> Numident is used to store records of every person who has ever applied for a Social Security Card
IIRC, a Social Security Card application is a multi-page form which contains a good portion of the info most financial institutions use to verify identity.
TheCraiggers 3 hours ago [-]
> involuntarily resigned
I'm curious what this actually means. Common sense would translate this to "fired" but since they didn't use that term, I'm guessing something else is at work here, probably involving whistleblower protection laws.
missingcolours 5 minutes ago [-]
I assume that means "you can resign, or we'll fire you, your choice".
A work environment is made hostile to the (mental/physical/emotional) well-being of a someone such if they want to stay safe/sane they have to leave.
mandeepj 2 hours ago [-]
> involuntarily resigned
A bit further down in the article
effectively forced him from his role as chief data officer
Simulacra 3 hours ago [-]
I'm always intrigued by these letters, because there's not really anything the Senator can do to force a response. He can say you have two weeks to respond, but aside from forcing someone to testify, or trying to pull funding, this Senator really doesn't have any leverage
davmre 2 hours ago [-]
Senators, especially committee chairmen, have quite a bit of implicit leverage, beyond the direct leverage of subpoenas or directly cutting funding to an offending agency.
Any given Senator is to some extent constantly in a favor-trading game with executive branch officials. People from the President on down need congressional cooperation to get their pet provisions into bills, programs funded, nominees approved, etc. A Senator can tell a White House official "I'd love to help you with that, however I have this issue with this agency not responding to my requests". Assuming it's a reasonable thing, whoever at the agency is in charge of this then gets an irate call from their boss's boss's boss ordering them to cooperate.
Of course this mostly doesn't actually get played out, because everyone understands the dynamic that defying senatorial requests will ultimately cost the President in terms of cooperation on other issues. So the norm is mostly to comply with reasonable requests, unless you're quite sure that it's a top-level priority where the White House really wants to take a stand.
metabagel 3 hours ago [-]
I believe how it works is that if the letter is not responded to, it becomes a subpoena. If that's not responded to, it becomes either criminal or civil contempt of Congress. Bear in mind that this senator is chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.
> there's not really anything the Senator can do to force a response.
As a chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, he can call SSA head for a senate hearing, which he can’t refuse
standardUser 2 hours ago [-]
It Crapo's serious, he can try to recruit some other Republicans in congress and start making some noise. There must be at least a few who are particularly keen on privacy issues and/or care about their constituencies SS checks. And these are issues that are easy to scare voters with, and can rile up both party's bases and independents. Plus, everyone hates Musk.
But that'll never happen, because Trump won't allow it and his party has become slavishly obedient to his every whim. In any other Congress, DOGE would already be the subject of congressional joint investigation.
ngcc_hk 3 hours ago [-]
Those who resisted was not supported and was forced out. What one would expect now.
A letter and a formal response meant nothing. One day we might see all these out. Good luck America.
frogperson 3 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
SilverElfin 2 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
yepitwas 2 hours ago [-]
It’s not hyperbole. People shutting down frank discussion of what these folks are doing because it might hurt their feelings is part of why we’re where we are now.
Saying mean things about the people consistently calling for political violence for decades and currently attempting to shift the country very far toward authoritarianism, isn’t the problem.
krapp 2 hours ago [-]
Those words can't be both meaningless and an incitement to violence. Pick a lane, please.
SilverElfin 1 hours ago [-]
They can be meaningless to most people but incitement to a few deranged people.
clipsy 14 minutes ago [-]
So now all of us on the left must police our speech for fear of what some lunatic might do? Why?
Charlie Kirk himself said that gay people should be stoned to death -- do you think perhaps that might have incited a few deranged people? Why don't people like you ever demand that the right curtail their own speech for fear of what the lunatic fringe might do?
krapp 58 minutes ago [-]
The words "authoritarianism" and "fascism" aren't meaningless to most people. They aren't even meaningless to you.
clipsy 2 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
smoyer 2 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
moduspol 2 hours ago [-]
Is BlueSky leaking onto HN now?
SanjayMehta 2 hours ago [-]
He’s violet not blue.
showdeaduser 2 hours ago [-]
[dead]
Rendered at 02:53:15 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
IIRC, a Social Security Card application is a multi-page form which contains a good portion of the info most financial institutions use to verify identity.
I'm curious what this actually means. Common sense would translate this to "fired" but since they didn't use that term, I'm guessing something else is at work here, probably involving whistleblower protection laws.
> I'm curious what this actually means.
See perhaps "constructive dismissal":
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_dismissal
A work environment is made hostile to the (mental/physical/emotional) well-being of a someone such if they want to stay safe/sane they have to leave.
A bit further down in the article
effectively forced him from his role as chief data officer
Any given Senator is to some extent constantly in a favor-trading game with executive branch officials. People from the President on down need congressional cooperation to get their pet provisions into bills, programs funded, nominees approved, etc. A Senator can tell a White House official "I'd love to help you with that, however I have this issue with this agency not responding to my requests". Assuming it's a reasonable thing, whoever at the agency is in charge of this then gets an irate call from their boss's boss's boss ordering them to cooperate.
Of course this mostly doesn't actually get played out, because everyone understands the dynamic that defying senatorial requests will ultimately cost the President in terms of cooperation on other issues. So the norm is mostly to comply with reasonable requests, unless you're quite sure that it's a top-level priority where the White House really wants to take a stand.
https://legalclarity.org/what-is-the-penalty-for-refusing-a-...
https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/investigation...
As a chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, he can call SSA head for a senate hearing, which he can’t refuse
But that'll never happen, because Trump won't allow it and his party has become slavishly obedient to his every whim. In any other Congress, DOGE would already be the subject of congressional joint investigation.
A letter and a formal response meant nothing. One day we might see all these out. Good luck America.
Saying mean things about the people consistently calling for political violence for decades and currently attempting to shift the country very far toward authoritarianism, isn’t the problem.
Charlie Kirk himself said that gay people should be stoned to death -- do you think perhaps that might have incited a few deranged people? Why don't people like you ever demand that the right curtail their own speech for fear of what the lunatic fringe might do?