Staff ReportsPresident Donald Trump has taken to Truth Social to unleash a scathing critique of the Biden administration’s rampant use of an autopen for signing executive orders and pardons, declaring any such documents invalid without Joe Biden’s personal involvement. This fiery declaration cuts straight to the heart of presidential accountability, exposing what Trump views as a blatant dodge of responsibility that left unelected staffers effectively running the show. Supporters are rallying behind this no-holds-barred takedown, seeing it as a vital stand against the erosion of executive integrity.
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer’s investigation lays bare the shocking scale: a staggering 88% of Biden’s documents—846 out of 958—featured autopen signatures, turning the Oval Office into a factory of mechanical approvals. This overwhelming reliance screams questions about true leadership, especially when a policy of national consequence bypasses the president’s direct hand. Trump’s insistence that these actions were illegal underscores a dangerous precedent where shortcuts supplanted genuine oversight.
Comer’s probe reveals even more damning details, with 82% of autopen uses occurring while Biden was in Washington, D.C., and many happening during his absences altogether. It’s a stark image of detached governance, more suited to a puppet regime than America’s command center. When major decisions roll out without the leader’s presence, public trust in who holds the reins crumbles, fueling rightful demands for transparency and personal accountability.
While defenders tout the autopen as a practical tool for the presidency’s burdens, its near-total dominance raises red flags about authenticity and authorization. Nearly nine in ten key actions skipping Biden’s touch invites skepticism: were these mandates truly his, or proxies pushing radical agendas? In high-stakes governance, no shortcut justifies handing power to shadowy aides over the people’s elected leader.
This autopen controversy marks another explosive chapter in U.S. politics, with Trump’s unfiltered accusations driving the narrative and Comer’s committee poised for deeper digs. As the saga unfolds, it spotlights the urgent need to reclaim ironclad standards for executive actions. True leadership demands a president’s signature—literal and figurative—not a machine’s hollow imprint on history.
