' The president making a decision… [The House Oversight Committee has found] that there is no clear evidence that Joe Biden personally made the decision that ONLY a president can make."

"You guys are missing the point. The allegation is that Joe Biden had no idea that his signature was being affixed to certain things, and if that's true, it is a valid question. If the President doesn't personally make a decision or make an [order]."

"The President is not a figurehead."

---

That is a valid question. Whether it can ever be definitively answered is another matter, altogether.

They would have used it sooner, but they have to spend that whole five days working with Joe to get the autopen programmed.

fc2112 said:

---

To me, the autopen is a bit of a side show.

The bigger question - for all that time, who was the chief executive of the United States? Don't say Obama - he wasn't at the White House and wasn't involved om the day to day operations of the government.

I'm guessing a committee of Dr. Jill, Ron Klain then Jeff Zients, and Mike Donilon.

---

Jake Tapper's book mentioned an internal group known as "The Politburo", specifically Mike Donilon and Steve Ricchetti.

TAMUallen said:

---

Jill isn't sharp enough to do it.

---

plus she was too busy with her medical practice

To be honest, by Day 5 Joe Biden was too demented to sign anything.

torrid said:

---

fc2112 said:

---

To me, the autopen is a bit of a side show.

The bigger question - for all that time, who was the chief executive of the United States? Don't say Obama - he wasn't at the White House and wasn't involved om the day to day operations of the government.

I'm guessing a committee of Dr. Jill, Ron Klain then Jeff Zients, and Mike Donilon.

---

Jake Tapper's book mentioned an internal group known as "The Politburo", specifically Mike Donilon and Steve Ricchetti.

---

Ricchetti - I forgot about that maggot.

If you just wanna pick a pardon to pursue for validity - I vote Liz Cheney.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Yes, the question will be do you have to presume all of them were verbally authorized without some sort of documentation process? You either take the stance they are only valid if documented and otherwise presume the rest are not legitimate, or you presume they are all legit unless specific detailed evidence of fraudulent use of the process without the knowledge of the president emerges. I agree with Tesla that the court system would be very unlikely to find that they are illegitimate and try to impose their authority on the validity of executive branch actions to such a degree. The default will be to presume legitimacy.

You can argue the constitution only invests the individual power of the president in the president himself so the president can delegate authority to a degree, but not his individual responsibilities. The president has requirements to take actions to do things as an individual per the constitution.

---

There are mass pardons where names were tossed in right before the autopen while Biden was remote. If there's no paper trail of these names being produced for Biden's awareness that the recipients even exist & there's no indication he was made aware of their addition & there's no communication log between addition and "signature"… the preponderance of the evidence would indicate that he never authorized the addition of those individuals or the signature of THAT document.

Essentially:
"Here's a list of 10 potential pardon recipients for the president to "review'"
Days later "…now we've got 5 more for him to "review'"
Hours later w/ no communication trail …auto pen forgery affixed for 20 names.

Obviously those last 5 names were frauded in and the 5 before were BS too. The first 10 are unlikely to have ever been honestly reviewed and verbally authorized either.

The President can't just say "run the country" to his chief of staff & grant him presidential carte blanche. At the end of the day - there has to be a limit on how far a president can delegate. I would draw a like in that a presidential pardon requires specific action by the president and if the preponderance of the evidence indicates the absence of specific action, that pardon was never issued.

TAMU1990 said:

---

Here is:

One of the greatest criminal conspiracies ever perpetrated on the American people.

They knew he was a vegetable by Day 5. By 2022, they knew he was an utterly incapacitated one at that.

They began using the autopen on Day 5 of Biden’s installation into the White… pic.twitter.com/FDBdpTysps

— 🇺🇸RealRobert🇺🇸 (@Real_RobN) October 28, 2025

Just unbelievable stuff, but not really. Biden was the Trojan horse for the Democrat Socialists and Obama. Now they need to look at all of his time on the beach and see how many things were signed. I guarantee they got sloppy.

---

Fauci is squirming.

Keep up the pressure.

Unravel EVERYTHING the corrupt Biden Crime Family did.