AMNA NAWAZ: The Social Security# Administration now says members## of Elon Musk's DOGE team working at the agency# last year accessed and shared sensitive data.

In a court filing earlier this month,# the Trump administration amended what## it had previously disclosed, writing that one# DOGE employee at SSA signed an agreement with## an unnamed political advocacy group to# analyze voter rolls to -- quote -- "find## evidence of voter fraud and to overturn# election results in certain states."

In another instance, a DOGE member shared# personally identifiable information of 1,000## people in an encrypted e-mail attachment,# though the government says they aren't sure## what specifically was shared or whether it# was accessed.

And SSA also said DOGE shared## data on third-party cloud servers that are --# quote -- "outside SSA's security protocols," so## the agency doesn't know what information was# shared or if it still exists on the server.

The latest disclosures seemed to confirm some# key concerns first raised in a whistle-blower## complaint last summer filed by# the agency's chief data officer.

That whistle-blower, Chuck# Borges, involuntarily resigned## from government in August and filed a# retaliation complaint late last year.

I spoke with him earlier# alongside his lawyer, Debra Katz.

Welcome to you both.

Thanks for being here.

DEBRA KATZ, Attorney for Chuck Borges.. HUCK BORGES, Forme.. AMNA NAWAZ: So, Chuck, before we .. rather, confirms what first you# shared when you came forward in## your whistle-blower complaint months ago.

What did you think when you saw all this,# especially after months of government denials?

CHUCK BORGES: I will be honest.# I was pretty disappointed.

This is a situation where the public loses.

My# disclosure essentially outlined three concerns## that I had.

The first was that DOGE employees had# inappropriate access to our data.

The second was## that they violated a temporary restraining# order and that the third was that they had## uploaded sensitive Social Security data to a# cloud server without adequate security controls.

In all three of those instances,# the public state is at risk.## So to have validation of those# first two concerns is disappointing,## especially in light of the fact that these could# have been investigated and uncovered months ago.

AMNA NAWAZ: Well, speaking to that timeline,# Debra, the court filing was on January 16.

There## were a number of corrections to the previous# testimony from agency officials.

What's your## understanding of why it took so long for the# government to correct those previous testimonies?

DEBRA KATZ: Because the government's not# telling us the truth.

I still don't think## we know the full story.

The allegations# that Mr.

Borges raised are quite serious.

And he raised them with the federal agency# that is responsible, Office of Special Counsel,## for investigating his disclosures.

And rather# than investigating it, they have kicked it to a## different agency.

In terms of his retaliation# claims, they haven't investigated at all.

So we have a situation in a very real sense# where the fox is guarding the henhouse.

AMNA NAWAZ: Let's talk about what's at stake here.

Chuck, you mentioned in some of the details of# what you came forward to share.

Broadly spea.. what are the dangers as you see them of sharing# that kind of personal data on a cloud server?

CHUCK BORGES: Right.

So, Social Security data is your most#sensitive personal information.

It's the information that's on your birth# certificate.

So when you apply for a## mortgage and you have to answer security# questions, and it's what's your mother's## maiden name and what's your place of birth# and what's your father's middle name?

All of that information is held resident at# Social Security.

So to put that personally## identifiable information that can be used# to propagate identity theft, mortgage fraud,## steal small business loans, impersonate# dead people into an environment where## it could be downloaded or accessed# inappropriately or stolen or shared,## it's a risk to literally every single living and# dead American's ability to have a daily life.

AMNA NAWAZ: And we should point out, we don't# know what was on the cloud server, correct?

CHUCK BORGES: So my disclosure pretty# specifically alleges that a database## called the Numident, which is the master# database of your personal information,## was uploaded to an AWS cloud environment.

Now, that is different from the court filing# last week, which resided around specific data## access for specific DOGE employees.

But if those# first two things that I alleged were correct,## I'm very concerned about the third one, especially# when, when you're normally protecting data, it## is very easy to produce documentation that shows# that the data has been safe and secure all along.

AMNA NAWAZ: Let me try to square some of# the information we have seen out there now.

