Speaker 1: And we are back with another edition of the Federalist
Radio Hour. I'm Matt Kittle's senior elections correspondent at the
Federalist and your experienced Shirpa on today's Quest for Knowledge.
As always, you can email the show at radio at
the Federalist dot com, follow us on exit fdr LST.
Make sure to subscribe wherever you download your podcast, and
of course to the premium version of our website as well.
Our guest today is Mike Cowell, president of the Oversight
Project and lead investigator behind the auto pen scandal involving
the mentally diminished former President Joe Biden. Of course, a
very interesting week on that front with a new report
out from the House. Mike, thank you so much for
joining us today on this edition of the Federalist Radio Hour. Hey,
great to be back on. Yeah, it's great to have
you on. And you can take a victory lap here
at some level because you were the first to really
dig into this. I want to set the stage here
by reading from my Federalist colleague Beth Brellia's story this morning.
The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform released a
one hundred page report Tuesday with the damning title the
Biden Auto Pen Presidency Decline, Delusion and Deception in the
White House. It details former President Biden's diminishing mental and
physical abilities, the implications of that decline, and Biden's inner
circle of loyalist attempting to mislead the nation to ignore
what people's eyes plainly showed them. The report states the committee,
led by Representative James Comer, Republican from Kentucky, found that
Biden White House officials exercised the authority of the former
president and intentionally concealed Biden's rapidly worsening mental and physical state.
Since you were there at the beginning of all of this,
as a matter of fact, as you served as lead
investigator the Oversight project was the first to uncover the
Auto Pen scan. Wanted to scandal, wanted to get your
first thoughts on what came out of that report and
where we go from here.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so thanks for having me on at the outset.
I'll say we are far from victory. Victory happens when
accountability happens. The people who have the no good pardons
should be federally prosecuted and the people will implemented the
scheme of forgery and lying should also be prosecuted, and
so we have laid the foundation.
Speaker 3: For that work.
Speaker 2: We have, you know, as you noted when we broke
it in March of this year, have constantly been putting
on new pieces of information, and then Chairman Comer and
his team did an excellent job of grabbing you know,
a lot of additional evidence through the interviews of a
bunch of Biden era officials who basically test by to
a few key themes of people who are supposed to
be who traditionally their positions would put them in the
nexus of power in the chain of command, barely saw
the president, and so the president wasn't an active force
in the White House, which clearly supports the core contention
of our autopendi investigation. Also, there just wasn't a chain
of custody for these things to prove that there was
evidence that Biden himself actually was exercising the presidential authority
that manifested itself in things such as pardons and commutations,
and there's a lot there. Yesterday, you know, we put
out some additional information that we went and reviewed everything
that had Biden's alleged signature on it, and we found
that eighty eight percent of documents excluding public laws were
aut epend that's a lot of autopends.
Speaker 4: That there's a lot of autopends.
Speaker 2: Yeah, all the public laws that he allegedly did sign.
Put in a nine minute video of them all running
up against each other, and you'll see the signatures all
over the map.
Speaker 3: It instantly begs.
Speaker 2: Questions of was there more than one person signing these
things for the president?
Speaker 1: It does beg that question, and it is a crucial
question because we're not only talking about these pardons here,
we're talking about all manner of things in the federal government.
You talk about that eighty eight percent, what area is again,
I mean, and is there something in particular that really
stood out to you in your review?
Speaker 2: Yeah, so it's executive orders, pardons, commutations, and proclamations.
Speaker 3: Eighty eight percent.
Speaker 2: Of those, in other words, eight hundred and forty six
out of nine hundred and fifty eight were signed by audit.
What stands out to us is obviously the scale of usage.
I mean, it was autopen by default in the administration.
And for those on the left who were claiming that
this is how it's always worked, people have always used autopens,
not at this scale, there was something going on. You know,
the autopen was designed as a tool for executive convenience
the presidents in one place, the documents in another.
Speaker 3: Not as a tool to basically replace the president.
Speaker 2: And that's what happened during Di Biden years, and other
things we've put out show that it's not just us
saying it.
Speaker 3: It was the DOJ at the time.
