Search This Blog

Friday, March 14, 2025

Biden sources suspect aide may have abused autopen as Trump’s ‘far more restrictive’ rules revealed

 A key aide to former President Joe Biden may have exceeded their authority by liberally using an autopen to sign official documents, according to two former White House sources, as President Trump’s aides set up “far more restrictive” rules governing the use of the mechanical device.

A document obtained by The Post outlines the narrow set of circumstances in which Trump’s signature can be affixed to documents, following controversy this week kicked off by a Heritage Foundation analysis of Biden signatures on various records, including last-minute pardons.

A small group of officials under both Biden and Trump have been delegated the power to get documents “signed” robotically, but 82-year-old Biden’s perceived cognitive decline sparked debate about whether some aides may have assumed his wishes in his final stretch as commander-in-chief.

President Trump’s aides say they have established more restrictive rules for use of autopen signatures.AP

One Biden White House source told The Post they suspect that a key aide to the then-president may have made unilateral determinations on what to auto-sign. The Post is not publishing that staffer’s name due to the lack of concrete evidence and refutations by other colleagues.

The Biden aide, who did not respond to requests for comment, would frequently make mention of what “the boss” wanted, the source said, but compatriots would have “no idea” if it was true because the internal culture was to not ask questions.

“I feared no one as much as I feared that [staffer]. To me, [the staffer] basically was the president,” the person said. “No one ever questioned [the staffer]. Period.”

Former President Biden’s use of an autopen for many documents spurred controversy due to his perceived cognitive decline.Getty Images

“Everyone” was suspicious of this individual exceeding their authority when claiming to speak for the president, the source said. “But no one would actually say it.”

“I think [the aide] was using the autopen as standard and past protocol,” The Post’s informant said.

“There is no clarity on who actually approved what — POTUS or [the aide].”

A second Biden White House source agreed that the person was suspected of assuming the then-president’s positions and handing down orders without it being clear if they actually had communicated with the commander-in-chief.

Several other former staffers, including those who in the past have offered unvarnished assessments of what they view as the shortcomings of the ex-president and his core staff, described the allegation as absurd and said they never saw the person abuse their authority.

One Biden White House source told The Post they suspect that a key aide to the then-president may have made unilateral determinations on what to auto-sign.X / @OversightPR

One of the skeptics noted that Biden frequently would “demand to see the most mundane statements” put out by the press office during their tenure early in his term of office — with another calling the entire storyline “bulls–t” and adding that it was “embarrassing” for Trump and his allies to be making it an issue.

Attorney Mike Davis, a prominent outside adviser to Trump and his team, told The Post that the particular circumstances of autopen use matter, noting that it’s common practice in Washington for politicians to delegate auto-signatures to aides.

“If they’re carrying out the president’s will, it doesn’t seem like an issue. If they’re not carrying out the president’s will, it’s a huge issue — it’s criminal,” Davis said, listing forgery, obstruction of justice and fraud as potential charges.

“If an authorized autopen operator is using the autopen on a particular document against the president’s will, it’s clearly not valid.”

‘Far more restrictive’ rules under Trump

An internal memo drafted Thursday by Trump staff secretary William Scharf, who for the past two months has publicly described and presented documents to Trump for his signature in the Oval Office, lays out the restrictive current use of the autopen.

“We have gone significantly further than [the] need for express approval, both in this Administration and in the First Trump Administration,” Scharf wrote.

Trump staff secretary William Scharf (left) laid out autopen rules in an internal memo this week.ZUMAPRESS.com / MEGA

“Our practice around autopen usage is far more restrictive than most previous administrations. We do not use the autopen for documents that exercise the powers of the Presidency. So, for example, we do not use the autopen for executive orders, presidential memoranda, decision memoranda, nominations, appointment orders or commissions, or bills to be signed,” he wrote.

“We do not use the autopen even for more routine purposes, such as the invitation of foreign leaders to the White House. The President personally signs all of these, in the presence of witnesses. We will occasionally use the autopen when a single document requires multiple presidential signatures, or when multiple copies of a single document require signing, but only after the President has personally signed off and only at his direction.”

