World Blog by humble servant.Humble Servant News on X: Investigative Report – Biden’s Pardons Under Fire: Potentially Unlawful and Void

Humble Servant News on X: Investigative Report – Biden’s Pardons Under Fire: Potentially Unlawful and Void

March 17, 2025  

In a bombshell exposé, Humble Servant News on X delves into the controversy surrounding former US President Joe Biden’s final pardons, which current President Donald Trump has declared “void and vacant.” This investigative report uncovers allegations of procedural irregularities, potential misuse of presidential authority, and questions about Biden’s awareness of the clemency documents he allegedly signed—raising the possibility that these pardons may lack legal standing. Below, we detail the pardons in question, the reasons they might be deemed unlawful, and the broader implications of this unfolding scandal.

The Pardons in Question

Shortly before leaving office on January 20, 2025, Biden issued a series of preemptive pardons that have sparked outrage and scrutiny. Among the most contentious are:  

Members of the January 6 Congressional Select Committee: Biden granted clemency to several political figures involved in the investigation of the January 6, 2021, Capitol Hill riot. His administration justified these pardons as a protective measure against potential “unwarranted prosecution” under Trump’s second term.  

Hunter Biden: In a stunning reversal of his public stance, Biden issued a retroactive blanket pardon for his son Hunter, covering a range of potential legal liabilities. This move came after Biden had repeatedly vowed not to interfere in his son’s legal troubles.  

Other Political Allies: Reports suggest additional pardons were extended to lesser-known figures tied to Biden’s administration, though specifics remain murky due to limited transparency from the outgoing administration.

Why These Pardons Might Be Unlawful

The legitimacy of these pardons hinges on several legal and ethical concerns, each of which could render them null and void under US law:  

1. Lack of Presidential Knowledge or Consent

President Trump, in a fiery Truth Social post on March 10, 2025, alleged that Biden “was completely unaware” of the pardons and that “the necessary Pardoning Documents were not explained to, or approved by, Biden.” If true, this raises a critical question: Can a pardon be valid if the president did not knowingly authorize it?  

Supporting Evidence: Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey has echoed this claim, arguing in a March 12, 2025, letter to the DOJ Inspector General that “unelected staff” may have exploited Biden’s cognitive decline to push through these actions. Bailey cites House Speaker Mike Johnson, who reportedly said Biden couldn’t comprehend the orders he was signing, and Democratic fundraiser Lindy Li, who claimed Biden’s staff, wife, and son effectively “ran the country” in his final months.  

Legal Implication: The US Constitution grants the president sole authority to issue pardons (Article II, Section 2). If Biden lacked the capacity or awareness to exercise this power, the pardons could be deemed unconstitutional.

2. Use of the Autopen: A Tool or a Loophole?

The Oversight Project, a conservative Heritage Foundation initiative, revealed that Biden relied heavily on an autopen—a mechanical device that replicates a signature—throughout his presidency, including for these pardons. Trump has called this practice “disrespectful to the office” and potentially “not even valid.”  

Historical Context: While autopens have been used by presidents since Thomas Jefferson’s time and were legally defended under George W. Bush as a substitute for a signature, critics argue Biden’s case is different. The sheer volume of autopen use, combined with his visible frailty, suggests staff may have wielded it without oversight.  

Potential Illegality: If staff members controlled the autopen to issue pardons Biden didn’t approve—or even know about—it could constitute a fraudulent usurpation of presidential authority, rendering the documents legally suspect.

3. Self-Dealing and Abuse of Power

The pardon of Hunter Biden has drawn particular ire, with critics labeling it a blatant abuse of power. Biden’s earlier promise not to pardon his son amplifies suspicions of impropriety.  

Why It’s Problematic: Preemptive pardons for family members, especially without clear justification, could violate ethical norms and invite judicial review. If evidence emerges that Hunter or other staff orchestrated this pardon without Biden’s informed consent, it might be struck down as an invalid exercise of authority.

4. Timing and Political Motivation

The preemptive nature of the January 6 committee pardons—intended to shield recipients from future prosecution—has been criticized as a partisan maneuver rather than a legitimate use of clemency. Trump alleges these committee members “orchestrated their own pardons,” suggesting a conspiracy within Biden’s administration.  

Legal Risk: Pardons must serve a public purpose, not merely protect political allies. If proven to be a self-serving act by staff or committee members, courts could find them unlawful.

Broader Implications

This scandal has ignited a firestorm of debate about the integrity of Biden’s final months in office. Missouri AG Bailey has demanded a DOJ investigation, warning that “radical policy” pushed by unelected aides could undermine not just these pardons but other late-term executive orders—like Biden’s controversial Equal Rights Amendment claim, which lacked legal grounding due to its expired ratification deadline.  

Trump, speaking at the Department of Justice on March 14, 2025, vowed to challenge the pardons’ validity, while the Oversight Project’s findings hint at a presidency potentially hijacked by staff amid Biden’s decline. If substantiated, these allegations could lead to historic legal battles over the scope of presidential power and accountability.

Conclusion

Humble Servant News on X concludes that Biden’s pardons face serious questions of lawfulness due to potential lack of consent, misuse of the autopen, self-dealing, and political overreach. Whether they stand or fall may depend on forthcoming investigations and judicial rulings. For now, Trump’s declaration of “void and vacant” resonates as both a political jab and a plausible legal stance—one that could reshape how we view the end of Biden’s presidency. Stay tuned as we continue to dig deeper into this unfolding story.