patrick.net

Ceffer says

Strange. People who say SS couldn't be that sloppy, and yet election fraud was conspicuously sloppy with fake addresses and dead people. They just don't give a fuck because they believe themselves to be impervious i.e. impervious leads to sloppy.

... and yet no prosecution of the sloppy election riggers I'm aware of. Must be not that sloppy after all, if they are so hard to catch.

Eric Holder says

if they are so hard to catch.

Not hard to catch, hard to prosecute with the Dems, LibbyFucks and Freemasons at the helm. I gather that Trump has the election frauds on his menu, but we will see.

Ceffer says

Eric Holder says

if they are so hard to catch.

Not hard to catch, hard to prosecute with the Dems, LibbyFucks and Freemasons at the helm. I gather that Trump has the election frauds on his menu, but we will see.

Why hasn't he done anything about it? I mean, he kicked off many things, but not this.

Eric Holder says

Why hasn't he done anything about it? I mean, he kicked off many things, but not this.

Yet. It's not over.

Ceffer says

Eric Holder says

Why hasn't he done anything about it? I mean, he kicked off many things, but not this.

Yet. It's not over.

Right. But unlike many other things this needs to be done before midterms, which are less than 2 years away.

Eric Holder says

"The question is how many are legit dead and how many are just
data glitches. This will require legwork."

No it does require legwork because we already know just by looking at the age of
the Social Security recipients. We have over 20 million retirees who are over 100
years old. At this point it is safe to assume that these 20 million recipients are cases
of fraud. Except perhaps ten people or so.

I am asuming they can track what account the checks were deposited into.

The_Deplorable says

No it does require legwork because we already know just by looking at the age of
the Social Security recipients

Really? You can tell by just looking at one field that this is really the age of a recipirent and not date attribute corruption during transition from COBOL to RDBMS or during Y2K scramble? How?

AmericanKulak says

Democrats wanted illegals migrants on PERMANENT social security so they could drain our system

"drain out stystem"? To what end? What purpose?

Al_Sharpton_for_President says

I am asuming they can track what account the checks were deposited into.

You'd sure think so. Lack of this talking point from Elon/Trump is EXTREMELY concerning.

Al_Sharpton_for_President says

I am asuming they can track what account the checks were deposited into.

That's the legwork. Part of it. But apparently, as we just learned, it's not necessary.
"Because we know by looking".

So what's the next step? Cancel all these accounts which have hinky number in the DOB field outright? And if at least half of these turns out to be legit people whose data was effed up deal with 20M happy customers? With what workforce? And is it really better than do the legwork first?

PS. The fact that Musk and his 19yo geniususes don't even enterntain the possibility of data being screwed but go straight for "they are all dead" is fucking amateur hour.

https://genesiustimes.com/democrats-insist-century-old-social-security-recipients-are-real-and-they-all-voted-for-biden/

I can believe they all voted for Biden. Over and over again, too.

Eric Holder says

... and yet no prosecution of the sloppy election riggers I'm aware of. Must be not that sloppy after all, if they are so hard to catch.

No standing before election, nothing wrong was done
No standing after election, you should have brought this forward before.

Also, the biggest steals were in the bluest areas. Elections are run by the state. All of irregularities happened in a handful of counties in 5 states. The RINOs threw it on purpose; they fought tooth and nail over a few hanging chads in Florida in 2000.

Were any of you as shocked as I that Social Security employs 60,000 people?

WTF???

clambo says

Were any of you as shocked as I that Social Security employs 60,000 people?

WTF???

Not shocked since it's government after all. You probably need 1-5k people max. The employers and business owners send the info in on their own. It's a database operation. Data in, payment out when you want to start collecting. If anything 1K of those employees should make sure recipients are even alive.

While basic, Federal input for payroll is redardedly simple. You don't need a payroll service. Did it for 15 years. I could easily do it for a company of 1k employees on my own.