A memo dated Jan. 28 and also reviewed by The Post grants Scharf and White House chief of staff Susie Wiles the authority to use the autopen “for all matters.” Scharf’s deputy and the president’s executive clerk are allowed to make the call at Scharf’s direction.

The White House director of correspondence, who manages lower-stakes public communications such as congratulatory messages to Americans on significant life milestones such as birthdays, is also allowed to use the autopen “for standardized policy materials after clearance by [Scharf]” and for “Presidential messages in accordance with specific direction,” according to the January memo.

Biden appeared to have used an autopen to make a spate of last-minute pardons, according to a Heritage Foundation analysis.AFP via Getty Images

Autopens have been used by presidents since Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s — most notably for letters to children and similar trivial matters — but the use has expanded over the years, with President Barack Obama in 2013 using an autopen to sign a major spending bill.

Both Biden and Trump aides have jumped on a plane to hand-deliver significant legislation for the president’s signature.

“Under our Administration, the autopen is housed in the Office of Presidential Records,” Scharf wrote Thursday. “It is housed there because OPR is not a ‘production’ office, meaning that they do not independently produce documents. That ensures that a single office cannot both create a document and have it ‘signed.’ This is a crucial control mechanism that ensures that the President’s signature, and the authority that flows from it, is protected.”

Scarf added: “I view it as my weightiest responsibility as the President’s Staff Secretary to ensure that documents issuing from this White House under the President’s signature reflect the actual expressed will of the President, and that he has the opportunity to personally review the finalized copy of every such document when it is presented for his signature.”

‘Weird stuff’

The autopen, housed in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building next door to the White House, hasn’t been used only for weighty documents — such as pardons issued to former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) and Dr. Anthony Fauci in the closing days of Biden’s term.

In fact, the pen has been used by White House staff to ink everything from kitchen utensils to sports memorabilia.

Autopens have been used by presidents since Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s — most notably for letters to children and similar trivial matters.Getty Images

“We would get weird historical stuff. Like people had collected every president’s signature on the weirdest objects and needed the newest one,” a Biden White House aide told The Post.

“Think about Nixon signing some spatula decades ago and then some guy starts collecting every president’s signature.”

If someone wanted to get an exotic item signed, they would either mail it to the White House or hand it off in person at an event with the president’s staff.

“They’d visit and come for some events and pass it off to someone and we’d get it screened and logged and then they give it to Outer Oval,” the person recalled.

Documents such as annual heritage month declarations, meanwhile, frequently got the auto-signature and “if it happened last year, we know that we would automatically do it again. So there wasn’t an approval process.”

https://nypost.com/2025/03/14/us-news/trump-establishes-far-more-restrictive-autopen-rules-as-biden-aides-murmur-about-possible-misuse/

NASA gets extra week to submit mass layoff plan given busy mission workload

  NASA on Friday said it received a one-week deadline extension to submit its plans to the top U.S. personnel agency for mass layoffs, given the number of high-priority space missions the agency is grappling with this month.

https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2025-03-14/nasa-gets-extra-week-to-submit-mass-layoff-plan-given-busy-mission-workload

Trump demands 'accountability' for his pursuers at Justice Department speech

 President Donald Trump on Friday vowed to seek accountability for those who pursued him during his years out of power, speaking at the U.S. Justice Department whose prosecutors had brought some of those cases.

In a rare political speech at the department's Washington headquarters, Trump painted a dark picture of its trajectory prior to his return to office in January, saying it had been co-opted by "hacks and radicals."

"I will insist upon and demand full and complete accountability for the wrongs and abuses that have occurred. The American people have given us a mandate - a mandate like few people thought possible," Trump said.

Trump spoke to a department that twice indicted him during his years out of power on charges accusing him of illegally storing classified documents at his Florida club and plotting to overturn his defeat in the 2020 election.

https://www.streetinsider.com/General+News/Trump+demands+accountability+for+his+pursuers+at+Justice+Department+speech/24502957.html

Flu Vaccine Exposed: The Shocking NIH Discovery They Don't Want You To Know

 Via The Vigilant Fox,

Two decades ago, CBS aired a bombshell report on the flu shot, revealing a truth that health officials didn’t want to admit. Despite flu shot uptake among seniors skyrocketing from 15% to 65%, flu deaths continued to climb.

