"This isn't just bad policy. It's sabotage. It's deliberate. It's unforgivable."

[RandomNumbers]

33. Ahem.

I was favorable to your position. (I only wish I had seen some evidence that AI could write this well, when I presented MS Copilot some programming problems, just to see what it could do. I haven't been bothered recently.)

But you claim as evidence of being AI-generated:

Exaggerated statistics and claims: While the text claims to present factual information, some of the statistics (e.g., millions of people over 110 receiving benefits) are presented in a way that is designed to create shock value, and are easily disproven. The combination of shock value and innacurate statistics is a red flag.

BUT WAIT. Here is the context in the post that you are blaming for "innacurate (sic) statistics":

In his recent speech to Congress, Trump stood before the nation and claimed that millions of “dead” people were still in the Social Security system, draining taxpayer dollars with fraudulent checks. He said there were 4.7 million people aged 100 to 109 still on the rolls. He claimed 3.6 million people over the age of 110 were receiving benefits. By the time he suggested nearly 3.5 million people aged 140 to 149 were cashing Social Security checks, it sounded less like a speech and more like a fevered rant from a man who still believes windmills cause cancer.
The numbers weren’t just wrong — they were laughably impossible. The SSA’s own data shows that only about 44,000 records with unverifiable birthdates are still linked to active benefits. The agency has long had automated systems in place that suspend payments for anyone listed as 115 or older unless they actively prove they’re alive. Trump’s wild claims about centenarians on the take weren’t just exaggerated — they were fantasy.

The piece is not making any assertion about "millions of people over 110 receiving benefits" - it is asserting that TRUMP stated that, and that it was FALSE.

While I agree with many of your points, you missed on this one.

What I would REALLY like to see on posts like the OP (preferably from the original writer, but alternatively, crowd-sourced by DU members) is citations. Like, link to the speech where Trump stated those things. (I bet if we search DU we could even find references to that speech right here.) Another one from the OP: "The Social Security Administration is in the process of closing 47 field offices across the country. " I'm pretty sure that's true, but wouldn't it be great if we linked to the factual corroboration of that? (sort of like Wikipedia).
I see more problems with the paragraph that begins "For many seniors, this new system is impossible to navigate. The online portal is a minefield for those unfamiliar with technology." While I sense that that is probably true - it is rather subjective and it would be nice to point to a survey or SOMETHING that backs up the statement, and the following statements that are similarly problematic.