House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer is urging the Department of Justice to explore allegations regarding former President Joe Biden’s use of autopen to sign executive actions. This call follows the committee’s extensive investigation into Biden’s White House, focusing on whether his aides concealed signs of mental decline during his presidency. The committee’s recent 100-page report raises serious questions about Biden’s ability to make decisions and the authenticity of the actions taken in his name.
The report claims that Biden’s inner circle intentionally obscured the truth about his cognitive state. It states, “Faced with the cognitive decline of President Joe Biden, White House aides — at the direction of the inner circle — hid the truth about the former president’s condition and fitness for office.” This suggests that not only were concerns ignored, but there may have been a systematic effort to present a misleading picture of Biden’s health.
The committee pointed out a “haphazard documentation process” regarding pardons issued by Biden, leaving unanswered questions about whether these decisions were genuinely made by him. Comer emphasized that in the absence of adequate evidence showing that Biden approved certain executive actions, those actions “should be considered void.” The significance of documentation in this context cannot be overstated. Without clear records, the legitimacy of these executive actions remains in doubt.
The investigation also turned a spotlight on Hunter Biden, the former president’s son. Testimonies revealed that Hunter was present in discussions surrounding pardons, particularly for family members. Jeff Zients, Biden’s former Chief of Staff, noted Hunter’s involvement, saying, “It was towards the end… the family discussions.” This raises troubling implications about potential conflicts of interest in the pardoning process, suggesting familial ties may have improperly influenced these decisions.
Despite extensive interviews with 14 witnesses over three months, the inquiry uncovered a lack of acknowledgment from Biden’s senior aides regarding any concerns about his mental capabilities. The report stated, “Not one of the Committee’s 14 witnesses was willing to admit that they ever had a concern about President Biden being in cognitive decline.” Many witnesses could not recall discussions about Biden’s cognitive health, raising further doubts about their willingness to confront uncomfortable truths amidst the investigation’s scrutiny.
Dr. Kevin O’Connor, who served as Biden’s physician, came under fire for his responses during the investigation. He exercised his Fifth Amendment right to avoid answering nearly all questions, leading Comer to label this behavior as “reckless.” The report suggested that O’Connor’s failure to conduct cognitive assessments while Biden was in office could indicate serious lapses in his professional duties. Comer even called for the District of Columbia Health Board of Medicine to investigate O’Connor’s conduct, implying that he might have aligned with political pressures that compromised his medical responsibilities.
Biden’s allies have dismissed Comer’s investigation as politically motivated, arguing that concerns over Biden’s mental acuity have been amplified by media narratives and Republican opposition. Following Biden’s challenging debate performance in June, many critics have pointed to this as evidence of cognitive decline. In contrast, Biden himself asserted in a July interview, “I made every decision” on his own, maintaining that he is fully competent.
The overarching themes of the report paint a complex picture of the former president’s leadership during a critical time in the nation’s history. As the investigation unfolds, the implications of the findings could impact not only perceptions of Biden’s presidency but also the broader discourse around mental fitness in leadership roles.
"*" indicates required fields