NIH scientists were devastated. They expected the data to confirm the vaccine’s effectiveness. But instead, their own research shattered that assumption. So they assumed other factors must be “masking the true benefits of the shots.”

However, as Sharyl Attkisson reported at the time, “No matter how they crunched the numbers, they got the same disappointing result. Flu shots have not reduced deaths among the elderly.”

WATCH:

Atkisson, the reporter in the above clip, later left mainstream news to become an independent journalist focused on exposing Big Pharma, government corruption, and mainstream media lies.

Going back to the story, the scientists looked at the flu shot data of other countries in hopes of finding more optimistic data. But what they found instead was “the same poor results in Australia, France, Canada, and the UK.”

You can read their disappointing study here.

Rather than re-evaluating their approach, health officials doubled down. The CDC refused to acknowledge the failure and instead proposed a “roundabout way” of protecting seniors. Their new strategy? Inject kids to “protect grandma.”

Sound familiar? They used the same playbook during COVID. When the pharmaceutical product didn’t work as promised, they pushed mass vaccination of children—not to protect them, but to “shield vulnerable adults.”

This strategy failed 20 years ago, yet they’re still pushing the same flawed tactic today—despite children having nothing to gain while taking all the risk.

This disturbing reality prompted Kurt Metzger of The Jimmy Dore Show to say, “If they were doing this 20 years ago, they managed to make the same mistake again. That’s a little bit hard to believe it’s a mistake.”

https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/flu-vaccine-exposed-shocking-nih-discovery-they-dont-want-you-know

New Beltway Intrigue: Follow the Biden EPA Money

 by James Varney

When the Biden administration announced $27 billion in environmental grants last April, it set the clock ticking on a predicament: how to get the unprecedented sums for the President's envisioned NetZero future out the door before the fiscal year ended on Sept. 30?

AP
Lee Zeldin, Trump EPA Administrator: Sees "a deeply entrenched pattern of political favoritism" in Biden grant awards.

The task was complicated by the fact most of the money – $20 billion – would go to just eight nonprofits that, like the Environmental Protection Agency itself, had never handled such gargantuan grants.

In hindsight, it’s easy to suspect that corners were cut, or laws were broken, or, at the very least, extraordinary measures were taken.

Those possibilities are clearly on the mind of EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin as he tries to unravel what happened to Inflation Reduction Act spending that the Biden White House’s Office of Management and Budget and the EPA decided to expedite before the November election – an effort that included moving the roughly $20 billion to a private institution, Citibank, away from oversight of the Treasury Department. 

On Wednesday, Zeldin moved to terminate the arrangements as the enriched nonprofits have filed lawsuits looking to protect their grants. The battle has thrust into the spotlight what had been a rather quiet attempt by the Biden administration to spend the $27 billion.

The money was put into the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, a new entity born in 2022’s Inflation Reduction Act, which Democrats pushed through Congress without any Republican support.  

EPA

“This bold investment will not only deploy clean energy and combat the climate crisis but also improve health outcomes, lower energy costs, and create high-quality jobs for Americans,” Biden’s EPA declared when seeking applications for the grants, “all while strengthening our country’s economic competitiveness and ensuring energy security.” 

The grants, unveiled April 4, 2024, came with its built-in deadline to push the money out just months away. So a political deal was struck between the White House’s Office of Management and Budget and EPA, current agency officials told RealClearInvestigations. As a hedge against future administration attempts to curb the program, the deal classified the now-suspect $20 billion in a novel way making it hard to track.

Zeldin has asked the EPA’s inspector general and the Department of Justice to investigate the unorthodox arrangement.

“I think it will be an uphill battle to recover the money, but it’s impressive to see Trump and Zeldin running with it,” said Daren Bakst of the conservative Competitive Enterprise Institute, which has labeled the Greenhouse Gas money “slush funds.” 

“Even if you look past the entities that receive the money, or how they figured out how to get the money to them, this is a setup that is prone to corruption, abuse and cronyism regardless of party,” Bakst said. “The whole thing looks questionable.”

epa.gov
The Biden EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund: money to new nonprofits with few assets but political connections.