Speaker 2: We put out an email from a very senior person
at DJ, one of Meic Garland's right hand men as
a career, Bradley Weinsheimer, who after the parting spree on
January seventeenth where they shortened the sentences of what they
told us were non violent drug offenders, they ended up
being very violent offenders. They didn't even think the president
had approved, and there was all sorts of funky problems
with it, and so there's a lot to be undone.
Speaker 1: I guess the short response to all of this is
he had no idea what was being signed in his name.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, that appears to you know, be what happened.
And also, again don't take my word for it, take
Joe Biden's word if you want. He went to the
New York Times and said for those pardons and commutations
in question. He didn't individually approve them. He just sent
broad categories for his staff to go out and collect
names and fill in the blanks. And that's not a
valid exercise of the part in power. And so again,
like we're proving over and over and over again through
this original evidence that these things are no good and
so the balls in the Department of Justice's hands. It's
always been in their hands, you know. Yesterday after Chairman
Comber released the report, Dio Jay said, hey, we're investigating. Well,
you know, I'm here to say investigating is no longer
good enough.
Speaker 3: There needs to be accountability.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, that's the problem that we've seen for many,
many years. We're seeing some accountability that certainly more accountability
in the Trump administration than we've seen in a very
long time. But for a lot of folks, and I
would imagine it's frustrating for you. It's a lot of
it's coming too little and hopefully not too late.
Speaker 4: That interview with The New.
Speaker 1: York Times that President Biden had must have made things
incredibly more difficult for the people who have been aiding
and embedding him, who have covered for him, and who
could indeed face prosecution in all of this.
Speaker 4: Am I correct?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 2: I think that was the case every time Joe Biden
opened his mouth, and it's probably why he was moved
from the picture and replaced with an auto pen. The
New York Times interview is also very curious, because why
is The New York Times published the audio. It's like
Biden came out of hiding, or his handlers took him
out of hiding, because we had done so much damage
to the historical legacy of what was left of his administration,
and he tried to salvage it. And he basically admitted
to the key contentions of our investigation, which I'll take
you to a little bit back down memory lane after
we rolled it out in March. I'll give you one
wild guess as to what the New York Times called it.
Speaker 1: Par for the Sea, Yeah, yeah, yeah, that's yeah. That's
their default position, as you know, anything that comes out.
They're from Russia collusion hoax, to the you know, the
COVID scandal, now to Arctic frost and to the auto
pen scandal. That's their default position. But no, it's not
a conspiracy theory at all. We've got the receipts for this.
Speaker 2: That's exactly right, and you know, juxtaposed against this whole
narrative art that the Democrats have, you know, manufactured of
assaults on democracy. What greater assault on democracy than not
having a duly elected president.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that is absolutely right, and this is there's more
to come, obviously, but this is such a really dark
chapter when it comes to representative democracy in this republic's history.
And as you say, what we're hearing from the left
over and over again the marching armies of Marxist out there,
is that the Trump administration, the president is a threat
to democracy. But this obviously did a number on the
concept of duly elected presidents and what this country's elections
are truly all about. Now, you say, and we've noted
this before, but you have said this about the committee's findings.
The ultimate test is whether Attorney General Bondi will prosecute
individuals whose quote pardons were never valid in the first place,
and execute or rearrest those who did not receive valid communications.
That goes deep and wide. How do you propose the
Justice Department go about this beyond just the investigation side.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's easy, and we've we've charted out for them
multiple times.
Speaker 2: And so it's important to also note that for a
lot of people who Biden shortened their sentence via auto
pen or whoever shortened via the AUTOPEN, they were released
during the Trump administration.
Speaker 3: So DOJ under.
Speaker 2: Pam Bondi has actively been obeying the orders of the autopen.
That's a huge problem. They're violent people who have been
put back on the streets during this administration, despite the
President saying over and over again the pardons are void, vacant,
and of no effect, and not seeing the president's orders
being faithfully implemented. So the first thing would be to
recognize that the President has declared those actions illegal and
to re arrest the people that should be back in prison.
And there's also individuals that were taken off death row
and some of them are on like home confinement. Now
that's unacceptable, so Bondi puts some of them in a
maximum security prison instead, but they need to be back
on death row. And so that's the easy stuff right
like that, to me, there's no real good excuse for
why it hasn't happened. I know what the arguments of
DJ are, but they're not good enough. And then Separate
from that, the individuals that received the no good pardons,
think of.
