Staff Reports
In the latest chapter of the ongoing Biden saga, the spotlight has returned to the President’s mental health and the curious merry-go-round of last-minute pardons signed by his administration. Ian Sams, who served as a senior advisor to the White House Counsel’s Office, recently took the hot seat before the House Oversight Committee. Mr. Sams has been a vocal defender of President Joe Biden, dismissing any concerns over Biden’s cognitive sharpness as mere conspiracy theories. Yet, Sams’ confession that he only met the President twice during his tenure has raised some eyebrows. How can one steadfastly assure the public of Biden’s mental fitness if the closest they ever got to scrutinizing it was probably from a safe distance?
The revelations don’t stop there. There’s more eyebrow-raising to be done with the latest scoop involving the Department of Justice (DOJ) and a whirlwind of pardons Biden signed just days before leaving office. According to reports, not only were the processes behind these pardons described as ‘unorthodox,’ but DOJ insiders called it legally questionable. Imagine an era where pardons were reportedly administered like candy from a piñata, signed en masse with an auto pen as if they were merely holiday greeting cards. The auto pen was famously used for standard, ceremonial documents, not for significant legal pardons, especially when those pardons involved violent offenders. One might muse if, behind closed doors, they were playing a high-stakes game of ‘who-got-clemency.’
Behind the scenes at the DOJ, even top legal minds expressed concern about what was unfolding. One of Garland’s top aides cautioned that this automatic signing party could very well be going against legal norms. But in the classic political dodgeball game, the concern was ignored as the process rolled on. As House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer pointed out, these moves are ripe for legal challenge, likely to hold like a house of cards in a gusty wind when faced with judicial scrutiny.
There was a moment of candid, almost humorous truth in the New York Times, where Biden admitted to setting the criteria for clemency but didn’t personally approve each case. Welcome to Governance 101, where delegation is sometimes confused with a royal decree. The ghost of Andrew Jackson would probably chuckle at the notion of an auto pen acting as the last word in a legal process meant to involve careful consideration and personal responsibility. One might have to wonder if the auto pen ever experienced hand cramps from its loyalty.
Now, as this unforgettable charade surrounding mysterious pardons and questionable mental fitness unfolds, Republicans sniff an opportunity. They argue that President Trump might have grounds to contest these contentious decisions once he returns to the scene. Perhaps there’s irony here worth noting: when official actions turn into something more akin to secretive backroom deals, the folks that weather it unscathed gain quite the tales to tell. It seems, for all intents and purposes, the White House sent an unmissable message: governance is best left to the seldom-seen but wildly speculative hands of an auto pen and a doctrine of bewildering delegation.