The process began before the April 4 announcement. In December 2022, Jahi Wise, an executive with the Coalition for Green Capital, joined EPA as a senior adviser. In July 2023, the EPA published a request for proposals from applicants to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund.

The fund was broken into three parts. The two largest, the National Clean Investment Fund (NCIF) and the Clean Communities Investment Accelerator (CCIA), received huge sums, totaling $20 billion. Notably, as RCI reported last October, grants went to nonprofits that had paltry assets, had been granted their nonprofit status only the month before, or had people associated with them who had previously served various federal or state Democratic administrations. For example, the Coalition for Green Capital, Wise's former outfit, was awarded $5.1 billion.

Three weeks later, an arrangement was made between OMB and EPA in which the money was designated “non-exchange” rather than “exchange” – a first for EPA funds, according to current officials. That label allowed for the money to be moved to recipients in lump funds rather than parceled out over the length of the deals with the nonprofits, which in most cases were slated to run until 2029, 2030, or later, records show. It also called for an outside financial institution to manage the money, in part because the agency had zero experience in handling grants of this size. 

AP
June 27: Biden's disastrous debate performance changed the calculus of how long he would be in office.

Although the language in the Inflation Reduction Act dealing with the Greenhouse Gas funds does not use “shall,” the word Congress usually employs to indicate that something is required, the law did impose a deadline of Sept. 30 – the end of the fiscal year – EPA officials and legal experts agree. 

On June 27, as the EPA was making its deals with the nonprofits, Biden had his disastrous debate with Donald Trump, and on July 21 Biden ended his re-election campaign and threw his support to then-Vice President Kamala Harris. The Greenhouse Gas fund money remained unobligated at that point, according to EPA officials.

The deals were finally completed and the National Clean Investment Fund and the Clean Communities Investment Accelerator money was obligated to the nonprofits on Aug. 16, according to a timeline provided to RCI. That left $7 billion, the portion that comprised the third component of the fund, Solar For All.

At that point, the $20 billion, though obligated, remained with the Treasury, officials said. A memorandum of understanding between EPA and the Treasury Department on moving the mountain of cash was not signed until Sept. 6. 

Two weeks later, the Republican-led House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee held a hearing to learn more about EPA funding oversight, calling the agency’s inspector general Sean O’Donnell to testify. O’Donnell made clear he had never seen the maneuvers the EPA was making with the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, and said neither he nor his staff would be able to stay on top of it.

C-SPAN
Sean O’Donnell, EPA Inspector General: “It’s like they created an investment bank. It’s fantastically complex."

“I can’t say enough about how complex this system will be,” O’Donnell testified. “It’s like they created an investment bank. It’s fantastically complex. I think it’s unusual.”

Yet it was not until Nov. 12, three working days after Trump beat Harris in the 2024 election, that the EPA began talks with Citibank about taking control of the $20 billion, Trump administration officials told RCI. During those negotiations, on Dec. 5, Project Veritas released an undercover video of an EPA official laughing about what he considered an extraordinary process, likening it to “throwing gold bars off the deck of the Titanic.”

The Citibank arrangement effectively removing direct EPA oversight, and with interest on the $20 billion going to the grant recipients, was signed on Dec. 27, agency officials told RCI. The deal thus represents a carve-out for the two aspects of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund that accounted for the $20 billion; the $7 billion comprising Solar For All remains with Treasury. The Trump administration has frozen that money, although some of it has already been distributed, according to federal records.

Critics of the spending said the timeline smacks of shady politics.

Steve Milloy, a skeptic of apocalyptic global warming, said he has received a government grant and his experience was profoundly different than the one enjoyed by Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund winners. His process was an uncomfortable one that lasted 10 months, he said.

“They crawled up my ass, and that was for a small grant,” he said.

The contrast is striking, in his opinion.

“I’ve never seen anything like this,” he said. “It is fishy … I think they thought they would win reelection and panicked when they lost. It seems like all of this is being done without due diligence or accountability."

'Tip of the Iceberg'

Picking up on the “gold bars off the deck of the Titanic” video, Zeldin cited the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund as a dubious operation during his confirmation hearing Jan. 17, and he has been outspoken against it since becoming administrator. On March 2, he wrote to the EPA inspector general, urging him to look into the deals. 

