Judge orders Musk and DOGE to delete personal data taken from Social Security
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
This is exactly what would have happened at any well run corporation. Yes, you can audit the data. No, you can't have it without IT scrubbing the personal info, per the relevant laws.
DOGE's access, and then laptops being connected to public Internet via starlink used to analyze the data, made me and several other IT admins hyperventilate.
DOGE's access, and then laptops being connected to public Internet via starlink used to analyze the data, made me and several other IT admins hyperventilate.
Last edited:
Upvote
265
(267
/
-2)
Oh sure, because complying with the law and judges they disagree with is 100% in their pattern of behavior.
God we are so fucked.
God we are so fucked.
Upvote
174
(178
/
-4)
What is stopping Trump to pardon Musk and/or everyone in DOGE if they are convicted?
They could just continue working as they were ...
Or it works differently in the US?
They could just continue working as they were ...
Or it works differently in the US?
Upvote
75
(78
/
-3)
WokStation
Smack-Fu Master, in training
The Guardian calls them the "so-called Department Of Government Efficiency", which makes me smile.
Won't be long until there's a ranty post on TSocial accusing the judge of being an "extreme left democrat".
Won't be long until there's a ranty post on TSocial accusing the judge of being an "extreme left democrat".
Upvote
143
(145
/
-2)
Nothing stops Trump from pardoning them, and they don't even have to be convicted, or even accused. I think it has to be for things that allegedly happened in the past, but that's about the only constraint and I'm not even sure that one is true.
OK the Copilot says "According to Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the president can grant pardons for federal offenses but cannot pardon state crimes. Additionally, the president cannot use the pardon power in cases of impeachment. Beyond these explicit limitations, the pardon power is considered "plenary," meaning it is broad and unrestricted by Congress or the judiciary"
Upvote
6
(23
/
-17)
They won't say "no" -- they'll say "OK". And that'll be all that happens.
Takes longer to sort out verbal compliance backed by non-compliance than it does direct contempt of court.
Upvote
116
(117
/
-1)
I would like to know why anyone in the federal government is even doing anything for him. DOGE has no real legal authority. These departments need to tell Musk and DOGE to go pound sand when he wants something and remind king thug that executive powers do not go there.
But I guess that is why we are living THE dystopian dream. So much winning.
sigh
But I guess that is why we are living THE dystopian dream. So much winning.
sigh
Upvote
84
(89
/
-5)
The POTUS is actually limited in what they can pardon: they're limited to pardoning federal criminal offenses against the law.
Technically, contempt of court is in a different category, and so isn't pardonable by POTUS like murder or copyright infringement would be.
Upvote
72
(75
/
-3)
From my layman's understanding (as well as based on the civics I learned in school long ago), the president could pardon them for this specific transgression and the courts would not be allowed to convict them a second time for the same incident. However, if they committed another instance of bogarting information from the SSA, the first pardon wouldn't apply and they'd have to either fight the case or pray that Trump is still willing to pardon them a second time.
It's unprecedented territory, but I get the feeling Lexmark is going to get a lot of business printing off pardons over the next 4 years.
Edit: BrianZ reminded me of the federal vs state distinction. Of course, that would only require them to be convicted in a state with a governor sympathetic to Trump willing to pardon them for their "patriotism".
Upvote
38
(39
/
-1)
because when they call the cops, the cops take DOGE's side
Upvote
124
(125
/
-1)
False. The biggest Ponzi scheme of all time is trickle-down economics, which is actually vacuum-upwards economics.
Upvote
190
(191
/
-1)
I read on another forum that in response to this Trump signed an EO that said Musk is to have access to all records. I can’t find a news article to support that but it would not be surprising. Well the only surprising part is it’s approaching 3pm on the east coast and he has to fly to Florida to get 18 in before dark.
Upvote
17
(17
/
0)
Upvote
178
(181
/
-3)
The thing I worry the most about are those cybersecurity precautions.....its less who has the data as much did they take the proper steps to ensure the security of the systems all the data has been copied to or connected to sensitive networks, what audits have they completed to ensure the hardening was properly and completely performed?
Somehow...I fear they may have skipped most of the steps in hardening and securing stuff in the name of "efficiency"...
