Gov't Workers Caught In Huge Medicaid Fraud Scheme

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

James O'Keefe strikes again:

VIDEO shows government workers helping Russian mob, sex traffickers, and even terrorists get Medicaid benefits...

DAILY CALLER: Conservative filmmaker James O’Keefe released the first installment in a new video investigation Monday morning, this one focused on Medicaid fraud. The first video in the series shows government employees in Ohio assisting two men who have described themselves as Russian drug smugglers with applications for Medicaid.

In the video, the men explain to Ohio Medicaid workers that they are Russian immigrants who sell illegal drugs, drive a modified McLaren F1 sports car with a gold-coated engine, and use their underage sisters to perform sexual favors in exchange for drugs.

In response, Ohio employees tasked with disbursing federal Medicaid dollars are shown coaching the men through the process of applying for benefits. “If it’s not something registered here, maybe I just wouldn’t mention it,” a Franklin County Medicaid officer named Traci Daniels tells the men, when asked whether they should mention owning a vehicle that retails for nearly $1 million, as they apply for government aid designed to help poor people. “Not that I can say that. You didn’t hear that from me. But, that would right there, that would throw him off. He would be immediately not qualified.”

dailycaller.com/2011/07/18/new-o%E2%80%99keefe-investigation-uncovers-medicaid-fraud-video/

[Sharon]

Paul your title is misleading. The quote states they were applying for Medicaid which happens to be different from Medicare.

Edit: The cat was helping me post. Needed some corrections. ;D

[djAdvocate]

do people still listen to O'Keefe?

i would urge anyone interested in his nonsense to wait until the parties accused have had the chance to defend themselves. so far, virtually every one of his ruses were without merit.

[mmhmm]

I have a cat who helps me post, as well, Sharon. I'm sooo empathetic! ;D

Paul, you might want to change the title of the thread to reflect what the article actually says. Medicare and Medicaid are two different things.

[djAdvocate]

Jul 18, 2011 20:14:11 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

I have a cat who helps me post, as well, Sharon. I'm sooo empathetic! ;D

Paul, you might want to change the title of the thread to reflect what the article actually says. Medicare and Medicaid are two different things.

he might want to put in a disclaimer about how this man's mendacity has cost a lot of good people their jobs for absolutely nothing, and that this may very well be more of the same.

he is about as honest and well intentioned as Rupert Murdoch- though insignificant by comparison.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jul 18, 2011 20:13:39 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

do people still listen to O'Keefe?

i would urge anyone interested in his nonsense to wait until the parties accused have had the chance to defend themselves. so far, virtually every one of his ruses were without merit.

That's quite a claim- I've heard it before. It's incorrect. Unless you care to back it up, it will be YOU I'd recommend people not listen to.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jul 18, 2011 20:14:11 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

I have a cat who helps me post, as well, Sharon. I'm sooo empathetic! ;D

Paul, you might want to change the title of the thread to reflect what the article actually says. Medicare and Medicaid are two different things.

Done. Just mixed up my big, bloated, about to be bankrupt government programs...there are so many.

[Sharon]

The workers are probably not allowed to tell the people if they qualify or not, that is for other "more knowledgeable" people to evaluate the application.

My mother works for the county clerk recording property transactions. She says that she see things all the time that are wrong but they are not allowed to tell people what needs to be done to make it correct. If they did they would be practicing law. She gets so frustrated because she says we know this stuff better than some of the lawyers who bring in property transactions.

This is all government at its finest don't let lower level people who may actually know something do anything more than put name a in box 1.

[mmhmm]

Thanks, Paul.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jul 18, 2011 20:37:16 GMT -5 Sharon said:

The workers are probably not allowed to tell the people if they qualify or not, that is for other "more knowledgeable" people to evaluate the application.

My mother works for the county clerk recording property transactions. She says that she see things all the time that are wrong but they are not allowed to tell people what needs to be done to make it correct. If they did they would be practicing law. She gets so frustrated because she says we know this stuff better than some of the lawyers who bring in property transactions.

