Trump's Autopen Vendetta: A Perjury Bluff That Could Unravel the Presidency, By Charles Taylor (Florida)
Festering in the fevered theatre of American politics, where grudges are like open wounds and legal threats fly thicker than confetti, President Donald Trump has lobbed his latest grenade at former President Joe Biden. On November 28, 2025, just weeks into his second term, Trump took to Truth Social to declare war on the humble autopen, that mechanical marvel that's signed more bills than most presidents have hot meals. Claiming that "approximately 92%" of Biden's documents were mechanically inked without his direct involvement, Trump announced: "Any document signed by Sleepy Joe Biden with the Autopen... is hereby terminated, and of no further force or effect." He didn't stop there, adding a zinger: "Joe Biden was not involved in the Autopen process and, if he says he was, he will be brought up on charges of perjury."
It's vintage Trump: bombastic, unsubstantiated, and laced with the kind of legal sabre-rattling that sounds tough but crumbles under scrutiny. But this isn't just red meat for the MAGA faithful. It's a direct assault on the constitutional machinery of the executive branch, raising profound questions about presidential authority, the validity of laws, and the weaponisation of perjury claims against political foes. As House Oversight Chairman James Comer cheered, calling the autopen actions "null and void," the real story is the immense legal quicksand Trump is wading into. Spoiler: This bluff is as likely to stick as a wet noodle to the Oval Office wall.
The Autopen at the Heart of the StormFor the uninitiated, the autopen isn't some sci-fi gadget, it's a 19th-century invention refined for the jet age, a robotic arm that replicates a president's signature with eerie precision using a real pen. Presidents from Truman to Obama have leaned on it for the drudgery of signing stacks of letters, photos, and yes, the occasional bill when travel or time constraints bite. It's not lazy; it's logistics. A 2005 Justice Department memo under George W. Bush laid it out clearly: As long as aides act under the president's express direction, autopen signatures carry full legal weight under Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution, which requires only that a bill be "signed by the President." No physical squiggle required, the intent seals the deal.
Trump's claim? Biden's inner circle of "Radical Left Lunatics" hijacked the Resolute Desk, forging a shadow presidency while Joe napped. He cites a 2025 House Republican probe that found "circumstantial evidence" of Biden's diminished interactions but zero smoking gun of unauthorised use. Internal emails show staff confusion over oral approvals for end-of-term pardons, but Biden himself told the New York Times in July 2025 that he greenlit those controversial clemencies by name. Trump's 92% figure? Pulled from thin air, no hard data backs it.
The legal fallout from voiding these "autopen abominations" is a constitutional dumpster fire. Executive orders, pardons, bill signings, Trump's one-man nullification spree could retroactively unravel Biden's legacy. Imagine: Climate regs vapourised into ether, immigration pauses reinstated overnight, or most explosively, pardons for Hunter Biden and good old Dr Fauci deemed invalid, exposing recipients to fresh prosecutions. Legal scholars are already howling. As one Washington Post analysis notes, this isn't just overreach; it's an invitation to chaos, where every future president could "un-sign" their predecessor's work on a whim. The Supreme Court, Trump's own appointee-heavy bench, would likely swat this down under the de facto officer doctrine, actions taken under colour of authority stand, autopen or not. But until then? Policy whiplash for agencies, lawsuits from every corner, and a presidency paralysed by retroactive vendettas.
The Perjury Pipe Dream: A Charge in Search of a CrimeAh, but the perjury threat, that's the real head-scratcher, a legal landmine masquerading as a gotcha. Perjury, under 18 U.S.C. § 1621, requires a wilful false statement under oath in a material proceeding, like a congressional hearing or court deposition. Trump's dangling it like a Sword of Damocles: If Biden ever swears he authorized the autopen (say, in a probe or lawsuit), boom, federal felony, up to five years in the slammer.
Immense issues abound. First, when would Biden testify? No subpoena's been issued; this is Trump freelancing from Truth Social, not a DOJ indictment. Even if Comer hauls him before Oversight, Biden's team would invoke executive privilege faster than you can say "plausible deniability." And if push came to subpoena, Biden wouldn't take the stand, he'd plead the Fifth across the board, shielding himself from self-incrimination on everything from autopens to his aggressive prostate cancer diagnosis (metastatic since May 2025). The Fifth isn't just for mobsters; it's a constitutional firewall, and no judge would force a frail ex-president mid-treatment to perjure-proof himself under oath.
Second, materiality: Trump's got no evidence Biden lied, just innuendo about his "AWOL" status. Proving wilfulness in a fog of aides' emails and oral directives? Good luck to any prosecutor. As Reddit's r/moderatepolitics thread erupts, "How can he charge him with perjury if everything the president does... is immune?" Post-presidency, Biden's fair game, but Trump's own SCOTUS-ruling on immunity (July 2024) muddies waters: Official acts get a broad shield, and autopen approvals scream "official."
Third, the hypocrisy burns. Trump autopened his way through COVID relief in 2020, over 100 bills while golfing Mar-a-Lago. Obama used it for the Patriot Act extension mid-Africa trip. If Trump's retroactively nuking Biden's, what's stopping a future Democrat from voiding Trump's tax cuts as "autopen fraud"? It's a Pandora's box of selective enforcement, eroding the rule of law into a partisan putty knife.
Why This Circus Won't See DaylightThis is performative payback, not prosecutable plot. Biden's camp? Stone silence, a spokeswoman declining comment as he battles bone-metastasised cancer. No testimony means no perjury; no court will buy Trump's fiat as law. Legal eagles predict a swift smackdown: The Administrative Procedure Act bars arbitrary revocations without notice-and-comment, and federal courts loathe executive do-overs that upend settled expectations.
At root, this is Trumpism unmasked: Grievance as governance, where legal norms bend to personal score-settling. It won't stick, Biden pleads the Fifth from his Delaware beach house, courts swat the autopen apocalypse, and the 92% myth joins birtherism in the hall of hoaxes. But the damage? It poisons trust in institutions, invites copycat chaos, and reminds us that when a president treats the law like a yo-yo, democracy dangles by a thread.
Comments