BREAKING: Trump Declares Any Document Signed by Biden with Autopen is Terminated – Threatens Biden w

[mystery-ak]

BREAKING: Trump Declares Any Document Signed by Biden with Autopen is Terminated – Threatens Biden with Perjury Charges
by Cristina Laila Nov. 28, 2025 1:50 pm

President Trump on Friday declared any document signed by Joe Biden with an autopen is “hereby terminated and of no further force or effect.”

Trump also threatened Joe Biden with perjury charges.

“Any document signed by Sleepy Joe Biden with the Autopen, which was approximately 92% of them, is hereby terminated, and of no further force or effect. The Autopen is not allowed to be used if approval is not specifically given by the President of the United States,” President Trump said on Truth Social.

“The Radical Left Lunatics circling Biden around the beautiful Resolute Desk in the Oval Office took the Presidency away from him. I am hereby cancelling all Executive Orders, and anything else that was not directly signed by Crooked Joe Biden, because the people who operated the Autopen did so illegally. Joe Biden was not involved in the Autopen process and, if he says he was, he will be brought up on charges of perjury. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” Trump said.

more
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/11/breaking-trump-declares-any-document-signed-biden-autopen/

[Cyber Liberty]

But can Trump make it stick?

[rustynail]

Those poor Federal Judges can't even celebrate a quiet Thanksgiving with their families without Trump going out and doing things.

[mystery-ak]

https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1994494541299134858

[Canuck Conservative]

The Supreme Court will decide, eventually.

But there's already a lot of evidence that Biden had no clue what was done in the last few months ... Milley, Fauci, the death-row convicts, and other guilty parties must be squirming right now ...

GOOD

[Hoodat]

According to Article I, Section 7 of the US Constitution, any order, resolution, or vote passed by Congress requires approval from the President, not from the President's auto-pen.

[Kamaji]

But can Trump make it stick?

That's the question, innit.

[DefiantMassRINO]

Take it to the Supreme Court.

Every time I sign a mortgage, the lender requires me and my wife to appear in person, with mulitple forms of iD, to personally sign the mortgage contract in front of a witness before a Notary Public as authentication and validation that I consent to be party to the agreed contract.

Autopen is akin to someone with a rubber stamp of my signature to stamp my signature upon a legal document without written, signed, and notarized power of attorney.

Laws and contracts require a demonstrable written, witnessed, and notarized chain of authority and authentication to be enforceable.

If someone uses a 'stamp' to authorize an official action without a demonstratble, written, authenticated chain of authority - starting with the US Constitution, followed by Laws of Congress - why should it be considered valid?

Isn't signing an official Presdential Federal action with autopen - not authorized by the US Constitutional and Laws of Congress - identity theft and fraud?

An unauthorized person is assuming the identity of the President and of the Office of the President of the United States to fraudulently authenticate official acts as having been personally authorized by the President, as evidenced by the President's personal signature.

At the very least, if the US Constitution and Laws of Congress allow the President to delegate authorities, shouldn't official acts be personally signed on Behalf of the President by an official with legally delegated authority to do so.
 

[libertybele]

The Supreme Court will decide, eventually.

But there's already a lot of evidence that Biden had no clue what was done in the last few months ... Milley, Fauci, the death-row convicts, and other guilty parties must be squirming right now ...

GOOD

Mama Jill should be held accountable.  IIRC she attended cabinet meetings.  Why?

[Fishrrman]

Mr. Trump has made this statement knowing full well that the issue will get pushed into the Supreme Court. That's exactly what he wants.

I doubt the Court has ever ventured in this direction before (I could be wrong).

I sense that the thrust of the president's arguments before the Court will be that in order to be Constitutionally valid, any document that carries the force of Executive power behind it (such as signing a bill from Congress, signing executive orders, signing presidential pardons, signing ANYTHING that will be acted upon on the basis of those powers granted to the president by the Constitution) will require an in-person signature by the president, as verified by witnesses.

I can't speculate as to how the Court will rule regarding presidential documents that were already signed using the autopen. The Court may decline to invalidate them on the basis of "ex post facto". But at the same time bar the use of the autopen for such in the future.

Mr. Trump... push this against them, and push as hard as you must to win the goal.

[Smokin Joe]

 

[berdie]

We are gonna need more popcorn.

[libertybele]

Well, there's the issue of the auto pen, but what about in the future having AI intelligence help the president make decisions? Certainly AI is going to change our military and the president is CIC -- so are we then entering a whole new era that needs amendments to the Constitution??

[Hoodat]

You haven't figured it out yet?  Trump IS AI.  Remember that whole 'covfefe' incident?  That was the beta version.

