Janice R. Andrews
The Allegation: It’s Suspicious That Biden’s Withdrawal Letter Doesn’t Have the Presidential Seal
A Facebook post dated July 21st has garnered a lot of attention, suggesting that President Joe Biden’s letter announcing his intention to withdraw from the presidential run is suspect since it does not have the presidential seal. The tweet asks, “Where’s the Presidential Seal?” and includes an image of Biden’s letter of withdrawal from X, previously Twitter.
More than 600 people have shared this article, and several commenters have suggested that the missing seal is proof of something worse. Remarks like “He never really was president!” “Therefore, there is no seal!” and “His signature differs and has no seal.” The question “Who really knows what’s going on?” reveals the underlying suspicion.
Lack of Context: Factual Check Rating
The inferred assertion that Biden’s withdrawal letter is suspect because it doesn’t have the presidential seal is untrue and unsupported by evidence. The absence of the presidential seal on this paper has a rational reason.
Presidential Seal Used by Biden on Campaign Materials
On 21 July, President Joe Biden said on social media that he was withdrawing his candidature for reelection. Following a badly regarded debate performance, many Democrats expressed worry for his capacity to challenge former President Donald Trump for the presidency, and ultimately culminated in weeks of pressure leading up to this decision.
The letter lacks the presidential seal and was shared on Biden’s campaign social media channels instead of his official ones. This exclusion is in line with previous correspondence that the Biden campaign has made public, such as one that was sent out earlier in July. On the other hand, letters and remarks shared on his official presidential accounts conspicuously display the presidential seal.
Professor emeritus Michael Traugott of the University of Michigan explained that the Hatch Act is probably the reason behind the presidential seal’s disappearance. This federal statute forbids government workers from engaging in partisan political activity with their official employment. “The Biden people interpreted this announcement as a campaign-related event,” Traugott clarified. The presidential seal and other White House accoutrements are prohibited from being used by the Hatch Act.
The Hatch Act and Historical Context
The Hatch Act does not apply to the president or vice president, but a number of Biden administration officials have been accused of breaking it. Prominent instances comprise of former White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain and White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre. According to Traugott, Biden’s team probably took additional care to prevent such charges.
Several senior officials in the administration of former President Donald Trump were previously found guilty of breaking the Hatch Act, particularly at the 2020 Republican National Convention, according to a federal watchdog’s probe.
A 1972 executive order governing the use of the presidential seal was signed by President Richard Nixon. Political campaigns are not included in this directive, however the president is allowed to utilise the seal.
Recap and Further Verification of the Information
Biden’s withdrawal letter lacks the presidential seal, which is in line with other campaign materials and probably a compliance step for the Hatch Act. The argument that Biden’s declaration of his resignation and his presidency are questionable since there is no seal to certify it is unfounded.
The social media user who first shared the post was contacted by USA TODAY for comment, but they did not respond right away. Lead Stories refuted the assertion as well.
References:
- Joe Biden’s postings on X and other social media platforms;
- Michael Traugott, email conversation with USA TODAY on July 24;
- U.S. Office of Special Counsel
- Hatch Act Overview;
- National Archives,
- Executive Order 11649
It is evident from addressing the facts and giving historical background that Biden’s letter’s failure to include the presidential seal is not exceptional nor suggestive of any illegality. This incident should serve as a warning to examine such assertions closely and look for reliable facts.
