Polymarket.com/doge

[Winehole23]

The whistleblower’s disclosure appears to reveal a carefully planned, willful falsificationof federal government records in order to weaponize the SSA as a tool for immigrationenforcement. This scheme appears to violate federal data privacy and integrity laws and amountsto an egregious transgression of due process.

[Winehole23]

As detailed below, and attested to in the attached Declaration, DHS directed SSA to mark as dead first thousands and then millions of individuals without any do entation that they were in fact deceased, in violation of the Privacy Act and SSA regulations, policies, and procedures. Mr. Schofield refused to carry out this directive, which SSA counsel advised was illegal. Mr. Schofield was then privy to a conversation in which a DOGE member acknowledged that the reason that DHS was asking SSA to mark as dead these thousands then millions of people in SSA master databases was to force them to self-deport or to be captured when they went to SSA offices to try to prove they were alive. Such malevolent action is not only reprehensible, but also illegal.

[Winehole23]

According to public reporting, Acting Commissioner Dudek, at the urging of then Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, signed two memoranda “allowing the database action” that caused the “mostly Hispanic names and their attached Social Security numbers [to be] added to the Death Master File.” Despite the implication of former Secretary Noem’s memoranda that immigrants have SSNs illegally, any noncitizen immigrant who is authorized to work in the United States is legally eligible for an SSN.

[Winehole23]

cray

Moreover, DHS’s request to “kill off” these individuals came without any do entation showing they had actually died. Without any evidence of these 6,000+ individuals’ deaths, Mr. Schofield’s office refused to comply with the request from DHS. Unlike adding death dates to the records in the system for individuals who would have been at least 115 years old if they were alive and whom everyone assumed were in fact dead, this request was to kill off people that SSA had no reason to believe were dead.

[Winehole23]

Mr. Schofield consulted with a colleague in the Office of Policy and with counsel in the Office of General Counsel (“OGC”) to make sure he was correct in his initial analysis that the request was illegal. These individuals confirmed his view that adding dates of death to individuals’ records for whom there is no evidence of death would be contrary to law and regulation. In an effort to provide an alternative solution rather than just saying no outright to DHS’s request, Mr. Schofield and his colleagues began discussions to identify a legal course of action to respond in some way to DHS since he understood that SSA leadership had approved the request.

Mr. Schofield then notified his supervisor, Acting Deputy Commissioner Doris Diaz, of his concerns about the illegal nature of the request and she too agreed that it was illegal to add dates of death to Numident without proof of death. Ms. Diaz told Mr. Schofield that she would tell her superiors that the office could not list individuals as dead within the Numident system without death dates and proof of their deaths. Mr. Schofield believes that she then discussed this with her superior, Acting Commissioner Dudek.

[Winehole23]

Though people in the CIO’s office knew that the records in the Numident had been changed, Mr. Schofield and his colleagues in the Office of Analysis, Integration, and Performance Oversight only learned that the action had been taken when they began to get calls from field offices seeking guidance about what to do for individuals who were alive but who had been identified in the Numident and Death Master File as deceased. In fact, many of the individuals branded by the administration as having links to terrorist activity or criminal records and placed on this list were neither.

[Winehole23]

if they ever made an honest reckoning of Privacy Act violations by DOGE, they'd have to jail El0n Musk and hang people for illegally declaring living people dead

Records stored in a Privacy Act system of records may not be disclosed “by any means of communication to any person, or to another agency, except pursuant to a written request by, or with the prior written consent of, the individual to whom the record pertains [subject to 12 exceptions].” 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b). Because the individuals whose records DOGE accessed did not give consent for their use, for DOGE to access the master files, they would need to qualify for one of the Privacy Act’s 12 exceptions even though President Trump’s executive order establishing DOGE urged agencies to give DOGE staff access to their records. The President’s executive order explicitly states that it is to “be implemented consistent with applicable law,” which includes the Privacy Act.

[Winehole23]

"an excellent savings tracker"

As such, every individual whose record was knowingly and willfully altered through the actions described in this do ent has the right to bring a Privacy Act suit against the agency pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552a(g)(1)(D) (“Whenever any agency . . . fails to comply with any other provision of this section, or any rule promulgated thereunder, in such a way as to have an adverse effect on an individual . . . the individual may bring a civil action.”) and potentially receive financial remedies. Individual Privacy Act plaintiffs historically have had trouble substantiating the intentional and willful prong, but in this case there is strong evidence that both DOGE and DHS insisted that SSA employees add death dates that they knew to be false to Privacy Act protected records. Dead people have no rights under the Privacy Act and there were apparently no adverse impacts as a result of adding an artificial date for people who were already dead as directed by DOGE. However, there were real and significant consequences and damages for the 6,000+ people who were “killed off” at the request of DHS, such that individual Privacy Act suits could succeed against DHS and/or SSA.

[Winehole23]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/do ...f8991a3888.pdf