On a record-setting day, U.S. Customs and Border Protection reported the lowest number of apprehensions of illegal immigrants at the southern border, the Washington Examiner reported.
July 20 marked not only the lowest daily total but also contributed to the lowest monthly figures ever recorded in the history of border enforcement.
This stark reduction in illegal crossings is a result of policy reversals from the previous administration, showcasing an altered approach towards border security and management.
During the peak of illegal immigration under President Joe Biden, figures reached a staggering 14 million unauthorized residents in the U.S. in 2023. This represented 27% of the nation's total foreign-born population according to the Pew Research Center. The change in numbers is significant, considering President Donald Trump's current administration achieved unprecedented lows shortly after his return to office.
Under Biden, high numbers of migrants were characteristic, with monthly figures consistently outpacing several past administrations. In contrast, the recent counts from Trump's administration reflect a drastically different scenario—an almost 93% drop in border apprehensions.
The recorded low of just 116 illegal immigrants seized on July 20, as announced by the House Committee on Homeland Security, signals a transformative shift in border patrol methodology.
July's total count at the Southwest border was 7,382, a figure that not only set the daily record but also established a new low for monthly totals. According to the committee overseeing Homeland Security, this reduction breaks the previous record set just the month before.
"This is the lowest monthly total in [Customs and Border Protection] history, breaking the previous record set last month," stated the committee at the monthly border briefing. This sentiment emphasizes how successive months under the Trump administration have continually lowered illegal crossings.
This drop in numbers is partly due to no inadmissible aliens being released into American communities for three consecutive months—a stark contrast to the thousands released in July of last year under Biden.
A noticeable decline was also seen in the treacherous Darien Gap route, a common path for migrants coming from South and Central America. Reports in May highlighted a 99.5% decrease in individuals attempting this perilous journey, marking another success in curtailing unsafe and illegal migration.
Such significant declines in illegal crossings point to effective border security measures and possibly more stringent policies under Trump's administration. These measures seem to be disincentivizing attempts to cross into the U.S. illegally, thus reducing the risks associated with undocumented travel.
Rep. Andrew Garbarino of New York emphasized the effectiveness of these new policies, "With Southwest border apprehensions at a record low due to the reversal of the Biden-Harris administration’s open-borders policies, the days of human smugglers, gang members, known or suspected terrorists, and drug traffickers taking advantage of our borders and communities are over," he declared.
These record-setting numbers may reshape the discussion around immigration and border enforcement in the United States. As the current administration continues to enforce and possibly expand its strategies, these might serve as benchmarks for future operations and policy formulations.
The visible successes of these new strategies reflect a broader shift from reactive to preemptive border security measures, focusing not just on apprehending migrants but preventing illegal entries altogether.
Observers and policymakers alike will be watching closely to see how sustained these trends are and what other changes in policy or enforcement might come as the administration progresses.
New York Attorney General Letitia (Tish) James spent months bragging about the civil penalty her case forced President Donald Trump to pay, only to have it completely backfired right in her face this week.
According to Breitbart, an appeals court handed Trump a massive win by throwing out the staggering $364 million penalty he was ordered to pay earlier this year, marking yet another epic legal victory for the president and his team of defense lawyers.
Five judges in New York’s mid-level Appellate Division ruled this week that they believe the original verdict against Trump was "excessive."
Two of the judges on the panel said that the excessive fine "violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution."
The court's bombshell ruling was shared this week, and it made clear that it believes that the original penalty was ridiculous.
"While the injunctive relief ordered by the court is well crafted to curb defendants’ business culture, the court’s disgorgement order, which directs that defendants pay nearly half a billion dollars to the State of New York, is an excessive fine that violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution," Judges Dianne Renwick and Peter Moulton wrote in the court's opinion.
Breitbart News Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow posted on X after the decision came down, reminding readers that it was based on the same argument he made in one of his books.
🚨 BREAKING: Appeals court throws out $515 million(!!) civil fraud penalty against President Donald Trump.
The judge ruled the penalty was cruel and unusual, violating the Eighth Amendment.
This is EXACT argument I made in my NYT bestseller BREAKING THE LAW!
Great news.…
— Alex Marlow (@AlexMarlow) August 21, 2025
While most of Trump's recent legal wins have come via the U.S. Supreme Court, the appelate courts have also generally been kind to the Trump administration.
The president's only real legal roadblock at this point is the federal judiciary, where he's stopped at nearly every turn by mostly Democrat-appointed federal judges.
