Presidents Trump and Biden are feuding over Biden's use of the autopen—a machine that replicates a president's signature—to sign pardons. Trump claims it's "lazy," while Biden's team defends it as a practical tool for efficiency. The debate has reignited questions about the legitimacy and tradition of using the device for official acts.

Editor’s Note: It might seem like a small thing, but the autopen debate taps into bigger questions about presidential authority and modern governance. Is it cutting corners, or just adapting to the demands of the job? Either way, it’s another flashpoint in the endless tug-of-war between tradition and convenience in Washington.

A top aide to President Biden approved thousands of pardons at the last minute using an autopen—a machine that replicates signatures—instead of having Biden sign them personally. This has sparked fresh concerns about Biden’s cognitive state and whether someone else is effectively making key decisions behind the scenes.

Editor’s Note: This isn’t just about paperwork—it feeds into bigger worries about Biden’s leadership and transparency. If major decisions like pardons are being handled without his direct involvement, it raises questions about who’s really in charge and how much the president is actively steering his administration. For critics, it’s another red flag; for supporters, it might just be bureaucratic efficiency. Either way, it’s fuel for an already heated debate.

An email has surfaced showing that Biden's Chief of Staff approved the use of an autopen (a machine that replicates signatures) to issue pardons during the Trump administration. The revelation raises questions about the transparency and process behind these pardons, especially since autopen use for such decisions is uncommon.

Editor’s Note: This isn’t just bureaucratic inside baseball—using an autopen for pardons could set a concerning precedent. Pardons are a big deal, often involving high-stakes legal and ethical judgments. If they’re being signed by a machine rather than the president directly, it might make people wonder how much personal scrutiny these decisions are really getting. For critics, it’s another red flag about how power gets used behind the scenes.