- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Can any decent attorney (not AggieHank or SFP) give opinion on autopen
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:22 pm to AggieHank86
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:22 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
2) capacity
Therein lies your problem.
1
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:22 pm to tide06
quote:
Docusign is 100% legally binding.
I’ve bought and sold houses that way.
As others have said docusign is not the same thing as the product that the White House uses.
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:23 pm to VoxDawg
quote:
I find it interesting that in this discussion, the folks who swear nothing untoward was going on take the position that "Biden's cabinet never invoked the 25A against him, so everything bearing that e-signature should be seen as legit."
You're strawmanning the frick out of this.
That's not the argument being made.
quote:
The issue is the Constitution.
To argue the autopen signatures are invalid, you'll be arguing a Constitutional violation, which will be difficult when there is a set remedy in the document for such an issue (the 25th Amendment).
That's the argument.
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:25 pm to BBONDS25
quote:It is a significant issue, no doubt.quote:Therein lies your problem.
2) capacity
But I think that all three issues play a role here.
If there was a lack of capacity, the 25th seems to be the exclusive remedy ... which is a problem in trying to void any of Biden's actions.
OTOH, if there WAS "capacity," but no "authorization" (IOW, a de facto "forgery"), you have a completely different can of worms, and the 25th does not seem to be implicated in any way.
"What happens if someone forges the signature of POTUS on a bill" is a VERY different question, versus "POTUS was NCM and could not legally do anything enforceable."
Just my 2-cents.
This post was edited on 3/10/25 at 12:28 pm
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:26 pm to VoxDawg
quote:
I find it interesting that in this discussion, the folks who swear nothing untoward was going on take the position that "Biden's cabinet never invoked the 25A against him, so everything bearing that e-signature should be seen as legit."
Like it's incumbent on a band of usurpers to self-report when the conductor of their gravy train is non compos mentis, drawing attention to what they would/did otherwise get away with unnoticed when they simply kept up the ruse.
That's why the real question is whether Biden was involved at all?
You can have an insane (or dementia-ridden) president sign EOs and bills into law. If the 25th is invoked, that would only preclude future actions - there is no guidance as to whether it would invalidate his actions prior to the 25th being triggered.
This post was edited on 3/10/25 at 12:26 pm
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:34 pm to SlowFlowPro
E signatures or auto pen signatures both require that the signature is that of the authorized person doing it., unless someone else has the legal authority to do so is fraudulent. The questions surrounding Biden is was someone else doing it. Considering his shown capacity levels and many instances of denial of his doing something to the contrary then obvious questionable behavior needs challenged
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:36 pm to SlowFlowPro
RA’d for shitty attourneying
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:36 pm to AnotherWin4LSU
Any bill or legislation has to be hand signed. Autopen is for Chrismas cards and political correspondence.
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:39 pm to AnotherWin4LSU
Biden would have to confess that he did not sign nor authorize the autopen signatures.
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:40 pm to udtiger
Could this be part of the reason that Hunter/Jill played ball?
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:40 pm to CC
quote:Do you have any governing authority for this assertion ... or just blowing smoke?
Any bill or legislation has to be hand signed. Autopen is for Chrismas cards and political correspondence.
Because a 2005 AG Opinion disagrees with you.
chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/LINK
This post was edited on 3/10/25 at 12:45 pm
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:41 pm to VoxDawg
quote:
Could this be part of the reason that Hunter/Jill played ball?
No question.
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:46 pm to udtiger
This is the first thing I thought of when this investigation was launched:
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:54 pm to AnotherWin4LSU
If this is in regards to Biden using one, the problem I see is if someone else used it to forge Bidens signature to EO's or pardons.
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:54 pm to AnotherWin4LSU
What I find interesting is that all this talk stems from that original Heritage Foundation investigative piece that alleges to have found that the only document Biden actually signed himself was the paperwork that pulled him from the presidential election.
That simply isn't true in anyone's reality.
That simply isn't true in anyone's reality.
This post was edited on 3/10/25 at 1:04 pm
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:57 pm to AnotherWin4LSU
quote:
Can you read? I said decent attorney and not you.
He gave the best answer.
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:58 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
See, moneyg? This is why the 25th is going to end up being in the conversation.
I didn't say it wasn't going to be in the conversation.
You jumped to it and declared this entire discussion moot because the constitution gave the 25th as a remedy.
Feel free to change your position.
Posted on 3/10/25 at 12:59 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Because a 2005 AG Opinion disagrees with you.
So those get tacked right onto the end of the Constitution?
Did that opinion have anything to say about WHO was operating the autopen?
Do you believe that biden rationally decid3ed to sign everything he signed?
Posted on 3/10/25 at 1:00 pm to moneyg
DOJ certified that Joe was not competent for legal issues.
So everything Joe “signed” is null and void
So everything Joe “signed” is null and void
Posted on 3/10/25 at 1:00 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Again, I don't work in Biglaw, but legal secretaries and paralegals "click the button" quite routinely, as far as I know. There are lawyers who work in bigger offices who can clarify this.
There are a few issues at play here
As for focusing and basically any electronic signature - any time a lawyer has an electronic signature he is signing as an officer of the court and is subject to sanctions
As for docusign as others said they have their own protections and valid
The question I see is if any executive order is even allowed to be signed electronically since it does not appear to be authorized by any law or other order and did he do it or authorize it or even know it was being done.
I think ugly theater would be must watch tv and bring biden in to explain these orders on live tv and why he signed
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News