Speaker 3: Shift, Melle Fauci, etc.
Speaker 2: You charge them for the crimes that they admitted guilty
when they accepted the pardon. So under Biden administration, the
Department of Justice argued that if you accept a pardon,
you admit to the guilt for the crime. So now
we just this got a whole bunch easier because people
like Shifting, etc.
Speaker 3: When they accept for those pardons, admitted guilt for the crimes.
Speaker 2: So you have that working in your favor, and then
you look at whatever criminal activity they should be charged
with and you charge them, and then you have this
fighting court.
Speaker 1: What is pray tell the dojay's arguments, for instance, as
you mentioned, not putting violent criminals, taking them out of
home confinement and putting them back into prison and death
row inmates back on death row. What is the argument here?
Speaker 2: Yeah, One argument is that the President Trump is wrong
and what he says is wrong. And so let's just
be clear that that's what the argument is based on.
Because President Trump has clearly an unequivocally said hundreds of
times at this point that the pardons are no good.
Speaker 1: So there are good Yeah, so President President Trump's own
attorney general is arguing against the president, who they serve
at the president's will.
Speaker 2: Yes, yes, that is what's happening now, in effect, because
the President says pardons are no good, and DJ is saying, well,
we don't want to do anything that could attack the
use of the auto pen or the you know, these
types of parties, because you know, we don't want to
limit presidential authority in any way, which is in effect
saying the President is wrong, that the pardons are good.
Speaker 3: And so that's what's happening.
Speaker 2: And I don't know if that's gotten to the President's
attention yet, but I think he would be, you know,
not too happy to know that, you know, his own
Department of Justice is taking the opposite position as to him.
And then I think a second order argument is the
politics of it all. You know, they don't want to
bring these prosecutions for political reasons.
Speaker 1: Yeah, pardon me, but I mean that that's a ridiculous idea.
If that is indeed the case, that you don't want
to take away the authority of the president and the
use of the auto pen. What did Joe Biden do
and what did his underlings do By the broad use
of the autopen for all of these pardons and executive
orders and all of these dispensations, and then that absolutely
undercut the office of the presidency. I think the argument
ought to be that that broad use of the auto
pen was what you know, limited or eroded the power
of the executive branch.
Speaker 3: That's exactly right.
Speaker 2: There can only be one president at a time, and
all of the executive powers are vested in that individual,
and so by prosecuting these you were reasserting that foundational principle.
So I think they have it completely wrong. And there's
a massive distinction not only in the scale of the usage,
but the type of the usage. So people who disagree
with me will point to a you know, early two
thousands internal DOJA, non binding legal opinion. They basically says
you can use the autopen if the president's aware of it.
Speaker 3: Well, that's you know, a key distinctioneer.
Speaker 1: Because Biden was not aware in the New York Times, Yeah, yeah, definitely.
So we'll get to the political ramifications of all of this,
or the political calculus of all of.
Speaker 4: This in a bit.
Speaker 1: But you know, it is curious how the left, the
Democratic Party, tries to defend Biden as well as their
sycophants in the accomplice media. But let's talk about the
difference between the broad use of the autopen during the
Biden years and the use of the autopen by President
Trump in the first term or President Obama during his
term George H. W.
Speaker 4: Bush.
Speaker 1: As long as the autopen has been used, what I
think is lost in the conversation is there is a
dramatic difference in the use of the auto with those
other administrations compared to the Biden administration.
Speaker 2: That's one hundred percent correct. I mean, both of the
scale and the type. It was autopen by default, even
at times when the president was in the White House
and otherwise, you know, if things were running as they
said they were, there's no reason.
Speaker 3: He was unable to sign.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's it's interesting some of the explanations or examples
that they give. But then when you see and and
you hear what Joe Biden is saying about the widespread
use of the autopen and his absolute negligence in that,
I think it really drives home the point. So the
political ramifications, I mean, this, this thing does not happen
in a vacuum, and the president may very well be right,
and I think a lot of us agree that he
is correct on this. And not only is he right,
he's constitutionally correct on this. But what happens do you
think in an unhinged environment from the left, if all
of these pardons, particularly all of the pardons for the
very bad deep state actors and others are basically voided, what.
