Introduction to The Autopen Scandal | When a Machine Signs for the President and Nobody Knows Who Gave the Orders
Congressional investigators close in on Biden's inner circle as former aides lawyer up and refuse to answer basic questions about who controlled the autopen during the president's cognitive decline
What if a machine was signing for the President of the United States, and no one knew who was giving the orders?
During a recent visit to Monticello, I found myself captivated by a peculiar device sitting on Thomas Jefferson's desk: a polygraph. Not the lie detector you're thinking of, but an contraption that allowed Jefferson to create perfect copies of his letters as he wrote them. Jefferson, ever the gadget enthusiast, acquired his first polygraph in 1804 and reportedly called it "the finest invention of the present age." The prolific writer used two-pen models, keeping one at Monticello and another at the White House, ensuring every important document was duplicated.
Jefferson could never have imagined that centuries later, a far more sophisticated descendant of his beloved copying device would sit at the center of what may become the biggest presidential scandal of our lifetime.
The Biden autopen scandal isn't just about a machine. It's about who was really running America. While presidents have used autopens for decades to handle routine signatures, the scale under Biden was unprecedented: over 1,200 documents, including 235 federal judge appointments and mass pardons that included commuting sentences for 37 death row inmates just before Christmas 2024. But here's the explosive question that has House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer and Senate investigators circling: Was Joe Biden actually authorizing these signatures, or was someone else pulling the strings?
As Biden's cognitive decline became increasingly visible to anyone with eyes (from his halting debate performance to his frequent on-stage confusion), suspicions grew that a small circle of powerful aides had essentially seized control of the presidency. Jake Tapper, in his book "Original Sin," describes this inner circle as a "Politburo," a reference that should send chills down the spine of anyone who values constitutional governance.
This is the first installment of a deep dive into the autopen scandal, a story that could expose either the greatest constitutional crisis in modern history or gross mismanagement at the highest levels of government. We'll follow the investigations, examine the players, and ask the questions mainstream media won't: If Biden wasn't signing these documents, who was? And what does that mean for every pardon, every executive order, and every judicial appointment from his presidency?
The House Oversight Committee is trying to close in on answers, with key Biden aides already lawyering up and Neera Tanden's recent testimony raising more questions than it answered. Will the truth finally come out, or are we witnessing the greatest cover-up in presidential history?
Background: The Autopen and Its Controversial Use
So, what in the world is an autopen, when can it be used, and how have past presidents used it?
An autopen is essentially a sophisticated robot pen: a machine that holds a real writing instrument and mechanically reproduces a person's signature with remarkable precision. Think of it as the grown-up version of Jefferson's polygraph, but instead of requiring the president to physically guide two pens simultaneously, the autopen does all the work. These machines range from $2,000 to $20,000, depending on their sophistication, and can sign everything from routine correspondence to official government documents.
The device has a surprisingly long presidential pedigree. Harry Truman was reportedly the first president to use a modern autopen regularly, followed by presidents like John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, and Gerald Ford. For decades, autopens were primarily used for what you'd expect: signing thousands of thank-you notes, birthday greetings, and other routine correspondence that would otherwise consume hours of presidential time.
But here's where things get interesting: the autopen's role dramatically expanded in the modern era, particularly starting with Barack Obama. While George W. Bush's Justice Department had issued a comprehensive 29-page memo in 2005 confirming that autopen use was completely constitutional for signing legislation, Bush himself was apparently uncomfortable with the precedent. He famously chose to fly through the night to return to Washington rather than use an autopen to sign emergency legislation in 2005.
Obama had no such reservations. In 2011, he became the first president to sign legislation with an autopen when he used the device to ink a Patriot Act extension while attending a G-8 summit in France. Republican critics questioned the constitutional soundness of the move, but Obama's team simply pointed to Bush's own Justice Department memo. The precedent was set.
The use of autopens has only accelerated since then, reaching unprecedented levels during Biden's presidency. According to official records, over 1,200 presidential documents were signed using an autopen during Biden's term, including 235 federal judge appointments and a record number of pardons and commutations. This included the controversial commutation of sentences for 37 out of 40 federal death row inmates just before Christmas 2024. To put this in perspective, that's more autopen usage than all previous modern presidents combined.