This is all government at its finest don't let lower level people who may actually know something do anything more than put name a in box 1.

This clearly shows workers helping. I think it is just like ACORN. It's part of a larger culture of corruption that permeates every crack and crevice of government.

[mmhmm]

Jul 18, 2011 20:13:39 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

do people still listen to O'Keefe?

i would urge anyone interested in his nonsense to wait until the parties accused have had the chance to defend themselves. so far, virtually every one of his ruses were without merit.

It's my habit to wait until the verdicts are in before propounding, dj. I find it saves me a great deal of red-faced apologizing when things don't go as I predicted.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jul 18, 2011 20:43:58 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Jul 18, 2011 20:13:39 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

do people still listen to O'Keefe?

i would urge anyone interested in his nonsense to wait until the parties accused have had the chance to defend themselves. so far, virtually every one of his ruses were without merit.

It's my habit to wait until the verdicts are in before propounding, dj. I find it saves me a great deal of red-faced apologizing when things don't go as I predicted.

You don't like the Dan Rather method? When you can't prove it, get fake documents. When the documents are fake, claim it doesn't matter because you know the story is true anyway?

[chiver78]

Jul 18, 2011 20:41:18 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Jul 18, 2011 20:37:16 GMT -5 Sharon said:

The workers are probably not allowed to tell the people if they qualify or not, that is for other "more knowledgeable" people to evaluate the application.

My mother works for the county clerk recording property transactions. She says that she see things all the time that are wrong but they are not allowed to tell people what needs to be done to make it correct. If they did they would be practicing law. She gets so frustrated because she says we know this stuff better than some of the lawyers who bring in property transactions.

This is all government at its finest don't let lower level people who may actually know something do anything more than put name a in box 1.

This clearly shows workers helping. I think it is just like ACORN. It's part of a larger culture of corruption that permeates every crack and crevice of government.

there are plenty other examples that could be used here in place of ACORN. joost saying....

[cereb]

Jul 18, 2011 20:10:15 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

James O'Keefe strikes again:

VIDEO shows government workers helping Russian mob, sex traffickers, and even terrorists get Medicaid benefits...

DAILY CALLER: Conservative filmmaker James O’Keefe released the first installment in a new video investigation Monday morning, this one focused on Medicaid fraud. The first video in the series shows government employees in Ohio assisting two men who have described themselves as Russian drug smugglers with applications for Medicaid.




In the video, the men explain to Ohio Medicaid workers that they are Russian immigrants who sell illegal drugs, drive a modified McLaren F1 sports car with a gold-coated engine, and use their underage sisters to perform sexual favors in exchange for drugs.

In response, Ohio employees tasked with disbursing federal Medicaid dollars are shown coaching the men through the process of applying for benefits. “If it’s not something registered here, maybe I just wouldn’t mention it,” a Franklin County Medicaid officer named Traci Daniels tells the men, when asked whether they should mention owning a vehicle that retails for nearly $1 million, as they apply for government aid designed to help poor people. “Not that I can say that. You didn’t hear that from me. But, that would right there, that would throw him off. He would be immediately not qualified.”

dailycaller.com/2011/07/18/new-o%E2%80%99keefe-investigation-uncovers-medicaid-fraud-video/

LOL! this isn't a "huge" fraud scheme by any stretch. First off, it's another "lets plant pretend outrageous criminal" in the office of "dumbass government paper pusher" by Okeefe. Ho hum, the dude has been discredited. He's a very crappy film maker. I like documentaries. His are lousy on a good day.


Huge fraud is when a doctors office or complex is found to be billing hundreds of thousand of dollars for patient care to patients who never stepped foot in the office. They pay little thieves and scam artists to pilfer peoples card numbers or the cards themselves and hammer them with fake services. They pay "patients" 500 bucks for the card so they can bill thousands. That's huge fraud. Where was this film maker while that was ACTUALLY going on HMMMMM?