Speaker 2: Happens is a very good thing where we have accountability
meeted out for some of the biggest abuses in our
government's history, particularly as it relates to the weaponization of
government against their political enemies. Practically, I think one of
the issues that DOJ is, look, they can barely get
a COMI prosecution or indictment. Rather across the finish line,
you had disagreement not only the political ranks, but also
the failure to faithfully implement the orders down in the
eastern districts of Virginia. Now compounding that problem is we
don't have that many Trump appointed and confirmed US attorneys
in place, largely running off a system.
Speaker 3: Of holdover from the Biden and Obama years.
Speaker 2: And so I'm sure that calculates into the DOJ thinking
we don't have operational control of the Department of Justice
to actually effectuate something on this scale, and so we've
been calling on them to you know, get operational control.
But I do think that's another element here.
Speaker 5: If you want to be wealthy, you have to have
a wealthy mindset. How the watch doot on Wall Street
podcast with Chris Markowski every day Chris helps unpack the
connection between politics and the economy and how it affects
your wallet. Walk away from easy money. Ignore most of
the headlines because ninety five percent of them are garbage.
Always continued to reinvest. Whether it's happening in DC or
down on Wall Street, it's affecting you financially.
Speaker 3: Be informed.
Speaker 5: Check out the watch dot on Wall Street podcast with
Chris Markowski on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 1: That's also something that's in the hands of Congress, particularly Senate,
and you know the and the lags in all of that.
Now you've got this stupid political theater of the government
shutdown and a lot of distractions going on, But this
is a key constitutional issue. Let me ask you this.
Do you think that the Department of Justice is afraid
Is it afraid of roiling the political waters.
Speaker 4: The you know, the the.
Speaker 1: Sort of potential that could happen. And again I'm not
excusing any of this. The law is the law, and
what we've seen in this country and the weaponization of
justice and what we've seen in the unruly acts from
the left out in our streets and with all kinds
of policy that has led to, you know, the violation
of laws. The rule of law is critical here and
that's what we're really talking about. But that does not
that does not mean that the left won't do what
the left does.
Speaker 3: The the.
Speaker 1: Rebellion insurrection, you know, laden mob that goes out in
the streets and is fighting Ice. What do you think
will happen on that front.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Well, the bad news is the violence is already here.
And the resistance movement as they call it, which is
nothing more than a violent obstruction movement, you know, drenched
in extremism and manifesting in domestic terrorism. It was here
when they shot President Trump in the face. It was
here when they shot and killed Charlie Kirk, it was
here when they assassinated Ice of officers. It's here, and
so we need not make decisions based on the fact
that we can avoid it, because it's already happening.
Speaker 3: I'll tell you the real danger.
Speaker 2: Of not doing it is you will lose faith in
the operation of government, and particularly the ability of a
political movement such as the America First movement, which is
still young, to actually generate real lasting impact on its
core promises. And one of the core promises accountability. And
I think the Department of Justice lost their footing in
the wake of the Epstein rollout and the bungling of that,
and has been a.
Speaker 3: Little bit scared of the shadows since.
Speaker 2: And so it's of existential importance in my view that
they actually proceed on this autopen route. And that's why
we've invested, you know, so much time and energy on it.
Speaker 3: It is it is important for so many different reasons.
Speaker 1: Our guest today is Mike Howell, president of the Oversight
Project and lead investigator behind the Autopen scandal. When all
of this stuff started breaking in March, it was Mike
and the Oversight Project leading that way. In fact, didn't
that turn into a pretty detailed documentary from Fox News
as well?
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, we got the Fox Nation documentary. It's great.
Speaker 2: It has a lot of you know, key key players
in this story. I suggest anyone who wants to hear
about the origins of it.
Speaker 3: Take a look.
Speaker 2: It's a shorter documentary, but I mean it's started in
the townhouse in Washington, c You with a bunch of
guys who knew something was wrong and did the thing
that not enough people do, which is roll up your
sleeves and engage in hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of
hours of work of document review, of legal analysis, of
probing data collection. And that's what makes the Oversight project,
I think, something that I'm so intensely proud of, because
that has been the missing link. You know, everyone you
know to to some credit, you know is out there
for you know, the big flashy headlines and the big
cable news appearances, but you need guys that are really
doing the scrubs.