The contrast between Democratic and Republican presidents appears stark, though we're working with incomplete information. While Trump acknowledged using an autopen during his first term, he claimed he used it "only for very unimportant papers": routine correspondence and letters of support. Biden, by comparison, reportedly used the device for some of the most consequential presidential actions: judicial appointments that will shape the courts for decades and pardons that permanently alter criminal justice outcomes.
But here's the thing that should concern every American, we'll never really know the full extent of autopen use by Trump, Biden, or any president because there is no official, publicly available record documenting when a president uses the device to sign official documents. As NBC News noted, "How often did Biden use an autopen? That's unclear. There is no official record of Biden's using an autopen for official government business." The same opacity applies to Trump's usage. We only have his word that it was limited to "unimportant papers."
This lack of transparency isn't an oversight; it's a deliberate gap in presidential accountability. Congressional investigators are now scrambling to build a "paper trail" of autopen usage precisely because such records aren't systematically maintained or disclosed. While there may be internal White House documentation, this information isn't part of any standardized public record accessible to Americans who deserve to know when their president is physically signing documents versus when a machine is doing it for him.
This prompted Trump to take action almost immediately upon returning to office. On June 4, 2025, he signed an executive order directing the Department of Justice to investigate whether Biden's use of the autopen constituted a "conspiracy" to conceal cognitive decline and bypass constitutional requirements for presidential decision-making.
But here's what's fascinating and frustrating about the media coverage of this scandal. Outlets like NPR and CBS have spent considerable energy explaining that autopen use is perfectly legal (which everyone already knows thanks to Bush's 2005 memo) while studiously avoiding the real question that has Americans concerned: Did Joe Biden actually know what was being signed on his behalf?
NPR's coverage, for instance, dismisses Trump's concerns as "claiming without evidence" while focusing extensively on the historical precedent and constitutional legality. CBS similarly emphasizes the device's long history of presidential use. But neither outlet, or much of the legacy media, seriously investigates whether Biden was cognitively capable of directing the autopen's use or whether staff members were making these critical decisions independently.
This isn't about whether autopens are legal. We've known that for nearly two decades. This is about whether the President of the United States was actually president, or whether a small circle of aides was effectively running the country while Biden's signature was being mechanically reproduced on documents he may never have seen.
The legacy media's reluctance to ask these hard questions only deepens the question surrounding who was really in charge during the Biden presidency.
Biden's Cognitive Decline: A Public Record
While the legacy media and Democrats would love for us to forget what we witnessed throughout Biden's campaign and presidency, it was obvious to anyone with common sense (anyone not suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome or engaging in some dystopian real-life version of Orwell's Newspeak) that Biden was not well and hadn't been well for years. We watched it all play out publicly before our eyes, yet we were repeatedly told by his press secretary, cabinet members, and Democratic leadership that he was "running circles" around people and was "the best he's ever been."
The signs were there from the beginning. During a July 2021 CNN town hall, Biden confused Senator Rob Portman's title and trailed off mid-sentence while discussing vaccine approval, saying, "Just like the other question that's logical and I've heard you speak about it, because you all. I'm not being solicitous, but you're always straight up about what you're doing." These weren't isolated incidents. They were patterns.
By 2022, the episodes became impossible to ignore. At a White House conference in September, Biden asked, "Jackie, are you here? Where's Jackie?" referring to Congresswoman Jackie Walorski, who had died in a car accident two months earlier. This was a death Biden had already issued a condolence statement about. When questioned, Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre insisted Biden mentioned her because she was "top of mind."
The year 2023 brought even more alarming incidents. Biden tripped over a sandbag at the Air Force Academy commencement and required assistance to stand. He confused Iraq with Ukraine twice in 24 hours. During a visit to Ireland, he mistook New Zealand's rugby team for a British paramilitary group. At a Veterans Day memorial, he appeared confused, asking, "What am I doing?" and standing frozen.
