Why DOGE is Struggling To Find fraud in Social Security

[placeholder]

Elon Musk put a big target on the Social Security Administration in the first weeks of the Trump administration, claiming it is plagued by “immense waste” and promising audits to root out “the extreme levels of fraud.” President Donald Trump said during his joint address to Congress earlier this month that Musk’s U.S. DOGE Service was already “identifying shocking levels of incompetence and probable fraud” at the agency.

But some of the biggest examples of allegedly wasteful spending held up by Musk and DOGE so far have been overblown or inaccurate. Musk’s assertion that tens of millions of dead people over 100 years old are receiving Social Security benefits was so off-base that it had to be tamped down by the agency’s acting head, who had been promoted because of his willingness to cooperate with DOGE. “These individuals are not necessarily receiving benefits,” acting Social Security commissioner Lee Dudek said.

https://archive.ph/iAMdN

[Yagoda]

So finding fraud is OK or not OK?

 

 

[Purdey]

Finding fraud is fine as long as there is evidence to present the court where the charges are filed. 

[placeholder]

Just now, Yagoda said:

So finding fraud is OK or not OK?

 

 

Finding it is okay. Telling lies that you found fraud not so much. Especially when you claim to have found massive amounts of fraud and it all evaporates.

And even after the claim is disproved, a certain ignoramus appears before the Congress and repeats the claim.

[Yagoda]

13 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Finding it is okay. Telling lies that you found fraud not so much. Especially when you claim to have found massive amounts of fraud and it all evaporates.

And even after the claim is disproved, a certain ignoramus appears before the Congress and repeats the claim.

So you are saying that there is no fraud in Social Security?

[placeholder]

5 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

So you are saying that there is no fraud in Social Security?

Of all the pathetic traps that someone has ever tried to lay for me in this form, that's about the saddest. Didn't I just recently note that finding fraud is a good thing. But making false claims about it is a bad thing.. Do you think that making massively false claims about finding fraud is a good thing? Or a bad thing?

 

Let me put a few in another way that you might better understand via a fable.

Do you think that the little boy who cried wolf didn't deserve his fate? Do you understand why people ended up not believing him?

[Yagoda]

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Of all the pathetic traps that someone has ever tried to lay for me in this form, that's about the saddest. Didn't I just recently note that finding fraud is a good thing. But making false claims about it is a bad thing.. Do you think that making massively false claims about finding fraud is a good thing? Or a bad thing?

 

Let me put a few in another way that you might better understand via a fable.

Do you think that the little boy who cried wolf didn't deserve his fate? Do you understand why people ended up not believing him?

Good finding fraud is good, hes hired to do that, why are you complaining? You admit there is fraud, finding it is good, yet you whine just because you hate the USA

[sqwakvfr]

Oh I have seen examples of SS and SSDI fraud over the years.  For SS in some cases "grandma died but the checks still came in so we cashed them".  Many do not see a problem with this. In terms of SSDI it's like Work Comp fraud where some who are allegedly disabled are working, playing golf etc. 

[placeholder]

8 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Good finding fraud is good, hes hired to do that, why are you complaining? You admit there is fraud, finding it is good, yet you whine just because you hate the USA

So you think making massively false claims is good? Lying is good? Persisting in lies even when they are exposed is good? Concealing evidence that could establish whether your claims are valid or not is good? Is transparency a good thing or a bad thing?

[Dan O]

39 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

So finding fraud is OK or not OK?

 

 

Why do you always try to twist the narrative. No one said fraud or waste was ok.

 

To claim fraud and waste at levels that don't exist or to take inaccurate data and try to represent it as accurate facts and claim a victory is blatantly wrong. Do you agree with that statement or disagree ?

[pomchop]

so trump rules the fbi and justice department...if indeed they have found fraud then by all means have fbi investigate and if warranted doj file charges and prosecute every single case....I think very very few americans of any party are in favor of allowing fraud to go unpunished....but when you scream fraud fraud and make massive cuts then you also need put up the actual facts and evidence along with the names of people and charge them...right now we do still have a court system that is suppose to conduct trials and then determine if the evidence supports the case and often a jury will also listen to the evidence and then decide guilty or not guilty.  So make sure you have real evidence and not a bunch of conspiracy theories.

