Acting Commissioner Michelle King, who was appointed last month, has been forced out after attempting to stonewall an investigation into massive fraud within the agency—an investigation spearheaded by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
King’s abrupt departure comes after Musk’s team requested access to critical data that could expose widespread abuse and fraudulent claims draining the Social Security fund.
Far-left Washington Post reported:
The acting commissioner of the Social Security Administration left her job this weekend after a clash with billionaire Elon Musk’s U.S. DOGE Service over their attempts to access sensitive government records, three people familiar with her departure said Monday.
Michelle King, who spent several decades at the agency before being named its acting commissioner last month, has now left her position after the disagreement, the people said.
President Donald Trump appointed Leland Dudek, a manager in charge of Social Security’s anti-fraud office, as acting commissioner while Frank Bisignano, the president’s nominee for permanent commissioner, is vetted by the Senate, according to three individuals who spoke on the condition anonymity to speak candidly. A public announcement is expected this week. Dudek had posted positive remarks on social media about DOGE’s efforts to cut costs and search for fraud in federal agencies, according to two of the individuals.
The White House declined to comment on the developments. However, White House officials have said that Musk’s associates are being properly vetted and have the proper security clearances before they are appointed to official roles in the agencies they are helping scrutinize. Administration officials have also been skeptical of career employees’ efforts to guard federal data, which they have maintained political appointees should also be able to access, particularly if necessary to root out wasteful or erroneous spending.
Since President Trump’s return to power, his administration has made it clear that government waste and fraud will no longer be tolerated. Social Security alone accounts for nearly $1.5 trillion in annual spending, and conservatives have long pointed to rampant misuse of disability and retirement benefits that Democrats have refused to address.
Musk’s DOGE initiative has already uncovered shocking levels of fraud and corruption across multiple federal agencies, with insiders warning that Social Security is one of the worst offenders.
The Gateway Pundit reported earlier that White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller has sounded the alarm on a massive foreign fraud operation that has siphoned off billions of dollars in taxpayer-funded benefits using fake IDs and fake Social Security numbers.
“There’s a massive amount of fraud in this country. You have, for example, foreign fraud rings,” Miller wrote.
“These are foreign nationals who come into the United States, they use fake social security numbers, they use fake identities to steal billions in taxpayer benefits.
“There’s no way to know until DOGE gains full access exactly how much money we’re talking about. But over a ten-year normal budget window, you could be talking about saving over a trillion dollars by clamping down on massive fraud in our tax and entitlement systems, including, again, those carried out by organized fraud and theft rings.”
Read more:
The Gateway Pundit also reported earlier that Elon Musk’s DOGE team has unearthed jaw-dropping irregularities from the U.S. Social Security database.
The numbers are truly mind-boggling: over 25 million Americans registered aged 100 and older, with some purportedly older than the U.S. Constitution itself.
This information released by Musk aligns with the audit conducted by the Social Security Administration Office of the Inspector General (SSA OIG) in 2015.
According to the report, “In response to our 2015 report, SSA considered multiple options, including adding presumed death information to these Numident records. SSA ultimately decided not to proceed because the “. . . options would be costly to implement, would be of little benefit to the agency, would largely duplicate information already available to data exchange consumers and would create cost for the states and other data exchange partners.”
Read more:
