My question would be what were his sources and why does he think that? Because, well, I'm also related to a retired public health doctor (CDC and all that), and her take is entirely different.
Yes, there is some cooking of the numbers to secure funding -- that happens in nearly every single business in the country, whether it's a public entity to secure funding, or creative accouting to legally escape taxes. I know that around here the majority of the COVID deaths listed COVID as the precipitating event -- i.e. yes, the guys at the Soldier's Home were old and generally ill (why else would they be in a retirement hospital), but 75 of them died within a month or so of each other, with contributing factors like understaffing meaning that workers were pressured to come in even if they were sick. In addition, the ventilation system in the building was substandard, and the more crowded the patients were (due to understaffing some wards were combined), the more likely they were to die.
It was the public health doctor's retired infection control nurse wife who provided this specific information; she was contracted to come in and help them get some control over the pandemic in their facility after the bulk of the deaths, and she wrote a very comprehensive report for the state (which is now finally going to fund a replacement for that facility).
Some people see a single case of cheating as a reason to go to unbelievable expense to stop that cheating -- but generally only if it suits their needs. Marginal behavior that they or people/institutions they identify with is simply "exploiting the rules," marginal behavior that they don't identify with, or that are engaged in by "other" groups, is cheating.
Wendy P.