 

Elon Musk screaming fraud fraud fraud is not same as giving specifics and referring to DOJ to charge.

 

Otherwise it is all a load of BS.

 

 

[bubblegum]

Don't know why you guys still try and reason with Yagoda. He is a lost case for humanity.

[Dan O]

27 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

So you are saying that there is no fraud in Social Security?

You are pathetic in your blind claims and assertions. You spread bs but when called out get pissed and report people for trolling or stalking you.  You're a sad human based on your false statements, claims and ridiculous questions posted that are a disconnected attempt to be right.

[Yagoda]

6 minutes ago, Dan O said:

Why do you always try to twist the narrative. No one said fraud or waste was ok.

 

To claim fraud and waste at levels that don't exist or to take inaccurate data and try to represent it as accurate facts and claim a victory is blatantly wrong. Do you agree with that statement or disagree ?

Got it.

 

Man steals $20. Turns out to be $19.99. How dare you say he stole $20!

 

You dont need to respond to me with your sad little flames, Ill came back tomorrow to see the frenzy you guys work yourselves into.

 

 

[placeholder]

2 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Got it.

 

Man steals $20. Turns out to be $19.99. How dare you say he stole $20!

 

You dont need to respond to me with your sad little flames, Ill came back tomorrow to see the frenzy you guys work yourselves into.

 

 

But actually, it's the reverse that's the case. Investigator claims $20 in fraud, comes up with 1 cent. Oh, heck, I'm going to go crazy. Make it 3 cents.

[sqwakvfr]

SSA actually has Fraud Investigation Units throughout the country. I saw one in action in LA years ago. The team was targeting a guy on SSDI due to back injury.  He was collecting benefits  but the team got a tip that this guy was working.  The lead agent told me they needed hours and hours of surveillance in order to file a fraud case with a US Attorney.  In this particular case the fraud guy was working at his wife's restaurant and they had him under surveillance for a month before filing the case with the US Attorney.  This is how cumbersome it was or possibly still is to prosecute SSDI fraudsters. 

[Dan O]

10 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Got it.

 

Man steals $20. Turns out to be $19.99. How dare you say he stole $20!

 

You dont need to respond to me with your sad little flames, Ill came back tomorrow to see the frenzy you guys work yourselves into.

 

 

Translation:   I have no defense for my ignorance so I will run and hid after I claim victory.

[Dan O]

3 minutes ago, sqwakvfr said:

SSA actually has Fraud Investigation Units throughout the country. I saw one in action in LA years ago. The team was targeting a guy on SSDI due to back injury.  He was collecting benefits  but the team got a tip that this guy was working.  The lead agent told me they needed hours and hours of surveillance in order to file a fraud case with a US Attorney.  In this particular case the fraud guy was working at his wife's restaurant and they had him under surveillance for a month before filing the case with the US Attorney.  This is how cumbersome it was or possibly still is to prosecute SSDI fraudsters. 

Doing due diligence isn't cumbersome, it's a result of proper planning and execution. They surveilled long enough to get enough supportive evidence to win the case. 

[Gottfrid]

15 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Got it.

 

Man steals $20. Turns out to be $19.99. How dare you say he stole $20!

 

You dont need to respond to me with your sad little flames, Ill came back tomorrow to see the frenzy you guys work yourselves into.

 

 

You just have serious problems. Read your comment again. Do you understand how pathetic it sounds, or is that above and beyond your level of understanding?

Everybody here is talking about them trying to make it sound like extreme amounts and massive fraud, and you are comparing with a cent. Please amuse us. Don´t come back tomorrow.

[placeholder]

4 minutes ago, Dan O said:

Doing due diligence isn't cumbersome, it's a result of proper planning and execution. They surveilled long enough to get enough supportive evidence to win the case. 

And, of course, they don't just investigate someone in order to catch them. It's also done as a way to discourage others. If there was no prospect of being investigated that would certainly encourage would-be malefactors.

