Trump Lashes Out at “Autopen Scandal,” Calls It One of the Biggest in U.S. History

President Donald Trump, now back in the Oval Office after his 2024 victory, has once again taken to his favored megaphone—Truth Social—with a blistering post that, depending on how you read it, is either vintage Trumpian hyperbole or a telling window into how he sees the modern presidency.

In a post published Monday, Trump accused unnamed actors in the Biden administration of using an “autopen” to sign off on executive actions that, he claims, a mentally sound President Biden would never have approved. “Other than the Rigged Presidential Election of 2020,” Trump wrote, “the Biggest Scandal in American History is the ‘AUTOPEN!’”

It’s a striking statement, even for Trump. And yet, it’s worth sitting with—if only to unpack what’s actually being said here.

What is an autopen, and why does Trump care?

Let’s start with the basics. An autopen is a mechanical device that reproduces a person’s signature. It’s been used for decades by government officials—including presidents—to sign ceremonial documents, or, in some cases, routine orders, particularly when they’re traveling or incapacitated. The practice goes back to at least Eisenhower.

In 2011, President Obama became the first to use an autopen to sign a bill into law while he was abroad—an act that raised eyebrows but was ultimately deemed legal by the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel. Since then, it’s been used sparingly, and with some transparency, but not without criticism.

So Trump’s not entirely wrong that autopen use brings up questions. But he’s going a lot further. In his post, he implies that during the Biden years—especially when questions about the president’s mental fitness were circulating—someone else was effectively making presidential decisions using the autopen as cover. The charge, in short, is that power was usurped.

Who exactly Trump thinks was behind this is left vague—“that person (or persons),” he writes—but the implication is that America was, at some point, being governed by people operating behind Biden’s name, not with his direct consent.

Is there any evidence for this?

As of now, no. There’s no publicly available documentation or whistleblower testimony to suggest widespread or unauthorized use of the autopen during Biden’s presidency in a way that subverted his actual decision-making authority.

That said, concerns about Biden’s cognitive capacity were real and widely discussed—even among Democrats—during his second term. Trump is clearly tapping into that anxiety.

But invoking the autopen as the vehicle of a “scandal” of historic proportions? That seems like more of a rhetorical tool than a policy critique. There’s no smoking gun, just suspicion layered with political theater.

Underneath it all: anxiety about who’s really in charge

Still, Trump’s post isn’t just about one piece of office equipment. It’s about something larger: distrust in the modern presidency itself. And while his delivery is conspiratorial and exaggerated, the core idea—that there’s often a gap between the visible face of power and the machinery behind it—isn’t entirely off-base.

We live in an age where executive power is vast, bureaucracies are sprawling, and presidents are surrounded by unelected aides and appointees who often shape policy just as much as the commander-in-chief. This isn’t unique to Biden. It’s a feature, not a bug, of contemporary American governance.

But Trump—who thrives on the idea of singular, unfiltered leadership—finds that whole arrangement deeply suspect. And so, we get posts like this, where the line between critique and conspiracy blurs.

Final thoughts

Look, there’s a lot of noise in Trump’s rhetoric. Always has been. But beneath the caps-lock and exclamation points, there’s a real tension he’s tapping into: about trust, about power, and about who really governs in the 21st century.

Is this “the biggest scandal in American history”? Not even close. But is it worth asking how we define executive authority in an era of delegation, digital signatures, and cognitive decline? Maybe. Maybe more than we’d like to admit.