Triunfo’s investigation into Joe Bidns’s self -use is incredibly stupid

President Donald Trump ordered on Wednesday to the lawyer of the Department of Justice and the White House to initiate an investigation into whether the actions taken by former President Joe Biden are invalid, based on unfounded accusations that his assistants made decisions for him.

In addition to the fact that the president directly ordered an investigation into his former political opponent would probably have been an accusable crime until a few months ago, this investigation is, for the most part, without merit. It does not claim any law or constitutional provision. It is what it seems: a fishing expedition designed to take revenge on Trump’s opponents and feed negative stories about the Democrats to the press.

The presidential memorandum Trump issued on Wednesday statements that “the attendees of former President Biden abused the power of the presidential firms through the use of an autopilot [automatic signature] to hide Biden’s cognitive decline and affirm the authority of article II “.

“This conspiracy marks one of the most dangerous and worrying scandals in American history,” says the memorandum. “The American public was about to discover who exercised the Executive Power, all while Biden’s firm was deployed in thousands of documents to make changes of radical policies.”

He continues to direct the Attorney General Pam Bondi and the White House lawyer, David Warrington, to investigate “if certain people conspired to deceive the public on the mental state of Biden and not unconstitutionally exercise the authorities and responsibilities of the president” and “the circumstances that surround the alleged execution of the biden of numerous executive actions during their final years in office”, including executive orders, the actions, the actions, the actions, the proclamations, the proclamations Pardones and the Clementes of the issuance of numerous years.

Saul Loeb through Getty Images

The latest investigation into the executive actions of Biden, in charge of Warrington, seeks to determine how many actions were signed by an autopilot and “who directed that the president’s signature be placed.” This aims to present the argument that Biden’s forgives for the members of the January 6 committee and their relatives, whom Trump wants to investigate; Clemency gives federal death inmates, whom Trump wants to execute; and other presidential actions are unconstitutional and null. Trump has already declared that these indults and subsidies of clemency are “null, vacancies and without further effect”, on social networks, although he has no authority to declare them as such.

The premise of this research is largely unfounded. Although it has been widely informed that Biden suffered a decline related to age and that its most internal circle tried, badly, hiding this of those inside the White House and the public, there is no existing evidence that suggests that Biden’s assistants “abused the power of presidential signatures through the use of a self -noise to the cognitive declines and the authority of the article II of Biden.”

This conspiracy arose from the usual right swamps with the misunderstanding of the documents published online. A speculative call for an investigation carried out by Missouri Attorney, Andrew Bailey, was collected by the Heritage Foundation’s supervision project, which had already been compiling Executive Branch documents to see if the Biden firm was identical in each one. The conservative group examined the signatures for the forgiveness of Biden and published online that all the firms looked exactly the same, as if a machine signed them.

There are at least two problems here. First, the supervision project was largely based on the forgiveness documents published on the online site of the Federal Registry. At the beginning of the mandate of each president, the president provides a single digital copy of his signature to the national archives, published by the Federal Registry, which is then set to all digital documents with the president’s signing. Therefore, it is not surprising that all pardons have identical signatures because all the documents published in the Federal Registry have the same signature for each president in the digital age.

The second problem is less shameful for those who claim some type of dirty game here, but more consistent. That is, the Constitution does not affirm that the president must sign indicators or subsidies of clemency or, really, anything except the bills approved by Congress.

“[H]E will have power to grant reprimand and pardon for crimes against the United States, except in cases of political trial, ”establishes the Constitution in the pardons.

That’s all.

By way of comparison, the Constitution requires that the president firm the bills approved by the Congress to become law. “If you approve it, it will sign it,” says the Constitution.

But neither Trump nor the right -wing groups and the media are talking about invoices, although that argument would probably be irrelevant anyway. (More about that later). The Trump memorandum focuses on “Clemence subsidies, executive orders, presidential memoranda or other presidential policy decisions.” He also mentions that “the White House issued more than 1,200 presidential documents [and] appointed 235 judges for the Federal Bank. “There is no constitutional requirement that the signing of a president is set to any of these actions, much less that that firm is written by the president’s hand.

For decades, the presidents have used Autopens, the first of which was patented in the United States in 1803, to sign all kinds of documents. A 1965 book examined the use of John F. Kennedy from Autopen and Lyndon Johnson showed the White House Highway on the cover of the National Enquirer, recognizing its use publicly for the first time. At the end of his mandate, President Barack Obama used the autopilot to sign forgiveness while on vacation in Hawai.

Eileen T. Messlar/Chicago Tribune through Getty Images

All this is perfectly legal and constitutional, according to An opinion of 1929 by the attorney general reported by USA today In 2017.

“No one but the president can exercise power, but the power that has been exercised as a registration and their evidence is a mere detail that can prescribe according to what he considers the practical needs and properties of the situation,” says the opinion of 1929.

As for the only line in the Constitution that orders the President to sign something, bills approved by Congress, the Office of Legal Advisor of the Department of Justice issued a Legal opinion in 2005written by Howard Nielsen (whom Trump designated for a trial of the District Court), which determined that it is constitutional for a president to use an automatic pilot to sign a legislation, whether he was present for the firm or not, as long as he indicated it to sign. Obama became the first president to sign legislation with an automatic pilot in 2011.

This opinion contains copious historical evidence for the use of autopilot or, as mentioned in the past, the “facsimile firm”, the presidents.

In 1969, an opinion of the Legal Advisor Office written by William Rehnquist, who would later be appointed president of the United States Supreme Court, “reported that the Secretary of State could sign extradition orders for the President in accordance with” a letter from the President to the Secretary to indicate a facsimile of the president’s signing, or that he signs in his name in his name. “

Everything required was “provision for the notification and approval of the president before the firm”, according to Rehnquist’s opinion.

“The question of whether the president must manually sign his name to a document is mainly owned instead of law, and it is at the discretion of the president to determine what documents he wishes to sign personally and those with respect to those who wish to delegate the signature to another person in his name or have his own written signature or condition in a half way”, the Rehist opinion states.

The only thing that is required is for the president to order to sign a document or a bill. And Biden has repeatedly backed and defended all the actions he took and signed during his presidency.

“Let me be clear: I made the decisions during my presidency. I made decisions about the pardons, the executive orders, the legislation and the proclamations. Any suggestion that it was not ridiculous and false,” Biden said in a statement in response to Trump’s investigation.

The lack of any legal or constitutional problem here and the origins of the accusations against Biden and their assistants as entrenched in a conspiracy halfway and without evidence they tell us everything we need to know. This is, as many actions taken in the second Trump administration, a pretext to launch research on Trump’s political enemies to produce anger bait content for the conservative media machine and punish those Trump promised to take revenge.

There is no law here, only a simple revenge.