[djAdvocate]

Jul 18, 2011 20:26:49 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Jul 18, 2011 20:13:39 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

do people still listen to O'Keefe?

i would urge anyone interested in his nonsense to wait until the parties accused have had the chance to defend themselves. so far, virtually every one of his ruses were without merit.

That's quite a claim- I've heard it before. It's incorrect. Unless you care to back it up, it will be YOU I'd recommend people not listen to.

if your audience for such a remark is those who aren't aware of the criticism of O'Keefe, that is probably a good idea. i would hate to bear the burden of shattering their illusions.

and i am sure you probably have heard these criticisms of O'Keefe before- and tuned them out: just like the articles i have posted, and the Rupert Murdoch story.

i also have little doubt that you would do the same if i offered proof now. and that doesn't exactly inspire me, even though it would take under a minute to present my case.

HOWEVER, if someone who has a known propensity for considering the opinions of others asks me to do so, i would gladly oblige. then again, they probably have already looked into it and know the facts.

[djAdvocate]

Jul 18, 2011 20:26:49 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Jul 18, 2011 20:13:39 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

do people still listen to O'Keefe?

i would urge anyone interested in his nonsense to wait until the parties accused have had the chance to defend themselves. so far, virtually every one of his ruses were without merit.

That's quite a claim- I've heard it before. It's incorrect. Unless you care to back it up, it will be YOU I'd recommend people not listen to.

ps- if you notice my original criticism, it was not of you, Paul. i noted, with some disappointment, that you failed to keep it that way.

for the record, i HONESTLY didn't know that people still listened (unskeptically) to O'Keefe. really!

[djAdvocate]

Jul 18, 2011 20:41:18 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Jul 18, 2011 20:37:16 GMT -5 Sharon said:

The workers are probably not allowed to tell the people if they qualify or not, that is for other "more knowledgeable" people to evaluate the application.

My mother works for the county clerk recording property transactions. She says that she see things all the time that are wrong but they are not allowed to tell people what needs to be done to make it correct. If they did they would be practicing law. She gets so frustrated because she says we know this stuff better than some of the lawyers who bring in property transactions.

This is all government at its finest don't let lower level people who may actually know something do anything more than put name a in box 1.

This clearly shows workers helping. I think it is just like ACORN. It's part of a larger culture of corruption that permeates every crack and crevice of government.

i have every confidence that this "gotcha" video is indeed, just like the ACORN video. and that is why everyone should be wary of it.

[mmhmm]

Jul 18, 2011 21:04:20 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Jul 18, 2011 20:43:58 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

It's my habit to wait until the verdicts are in before propounding, dj. I find it saves me a great deal of red-faced apologizing when things don't go as I predicted.

You don't like the Dan Rather method? When you can't prove it, get fake documents. When the documents are fake, claim it doesn't matter because you know the story is true anyway?

No, I don't, and it doesn't matter to me who pulls it, paul. I see it pulled on here all the time. I see it pulled in the media and in government. I see it pulled in corporate America. In short, I see it pulled most everywhere and it's pure garbage perpetrated by those who just want to pot-stir and don't care who, or what (including this country) goes down in the process.

Nope. Don't like that!

[djAdvocate]

Jul 19, 2011 0:16:52 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Jul 18, 2011 21:04:20 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

You don't like the Dan Rather method? When you can't prove it, get fake documents. When the documents are fake, claim it doesn't matter because you know the story is true anyway?

No, I don't, and it doesn't matter to me who pulls it, paul. I see it pulled on here all the time. I see it pulled in the media and in government. I see it pulled in corporate America. In short, I see it pulled most everywhere and it's pure garbage perpetrated by those who just want to pot-stir and don't care who, or what (including this country) goes down in the process.

Nope. Don't like that!

i always find it amusing when people try to bait others for hypocrisy, only to expose their own.

[Virgil Showlion]

I'd cut Ms. Daniels some slack with this one. She's dealing with two self-described wealthy Russian drug dealers (who mention they've forced their younger sisters into sex slavery), and they've made it clear that she's the only thing standing between them and a Medicaid payout.

