US Attorneys DECLINED Prosecution Against Illegal Aliens Who Used Social Security Numbers Of Dead People
U.S. Attorneys declined to prosecute illegal aliens accused of using the social security numbers of dead people in order to work.
That finding is contained in a footnote in a recent audit released by the Social Security Administration’s office of the inspector general.
“In three cases, [the Social Security Administration's Office of Investigators] confirmed that illegal aliens were using deceased numberholders’ names and SSNs to work,” the footnote reads. “But U.S. Attorneys in Arizona, Florida, and South Carolina declined prosecution.”
The fraudulent use of a social security number is a federal felony. The same is true for illegal aliens applying for work in the U.S.
Overall, the audit found over 6.5 million social security numbers for people over the age of 112 with no death records listed in a database called the Numident. Administration files were clearly not being updated properly, the inspector general determined, as it is believed that only a few hundred people 112 years or older are still alive in the U.S.
Some of the numbers were fraudulently used to open bank accounts, the audit found. Others were used by illegal immigrants seeking work.
Between 2008 and 2011, “employers made 4,024 E-Verify inquiries using 3,873 SSNs belonging to numberholders born before June 16, 1901,” the inspector general reported.
E-Verify is the system the Department of Homeland Security uses to ensure that immigrants are allowed to work legally in the U.S.
“These inquiries indicate individuals’ attempts to use the SSNs to apply for work,” the report reads.
The audit found that 34 deceased individuals’ numbers were being misused by individuals for work purposes.
And of those cases of fraudulent use mentioned in the audit, U.S. Attorneys, for some unknown reason, declined to press charges.
The report cited cases in South Carolina and Arizona.
One numberholder born in 1896 filed a “life claim” in 1958, at the age of 62. There were no earnings records for that numberholder from 1963 through 2006. But in 2007 and following years, an employer in South Carolina reporting paying wages ranging from $11,450 to $27,694 to someone using that number.
The case in Arizona was similar. A numberholder born in 1886 filed a “life claim” in 1953. No earnings were reported on that number from between 1956 and 2007. But between 2008 and 2012, an Arizona employer reported paying between $12,594 and $17,100 to whomever was using the number.
Gowdy: Hillary Must Testify ‘At Least Twice,’ Turn Email Server Over To Third-Party Arbiter
Trey Gowdy, the top House Benghazi investigator, says that Hillary Clinton must testify at least twice before his committee and that she should turn her private email server over to a third-party arbiter.
The South Carolina Republican issued a statement after a press conference Clinton held Tuesday.
Clinton addressed for the first time in public her exclusive use of private email during her four years at State. She also discussed her use of a private server which operated out of her Chappaqua, N.Y. home.
“Having finally heard from Secretary Clinton about her exclusive use of personal email with which to conduct official business while serving as Secretary of State, regrettably we are left with more questions than answers,” Gowdy said in the statement.
Questions remain over the security of the systems Clinton used to maintain her emails, Gowdy said.
Clinton said in her brief press conference that she used an email server her husband Bill used as president. She also claimed that the server was secure and that it was never compromised. She further claimed that she did not send classified documents on the email account.
But Clinton did not get into specifics about how her email server was set up or whether it was approved by the State Department.
That leaves open questions about “who authorized this exclusive use of personal email despite guidance to the contrary from both her State Department and the White House, who had access to the server from the time Secretary Clinton left office until the time—almost two years later—the State Department asked for these public records back, and who culled through the records to determine which were personal and which were public,” Gowdy said.
Clinton turned over 55,000 printed pages of emails to the State Department only in December. That occurred several months after State Department attorneys and officials who were responding to the Benghazi committee’s request for records began raising red flags over Clinton’s exclusive use of private email. While it is not illegal for federal officials to use private email accounts, employees are required to turn those documents over to their governing agencies to place in the public record. Clinton did not do that until nearly 2 years after leaving office, and only then at the request of State.
“Without access to Secretary Clinton’s personal server, there is no way for the State Department to know it has acquired all documents that should be made public, and given State’s delay in disclosing the fact Secretary Clinton exclusively used personal email to conduct State business, there is no way to accept State’s or Secretary Clinton’s certification she has turned over all documents that rightfully belong to the American people,” Gowdy said.
To help determine if both the State Department and the Benghazi committee obtained all relevant emails, Gowdy said that Clinton must “turn her server over to a neutral, detached third-party arbiter who can determine which documents should be public and which should remain private.”
“Secretary Clinton alone created this predicament, but she alone does not get to determine its outcome,” Gowdy added, also urging Clinton to testify before his committee at least twice.
Clinton has already said she will testify before the panel.
“The first appearance will be to clear up her role and resolve issues surrounding her exclusive use of personal email to conduct official business,” Gowdy said.
“Our committee will then call her to appear before the Committee in a public hearing to answer questions specifically regarding Libya and the Benghazi terrorist attacks that took the lives of our four brave fellow citizens.”
Hillary: I Had Two Phones, No, One Phone! [VIDEO]
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton claimed Tuesday that she used only one smartphone during her tenure at the State Department.
But two weeks ago, she told an interviewer that she used two very different smart-phones.
A friendly interviewer asked her, “Let me ask the big question; iPhone or Android?”
“iPhone,” she responded Feb. 24 to the audience at the Lead On Watermark Silicon Valley Conference For Women.
“OK, in full disclosure [pause] and a Blackberry,” she added.
Clinton’s contradictory claims raises the question of whether she had additional email networks that she has kept secret, even amid the current scandal over her decision to use a home-base private email service to conduct all her official business at the Department of State when she was President Barack Obama’s top foreign policy appointee.
That’s partly because the Blackberry’s anti-backer technology — including its anti-hacker software — is better than the technology in the earlier iPhones.
Also, government-designed anti-hacker measures are greatly weakened if communications channels run through two different types of cellphones.
In her March 10 press conference at the United Nations, Clinton claimed she had only one phone.
“Why did you opt out using two devices at the time?” a reporter asked.
“When I got there, I wanted to just use one device for both personal and work emails instead of two,” she responded.
“It was allowed… it was for convenience and it was my practice to communicate with State Department and other government officials on their .gov accounts so those emails would be automatically saved in the State Department system to meet record keeping requirements and that indeed is what happened,” she said.
Alternatively, Clinton may have been pandering to her audience, and declaring her loyalty to the lifestyle brand developed by Apple Computer Co.
The Apple products, including the iPhone series and Mac computers, are a brand favored by many upper-income, university-educated progressives in the media and culture sectors.
WATCH:
No comments:
Post a Comment