CHUCK BORGES: Sure.

AMNA NAWAZ: Because, when you came forward, you warned the personal information of some# 300 million Americans could be at risk.

The## government and their filing says information# from 1,000 people was shared on e-mail.

Do you believe it#could be limited to just 1,000?

CHUCK BORGES: No.

AMNA NAWAZ: There's no way?

CHUCK BORGES: No.

AMNA NAWAZ: An.. CHUCK BORGES: So, again, my disclosure# outlined a pattern o.. This court filing validates the# first two pieces of that puzzle.## The third piece has not yet been validated# or refuted yet with any documentation.

But if the first two allegations are correct, I'm# very concerned about the third.

As far as the 300## million, that was just initial news reporting.# That database houses personal information,## as I understand it, on all living and dead# Americans.

So this is a real risk to everybody.

AMNA NAWAZ: Debra, there's also this other# piece of it we reported on where DOGE## employees were alleged to have secretly been# in contact with a political advocacy group,## part of an effort, as we know now, seeking voter# information and personal information there.

Those employees, we understand,## have now been referred to a federal watchdog# group to.. which would bar government employees from# using their job for political activity.

What## do you know about that probe?

Do you trust# that there will be accountability there?

DEBRA KATZ: I trust there will# be no accountability there.

In fact, when members of this administration have# been found guilty of violating the Hatch Act,## there's no consequences, none at all.

The# Hatch Act is -- there are no civil -- there## are no criminal penalties.

If this has# happened, these are criminal violations.

And they need to be fully investigated, and# these people need to be prosecuted.

And there## needs to be a complete, thorough investigation# to see the extent of this.

And I believe,## as Mr.

Borges just said, it's far greater than# the thousand documents that they acknowledge,## 1,000 people that they acknowledge are at risk.

AMNA NAWAZ: A thousand is a far cry from the# 300 million that you say would be at risk here.

So can Americans know, can they be#sure that their data has not been compromised?

CHUCK BORGES: They can't be# sure until the agency releases## documentation that proves or refutes# my allegations one way or the other.

To date, they have released zero.

As a matter# of fact, if I recall right, one of the people## involved in the investigation into my concerns# was one of the people named in the disclosure.

AMNA NAWAZ: We also need to disclose# here for our audience's benefit,## you are now running for office.

CHUCK BORGES: I am, correct.

AMNA NAWAZ: Correct?..

CHUCK BORGES: I am.

AMNA NAWAZ: Tell us why.

CHUCK BORGES: I had a very good job in# a very hig.. that to do the right thing.

Now I see the# challenges we have at the federal level.

I## see them replicated at the local level.# I want to fix where I live.

I want to## be a leader that will do the right thing,# rather than what's politically expedient.

And I want to solve people's problems and# replace leadership that, quite frankly,## doesn't have the imagination, the initiative,# and in some cases the moral integrity to do it.

AMNA NAWAZ: We have talked to a number of# other whistle-blowers from various agencies## who talked about harassment, backlash after# they come forward.

Did you see any of that?## Do you have any message for people who# are still working in the government?

CHUCK BORGES: I do.

I did not receive any political retaliation.# There were some legal .. which I have never had a lawyer until now.# So I'm guessing that's pretty common.

But## I'm still here.

I'm still safe.

I'm# scared.

And I'm sure we're all scared.

But you can't let the fear control what you do.# If you know something, if you see something,## you have a duty to your fellow Americans to step# up and find a way to get the truth out there.## Let's foster a more transparent government.# Let's foster one that protects people.

So, if you're out there and you're scared,# reach out to me, reach out to others, reach## out to attorneys who can help you.

Let's make# sure the American people know what's going on.

AMNA NAWAZ: Chuck Borges here with his attorney,## Debra Katz, thank you both for# your time.

Really appreciate it.

DEBRA KATZ: Thank you.

CHUCK BORGES: Thank you.

AMNA NAWAZ: And following our conversation this# afternoon, the Office of Special Counsel reac.. out to Chuck Borges' attorney to gather more# information about his retaliation complaint.