I'm guessing there's just a chance Ms. Daniels will make a special effort to tell them what they want to hear.

[ugonow]

She could have quoted either of our last two presidents.... Everyone in the US has healthcare,use the Emergency room, ... or ....you must buy your own insurance.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jul 18, 2011 23:41:41 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jul 18, 2011 20:26:49 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

That's quite a claim- I've heard it before. It's incorrect. Unless you care to back it up, it will be YOU I'd recommend people not listen to.

if your audience for such a remark is those who aren't aware of the criticism of O'Keefe, that is probably a good idea. i would hate to bear the burden of shattering their illusions.

and i am sure you probably have heard these criticisms of O'Keefe before- and tuned them out: just like the articles i have posted, and the Rupert Murdoch story.

i also have little doubt that you would do the same if i offered proof now. and that doesn't exactly inspire me, even though it would take under a minute to present my case.

HOWEVER, if someone who has a known propensity for considering the opinions of others asks me to do so, i would gladly oblige. then again, they probably have already looked into it and know the facts.

I consider well-informed opinions from anyone. I have found myself on the side of the left on several major issues-- even on the side of the far left.

I support Julian Asange as much as I do O'Keefe.

So, aside from this rather wordy deflection-- do you have evidence?

All the ACORN denials were blown up. See, there's a certain The genius of the O'Keefe method. By releasing videos in stages, he was able to anticipate the response to the first ACORN videos-- including the demand for the release of the full raw video tapes.

He was able to release the first round, wait for all the defensive posturing and spin, then, having anticipated it- then nuke it with a second release.

Then finally, he released the full, unedited, raw video.

[jkapp]

Jul 19, 2011 6:32:02 GMT -5 @toughtimes said:

If they are not the ones tasked with actually approving the benefits, what is your point? After all, they are confronted with someone who looks like a real kook. Would you like to tell the Russian Mafia face to face that their benefits won't go through? That is above their pay grade.

I have faced strangers across an open counter as a youth. Sometimes people would be so crazy that I would remove the metal name plates from the windows next to me for fear they would be hurled at my head. You are a big man to wish clerks would confront gangsters. Guns in the face are not out of the question nor is a Molotov cocktail through the front door. I have seen bulletproof glass peppered with shotgun shells when the wrong people get irate.

It doesn't need to be Russian mobsters...just regular old citizens will pepper the glass with buckshot if they don't get the entitlements they feel they deserve.

[djAdvocate]

Jul 19, 2011 9:06:49 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Jul 18, 2011 23:41:41 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

if your audience for such a remark is those who aren't aware of the criticism of O'Keefe, that is probably a good idea. i would hate to bear the burden of shattering their illusions.

and i am sure you probably have heard these criticisms of O'Keefe before- and tuned them out: just like the articles i have posted, and the Rupert Murdoch story.

i also have little doubt that you would do the same if i offered proof now. and that doesn't exactly inspire me, even though it would take under a minute to present my case.

HOWEVER, if someone who has a known propensity for considering the opinions of others asks me to do so, i would gladly oblige. then again, they probably have already looked into it and know the facts.

I consider well-informed opinions from anyone. I have found myself on the side of the left on several major issues-- even on the side of the far left.

really? where? because i have posted many opinions that i consider to be moderate, and you have ignored or, more typically, dismissed them.

I support Julian Asange as much as I do O'Keefe.

that's nice. but Assange doesn't engage in selective editing, as far as i can tell. it is actually an annoying feature of his personality. you have to comb through 50k pages to find the one that interests you

So, aside from this rather wordy deflection-- do you have evidence?

you seriously don't know how flawed the ACORN gotcha video is? really?

All the ACORN denials were blown up. See, there's a certain The genius of the O'Keefe method. By releasing videos in stages, he was able to anticipate the response to the first ACORN videos-- including the demand for the release of the full raw video tapes.

He was able to release the first round, wait for all the defensive posturing and spin, then, having anticipated it- then nuke it with a second release.

