Trump Declares Biden’s Autopen Orders, Documents Null and Void
Trump Declares Biden’s Autopen Orders, Documents Null and Void
President Donald Trump announced that any document former President Joe Biden signed using the autopen has been “hereby terminated.” The Trump administration has repeatedly criticized the previous administration’s reliance on the device, which applies a signature to documents without the president physically signing them.
Critics of the former president argued that documents were signed without Biden’s knowledge, fueling claims that his cognitive ability declined during his time in the White House, Mediaite reported.
Biden has rejected those allegations and said he was personally responsible for every pardon issued in the final days of his presidency.
“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,” Trump wrote.
“The Autopen is not allowed to be used if approval is not specifically given by the President of the United States. 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.”
Presidents are believed to have used versions of the autopen for more than 200 years, dating back to Thomas Jefferson, who obtained one after it was patented in 1803, according to the Shapell Manuscript Foundation.
Gerald Ford, Lyndon B. Johnson, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama are all known to have used the device.
Obama became the first president to use an autopen to sign legislation in 2011.
In 2005, during the Bush administration, the Justice Department concluded the autopen is legal.
“A person may sign a document by directing that his signature be affixed to it by another,” a DOJ memo said. Legal scholars have also noted that the Constitution does not require presidents to personally sign pardons.
Trump made similar allegations about Biden’s autopen use in June, at which time he called for an investigation.
On Oct. 28, the Republican led House Oversight Committee recommended the Justice Department investigate the issue.
The White House responded to questions about how Biden’s orders could be “terminated” by referring back to Trump’s Truth Social post.
Trump told reporters in March that he has used the autopen “only for very unimportant papers.”
“You know, we get thousands and thousands of letters, letters of support for young people, from people that aren’t feeling well, etcetera,” Trump said.
“But to sign pardons and all of the things that he signed with an autopen is disgraceful.”
In a July interview with The New York Times, Biden said Republicans are “liars” for claiming he was unaware of his own White House actions that were signed using the autopen.
“I made every decision,” Biden said.
President Trump announced Thursday that he plans to temporarily halt immigration from third-world countries following the shooting of two National Guard troops in Washington, D.C. In a post on Truth Social, the president said the nation has advanced technologically but “Immigration Policy has eroded those gains and living conditions for many,” RedState
reported.
He wrote that he will “permanently pause migration from all Third World Countries to allow the U.S. system to fully recover, terminate all of the millions of Biden illegal admissions, including those signed by Sleepy Joe Biden’s Autopen, and remove anyone who is not a net asset to the United States, or is incapable of loving our Country, end all Federal benefits and subsidies to noncitizens of our Country, denaturalize migrants who undermine domestic tranquility, and deport any Foreign National who is a public charge, security risk, or non-compatible with Western Civilization.”
A NATIONALLY TELEVISED RECKONING: SENATOR JOHN KENNEDY READS AOC’S ENTIRE THREAD WORD FOR WORD ON AIR
When Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez took to social media to label Senator John Kennedy “dangerous” and declare that dissenting voices “needed to be silenced,” she likely anticipated a standard partisan retort. Instead, the Louisiana Senator delivered a calculated, unedited counterstrike that captured national headlines.
Bypassing Spin: The Unvarnished Record
Rather than trading insults online or issuing a press release, Kennedy carried the confrontation straight to a nationally televised public forum. Armed with a printed stack of records, the Senator took the podium, paused, and began reading AOC’s entire thread aloud into the microphone.
Every single post. Word for word. No commentary, no edits, and no interruptions.
The impact was immediate. By simply reading the text exactly as written, Kennedy turned the words themselves into the centerpiece of the discussion, forcing viewers to confront the rhetoric on its face without the buffer of online talking heads or social media spin.
The Constitutional Contrast
Once the last tweet was read into the record, Kennedy methodically dismantled the core premise of the argument. Drawing directly on the First Amendment, the Senator offered a biting, forensic critique of modern cancel culture and political double standards:
Free Speech vs. Political Censorship: Kennedy underscored the bedrock constitutional principle that no elected official has the authority to dictate who is permitted to speak or whose views are deemed acceptable.
The Receipts on Display: By contrasting the calls for silencing opponents against past defenses of radical speech, Kennedy highlighted what critics called a glaring standard of selective outrage.
Composure Over Outrage: Refusing to raise his voice, Kennedy let his trademark folksy calm underline the gravity of the constitutional stakes, turning the moment from a political spat into an indictment of authoritarian impulses.
A Turning Point in the Political Debate
The stark visual of a veteran senator calmly holding up public statements and letting them speak for themselves resonated widely, sparking an immediate frenzy across political broadcasts and digital platforms. The exchange shifted the spotlight from party lines to fundamental questions about accountability, public discourse, and the right to dissent.
By trading digital outrage for a live, unedited reading of the public record, Kennedy didn’t just answer a challenge—he forced Washington into a broader reckoning over the language of modern politics.
Will moments like this reshape how political battles are fought going forward? Share your thoughts below!
SENATE SHOWDOWN: ADAM SCHIFF’S GAMBIT CRUMBLES AS SENATOR JOHN KENNEDY DELIVERS A DEVASTATING TAKEDOWN
What began as a standard Senate hearing on intelligence reform erupted into one of the most explosive political confrontations in recent Capitol Hill history. Congressman Adam Schiff’s attempt to outmaneuver Senator John Kennedy reversed course dramatically, culminating in an extraordinary defeat that left the hearing room—and viewers across the country—stunned.
An Ambush Derailed
Schiff opened the session with an aggressive gambit, looking to steer the proceedings and dictate the narrative. Framing the discussion around intelligence protocols, Schiff quickly pivoted to launch familiar rhetorical salvos, attempting to put committee members on the defensive with sweeping assertions.
Kennedy, however, refused to yield an inch of ground. Known for pairing a drawling, down-home demeanor with razor-sharp legal acumen, the Louisiana Senator sat back, waited for Schiff to overreach, and sprang a meticulously constructed trap.
The Masterclass in Cross-Examination
Rather than trading partisan talking points, Kennedy methodically built his counterattack on raw documentation. Point by point, the Senator systematically challenged Schiff's record:
Dissecting past statements and intelligence memos line by line against verified committee findings.
Pressing hard on questions of procedural transparency, selective disclosures, and ethical boundaries.
Turning Schiff’s own past arguments back on him with unflinching, forensic precision.
As Kennedy tightened the focus on specific ethical violations and questionable oversight decisions, Schiff’s confident posture began to erode under the relentless questioning.
The Live-Broadcast Climax
The confrontation reached a boiling point when Kennedy introduced a critical piece of official correspondence into the record. The document struck at the core of Schiff’s defense, leaving no procedural exit.
In a shocking scene broadcast live to the public, the tension at the witness table snapped. Confronted with the unassailable evidence, Schiff’s own legal counsel hesitated, gathered their materials, and stepped away from the table—leaving Schiff isolated before the microphone without an answer.
The hearing room went dead silent. Schiff, deprived of both rebuttal and support, could only sit in stunned silence as the final seconds ticked away.
The dramatic clash has triggered shockwaves throughout Washington, with analysts hailing the exchange as a benchmark demonstration of rigorous congressional oversight and accountability.
What are your thoughts on this dramatic Senate face-off? Share your perspective below!