But it was the June 27, 2024, presidential debate that finally made Biden's decline undeniable to mainstream America. His halting, hoarse voice and frequent loss of train of thought shocked even sympathetic viewers. When discussing Medicare, he said, "Making sure that we're able to make every single solitary person eligible for what I've been able to deal with... the COVID... Excuse me, with dealing with everything we have to do with... look... if... we finally beat Medicare." Trump's response was devastating: "I really don't know what he said at the end of that sentence. I don't think he knows what he said either."
Throughout this period, Biden held fewer press conferences and cabinet meetings than his predecessors. He was frequently seen with note cards containing prepared questions and photos of reporters he was supposed to call on. (Also note above how CNN works to defend Biden.) Yet despite what Americans could see with their own eyes, the administration and mainstream media continued their gaslighting campaign.
Conservative outlets and social media users documented every incident while legacy media outlets consistently downplayed concerns, attributing them to "fatigue," "a cold," or normal aging. This divergent coverage only fueled suspicions that something much larger was being concealed from the American people.
These very public displays of confusion and disorientation are precisely why the autopen scandal matters so much. If Biden was struggling to answer basic questions or remember deceased colleagues, how could Americans trust that he was making informed decisions about federal judge appointments or presidential pardons? The mounting evidence of cognitive decline raises the disturbing possibility that while Biden appeared incapacitated, a machine was signing the most important documents in his name, potentially without his knowledge or understanding.
The Investigation Begins: Familiar Faces, Familiar Patterns
The investigation into the Biden autopen scandal is heating up, with Congress and Trump's DOJ digging for answers. If you followed the Hunter Biden Burisma saga, you'll recognize the name leading the charge: James Comer, the House Oversight Committee chairman who's no stranger to sniffing out government missteps. Joining him is Senator Eric Schmitt, investigating the constitutional angles, because when we're questioning whether the president was actually "presidenting," things get serious fast.
But let's be real. Washington investigations often feel like a circus that goes nowhere. Republicans get loud, Democrats stonewall, the media picks sides, and we all move on. Still, this one's worth watching. Here's where things stand as of July 2025:
Comer Targets Biden's Inner Circle: House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer is zeroing in on former aides like Dr. Kevin O'Connor (Biden's physician) and key staffers, demanding interviews to uncover who authorized autopen use.
Staffers Lawyer Up: By late May, Biden's former aides started hiring lawyers, a classic sign they're not eager to spill the beans. Comer says this happened fast, especially in Biden's final 100 days.
Subpoena for Biden's Doctor: In June, Comer subpoenaed Dr. O'Connor after the Biden White House blocked his appearance, accusing him of dodging questions about Biden's health.
Neera Tanden Testifies: On June 25, Neera Tanden, former Domestic Policy Council director, admitted she directed autopen signatures but denied covering up Biden's cognitive decline. Her four-hour testimony raised more questions than answers.
Jill Biden's Aide Ducks Out: Anthony Bernal, a top adviser to Jill Biden, refused to testify the same day as Tanden, prompting Comer to call it part of a broader cover-up.
O'Connor Tries to Delay: On July 7, Dr. O'Connor attempted to postpone his deposition, citing privilege issues. Comer rejected it, with the showdown set for July 9.
Schmitt Demands Records: Senator Eric Schmitt is requesting Biden-era documents under the Presidential Records Act, including autopen memos and pardon records, with a July 16 deadline to see if the administration complies.
Trump's DOJ Steps In: On June 4, President Trump ordered a DOJ investigation, led by Attorney General Pam Bondi, to probe whether aides used the autopen to hide Biden's mental state, calling it a "conspiracy."
Same Old Washington? Staffers are dodging, Republicans are hyping "evidence," and Democrats are calling it a witch hunt. Sound familiar? The real question is whether enough Americans will care to demand answers.
This is just the start. The next article in this series will dive into the key players: Ron Klain, Anita Dunn, and Jill Biden, and their roles in this drama. Because if a machine was signing for the president, someone had to be giving the orders.
