Autopen Presidency Is Exposed In Hur Testimony Recordings
Joe Biden’s public appearances and recorded testimony, particularly during investigations like the special counsel probe into his handling of classified documents, revealed signs of cognitive decline that raised concerns about his capacity to lead. The special counsel’s report by Robert Hur noted Biden’s “diminished faculties in advancing age,” describing him as likely to appear to a jury as a “sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” Transcripts from these sessions showed instances where Biden struggled to recall key details, such as the timing of his vice presidency or specific dates, with aides frequently stepping in to clarify or provide information. These lapses, combined with public moments of confusion—such as referencing outdated technology like a “record player” during a 2020 debate—fueled perceptions that Biden’s mental acuity was not sufficient for the demands of the presidency. This perception was compounded by reports that White House staff tightly managed his public exposure, curating his image to minimize scrutiny of his cognitive state.
The question of who was actually running the country during Biden’s presidency has become a significant issue, as evidence suggests his administration operated with heavy reliance on staff and close confidants. Posts on X and media reports have claimed that key figures like Jill Biden, Hunter Biden, top aides, and even an unnamed White House lawyer exerted outsized influence, with some alleging they controlled critical decisions. The White House’s reported efforts to shield Biden from unscripted moments and negative media coverage indicate a deliberate strategy to compensate for his limitations. This dynamic has led to speculation that unelected staffers or family members were effectively steering the administration, raising concerns about accountability and transparency. While Biden’s defenders argue his legislative accomplishments demonstrate effective leadership, critics point to the tightly controlled environment as evidence that others were managing the presidency behind the scenes.
Perhaps the most troubling issue is the widespread use of an autopen for Biden’s signatures on official documents, which has cast doubt on whether he personally approved many executive actions. Investigations by groups like the Oversight Project, affiliated with the Heritage Foundation, claim that virtually every document bearing Biden’s signature during his presidency was signed by an autopen, with only one known exception. This practice, while not unique to Biden’s administration, has sparked questions about who authorized its use and whether Biden was fully aware of the documents being signed in his name. Posts on X have amplified these concerns, with some users alleging that figures like Secretary of State Antony Blinken or White House lawyers controlled the autopen, potentially issuing orders without Biden’s direct knowledge. While autopen use is legal and has precedent, the scale of its application—combined with reports of Biden’s diminished capacity—has fueled accusations of a “masterful fraud,” where a “diffuse, managerial oligarchy” may have governed in his stead, undermining the legitimacy of his administration’s actions.