Users across social media weighed in on the appellate court's bombshell ruling in Trump's favor.
"What about disbarring the corrupt judge. This was an absurd ruling," one X user wrote.
Others called for AG James to face consequences.
"Lock Tish Up! Lock Tish Up!" another X user wrote.
President Donald Trump and his administration aren't afraid to let go of people who no longer serve their agenda, and a high-ranking Defense official just found that out this week.
According to the New York Post, Air Force Lt. Gen. Jeffrey Kruse, head of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), was fired this week in the wake of a DIA bomb-damage assessment report that was ultimately leaked to the media.
The report claimed that President Trump's strikes on Iran earlier this year only set the rogue regime back a few months regarding its nuclear program, contrary to what the Trump administration has claimed.
A senior Defense official reportedly told the Post that Kruse "will no longer serve as DIA Director."
The firing reportedly came down from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth over what was described as a "loss of confidence" in the three-star general, according to congressional sources.
The damage assessment report after the strikes on Iran, which were carried out by stealth bombers, was reportedly leaked to CNN.
The Post noted:
The DIA’s classified, “low confidence” estimation of the effectiveness of the June 21 airstrikes on Iran’s Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz nuclear facilities was leaked to CNN three days after American B-2 stealth bombers and cruise missiles bombarded the sites.
The report, which was based on intel gathered just a day after the bombings, suggested that Iran could recover from it and bring its nuclear program back online within months.
President Trump was not happy about the report or the fact that it was leaked to the press.
"AN ATTEMPT TO DEMEAN ONE OF THE MOST SUCCESSFUL MILITARY STRIKES IN HISTORY," in a Truth Social post at the time. "THE NUCLEAR SITES IN IRAN ARE COMPLETELY DESTROYED!"
Special envoy Steve Witkoff was especially fired up regarding the DIA's report, calling it "treasonous" and "outrageous."
The Post noted:
Special envoy Steve Witkoff charged that any suggestion the US did not achieve its military objectives in Iran is “completely preposterous,” in an interview on Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle” at the time.
Witkoff went on to slam the leaking of the DIA assessment as “outrageous” and “treasonous,” and called for an investigation to find the person responsible for it in order to hold them accountable.
Kruse's firing was only the latest in the Trump administration's efforts to clean house in the U.S. intelligence community.
DNI Director Tulsi Gabbard announced earlier in the week a major overhaul at her agency and others in the world of U.S. intel.
Ghislaine Maxwell had what many called a very rare talk with Todd Blanche, one of the Department of Justice's top-ranking officials, with many others speculating that the conversation could have had to do with potential immunity negotiations.
According to the Daily Caller, the Trump administration released a full transcript of her interview with Blanche this week, revealing all of the questions she was asked about deceased, convicted child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein and her role.
In the transcript, it was revealed that Maxwell said she didn't recall former President Bill Clinton receiving a massage aboard Epstein's private jet.
She also revealed during the two-day interview that she doesn't believe President Donald Trump ever sent Epstein a birthday card.
During the interview, Blanche dialed in on several questions related to Bill Clinton.
“Do you know whether, for example, President Clinton ever received a massage?" he asked at one point.
Her answer was quite wordy, to say the least.
“I don’t believe he did,” Maxwell said, prompting Blanche to ask her if she doubted her answer.
“Well, because I don’t—so that’s a good question. The time that Epstein and President Clinton spent together, the only times I believe—well, obviously they traveled. There was that, you know, the plane, they went on the plane 26 times or whatever … So they spent time on the plane together, and I don’t believe there was ever a massage on the plane. So that would’ve been the only time that I think that President Clinton could have even received a massage. And he didn’t, because I was there."
The Daily Caller noted:
Photographs allegedly taken in September 2002 showed Clinton receiving a massage from Epstein accuser Chauntae Davies while he was traveling to Africa for a humanitarian trip on Epstein’s plane. Another accuser, Virginia Giuffre, told an attorney that Clinton visited Epstein’s private island, though she did not say that the former president committed any crimes.
As far as Trump, Maxwell said she always believed him to be a "gentleman," noting that she never saw Trump in a compromising position.
"I actually never saw the President in any type of massage setting. I never witnessed the President in any inappropriate setting in any way. The President was never inappropriate with anybody," Maxwell said.
"In the times that I was with him, he was a gentleman in all respects."
It'll be interesting to see what else comes of the Trump admminstration's release of the rest of the Eptstein-related files.
