No Scrutiny of Visa Applicant Social Media Content

[Ben]

Maybe everyone else knows about this? It's the first I've heard about it though.

Apparently DHS has a policy that forbids agents from scrutinizing the social media content of prospective visa applicants. How is that not crazy? The freakin' Quicky Mart checks the social media posts of their prospective employees, but DHS can't look at the Facebook posts of people entering our country?

http://twitchy.com/2015/12/14/feel-safe-dhs-chief-reportedly-extended-policy-preventing-scrutiny-of-visa-applicants-social-media/

[roo_ster]

Maybe everyone else knows about this? It's the first I've heard about it though.

Apparently DHS has a policy that forbids agents from scrutinizing the social media content of prospective visa applicants. How is that not crazy? The freakin' Quicky Mart checks the social media posts of their prospective employees, but DHS can't look at the Facebook posts of people entering our country?

http://twitchy.com/2015/12/14/feel-safe-dhs-chief-reportedly-extended-policy-preventing-scrutiny-of-visa-applicants-social-media/

They use the time instead to check the social media habits of tea partiers and little old ladies in american flag hats in a joint DHS/IRS program. 

[Hawkmoon]

Bureaucracy at work. (Figuratively speaking, of course. I don't mean to imply that bureaucrats actually perform anything akin to "work.")

[Scout26]

The only thing she is lacking is the blond hair.  Whatever we are paying her, it is far too much.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHbHKCozVcs

"Sergeant at Arms, arrest this lady.  Ma'am you are in contempt and you get one phone call.  I suggest your boss at DHS and let him know that we'll also be arresting your staffers here.  Once you get us the answers to ALL our questions, then you'll be released.  Have a good day."

[Ben]

The only thing she is lacking is the blond hair.  Whatever we are paying her, it is far too much.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHbHKCozVcs

"Sergeant at Arms, arrest this lady.  Ma'am you are in contempt and you get one phone call.  I suggest your boss at DHS and let him know that we'll also be arresting your staffers here.  Once you get us the answers to ALL our questions, then you'll be released.  Have a good day."

Saw that a couple of days ago. While the lack of info provided is disgraceful, I actually feel sorry for her. I bet you a dozen donuts that she's a sacrificial lamb GS-13 sitting in a chair that should be occupied by an SES. They probably told her, "We're giving you a great opportunity because we respect your work! This will be awesome on your resume!".

Now I bet her career is sidetracked, and her superiors can say, "We're so sorry select committee - we had no idea this person would fail us so badly! We'll get right on looking up that info you want! We should have it by next November 12th."

[RevDisk]

Saw that a couple of days ago. While the lack of info provided is disgraceful, I actually feel sorry for her. I bet you a dozen donuts that she's a sacrificial lamb GS-13 sitting in a chair that should be occupied by an SES. They probably told her, "We're giving you a great opportunity because we respect your work! This will be awesome on your resume!".

Now I bet her career is sidetracked, and her superiors can say, "We're so sorry select committee - we had no idea this person would fail us so badly! We'll get right on looking up that info you want! We should have it by next November 12th."

No doubt she was a sacrificial lamb, but she seemed oddly unprepared even by sacrificial lamb standards. Either she's dumb as a brick, or got stonewalled, or intentionally took the dive. She had to have known she was going to be asked certain questions. Congress usually gives you some clue of why they want you to appear before them. Even google searches could have given rough numbers, which she could then claim she was still working firm numbers. That's why you make cheat sheets, and promise to give to give firm numbers after appropriately researching the specifics.

[Ben]

Either she's dumb as a brick, or got stonewalled, or intentionally took the dive.

All acceptable answers. :)

[roo_ster]

Either she's dumb as a brick, or got stonewalled, or intentionally took the dive.

All acceptable answers. :)

The power of AND.  Such like, "He was both stupid AND evil."

[K Frame]

Maybe MasterCard has better scrutiny of its applicants?

[lupinus]

No doubt she was a sacrificial lamb, but she seemed oddly unprepared even by sacrificial lamb standards. Either she's dumb as a brick, or got stonewalled, or intentionally took the dive. She had to have known she was going to be asked certain questions. Congress usually gives you some clue of why they want you to appear before them. Even google searches could have given rough numbers, which she could then claim she was still working firm numbers. That's why you make cheat sheets, and promise to give to give firm numbers after appropriately researching the specifics.

So....

Stupid, setup, or has been promised a nice paying private sector job doing essentially nothing but cashing a paycheck.