Trump’s Pardons Scrutinized After Signature Similarities Emerge

The legitimacy of recent pardons issued by former President Donald Trump is under scrutiny following the discovery of strikingly similar signatures on the documents. The U.S. Department of Justice updated its online records this week to replace these signatures with distinct variations after online observers raised concerns. The pardons, granted on November 7, 2023, included individuals such as former New York Mets player Darryl Strawberry, former Tennessee House Speaker Glen Casada, and former New York police sergeant Michael McMahon.

In response to the situation, administration officials attributed the issue to “technical errors” and staffing challenges. Chad Gilmartin, a spokesperson for the Department of Justice, stated that the website was corrected after one of Trump’s signatures was mistakenly uploaded multiple times. He emphasized, “There is no story here other than the fact that President Trump signed seven pardons by hand.”

The controversy has gained traction as critics point out the apparent similarities in the signatures. Online commentators noted that the original documents showed a lack of individual signature characteristics, raising questions about the authenticity of the signatures. Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesperson, defended the process, stating that Trump “signed each one of these pardons by hand as he does with all pardons.”

The timing of the pardons coincides with a broader campaign by Trump allies to challenge the validity of clemency granted by Joe Biden, many of which were signed with an autopen. Trump has repeatedly claimed that Biden is unaware of the content of documents bearing his name, contrasting his own hands-on approach to signing executive orders.

As part of this latest wave of clemency, Trump recently pardoned Changpeng Zhao, a cryptocurrency businessman convicted of money laundering. Despite admitting he “had no idea who he is,” Trump described Zhao as a victim of a “witch-hunt” by the Biden administration. Zhao had previously served four months in prison.

The discussion around the signatures has drawn the attention of handwriting experts, such as Thomas Vastrick, president of the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners. He noted, “A basic axiom of handwriting identification science is that no two signatures are going to bear the exact same design features in every aspect.” Legal scholars have also weighed in, asserting that the use of an autopen does not negate the validity of a pardon if the president’s intent is clear.

Legal historian Frank Bowman emphasized that the essence of a pardon lies in the intention behind it. He remarked, “Any re-signing is an obvious, and rather silly, effort to avoid comparison to Biden.”

The pardons granted earlier this month included significant figures such as Casada, who was sentenced to three years in prison for corruption, and Strawberry, who faced criminal charges in the 1990s. McMahon was recently sentenced for his involvement in a campaign described by a federal judge as “transnational repression.”

Despite the controversy surrounding the signatures, the Republican critiques of Biden’s autopen usage are likely to persist. In a recent statement, Republicans in Congress labeled Biden’s alleged diminished faculties and use of the autopen as significant scandals. They have urged a full investigation into the matter, suggesting that actions signed without proper documentation should be deemed invalid.

The House Oversight Committee reported that senior White House officials were unaware of who operated the autopen, leading to concerns about potential abuse. In contrast, Republicans have characterized Trump’s possible use of an electronic signature as legitimate.

As the investigation unfolds, Dave Min, a California Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, has called for clarity regarding leadership in the White House, stating, “We need to better understand who is actually in charge.”

The events surrounding these pardons and the signatures will likely continue to engage both supporters and critics of the former president as they reflect on the implications for governance and accountability. The Associated Press contributed to this report.