[sqwakvfr]

5 minutes ago, Dan O said:

Doing due diligence isn't cumbersome, it's a result of proper planning and execution. They surveilled long enough to get enough supportive evidence to win the case. 

This is one case so it isdifficult to go after many fraudsters at once.  Also, from what the lead agent told me the Fraud Inestivation Unit is very small within the SSA.  I know about investigations and the legal process because I encountered the Fraud Unit because a citizen reported suspicious men goiing in and out of a van that had been parked on the street for days.  My partner and I ended up pulling the agents out of the van at gun point because  they had failed to notify us of their suveillance operation (this is SOP). We laughed afterwards because the agents knew exactly how to respond in this type of encounter. . 

[Yagoda]

17 minutes ago, Dan O said:

Translation:   I have no defense for my ignorance so I will run and hid after I claim victory.

Im glad I could be a model for you in your responses to posts. You dont need to say thank you. 

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, Yagoda said:

Im glad I could be a model for you in your responses to posts. You dont need to say thank you. 

Even your promise to leave can't be trusted

 

30 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Got it.

 

Man steals $20. Turns out to be $19.99. How dare you say he stole $20!

 

You dont need to respond to me with your sad little flames, Ill came back tomorrow to see the frenzy you guys work yourselves into.

 

 

 

[Yagoda]

10 minutes ago, Gottfrid said:

You just have serious problems. Read your comment again. Do you understand how pathetic it sounds, or is that above and beyond your level of understanding?

Everybody here is talking about them trying to make it sound like extreme amounts and massive fraud, and you are comparing with a cent. Please amuse us. Don´t come back tomorrow.

Translation: I will always defend the theft from Americans, I better toss in a flame too

[Yagoda]

Just now, placeholder said:

Even your promise to leave can't be trusted

 

 

LO I know and everyone can see what I wrote LOL.

 

Enjoy!

[Gottfrid]

6 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Translation: I will always defend the theft from Americans, I better toss in a flame too

It´s not tomorrow yet, dude! You have to educate yourself.

[Dan O]

1 hour ago, Yagoda said:

Im glad I could be a model for you in your responses to posts. You dont need to say thank you. 

You dont deserve a thank you for being a knob and posting misleading and false information and then gaslighting and deflecting when confronted.

[Dan O]

1 hour ago, sqwakvfr said:

This is one case so it isdifficult to go after many fraudsters at once.  Also, from what the lead agent told me the Fraud Inestivation Unit is very small within the SSA.  I know about investigations and the legal process because I encountered the Fraud Unit because a citizen reported suspicious men goiing in and out of a van that had been parked on the street for days.  My partner and I ended up pulling the agents out of the van at gun point because  they had failed to notify us of their suveillance operation (this is SOP). We laughed afterwards because the agents knew exactly how to respond in this type of encounter. . 

Hmmm, not SOP to notify anyone as they dont know who's connected to those under surveillance. Pulling a gun on suspicious individuals is about as stupid as you can be when a phone call would have gotten police support.

[Dan O]

1 hour ago, Yagoda said:

Translation: I will always defend the theft from Americans, I better toss in a flame too

The only thing you are defending appears to be your delusional thoughts and misleading posts

[sqwakvfr]

3 hours ago, Dan O said:

Hmmm, not SOP to notify anyone as they dont know who's connected to those under surveillance. Pulling a gun on suspicious individuals is about as stupid as you can be when a phone call would have gotten police support.

So you have law enforcement experience in the US?  Back then I was the police.  So in your view I am the "stupid" guy for approachiing a suspicious vehcile with my weapon drawn.  Of couurse this is based upon on your  experience as a police officer in a major US city for years?   Any other pearls of wisdom on law enforcement tactics would you like to express at this time?

SOP for fellow Law Enforcement agencies to notify the agency in the city that they are conducting any activity with a point of a contact.  The exact nature of the operation does not have to disclosed.  

 

Lastly I cannot state anything about you as "stupid" because I do not know who or what you are.  Maybe you are, maybe you are not?