Speaker 3: And we're scrubbing.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and it's it's a pretty exhaustive process. Exhaustive and exhausting. Now,
what what I suppose really got your attention from this
one hundred page report from the House Committee on Oversight
and Government Reform. As you mentioned, they picked up on
some of the things that you were able to uncover
earlier this year. What really stands out from that report
for you?
Speaker 2: Yeah, so you know I've been tracking the investigation for
a long time and working obviously closer to the extent
allowable with Congress and their staff, and my staff and
their staff have been communicating on.
Speaker 3: A daily basis on this.
Speaker 2: The biggest disclosures, I think relate to just the overwhelming
breadth of evidence that all pointed.
Speaker 3: To support the same conclusions.
Speaker 2: Now, there are a couple individual pieces that stand out, like,
you know, the four million payment if Biden were to
stay in the race and win, and so he starts
to get it understand the incentive base of people to lie,
and so that was that was big.
Speaker 3: Another big thing, and this was.
Speaker 2: You know, all I really cared about for the purposes
of this report were two things. One, it needs to
say that the parties are no good. It said that
that is great because that is true. The second thing
that I was a little disappointed in, and I'm sure
there's some politics behind this, is the recommend for DJ
to initiate a review. I don't want to review. I
want prosecutions. The review is our investigation, it's Comber's investigation.
You know, Trump has already ordered reviews from DJ and
even the White House.
Speaker 3: I'm done reviewing it's time for action, all right.
Speaker 1: With all of that said, and what you've talked about
with the DJ and in some ways being scared of
its own shadow, is it time for new leadership there?
Speaker 2: You know, I can't go that far. You know that
it's the president's prerogative. I respected the president's decision. But
you know, who am I to play musical chairs or
suggest cabinet officials what I want to for the things
the president has promised and said to be well executed.
And maybe they can execute it, maybe they can turn
the ship around and do it. But I'm not here
today to call for any resignations or anything like that.
Speaker 3: But I know a lot of other people have.
Speaker 2: But you know that that's not not a place I'm
on ago just yet.
Speaker 4: Yeah, understandable.
Speaker 1: Do you see moving forward in increased will from the
some of the the antllary players in this as well?
You know, because we're going to we're going to see,
as you mentioned before, maybe an urgency from some of
the violent offenders that are out there. I mean, who
is really keeping track of the recidivism and the return
of violent crime?
Speaker 2: Right if one of these people that that was released
under the Trump administration with the bad part and kills somebody.
That could be a scandal that we don't want to
deal with. And obviously, you know the most important thing
is you don't want someone to be murdered as a
result of it, right, It would I think cause a
lot of heartburn.
Speaker 1: Well, I mean it's exactly the same kind of thing
at a larger scale that we saw with the wide
open borders, you know, in the invasion that we saw
from you know, these these policies they end up hurting people,
They end up hurting American citizens and you know, as
you mentioned before, there's no accountability. Speaking of the accountability question,
how much does this latest report from the House Committee
indict the accomplice media.
Speaker 3: Uh, it's a complete indictment.
Speaker 2: I mean, the thing that really grinds my gears is, uh,
you know, there's that book by Axios and Jake Tapper
that came out and said, oh, you know, we were
just lied to and didn't know what was going on
when they're the part of the cover up. But then
the un seriousness in which you know, political staff here
in d C showered them with adulation and exclusives and
new information and just fed the beast that lied to
them the whole time, and so the is broken. But
I wish that there's more efforts by the administration not
to try to rehabilitate them through, you know, a profit
maximizing exercise of the book tour for the people who
lie to us the whole time.
Speaker 4: Yeah, why is that? Why?
Speaker 1: Why not just the administration, it's Republicans in general. Why
do they never learn the lesson that they're never going
to get a fair deal? From the New York Times,
from CNN, from the Washington Post, you name it up
and down the line.
Speaker 3: Good question. I don't know. I do not know the
answer to that question. And you know, I watched, you know,
these these new media press gaggles and stuff they have.