Then finally, he released the full, unedited, raw video.

this is the problem with him, actually. he does his thing, which basically amounts to false defamation. then he waits until the entire nation is hysterical about it, and lives are destroyed. THEN he shows what the actual footage is, which is totally different than the edited footage, and in no way criminal. do you need me to get specific?

[reasonfreedom]

Jul 19, 2011 12:36:09 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jul 19, 2011 9:06:49 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

I consider well-informed opinions from anyone. I have found myself on the side of the left on several major issues-- even on the side of the far left.

really? where? because i have posted many opinions that i consider to be moderate, and you have ignored or, more typically, dismissed them.

I support Julian Asange as much as I do O'Keefe.

that's nice. but Assange doesn't engage in selective editing, as far as i can tell. it is actually an annoying feature of his personality. you have to comb through 50k pages to find the one that interests you

So, aside from this rather wordy deflection-- do you have evidence?

you seriously don't know how flawed the ACORN gotcha video is? really?

All the ACORN denials were blown up. See, there's a certain The genius of the O'Keefe method. By releasing videos in stages, he was able to anticipate the response to the first ACORN videos-- including the demand for the release of the full raw video tapes.

He was able to release the first round, wait for all the defensive posturing and spin, then, having anticipated it- then nuke it with a second release.

Then finally, he released the full, unedited, raw video.

this is the problem with him, actually. he does his thing, which basically amounts to false defamation. then he waits until the entire nation is hysterical about it, and lives are destroyed. THEN he shows what the actual footage is, which is totally different than the edited footage, and in no way criminal. do you need me to get specific?

Providing examples of his B.S. would be nice since I don't listen to him, otherwise all of your post are just baseless opinions.

[djAdvocate]

Jul 19, 2011 14:08:38 GMT -5 reasonfreedom said:

Jul 19, 2011 12:36:09 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Providing examples of his B.S. would be nice since I don't listen to him, otherwise all of your post are just baseless opinions.

rtf- i am seriously shocked that there are two people here that don't know it. but fine. since this problem is more widespread than i thought, i will give you what i can recall, and leave it to you to verify it, if you wish.

regarding the ACORN video..............

first of all, there is no evidence whatsoever that O'Keefe went to that office in that ridiculous pimp getup, yet the video in question leaves you no reason to believe otherwise. the people who helped O'Keefe and his girlfriend stated for the record that he was not dressed that way, as did everyone who saw him come into the office that day. when O'Keefe has been questioned about this, he has refused to answer the question.

secondly, the portion of the tape where the ACORN official appears to be offering O'Keefes girlfriend advice on setting up a prostitution ring is taken out of context. the advice was general advice to "not give up", after she presented her sob story about how rough her life was.

finally, as soon as they left the office, the authorities were called. this fact is conveniently left out of all of O'Keefes subsequent statements, for obvious reasons.

if any of these facts had been included in the original video, of course, ACORN would still be around. so, congratulations to O'Keefe for bringing down that organization. that was what he was trying to do. it had nothing to do with exposing graft- particularly, his own.

this is only one of O'Keefes many intentional misrepresentations i can cite. but it is by far the most incriminating one. he has gotten more careful as he goes along.

[mmhmm]

All one need do to learn about O'Keefe and his claims is to Google the name. You'll find all sorts of stuff, but you need to take the time to sort through it, read it, and us what you learn to extrapolate the truth from the hype. It's not difficult but does take some time and a desire to actually learn something about the man and his workings.