“These examples are the tip of the iceberg and suggest a deeply entrenched pattern of political favoritism, lack of qualifications, and other possibly unlawful allocation of taxpayer funds,” he wrote. “Disturbingly, these cases likely represent only a fraction of broader issues.”

Beyond questions about the money, questions also remain about the work it is meant to pay for, according to Zeldin and other EPA officials. None of the recipient nonprofits contacted by RCI, including the Climate United Fund, which got the biggest award of $7 billion, responded to requests for comment.

One stipulation of the Greenhouse Gas funds was that winners attract $7 of private investment for every $1 in federal money. The EPA told RCI that recipients submitted detailed plans in their applications, but could not say if that included specific financing arrangements. Former EPA Special Adviser Zealan Hoover told RCI last year that the goal was to create a market for these green banks through the size of the grants.

While it remains early in the process, it does not appear the groups will be able to hit that target. The Appalachian Community Credit Corporation, for instance, is supposed to get $500 million through the CCIA. On its website, however, it says it will use the money to create a $1.6 billion loan pool, which would be an investment ratio little better than 3-to-1.

The Virginia-based corporation did not respond to requests for comment.

It remains unclear how much money remains in the Citibank accounts and how successful Zeldin may be in recovering the money. Citibank declined comment.

'The Whole Thing Seems Incestuous'

Some outside observers believe there are mechanisms to claw back the funds. An EPA official told RCI there is boilerplate language in agency contracts that allows “termination for a change in agency priorities,” and Milloy said federal agencies terminate contracts “all the time.”

In this particular case, while it does appear Zeldin could claw back money, the EPA may be legally bound to simply give it to another private financial institution rather than return it to the Treasury, said David Super, professor of law and economics at Georgetown University Law Center.

In addition, Super said, there is that deadline of Sept. 30, 2024.

“There, as here, there was both an appropriation and a deadline for getting the money out the door,” Super said, citing a 1975 Supreme Court ruling. “Any competent lawyer would have told EPA that, unless it wanted to go through the procedures of the Impoundment Control Act, it would be an unlawful impoundment of funds if it failed to spend all the money – and, if it was going to do that, it had to do so by September 30, 2024.”

AP
Stacey Abrams: Lead counsel for Rewiring America ... and tied to a $2 billion EPA grant.

Other groups that received enormous grants also did not respond to RCI’s questions or requests for comment, including the Climate United Fund, which got the single biggest award: $7 billion up front for an arrangement that is supposed to last through June 2029, federal records show.

Climate United Fund has announced spending $311 million of its grant, all of it on three projects last October and November. The largest of those was $250 million to buy electric trucks, according to the group’s website. 

Previously, RCI reported on ties between some of the nonprofits’ key figures and the Biden or Obama administrations, and more of those have come to light since Zeldin pushed the issue into the spotlight last month. Many outlets have zeroed in on failed Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, who was lead counsel for a group known as Rewiring America. That group, in turn, is one of the main components of a new group known as Power Forward Communities, an outfit with listed assets of $100 that obtained its tax-exempt status last March, just weeks before it was named the winner of a $2 billion grant.

Trump mentioned Abrams and the EPA award in his congressional speech last week, and liberal “fact check” groups sprang to action to label his comment false because the money did not go directly to Abrams. Abrams acknowledged being a part of Rewiring America, however, and said the group bought energy-efficient appliances for people in Georgia.

Power Forward Communities, which did not respond to multiple requests for comment, lists scores of other partners. One of those, the Green Door Initiative in Michigan, is led by Donele Wilkins, whom Biden appointed as a member of his Environmental Justice Advisory Council last June. In other cases, Power Forward Communities is partnered with groups that also have other public revenue streams, such as the Nevada Clean Energy Fund, which is funded also by the Nevada governor’s office and has received nearly $850,000 of its separate $155.7 million grant via Solar For All. 

Similar ties have surfaced between the Biden administration and the Coalition for Green Capital. 

“The whole thing seems incestuous,” said Bakst of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. “When you see these short deadlines it really makes everything questionable, because when you rush something like this there will almost certainly be problems with it.”

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2025/03/13/a_new_beltway_mystery_follow_the_biden_epa_money_1097269.html