BREAKING: Biden Autopen Scandal Explodes—NYT Confirms He Didn’t Sign Off on All Pardons, Zeints Approved Fauci and J6 Committee—Here Are the Most Shocking Details
The Biden Autopen Scandal just detonated on a national scale—and the New York Times just confirmed what many suspected all along: Joe Biden didn’t personally approve all the pardons issued under his name.
According to explosive emails and testimony uncovered by the Oversight Project and detailed by the Times, thousands of acts of clemency were rubber-stamped using an autopen, not a signature from Biden himself.
Among the most shocking details:
Staff Secretary Stefanie Feldman ran clemency records through the autopen—even after new changes were made to the inmate list that Biden never saw.
According to a former aide, instead of presenting updated names to the President for review, staff “waited and then ran the final version through the autopen.”
Chief of Staff Jeff Zeints personally gave the green light to use the autopen for several January 19 pardons, including Dr. Anthony Fauci and J6 Committee-related figures, saying in an email:
“I approve the use of the autopen for the execution of all of the following pardons.”
Meanwhile, Neera Tanden, Biden’s former Domestic Policy Council director, testified she had independent authority to use the autopen between 2021 and 2023—without verifying Biden’s personal authorization.
This directly contradicts Biden’s claim to the New York Times that he “orally approved” every pardon and commutation.
“I made every decision,” he insisted.
But if that’s true—why did his physician plead the Fifth 10 times when questioned about his mental capacity? Why did Anthony Bernal, Jill Biden’s Chief of Staff, skip his deposition?
🚨 The Oversight Committee is now investigating.
This scandal isn’t just about a pen—it’s about who’s really running the White House.
Mark Van der Veen offers some of the most analytical and insightful writings on politics. He regularly opines on the motives and political calculations of politicians and candidates, and whether or not their strategy will work. Van der Veen offers a contrast to many on this list by sticking mainly to a fact-based style of writing that is generally combative with opposing ideologies.
Retarded