In a decisive session spurred by recent devastating events, the Texas House of Representatives passed a comprehensive six-bill package aimed at bolstering flood disaster responses and preventive measures in the Texas Hill Country, as Just the News reports, a move supported by President Donald Trump.
The legislative package, designed to enhance future disaster preparedness, includes critical reforms in emergency communications and safety protocols for youth camps.
Initially, progress on this vital legislation was stalled when over 50 Democrats withdrew, leading to the loss of a required quorum and halting the legislative process during an earlier session. This political maneuver effectively delayed deliberation on the flood relief package, among other key legislative items.
Subsequent to the political standoff, another special session was convened, eventually leading to the restoration of quorum. This allowed for the passage of several important bills, including a controversial congressional redistricting bill and the crucial flood relief package meant to address the aftermath of the July 4 Hill Country flood disaster.
The adopted legislation includes House Bill 1, which implements new safety protocols for youth camps, and Senate Bill 2, which reinforces disaster preparedness across various agencies. Also passed was House Bill 3, which calls for the creation of the Texas Interoperability Council to enhance communication during emergencies.
Other bills passed include Senate Bill 5 and House Bill 20, which allocate funds for disaster relief and related infrastructure improvements, and House Bill 22, which provides resources for local governments to invest in early warning systems and other necessary improvements.
House Speaker Dustin Burrows praised the legislation, stating that it addresses significant needs for improved systems and processes to prepare for future emergencies. Burrows highlighted the legislature's commitment to ensuring the state's readiness in the face of disaster.
Contrastingly, State Rep. Brian Harrison expressed significant concerns about several of the bills, voting against four out of the six. Harrison criticized the increased size and scope of government these bills represented and questioned the potential adverse impacts on existing processes and the autonomy of local governments.
Harrison specifically targeted amendments made to HB 1, lamenting that these changes, facilitated by Democrat modifications, could potentially lead to the unnecessary closure of youth camps that were otherwise safe from flood threats.
Beyond the immediate aftermath of the flood, Harrison's critiques continued with Senate Bill 2, arguing it introduces unnecessary occupational licenses and could undermine the role of local voters by making it easier to remove their elected officials.
His critique extended to House Bill 3, which he said could lead to unchecked government expansion, and House Bill 22, which he feared would improperly extend financial authorities related to emergency spending.
Despite these objections, the legislative session saw these bills pass by considerable majorities, with Harrison being a notable dissenter. The focus on expanding capacity for emergency response and streamlining disaster preparedness through these bills garnered bipartisan support from the majority of lawmakers.
Following the House’s approval, these bills are now poised for consideration in the Texas Senate, where they are expected to pass without significant opposition. Gov. Greg Abbott, having signaled his approval, is anticipated to sign the bills into law, formalizing the state’s escalated efforts to combat and prepare for natural disasters.
This legislative action marks a significant step towards strengthening Texas’ resilience against natural disasters, particularly in regions like the Hill Country, which are prone to flooding and other natural calamities. The expected outcomes include better-prepared communities and more robust infrastructure to manage future disaster scenarios effectively.
The legislative measures, once enacted, promise to bring not only immediate relief but also long-term improvements to disaster management and response strategies across the state, ensuring a more coordinated and efficient approach to handling emergency situations in Texas.
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) suddenly closed down a criminal inquiry into the Clinton Foundation in 2019, blindsiding a pair of tax experts who came to the agency with evidence of wrongdoing, according to e-mails reviewed by Just The News.
The two whistleblowers, John Moynihan and Larry Doyle, have alleged for years that the Clinton Foundation was involved in pay-to-play corruption with foreign governments. They submitted 6,000 pages of evidence to the FBI and IRS in 2017 and testified to Congress about their findings the following year.
Between January and April 2019, the whistleblowers met several times with IRS agents who appeared to show interest in their claims, according to the whistleblowers' notes.
Contemporaneous, partially redacted e-mails appear to show the IRS took the matter seriously enough to begin a criminal investigation. Indeed, an agent in New Jersey requested that a dedicated server be set up to upload the evidence.
“[Redacted] and I are working on a case that involves a significant amount of evidence,” the IRS email stated. “We would like to request a separate server that we can upload all this evidence onto this way it's all in one place and the three of us can view it. The three of us will need access to the server. If you need me to do anything on my end, please let me know," the agent wrote.
Another IRS e-mail with the subject line "Foundations Call" alludes to "possible coordination of investigations in the Dallas and Newark Field Offices.”
After this initial flurry of activity, the whistleblowers began to encounter pushback that seemed to come out of nowhere.