RWSGFY says

So what's the next step? Cancel all these accounts which have hinky number in the DOB field outright? And if at least half of these turns out to be legit people whose data was effed up deal with 20M happy customers? With what workforce? And is it really better than do the legwork first?

The benefits clearly outweigh the costs or disadvantages as far as stop payments on Social Security fraudulent accounts.

Those who are adversely impacted (which I doubt would be 20 million let alone 2 million) can go to a law firm or local Congressman's office to resolve this.

Send out notices warning that their benefits would be stopped in 3 months unless they provide more credentials or evidence needed to ensure the payments are not fraudulent.

With proper credentials or evidence it should not take the government more than 30 minutes to resolve this.

.

Interesting on the local neighborhood blogs. The propagandists are getting some real kickback, unlike previous times where virtually every poster would just politely toe the line with the propaganda line. The MSM Mockingbirds are doing everything they can to 'explain away' the SS discrepancies with, of course, a pack of lies. Never would have seen this in Cali probably just last year. Exchange got heated with the propagandists eventually resorting to name calling of those trying to rebalance the thread.

OP had just quoted some MSNBC crap explaining away the SS numbers of dead people collecting.

Remember this is coastal California. Even here, the lies aren't working any more, no matter how much they scream and yell them.

Patrick says

Hi Patrick. I'm genuinely curious about this—do you think most of these are actually fraudulent payments, or could they be some kind of database artifact or reporting issue (some sources mention COBOL dates, timestamps, etc ... ). Just asking for your opinion as a data guy who has likely has seen lots of data systems.

No it does require legwork because we already know just by looking at the age of
the Social Security recipients. We have over 20 million retirees who are over 100
years old. At this point it is safe to assume that these 20 million recipients are cases
of fraud. Except perhaps ten people or so.

Eric Holder says

"Really? You can tell by just looking at one field that this is really the
age of a recipirent and not date attribute corruption during transition from COBOL to
RDBMS or during Y2K scramble? How?"

Common sense. You are looking at the age of Social Security recipients over the age
of 100 and you have no reason to assume otherwise.

The_Deplorable says

Except perhaps ten people or so.

Exactly. Double digits could be fat fingers or other goofs. More than that is bullshit

Wouldn't be surprised, given the tendency of the demons to multi task. Laundering AND election fraud in a single package. Where better to get a roster of dead voters than SS?

AmericanKulak: Democrats wanted illegals migrants on PERMANENT social
security so they could drain our system

GNL says

""drain out stystem"? To what end? What purpose?"

To bankrupt the USA.

Patrick says

DNC for sure along with all 3 letter agencies must know the real people who those numbers translate into with address, phone numbers, relatives, their pets everything. It must be an open secret under privacy but within certain circles.

AD says

Send out notices warning that their benefits would be stopped in 3 months unless they provide more credentials or evidence needed to ensure the payments are not fraudulent

How about stopping benefits immediately?

If they have the wherewithal to cash checks they should be able to verify their identity.

GNL says

AmericanKulak says

Democrats wanted illegals migrants on PERMANENT social security so they could drain our system

"drain out stystem"? To what end? What purpose?

Partly Cloward–Piven to drain on purpose and partly not caring about draining as long as it helps buy a future voting block.

The_Deplorable says

No it does require legwork because we already know just by looking at the age of
the Social Security recipients. We have over 20 million retirees who are over 100
years old. At this point it is safe to assume that these 20 million recipients are cases
of fraud. Except perhaps ten people or so.

Eric Holder says

"Really? You can tell by just looking at one field that this is really the
age of a recipirent and not date attribute corruption during transition from COBOL to
RDBMS or during Y2K scramble? How?"

Common sense. You are looking at the age of Social Security recipients over the age
of 100 and you have no reason to assume otherwise.

DK is strong with this one.

