Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Is there any update on the AutoPen President Trump? “Yeah, it’s just gotten worse for their standpoint… The Autopen was illegal. It was illegally used. They’re totally Fooked.”

43,911 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

🚨 Oh boy…. Listen very closely to every statement Trump just made! • Autopens are meant for letters… not major proclamations. • Anyone who signs with Autopen — it really means you’re not the President! 👀 • We think we know who operated the Autopen.. more than one person • “The election… it’s been now caught” AGAIN!…. 👇👇👇 I’m telling you right now, there is a Constitutional Reason why Donald Trump signs everything, BY HAND. Donald Trump has NEVER used an autopen for EO’s or legislation. 🔴 THE CONSTITUTION 1. Article I, Section 7: This outlines the legislative process, stating that a bill becomes law if the president “approves” it and that he “shall sign it” if he does, or return it with objections (veto) if he doesn’t. —— The phrase “shall sign it” is the key…. does this imply a personal, physical act? 2. Article II, Section 1: The president’s executive power is vested in him —— this suggests that certain acts—like approving laws—are his alone to perform, raising questions about delegating that act to a machine. • The Constitution assumes the president’s conscious, individual assent to a law. —— An autopen, even if authorized, is a mechanical proxy—some argue it’s akin to delegating the decision itself, which the president can’t legally do. • The framers envisioned a hands-on executive role. In 1787, signing meant PEN TO PAPER by the person in question ——no machines existed to complicate this. An autopen might clash with that original understanding. • Legal Authenticity: A signature traditionally proves intent and identity. —— If a machine replicates it, could someone later challenge the law’s validity by claiming the president didn’t truly “sign” it? (LIKE TRUMP IS DOING NOW) • Precedent Concerns: If autopens are okay, what’s next—digital signatures, aides signing, or AI approvals? 🔴 I BELIEVE DONALD TRUMP WANTS THIS TO GO TO THE SUPREME COURT I Expect Donald Trump to VOID Joe Biden’s pardons to get smacked down by a corrupt judge… BUT it will ultimately go to the Supreme Court, and that is exactly where I believe Donald Trump wants it to go. PAY ATTENTION to the ruling’s language of the Supreme Court if and when it comes. The language will determine how far back it applies. Obama was the first US President to ever use the Autopen. He used the autopen to sign the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 while he was on vacation in Hawaii. He also used an autopen to sign a four-year extension of certain provisions of the Patriot Act in 2011, while he was in France. Republican Tom Graves argued the constitutionality of this action, specifically Article I, Section 7 when he signed the NDAA… citing what if the President was hospitalized? —— What would stop a group of radical cabinet members using autopen to push forth a separate agenda? (EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED WITH BIDEN) The DOJ determined it was ok to do at the time.. so OH HELL YEAH, this should definitely go to SCOTUS.

MJTruthUltra

256,321 просмотров • 1 год назад

Uh ohhh… they Fooked 🚨 President Trump says a great crime was committed with the Autopen, Suggested the Autopen can tell you WHERE it was used Generally, autopens do not come with tracking features, but how much you wanna bet the Autopen of a president does? Kek He goes on to suggest Joe Biden may be innocent and had no idea what they were doing. 🔴 AGAIN!…. I’m telling you right now, there is a Constitutional Reason why Donald Trump signs everything, BY HAND. Donald Trump has NEVER used an autopen for EO’s or legislation. 🔴 THE CONSTITUTION 1. Article I, Section 7: This outlines the legislative process, stating that a bill becomes law if the president “approves” it and that he “shall sign it” if he does, or return it with objections (veto) if he doesn’t. —— The phrase “shall sign it” is the key…. does this imply a personal, physical act? 2. Article II, Section 1: The president’s executive power is vested in him —— this suggests that certain acts—like approving laws—are his alone to perform, raising questions about delegating that act to a machine. • The Constitution assumes the president’s conscious, individual assent to a law. —— An autopen, even if authorized, is a mechanical proxy—some argue it’s akin to delegating the decision itself, which the president can’t legally do. • The framers envisioned a hands-on executive role. In 1787, signing meant PEN TO PAPER by the person in question ——no machines existed to complicate this. An autopen might clash with that original understanding. • Legal Authenticity: A signature traditionally proves intent and identity. —— If a machine replicates it, could someone later challenge the law’s validity by claiming the president didn’t truly “sign” it? (LIKE TRUMP IS DOING NOW) • Precedent Concerns: If autopens are okay, what’s next—digital signatures, aides signing, or AI approvals? Clip Watch Miranda Devine Full Interview

MJTruthUltra

124,636 просмотров • 1 год назад