Speaker 2: To me, it looks like a kid's table they're setting up,
and then they treat the legacy media as the adults
with the real stuff.
Speaker 1: Some of your your previous findings are are very interesting,
and I'd like to delve into those a little bit
and get a little more detail on them. As you
found and you were reporting, the Biden Whitehouse first deployed
the auto pen on day five of the Biden administration
to sign a proclamation day five, So this wasn't something
that you know, all the presidents slowing down by the
end of his four year term. This was something that
his handlers believed he needed right out of the gate.
Speaker 3: That's right. I mean, there's no doubt.
Speaker 2: That those closest to hiding in the basement Biden after
the stolen election knew that they would have to handle
this presidency different than any other. And the systems were
in place from the very deco understanding that they had
a diminished candidate. And that's the story of the administration
and another area of constitutional abuse. I mean, the twenty
fifth Amendment was designed for situations just like this. If
the president is incapacitated, you have to rely on the
patriotism character of the cabinet and the vice president to
make that decision. They instead, an elaborate exercise to evade
the invocation of the twenty fifth Amendment was on display
for the entirety of the Biden administration, and it had
very practical and awful consequences. I think it allowed the
opening for a really radical left to take advantage of
the fact that Biden wasn't there. And you hope that
maybe you know, this radical transformation of Biden has publicly
understood late in life. You know, we were told he
was a moderate, we were told he was an old guard, senate,
institutionalist type guy. He did not govern that way. And
I think that it's because of the auto pen and
how they were able to get away with it. I
happened to think that if Biden knew the policies would
open the border to that much death and destruction, he
wouldn't have done it. And I think it's things like
the autopen that allowed it to happen.
Speaker 4: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I mean, I have a hard time believing that he
was that cognizant quite frankly. I mean maybe a the
first year there was something still there, but we saw
just a rapid decline and it was happening before our eyes,
and we didn't need George Clooney in a New York
Times editorial to tell us that. But will I will
say this, if if we were counting on, as you noted,
the patriotism and the integrity of the people around Joe Biden,
his cabinet secretaries, America was screwed all along. So now
we understand that the facts are the facts. So the
question is will there be and you've talked about it.
Will there be people standing around this president, President Trump,
standing up and being patriotic for accountability?
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think there are. There are a few, like
with any administration.
Speaker 2: And this was a problem in the first go around,
right like there was all these promises as it related
to Hillary Clinton and so forth. And you know, I
worked on Capitol Hill in the Obama years and we
had a whole bunch of stuff we wanted to see
through Benghazi, you get on the list, fast and furious,
all the scandals of that era. But the decision was
made at that time that you know, they weren't going
to look backwards, they.
Speaker 3: Were going to look forward.
Speaker 2: Is the expression that's commonly used, and that's a standard
political instinct for when people get in and get confirmed,
to get through the campaign cycles. You know, you start
delivering on things you didn't say you were going to
do and you ignore the things you said you were
going to do. And I think there are individuals that
have that impulse now within the administration. You know, you
get it to be a cabinet secretary. You want to
execute on your agenda. You don't want to be playing cleanup,
doing doctor view and investigating your own staff is hard
work in more ways than one. That being said, there
are people in the administration who know, who agree with me,
and I think most of the voters out there that
this is what we voted for, and if we don't
deliver on it, it's going to be a black mark.
I'm talking about people like Ed Martin at the Department
of Justice. I'm talking about you know, Stephen Miller's of
this camp. Lindsay Halligan certainly is.
Speaker 3: I think jd.
Speaker 2: Vance, the Vice President, understands I think President Trump understands it,
obviously more and more than others. But President Trump, you know,
is a busy man. He needs people to faithfully implement,
you know, not only his key promises, but also his
instincts and to fall through on these things.
Speaker 1: He is an extraordinarily busy man. And we've seen that
just in the last several weeks alone, let alone you know,
nearly the coming on the first year of his term.
You mentioned some other things in your report as you
look through it that I think are pretty astounding. As
you note the details on it, President Biden appears to
have hand signed all but one bill into law. President
Biden's signature very significantly across the enrolled bills and appears
to deteriorate as his cognitive abilities to climb throughout his presidency.
