Staff Reports
Recent revelations from the House Oversight Committee have opened up a new can of worms regarding President Biden’s use of an auto pen to sign pardons and executive orders. It seems that there’s a lot more happening behind the scenes than what meets the eye. The findings suggest that even when decisions were conveyed in emails, it doesn’t necessarily mean that President Biden was personally involved. So, who exactly was pulling the strings while the President appeared more like a bystander in his own administration?
According to the Oversight report, it turns out that Chief of Staff Jeff Zients was often the one giving the green light to use the auto pen. After lengthy telephone discussions, decisions about pardons, including those involving family members, were communicated through layers of staff. For instance, Zients received updates from staffers who weren’t even in the meeting where the decision was supposedly made. He didn’t think to verify the accuracy of the information by checking with the President. Instead, he simply authorized the auto pen to do its job, leaving everyone wondering about Biden’s actual role in these critical decisions.
The investigation revealed an alarming pattern of how decisions were being handled within the White House. Questions arise about how often this auto pen was used and what the President truly knew about the situation. It was noted that certain aspects of Biden’s daily life and well-being were managed meticulously, with staff monitoring everything from his clothing to his physical activities. Yet, key staff members stated they didn’t feel the need to check in on the President’s condition, highlighting a concerning level of detachment.
A key point raised during the discussions was the inconsistency found when interviewing various staff members. Many offered conflicting accounts of the procedures followed for the auto pen’s use. The testimonies revealed a chaotic picture of decision-making during the final months of Biden’s administration. The cherry on top? Emails from the Department of Justice indicated concern about the excessive usage of the auto pen, further undermining the credibility of the process. It’s clear that if there were any solid signs of Biden being directly involved, they’ve been hard to find.
So, whether it’s the pardon of Biden’s brother or controversial figures like Anthony Fauci, there’s a push to declare these actions null and void. However, legality comes into question: how can one challenge a pardon when it stems from a President’s constitutional powers? The situation takes a twist with the mention of President Biden’s mental fitness. It raises eyebrows when it’s revealed that there were discussions about whether he should undergo a cognitive test, which they ultimately decided against. The idea that they might not have tested him because they expected him to fail adds an unsettling layer to the story.
What is clear is that the implications of these findings could spark a significant political scandal. The notion of a President not fully steering the ship, especially in matters as grave as pardons, raises alarms. There’s a clarion call for accountability among those in the administration, with hopes that further investigation might reveal the truth about the chain of command—ones that seem to be hiding in plain sight. The storyline is unfolding, and it looks like the plot is thickening as more details emerge about the myriad of decisions made under the cover of Biden’s presidency.