IRS special agent Paul Bataille remarked to the pair that "we can't talk about CF," while IRS supervisory special agent Carlo Nastasi insisted a probe of the Clinton Foundation could not proceed without a cooperating witness.
When the whistleblowers provided a list of potential witnesses, they were told that the IRS "really is not in a position to pursue charitable organizations that engage in purposes and activities beyond their approved authority” and that “the IRS is not capable or staffed to oversee this activity."
The tone shift came as a surprise after several meetings that seemed to generate momentum, with discussion even proceeding to "specific venues where cases might be brought.”
Was this a deliberate cover-up? If so, it would not be the first time that investigations into the Clintons were scuttled.
FBI director Kash Patel recently declassified evidence showing that FBI and DOJ leadership stifled probes into the foundation in 2016, as Hillary Clinton campaigned for the White House.
Three different FBI field offices began looking into the Clintons' nonprofit before then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe intervened, giving orders not to proceed further without his permission.
Doyle and Moynihan have a trial in U.S. Tax Court scheduled for Dec. 1, where they will plead their case for receiving a whistleblower award, which is a financial incentive the IRS gives to those who report on tax violations.
The Republican National Committee elected a new leader Friday as its former chair, Michael Whatley, formally stepped aside to run for the Senate in North Carolina.
Whatley's replacement, Trump ally Joe Gruters, was elected chair at a meeting in Atlanta, Georgia on Friday. President Trump had endorsed Gruters, a Florida state senator and longtime Trump ally, calling him a "MAGA warrior who has been with us from the very beginning."
With Trump's backing, Whatley was elected RNC chair in 2024 after Ronna McDaniel's troubled tenure, which saw Republicans slog through electoral losses and anemic fundraising.
2024 proved to be a banner year for Republicans as Trump pulled off the greatest political comeback in U.S. history and delivered historic gains with working-class voters, handing the GOP a trifecta -- control of the White House and both houses of Congress.
In an interview with the Daily Caller, Whatley touted the RNC's robust election integrity operation and a significantly improved financial outlook, which has left the party with $80 million in cash on hand. He credited Gruters, the RNC's former treasurer, with helping to replenish the party's coffers.
“He was the co-chair of the Florida campaign, along with Susie Wiles back in 2016 and has been one of the president’s steadfast allies on the committee,” Whatley explained.
“Over the last year, he has made sure that the stewardship that we’ve had in terms of fundraising and our financial shape -- which has never been better. So he’s an absolutely perfect pick. I think he’s going to be a very strong chair.”
Whatley is running to succeed Republican Sne. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who announced his retirement after clashing with Trump. Whatley has Trump's endorsement.
The Senate contest is expected to be a slugfest, with some predicting it will be the most expensive Senate race in American history.
While Whatley may be leaving the RNC, it remains firmly aligned with Trump and his priorities: namely, winning the midterms and keeping our elections safe from fraud.
“When we go back to the 2020 election cycle, there were really three states that I felt had an election integrity program that really succeeded. They were Ohio, Florida and North Carolina. And I put together that North Carolina program. Joe put together the Florida program,” Whatley told the Daily Caller.
Gruters was the co-chair of Trump's 2016 campaign in Florida, a onetime swing state that has turned solidly Republican under Trump's leadership.
In an interview with Fox, Gruters emphasized continuity and the centrality of Trump's vision in everything the party does.
"This is the president's party. This is the president's vision, overall. The party fully embraces the president, and we're gonna ride the president all the way to victory in the midterms, and we are going to win big," Gruters told Fox News.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that President Donald Trump can terminate millions of dollars in bogus health research that was geared toward diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.
The 5-4 ruling is a victory in Trump's effort to restore integrity to health science, which in recent years has come under attack from woke ideology. The court was split down the middle, with Chief Justice John Roberts, a conservative, siding with the liberal minority.
The case centers on $783 million in National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant funding that the Trump administration cut earlier this year, saying it was being spent on pseudoscientific, wasteful projects at odds with Trump's priorities.
The projects covered by the grants included a study on “Buddhism and HIV stigma in Thailand,” “intersectional, multilevel and multidimensional structural racism for English- and Spanish-speaking populations," and “anti-racist healing in nature to protect telomeres of transitional age BIPOC for health equity.”
The administration's cuts sparked furious backlash from Democrats, who said the White House was targeting critical, life-saving research.
In June, a district judge appointed by Ronald Reagan issued a bizarre, emotionally charged ruling that ordered the government to discharge the funding. U.S. District Judge William Young said the termination of the NIH grants was "arbitrary and capricious" and motivated by racial hatred.
