Trump’s Pardons Under Scrutiny for Signature Similarities

The clemency actions taken by former U.S. President Donald Trump are facing increased scrutiny after the Department of Justice replaced online documents that displayed strikingly similar signatures on recent pardons. The adjustments were made following observations by online commenters regarding the signatures on pardons granted to seven individuals, including former New York Mets player Darryl Strawberry, former Tennessee House Speaker Glen Casada, and former New York police sergeant Michael McMahon on November 7, 2023.

Officials from the Trump administration attributed the signature discrepancies to “technical” errors and staffing issues. They asserted that Trump had personally signed all the pardons. Chad Gilmartin, a spokesperson for the Justice Department, clarified that the website had been updated after one of Trump’s signatures was mistakenly uploaded multiple times due to these staffing problems. Gilmartin stated, “There is no story here other than the fact that President Trump signed seven pardons by hand and the Department of Justice posted those same seven pardons with seven unique signatures to our website.”

In an email to the press, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson reiterated that Trump personally signed each pardon. She suggested that the media should focus on investigating President Joe Biden‘s pardons, which were often signed using an autopen, rather than covering what she termed a “non-story.” This response comes amid ongoing efforts by the Trump administration to question the legitimacy of pardons granted by Biden, many of which were signed electronically.

The recent pardons, including those for Casada and Strawberry, have drawn attention due to their controversial backgrounds. Casada was sentenced to three years in prison for corruption related to taxpayer-funded mail businesses, while Strawberry had previously faced convictions for tax evasion and drug offenses. McMahon, on the other hand, was sentenced earlier this year for his involvement in activities described by a federal judge as a “campaign of transnational repression.”

Questions regarding the authenticity of Trump’s signature are compounded by a series of clemency orders issued in recent weeks. In one notable case, Trump pardoned Changpeng Zhao, a cryptocurrency businessman who pleaded guilty to enabling money laundering in 2023. Trump later remarked to CBS News that he had “no idea who he is” but had been informed that Zhao was a victim of a “witch-hunt” by the Biden administration.

According to Thomas Vastrick, a Florida-based handwriting expert and president of the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners, “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 experts emphasize that the validity of a pardon is determined by the president’s intent rather than the method of signing. Frank Bowman, a legal historian and professor emeritus at the University of Missouri School of Law, stated, “The key to pardon validity is whether the president intended to grant the pardon.”

The Justice Department’s adjustments to the signature documents have not quelled Republican criticisms of Biden’s use of autopen. Last month, Republican members of Congress condemned Biden’s alleged “diminished faculties,” labeling the use of an autopen as one of the “greatest scandals in U.S. history.” They expressed concerns that this practice calls into question all of Biden’s actions while in office, prompting them to request a thorough investigation from U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi.

In the wake of these developments, Dave Min, a California Democrat on the House oversight committee, has called for an investigation into the similarities in Trump’s signatures. He echoed Republican concerns about Biden, suggesting a need for clarity regarding who is truly managing the White House.

As the political landscape continues to evolve, the controversy surrounding Trump’s pardons and the signatures on the related documents exemplifies the ongoing tensions between the two administrations. The implications of these pardons, not only for the recipients but also for the broader political discourse, remain to be seen.