Ceffer says

Interesting on the local neighborhood blogs. The propagandists are getting some real kickback, unlike previous times where virtually every poster would just politely toe the line with the propaganda line.

The commentary on YouTube videos is also overwhelmingly pro DOGE and Trump on this issue.

Eric Holder says

date attribute corruption during transition from COBOL to RDBMS or during Y2K scramble? How?

Was Y2K really an issue for COBOL? I see Wired and other magazines claiming that COBOL did not have a date function, but that is not correct. True a 2 digit date was often used, but a very easy fix:

01 DATE-FIELD.
05 YEAR PIC 9(2).
05 MONTH PIC 9(2).
05 DAY PIC 9(2).

01 FULL-YEAR PIC 9(4).

IF YEAR < 50 THEN
MOVE 20YY TO FULL-YEAR
ELSE
MOVE 19YY TO FULL-YEAR.

Also COBOL was was made Y2K compliant anyway:



https://www.ibmmainframer.com/cobol-tutorial/cobol-date-function/

I doubt that the launderers would be going to the trouble to harvest a bunch of individual printed checks. They would just make accounting entries a la Bernie Madoff and scoop the amounts en masse.

SS allows direct electronic transfer to bank account numbers, no checks. Maybe they should see if the dead have a common bank or bank array for deposits.

Ceffer says

SS allows direct electronic transfer to bank account numbers, no checks. Maybe they should see if the dead have a common bank or bank array for deposits.

Yes, as the bank account that gets the automatic deposit from Social Security likely has another name on it.

The banks will also send to the IRS a 1099-INT even if they pay only $10 in interest for 1 year.

Run a query as far as those banking accounts of +90 year old Social Security recipients against those 1099-INT filings, and conduct a sampling of those banking accounts which have two names on the account.

Go from there based on those two names on the account. Lots of ways to audit this.

Also at least check to see if the Social Security recipients are filing a federal tax return.

.

It just keeps getting better and better.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/02/stephen-miller-exposes-foreign-fraud-rings-foreign-nationals/

AD says

Also at least check to see if the Social Security recipients are filing a federal tax return.

Since the dead guys have no other threshold income, they don't have a federal tax liability.

A left-leaning acquaintance of mine just posted that Elon is lying about this because some funeral director said that every time someone dies, the funeral directors fill out a form and fax it to the Social Security Administration.
As if that's proof.
#1 Is that person a funeral director? Who knows?
#2 Does such a form exist? Possibly. I wouldn't contest it.
#3 Do all funeral home directors follow the rules on this? Who knows?
#4 Does the person on the receiving end at the Social Security Administration follow through with whatever step should be taken next? Who knows?
So I could just as easily say this person is lying as this person says it about Mr. Musk.

It's true that the funeral home (or cremation service, etc.) reports the person is deceased to Social Security Administration at the same time he fills out the death certificate.

What may be true is that the social security numbers may be lying around if Social Security never got a death certificate from someone. It may not mean that social security is sending money to dead people however.

Ceffer says

Since the dead guys have no other threshold income, they don't have a federal tax liability.

They may be earning income through other assets like dividend paying mutual funds, etc and the banks and brokerages still have their name on the accounts since their deaths were never reported.

Then that brings the matter as far as the next of kin, heirs and probate with administering the inheritance.

But yes, I suspect a majority of the Social Security recipients who are dead likely make below that income tax reporting requirement.

But a vast majority of these recipients are to checking accounts which pay interest and which get reported annually as a 1099 INT to the IRS with all the names on the checking accounting.

At least one of the "all the names" is engaging in Social Security fraud.

This type of query is not hard to do as far as Social Security inspector general agents running queries with the IRS records on this.

This is an electronic records trail or virtual paper trail that can be easily founded and searched to aid in this type of investigation of Social Security fraud.

.

Since there are over 30 million extra active social security numbers than we have population in the United States, the potential for massive amounts of fraud is real. This does not just pertain to the over 100 years categories.