"I’ve never seen government racial discrimination like this,” Young said at a hearing. “Have we no shame?”
The Trump administration said the district court's ruling ignored a Supreme Court precedent earlier this year that allowed Trump to gut education funding targeted to DEI.
A majority of the Supreme Court agreed that Young lacked jurisdiction to force payment of the NIH grants, clearing Trump to make the cuts.
Neil Gorsuch, in a short, separate opinion chastising Young, noted a pattern of defiance from lower courts -- a trend that has frustrated Trump and his supporters.
"This is now the third time in a matter of weeks this Court has had to intercede in a case 'squarely controlled' by one of its precedents," Gorsuch wrote.
The Trump win brought out another turgid outburst -- 21 pages long -- from liberal Ketanji Brown Jackson, who has written a number of furious dissents blasting her colleagues for ruling in Trump's favor.
“This is Calvinball jurisprudence with a twist. Calvinball has only one rule: There are no fixed rules. We seem to have two: that one, and this Administration always wins,” she wrote.
Another win for Trump and common sense. Pound sand, libs!
Movie producer Elon Dershowitz, known for the films Fallen and Reversal of Fortune, passed away on Sunday at age 64 after suffering a stroke, Deadline reported. The deceased was the son of author and famed attorney Alan Dershowitz, who represented President Donald Trump during his first impeachment.
"The Dershowitz Family is heartbroken to share that Elon had a stroke and passed away peacefully, having donated his organs, on August 17, 2025. He was surrounded by his loving family. He is survived by his father Alan and his stepmother Carolyn," Elon Dershowitz's obituary read.
The tragic passing of Elon Dershowitz was likely a shock to the 86-year-old attorney. However, Alan Dershowitz curiously reposted articles about his son's death rather than a tribute. On Tuesday, Alan Dershowitz posted the Zoom link to his son's funeral service on X, formerly Twitter with the caption simply describing the time and event, "11:00 Livestream for Elon’s funeral service."
11:00 Livestream for Elon’s funeral service:https://t.co/bzV9lUDwdm
— Alan Dershowitz (@AlanDersh) August 19, 2025
Elon Dershowitz had an impressive career, including the distinction of making the 1990 film Reversal of Fortune that garnered actor Jeremy Irons his only Oscar win. The film was based on a true-crime nonfiction book written by his father, Alan Dershowitz, with the script penned by Nicholas Kazan.
The book and film were based on the case of British attorney Claus von Bülow, who was convicted of attempting to kill his wife in 1982. She survived but was left in a persistent vegetative state. Following his book and the film, von Bülow hired Alan Dershowitz for his appeal, which resulted in a not guilty verdict.
The part of Alan Dershowitz was played by veteran actor Ron Silver. "He brought it to Hollywood," and the proud father said at the time, happy to share that the film was his son's idea. Kazan and director Barbet Schroeder would also win an Oscar for the film.
"He went around shopping it. He persuaded the company to do it. He helped pick the stars. He was a very important part of that film," Alan Dershowitz recalled. Elon Dershowitz also served as executive producer in 1998's star-studded thriller Fallen, featuring Denzel Washington, John Goodman, and Donald Sutherland.
Other assistant producer credits for the younger Dershowitz include Oliver Stone's 1987 classic Wall Street and Talk Radio in 1988. Elon Dirshowitz turned his father's book, The Advocate’s Devil, into a film and produced Pete Rose on Trial, Whose Curse Is Worse: Red Sox and Cubs on Trial, and Break Up the Bombers: Yankees on Trial for ESPN.
Elon Dershowitz didn't follow in his famous father's footsteps, which eventually led to his defense of Trump during the 2020 impeachment. Harvard Law School, where Alan Dershowitz has taught since 1964, noted that the professor used solid arguments based on the Constitution to stop the impeachment that sought to throw Trump out of office in the waning days of his administration.
Nevertheless, the father and son enjoyed strong family ties. Elon Dershowitz's passing was sudden, but it wasn't the first time his father had to grapple with losing him. When he was just 10 years old, Elon Dershowitz was diagnosed with a brain tumor that doctors said would be fatal before he reached his 13th birthday, a milestone marked by a Bar Mitzvah in his Jewish faith.
It was a major blow to Alan Dershowitz at the time. According to The New Yorker, Alan Dershowitz was in Palo Alto on sabbatical in December 1971, attempting to write a book when his son was diagnosed. He was obsessed with finding a cure for his son's illness. "I couldn’t concentrate on my book," he recalled about the time in his life.