So it is it Biden signing these bills? Is it
somebody else? Is it auto pen Ultimately, I don't know.
Speaker 2: I don't know the answer to that. He's obviously on
camera signing some things at certain points. Yeah, but you know,
I'll leave it to the instincts of people who watch,
you know, the video we put out as to whether
that is a single signature applied differently over time, or
a different hand signing those documents.
Speaker 1: Well, President Trump basically on his first day in office,
in his first week in office, undid a lot of
the damage that Biden or his team did through executive orders.
But is there anything out there executive order wise, in
a specific example, if you would, that could definitely be
no and void because it was autopen.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I think some of the foreign policy executive voters definitely
fit that category. I think there are sanctions still on
the books that rolled out in the last days of
the administration that are still having like you know.
Speaker 3: Lingering effects.
Speaker 2: And so yes, President Trump virtually, you know, we're sending
all of the Biden executive orders, but they're still and
I call this the ghost of the autopen you know,
lingering second order and third order effects from those executive
orders that are hard to de implement, de implement.
Speaker 4: This is the auto pen scandal.
Speaker 1: Tell us about justice in America because when you think
about these, the most record number of pardons and commutations
that you have seen from any administration and far away record.
I mean, it was insane just how you know, many
of these pardons and commutations are going out, But what
is that? What does that communicate to Americans about the
system of law and order injustice in this country.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's a deeply embarrassment embarrassing event in which the
United States acted out of complete accordance with their constitution.
We've invaded countries for less in the name of building
democracies and constitutional republics, and so it should be a
sobering reminder that what we have is not permanent.
Speaker 3: And we have a playbook and a rule book.
Speaker 2: We have a strong foundation in history, but those things
have to be implemented by men of character. And when
you have a political project, such as a Democrat party,
intent on tearing those things down, they're not necessarily going
to do that, and so if you're a constitutionally minded patriot,
it should be a five alarm fire that the rules
aren't self enforcing and that we're up against something that
is not just the politics of the day and whatever
the issue du jour is, but of a very system
of government and way of life.
Speaker 1: How much is going to depend on the coming steps.
We've talked about reviews and so in Washington, d C.
It is a world of reviews. Not sure how long
that process is going to take, but the past is
any indication that's going to take some time. But what
what do you think this scandal? How will it inform
administrations moving forward?
Speaker 4: Yeah, well I don't.
Speaker 2: I think there'll be some safeguards around the autopen. I
think that, for for sure, no one wants to deal with,
you know, the historical, you know, absolute drubbing that Biden
has taken as a result of this issue for that
purpose alone, I think there'll be less frivolous use of
the autopen. But ultimately, if we don't solve for it
through prosecution and accountability, the real bad actor here is us,
because what good is it to just point out a
problem and then demonstrate that there's not the appetite or
political will to solve it.
Speaker 3: And so I think it'll be credibility destroying for both
the right and the left. If theft.
Speaker 2: For the left it'll be you know, this is how
you guys ruled. It was out of order, it was
just insane. But for the right it'll be what good
are you guys if you can't present an alternative to it.
Speaker 1: That's a good, very good point. And so if something
in the way of accountability doesn't happen by the mid terms,
how do you think that might influence the midterm elections?
Speaker 3: Yeah, people aren't going to turn out.
Speaker 2: Unless we execute on the key promises of President Trump's agenda,
people won't have a reason to turn out. You know,
whether that's massive importations, whether it's accountability, whether it's you know,
the economy being back on track, all those things. We
need to demonstrate to people who have joined this new
political coalition that their participation in the political process says
will manifest in actual changes, that it's not just noise.
And here's the rub President Trump has, you know, is
defining feature is keeping his promises. So I think he
intends to you will do that, But he's going to
need some help.
Speaker 1: Well, we've talked around the edges of this. You know,
I've been avoiding this question for some time because it
really is the meat and potatoes of all of this.
What do you think this Biden autopen scandal will mean
for Kareem Jean Pierre's book tour.
Speaker 2: Well, first off, I have a zero percent faith she
wrote a word of that book, so we'll call it
the ghostwriter's book.
Speaker 4: Well, no, the autopen book.