[Canuck Conservative]

Trump IS AI.  Remember that whole 'covfefe' incident?  That was the beta version.

His first pick for AG was Matt Gaetz, he still wants to bring in another 600,000 Chinese "students", and he trusts Steve Witkoff to handle the Russia negotiations

Uh, perhaps the machine still has some bugs to be worked out ...

[IsailedawayfromFR]

According to Article I, Section 7 of the US Constitution, any order, resolution, or vote passed by Congress requires approval from the President, not from the President's auto-pen.

and it requires the President to sign it as well.

However, Executive Orders are a completely different matter as the Constitution simply requires the President approve such action, and is silent on a signature.

So that EO approval could be verbal.

There is small likelihood one can prove he did not approve an EO autopen.

[Cyber Liberty]

and it requires the President to sign it as well.

However, Executive Orders are a completely different matter as the Constitution simply requires the President approve such action, and is silent on a signature.

So that EO approval could be verbal.

There is small likelihood one can prove he did not approve an EO autopen.

You mean like EOs that were signed while he was napping on the beach?

[roamer_1]

Take it to the Supreme Court.

Every time I sign a mortgage, the lender requires me and my wife to appear in person, with mulitple forms of iD, to personally sign the mortgage contract in front of a witness before a Notary Public as authentication and validation that I consent to be party to the agreed contract.

[...]

Good post. But as one who quite commonly worked commercially with banks, most of the boilerplate was all done.

Now, I DID still have to drop by and sign three or four documents. But the lion's share of the paper was either considered boilerplate and preconfigured, or waived. No where near the reams of crap I had to wade through when I first started doing business with them.

Funny that, too, since the early contracts were all under 10 grand - mostly under five grand, or even two - And in the latter days, we were swinging at fifty or a hundred grand all the time.

[Wingnut]

Did the Auto Pen sign Kamonji Brown putting her on to the Supreme Court?

[Timber Rattler]

Problem is that there is already a Department of Justice written opinion from 2005 on the matter that will need to be overturned.  That could be messy.

See link:

https://www.justice.gov/file/494411/dl

Here's a pretty decent article from 2011 on the matter:

All the President’s Signatures--
The constitutional quibble with the autopen. (It’s not what you think it is.)

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2011/08/the-constitutional-quibble-with-the-autopen-it-s-not-what-you-think-it-is.html

Problem is that if Trump declares Biden's use of the autopen invalid then does that mean EVERY prior use of it is invalid too, going back to Harry Truman?

10 facts about the 'autopen'

https://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/autopen-barack-obama-10-facts-085720

[IsailedawayfromFR]

You mean like EOs that were signed while he was napping on the beach?

if he had already given verbal approval for them, possibly yes.

Trump is barking up the wrong tree.

[Canuck Conservative]

Problem is that if Trump declares Biden's use of the autopen invalid then does that mean EVERY prior use of it is invalid too, going back to Harry Truman?

Not necessarily, they're not saying ALL of of Biden's auto-pen pardons are invalid, just in the last few months when Biden was clearly senile (as confirmed by Robert Hur). And they're not saying other Presidents' autopen use was questionable.

For example, they're not disputing the pardon he gave Hunter, because Biden was clearly there for that one.

BUT, for the flurry of pardons issued in the last week - which is more than 90% of them, including all the controversial ones - there are real questions about whether Biden ever knew what was being done behind his back. THOSE are targets for rollback.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Not necessarily, they're not saying ALL of of Biden's auto-pen pardons are invalid, just in the last few months when Biden was clearly senile (as confirmed by Robert Hur). And they're not saying other Presidents' autopen use was questionable.

For example, they're not disputing the pardon he gave Hunter, because Biden was clearly there for that one.

BUT, for the flurry of pardons issued in the last week - which is more than 90% of them, including all the controversial ones - there are real questions about whether Biden ever knew what was being done behind his back. THOSE are targets for rollback.

that is not what Trump said.  He said ALL where Biden was unaware.

Problem is proving he was unaware, which IMHO cannot be done.

[Canuck Conservative]

Problem is proving he was unaware, which IMHO cannot be done.

Hur already confirmed (through his awkward interviews) that Biden was already senile last July, and most of the pardons happened months after that.

Not impossible to prove, just takes some work. Start investigating!

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Hur already confirmed (through his awkward interviews) that Biden was already senile last July, and most of the pardons happened months after that.

Not impossible to prove, just takes some work. Start investigating!

all seemingly sounding good, but good luck proving that one.

A court will give a President the benefit of the doubt.

And it would seem to me to be Congress's or a court's prerogative to call out former Presidentual actions, not a current President.