"My marriage, which had been suffering for several years even before our trip to California, was now in deep trouble," Alan Dershowitz said. Although he indeed lost his marriage to his first wife, Sue, who is Elon Dershowitz's mother, the son pulled through and lived another 54 years.
Alan Dershowitz is a prominent attorney and cultural figure, but tragedy touched his family just the same with Elon Dershowitz's sudden death. No matter how old they get, losing a child is a heartbreaking event for any parent to suffer, especially when it is so quick.
The Oversight Project government watchdog group says correspondence between then-President Joe Biden's staff and veteran Department of Justice officials indicated potential problems with his use of the autopen to sign pardons, Fox News reported. President Donald Trump's administration is scrutinizing thousands of pardons signed in the final days of Biden's presidency as some wonder if they're now null and void.
Besides the use of the autopen, Biden's pardons were unconventional in how they were structured in granting clemency to categories of criminals. In one of the emails now under review, then-Assistant Deputy Attorney General Bradley Weinsheimer raised concerns among other staff members about how 2,500 pardons signed by Biden were characterized.
"[T]he White House has described those who received commutations as people convicted of non-violent drug offenses," Weinsheimer said in a January 18 email. "I think you should stop saying that because it is untrue or at least misleading," he added. Some pardons were indeed granted to criminals who should have remained behind bars.
"As you know, even with the exceedingly limited review we were permitted to do of the individuals we believed you might be considering for commutation action, we initially identified 19 that were highly problematic," Weinsheimer continued in his email. Those included Ferrone Cliaborne and Terrence Richardson, who were "sentenced to life imprisonment for drug trafficking offenses during which a police officer was killed." The DOJ had "voluminous" documentation from law enforcment and the victims' families about why they should have been let free.
Kyle Brosnan, vice president at the Oversight Project, noted that the emails between Biden staffers and the Justice Department show that it was worried about "vague" language in the blanket pardons that seemed to be "illegally delegated" to his aides. There was also the problem of exactly which criminals would be pardoned if they were convicted of multiple offenses and which warrants would apply.
"Later in the email, he was like, ‘Look, I read the statement you put out in the president's name, saying you've released a bunch of non-violent drug offenders," Brosnan recounted of Weinsheimer's email. "You've got murderers on your list today. So I'm trying to figure out what the president wants here for this funky warrant.'"
At one point, a Department of Justice official told White House staff to stop with the line about nonviolent offenders "because it was untrue or at least misleading." Meanwhile, Biden admitted that the way he went about the pardons was irregular, as he recalled in July during an interview, which Brosnan cited.
"Mr. Biden did not individually approve each name for the categorical pardons that applied to large numbers of people, he and aides confirmed. Rather, after extensive discussion of different possible criteria, he signed off on the standards he wanted to be used to determine which convicts would qualify for a reduction in sentence," Brosnan said of Biden's admission.
It was only people like retired Gen. Mark Milley whom aides discussed by name, while the rest were up to White House staffers based on Biden's given criteria. "Biden did not pardon individual people, but laid out categories of types of people to release and left it to the staff to figure out who meets that criteria," Brosnan said, noting that even those lists were signed off on with an autopen.
From what Brosnan and others have uncovered about the process for pardons, it's clear that Biden wasn't picking out individuals to grant clemency to as it is. However, another revelation this week gives more fuel to the fire for those who believe Biden may not have been part of the decision-making process.
Questions about his mental fitness plagued Biden's entire presidency, and now it seems that keeping Biden isolated was part of the plan to hide that fact, if what former White House spokesman Ian Sams has to say is true. Sams, who sat down for an interview with House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, said that he only spoke personally with Biden twice in his two years on the job, the New York Post reported.
“This was a huge interview today, and I think it contradicts everything that the former Biden people are saying with respect to the president’s mental fitness," Comer said. Another White House staffer corroborated Sams's assertion, noting that he mainly got his "marching orders" from communications chief Anita Dunn.
Comer believes this could point to a broader issue. "It raises serious concerns and serious questions about who was calling shots at the White House. If the White House spokesperson was being shielded from the president of the United States, who was operating the Oval Office?" Comer said.
It's likely all of these pardons will stand despite the use of the autopen and the irregularities in how they were meted out. However, it vindicates those who were sounding the alarm about Biden's mental state while in office and hints at a possible conspiracy theory coming true if Biden wasn't the one making the decisions.