[djAdvocate]

Jul 19, 2011 14:55:16 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

All one need do to learn about O'Keefe and his claims is to Google the name. You'll find all sorts of stuff, but you need to take the time to sort through it, read it, and us what you learn to extrapolate the truth from the hype. It's not difficult but does take some time and a desire to actually learn something about the man and his workings.

there is an epidemic sweeping this nation- the failure to challenge anything that seems superficially plausible and supports your perceptions of things.

every week i get these stupid emails from my dad. the latest one claimed that Snopes was an agent of Soros, and that Kagan defended Obama against the birthers before her nomination. the second claim doesn't even pass the smell test. the GOP would have blocked the nomination, and a fair number of congressional Democrats, as well. she would never have even been considered, imo. the first claim is false. it is FactCheck that is supported by Anenburg, which is a Soros charity. it took all of 30 seconds to dispelled the rumor nicely. so why did he even send it? because he believed it, obviously. the next question is, why did he believe it? and the answer is that it was congruent with his world view.

we need to stop doing this as a Democracy. we need to stop accepting "facts" that support our worldview and start challenging them. it is called "active participation", and it is what is required of us if we want a government that actually represents us.

until we start doing this, we have precisely the government we deserve.

[mmhmm]

Jul 19, 2011 15:02:59 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jul 19, 2011 14:55:16 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

All one need do to learn about O'Keefe and his claims is to Google the name. You'll find all sorts of stuff, but you need to take the time to sort through it, read it, and us what you learn to extrapolate the truth from the hype. It's not difficult but does take some time and a desire to actually learn something about the man and his workings.

there is an epidemic sweeping this nation- the failure to challenge anything that seems superficially plausible and supports your perceptions of things.

every week i get these stupid emails from my dad. the latest one claimed that Snopes was an agent of Soros, and that Kagan defended Obama against the birthers before her nomination. the second claim doesn't even pass the smell test. the GOP would have blocked the nomination, and a fair number of congressional Democrats, as well. she would never have even been considered, imo. the first claim is false. it is FactCheck that is supported by Anenburg, which is a Soros charity. it took all of 30 seconds to dispelled the rumor nicely. so why did he even send it? because he believed it, obviously. the next question is, why did he believe it? and the answer is that it was congruent with his world view.

we need to stop doing this as a Democracy. we need to stop accepting "facts" that support our worldview and start challenging them. it is called "active participation", and it is what is required of us if we want a government that actually represents us.

until we start doing this, we have precisely the government we deserve.

OMG, dj! I used to get those idiotic emails from my daughter-in-law. I finally told my son either he'd talk to her, or I would. Apparently, he decided prudence was the best choice and dealt with it himself. I've not received any more.

Why in the heck people eschew research, I have no idea. Yes, it's time-consuming; however, if you want to be informed it's the only choice. You can't just listen to whatever talking head happens to be babbling at the moment. If you do, you deserve what you get.

[djAdvocate]

Jul 19, 2011 21:21:28 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Jul 19, 2011 15:02:59 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

there is an epidemic sweeping this nation- the failure to challenge anything that seems superficially plausible and supports your perceptions of things.

every week i get these stupid emails from my dad. the latest one claimed that Snopes was an agent of Soros, and that Kagan defended Obama against the birthers before her nomination. the second claim doesn't even pass the smell test. the GOP would have blocked the nomination, and a fair number of congressional Democrats, as well. she would never have even been considered, imo. the first claim is false. it is FactCheck that is supported by Anenburg, which is a Soros charity. it took all of 30 seconds to dispelled the rumor nicely. so why did he even send it? because he believed it, obviously. the next question is, why did he believe it? and the answer is that it was congruent with his world view.

we need to stop doing this as a Democracy. we need to stop accepting "facts" that support our worldview and start challenging them. it is called "active participation", and it is what is required of us if we want a government that actually represents us.

until we start doing this, we have precisely the government we deserve.

OMG, dj! I used to get those idiotic emails from my daughter-in-law. I finally told my son either he'd talk to her, or I would. Apparently, he decided prudence was the best choice and dealt with it himself. I've not received any more.

Why in the heck people eschew research, I have no idea. Yes, it's time-consuming; however, if you want to be informed it's the only choice. You can't just listen to whatever talking head happens to be babbling at the moment. If you do, you deserve what you get.

the problem with NOT challenging the rumor is that if you don't, you feed it.

thanks for responding to this, btw, mm. i felt really good about that post, and hoped that someone would say something. anything.