Why It Matters: Stakes for America
While Democrats "don't want to look back" when asked about Biden's obvious cognitive decline and concerns about who was controlling the autopen, and the legacy media has zero interest in doing basic journalism to investigate what could potentially be as big as Watergate, this scandal matters more than Washington wants to admit.
The media's response is particularly annoying. Whenever this story is mentioned, they're quick to say that Trump has no basis for his claims, conveniently forgetting the obvious signs we all witnessed over the past five years. But here's the kicker: they make these dismissive statements without having conducted any journalism themselves. They're not investigating; they're just providing cover. It's wild.
For a group of people who are supposedly so concerned about "democracy" and "disenfranchising voters," Democrats and their media allies are uncomfortably willing to overlook a possible scandal that would be a clear violation of both, and one that put our country at considerable risk.
Remember, Joe Biden was elected because he promised to be a transitional, moderate president during a time when the world felt significantly chaotic with COVID and the BLM riots. Americans wanted a "normal" president, a steady hand. Yet oddly enough, he governed far to the left of his campaign promises and presided over major national security disasters like the Afghanistan withdrawal that resulted in the deaths of 13 American soldiers.
By the end of his term, several conflicts had broken out around the world, and he had enacted executive orders and declarations that pushed the nation toward a very unpopular leftist agenda, very much out of character for the moderate Biden that Americans thought they were electing.
Here's the disturbing question: If Biden's cognitive decline was as significant as it appeared, and if he wasn't making these consequential decisions, then who was? And why didn't anyone in his administration do their constitutional duty, put the country first, and invoke the 25th Amendment?
This matters not only because the American people deserve to know who was actually serving as president, but also because it exposes a terrifying vulnerability in our system. What protections are in place for the country when a president is incapacitated? Currently, there's no official "chain of evidence" documenting autopen use. This means that if a president is incapacitated or significantly cognitively compromised, virtually anyone with access could pretend to be president, signing pardons, executive orders, and judicial appointments that will affect America for decades.
The constitutional implications are staggering. If unelected staffers were making presidential decisions while Biden's signature was being mechanically reproduced, then we experienced a bloodless coup disguised as normal governance. That's not just a scandal. It's a constitutional crisis that demands answers.
Conclusion
The autopen scandal isn't just about a machine that signs documents. It's about who was actually running the country during Joe Biden's presidency. What started as questions about a mechanical signature device has evolved into a potential constitutional crisis that strikes at the heart of American democracy.
When Thomas Jefferson enthusiastically embraced his polygraph in 1804, calling it "the finest invention of the present age," he was simply trying to make his prolific correspondence more efficient. Jefferson was fully engaged, mentally sharp, and personally directing every letter that bore his signature. The device was a tool serving a capable president.
Fast-forward 220 years, and we may be looking at the dark evolution of Jefferson's innocent innovation: a sophisticated autopen potentially serving not as a tool for an engaged president, but as a substitute for an incapacitated one.
We've seen the timeline: Biden's visible cognitive decline, the unprecedented use of autopens for critical presidential decisions, and the emerging investigations that are already being stonewalled by former Biden staffers. We've witnessed the media's deliberate blindness to obvious questions and the Democrats' desperate desire to "move on" without accountability.
But here's what we haven't fully explored yet: the cast of characters who may have been pulling the strings while Biden's signature was being mechanically reproduced on documents that will shape America for decades. Jake Tapper called them a "Politburo." Others have described them as Biden's "inner circle" or "gatekeepers." Some allegations suggest they formed a virtual shadow presidency.
Who are these people? What positions did they hold? How much power did they wield? And most importantly, what are they so desperate to hide that they're lawyering up rather than simply telling Congress the truth?
Next week, we'll dive deep into the players in this unfolding drama. From Neera Tanden, who admitted to controlling the autopen, to the mysterious figures like Anthony Bernal who refuse to testify, to the longtime Biden loyalists who may have been making presidential decisions while the elected president appeared increasingly disconnected from reality.
The investigation is just getting started, and the resistance from Biden's former inner circle suggests there's much more to uncover. This story has all the makings of the biggest political scandal of our lifetime, or the most successful cover-up.
Either way, Americans deserve answers.