Speaker 3: Oh, the autopen book. Yeah, there you go.
Speaker 2: I don't know, and I'm not going to waste any
brain cells even wondering about it. But you know who
knows the kind of weird projects she's on right now?
I see the clips on accidents. I was happy to
have forgotten about her until she re emerged.
Speaker 1: Sorry to bring it up again, I could, of course,
because if we don't laugh, we cry in this business.
But let me ask you this off of the auto
pen scandal. You know, this is an administration that has
to deal with all kinds of areas of accountability. You
mentioned James Comy before, and I'm curious, as you've watched
this play out, John Brennan, the others, do you believe
there will be any accountability on that front. And what
do you think of the DOJ's case at this time
with James Comy.
Speaker 2: I think Lindsay Halligan is a hero for air dropping
in and to bring it where there otherwise was in
political will to get it done. I do think the
case suffers from the you know, well intentioned and good
faith effort to get it in as fast as possible,
and I think it'll allow Comy some wiggle rim. I
think it's an uphill battle, it's a worthy fight. I
celebrate it, and I will do whatever we can to
help make it successful. But it needs to be the
beginning of the beginning, and certainly now the end of
the beginning or anything less. The scale of actions need
to ramp up drastically, and we can't just you know,
take these these one offs as enough.
Speaker 3: We need to see a sustained march. And I think
when you look at something.
Speaker 2: Like the Arctic frost revelations that are coming out you
know now, and people realize the breadth and intensity of
what the FBI was doing to their political opponents, you
really start to you can't ignore that the FBI was
taken over in a corporate way, and that the Accountability
spreads out for much more than just the names that
you and I and your listeners may know, but to
you know, mid level and even you know brick agents,
and so there's a lot of accountability.
Speaker 3: That needs to happen.
Speaker 2: And I, you know, I am a huge supporter of
President Trump, but I will disagree with these premature celebrations
that institutions like the FBI are better now and completely fixed. Well,
there certainly are bet what you know, than they were.
They're under some political management, but they aren't reformed, and
the back guys are still there.
Speaker 1: Oh, the deep state goes very, very deep. And I
guess that's the you know, the issue with all of
these areas and the strengthening of the deep state under
Biden's watch, I don't think that's the right But during
his administration, I mean, he he deepened and he was
there of course when you know, the Intelligence Community assessment
first came out in sixteen led by his boss at
the time, Obama, and then of course Russia collusion that
came out of that, and the hurricane and James Komy
and the rest of them. But can you imagine how
much more smug I know, it sounds impossible, But how
much more smug James Coomy would be if he escapes
the conviction here?
Speaker 2: Yeah, my first thing I told our team is if
jam Comy escapes, I think.
Speaker 3: He's running for president.
Speaker 2: So if you want to have a nightmare tonight, think
about that before you go to bed.
Speaker 1: Wow, that has set my nightmares, that's for sure. A
final question for you. I appreciate your time and obviously
all the good work that you and the Oversight Project
have done over the last several months in this regard,
but does clearly history is not going to be kind
to Joe Biden. We know more and more about the
auto pen and just what an absentee landlord he was.
What does history say do you think about Joe Biden
after these latest revelations?
Speaker 2: History is written by the victors. I think it depends
on who wins. And if we turn this machine of
the weaponized federal government back over to the left, he'll
be rehability. He'll be presented as a flawed yet valiance
figure that interrupted the Trump agenda, which was a transient
moment in history.
Speaker 3: Now that's a history I don't want to read one day.
Speaker 2: I want to read a history where President Trump set
into motion a multi generational return of control of the
United States of America to the people and away from
this extremist and radical leftism that we see today.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and Americans absolutely know what they experienced over that
four year time period, and that is why they voted
the way they did in November of two thousand and
twenty four. Thanks to my guest today, Mike Cowell, president
of the Oversight Project and lead investigator behind the auto
pen scandal, you've been listening to another edition of The
Federalist Radio Hour. I'm Matt Kittles, Senior Elections correspondent at
the Federalist.
Speaker 4: We'll be back soon with more.
Speaker 1: Until then, stay lovers of freedom and anxious for the fray.
Speaker 2: I heard the fame voice the Reason, and then it
faded away.