Upvote
27
(27
/
0)
Sorry, but that is incorrect (regarding contempt, as long as it is in federal court to clarify) and there is case law to prove it:
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10186
Upvote
18
(18
/
0)
Even if they said "fine", would we really believe the band of teenage and 20-something hacks and trolls we know about - some already with records of related misconduct - wouldn't keep it anyway or spread it around with the rest of Musk's anonymous sycophants or online with their peers or, or just sell it? Some of these guys are real unhinged extremists and they've all hitched dived headlong into breaking the law and violating people's rights as a matter of course. What discussion is there where we pretend there are scruples to be found here? The entire project is malign.
Upvote
45
(46
/
-1)
Elon wont comply. The Judges and Democrats will throw their hands up and give up.
MAGA has won, nobody even tried to resist.
Its pathetic.
MAGA has won, nobody even tried to resist.
Its pathetic.
Upvote
48
(56
/
-8)
While true, the case referenced (this is pertaining solely to the context of contempt for those not reading it) is hardly enough to be controlling. But I don't think there's any room to question it either way.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
In a decent world (not the one we live in), all of those involved would potentially face jail time for this egregious criminal act. In this world, the judge will be ignored, and clown prince Elon will do whatever his ketamine addled brain wants.
Upvote
37
(38
/
-1)
It's one of the most basic rules of database and IT management. The principle of least privileged access. ie you only get what you need because every time you give access to something you increase the chance of it getting hacked or used improperly.
It is ridiculous that they did this and considering the age of the users they haven't been bit in the butt yet by a leak and are not careful enough with it. Ego plus wide access equals a hack. I bet it has already happened.
It is ridiculous that they did this and considering the age of the users they haven't been bit in the butt yet by a leak and are not careful enough with it. Ego plus wide access equals a hack. I bet it has already happened.
Upvote
49
(49
/
0)
Why not say yes? That data's been sold to every criminal enterprise and hostile nation on the planet by now. I'm sure Xi or Putin or whatever halfwit thug Big Balls sold the data to will let Musk and the wunderincels look at their copies.
Upvote
14
(15
/
-1)
Sorry to be so blunt but that is total bs. If a current Dem would be doing this they would trust security experts and use actual financial investigators instead of a donors random team. They would follow the law.
This is the end result of the GOP going full fascist that started all the way back in the 70s and has just gotten worse and worse since then.
The issue really isn't should we look for fraud, abuse, and inefficiencies. That is complete bs. They are not doing that. They are looking to use those as excuses to just vilify anything that doesn't fit their agenda of fascism and oligarchy.
No current Dem would do it THIS WAY. They would actually get professionals in the field to look at spending for ROI and do a real audit. Your statement is complete and total BS.
Upvote
148
(149
/
-1)
This has been my question since before the inauguration.
If they comply, then our democracy has a sliver of a chance of surviving this presidency. If not, then we are totally fucked. The courts do not have any enforcement powers of their own. They need the executive branch to enforce their legal decisions, and THIS executive is not big on personal accountability, or obeying the law.
After all, one of the executive branches checks against the judiciary is enforcement discretion. What are the odds Trump simply says "that's a fine ruling, let's see them enforce it" and continues doing whatever the fuck he wants? I, for one, would not bet against that outcome.
Upvote
51
(52
/
-1)
In at least one state (Georgia), there was corruption in pardons in the 1930s. In response, the pardon power was taken from the governor and given to a board, who will only consider it after the perp's sentence has been served. But this would be a federal offense, not state. It's not clear to me (IANAL) whether a civil contempt of court charge would be pardonable, it doesn't seem to be a criminal offense even if the judge can throw you in the clink without trial until you obey.
Upvote
17
(17
/
0)
Upvote
10
(10
/
0)
First they try to impeach the judge, and then our media ecosystem goes right on treating this all like politics as usual.
It’s fine. We’re fine here.
Upvote
48
(48
/
0)
Upvote
11
(11
/
0)
IIUC to impeach a judge they need 2/3 vote of the senate, same as for a president.
Upvote
18
(19
/
-1)
Is this the part where Musk/Trump/someone continues unimpeded and then claims the judge didn’t specify a time zone and, actually, all data was accessed during the first 24 hours of the Trump administration, so no court order was actually violated…and around we go.
This entire fiasco is nauseating.
A gutsy governor should just order the state police to arrest Musk/DOGE on sight.
This entire fiasco is nauseating.
A gutsy governor should just order the state police to arrest Musk/DOGE on sight.
Upvote
37
(39
/
-2)
I think contempt of court can be pardoned. That sheriff in AZ for example. However a pardon does not cover future offenses, so if the person is still in contempt of court tomorrow he can be jailed again for the new offense.
Upvote
11
(12
/
-1)