Denmead, Hampshire, England
Joined May 2015
Transparency Task Force retweeted
BIG 4 WHISTLEBLOWER AND THE 10 BILLION HOLE Brendan Lyon @lyon_brendan hit send: I am sick of being bullied. KPMG Australia answered the way every caring employer does, with a conduct investigation into the man who wrote it. On 22 October I joined the @TransparencyTF Zoom meeting and heard the story of Brendan Lyon, a whistleblower. I attached his slides for anybody interested in this fascinating story. That email went to Michael Pratt, head of NSW Treasury, on 19 November 2020, with a suggestion to grow up or tell the truth. Brendan Lyon was a KPMG partner checking a new state rail company called TAHE, and he says Treasury's numbers were essentially made up and the real budget hole was around $10 billion. A rounding error, the kind anyone makes with a calculator and a deadline. Brendan Lyon says Michael Pratt told him to correct the errors or delete every mention of Treasury modelling, which was none of his business. Emails Brendan Lyon gave Parliament also show Michael Pratt telling KPMG's senior partners that they had a partner out of control and that he expected action. Peer review, Treasury style, is an email to the boss. Transport Secretary Rodd Staples, who backed Brendan Lyon, was dismissed that month. Brendan Lyon alleges bullying, reprisals and pointless disciplinary processes followed, and says Gary Wingrove, then chief executive of KPMG Australia, removed him from the partnership in April or May 2021. Gary Wingrove became KPMG's global chairman and chief executive on 1 October 2026, and nothing says lessons learned like a bigger desk. A 2022 parliamentary inquiry found it was highly inappropriate for NSW Treasury to instruct Brendan Lyon to amend his report. The Audit Office of NSW also reported that 23 reports, 1,023 pages, arrived around midnight on the morning the state accounts were signed. Light bedtime reading. Brendan Lyon's slides explain the bigger picture. Australia lets accounting firms alone run as partnerships of up to 1,000 people, with a legal cap on what they pay when they lose a damages case. Since 2007 the cap covers any service sold for profit, including consulting by people who are not accountants, so a shield for accountants now fits anyone with a business card. Deloitte, PwC, EY and KPMG earned about $9.8 billion in Australia in 2025, and by Brendan Lyon's count about 75% of it sits under that cap. Risk management has never looked so relaxed. Brendan Lyon built a scenario to show the maths. A firm earns $15 million valuing a super asset that is hard to sell, gets it wrong, and members lose $100 million. The court finds the firm half to blame, the cap trims the award from $50 million to $20 million, insurance pays $19 million and the firm covers a $1 million excess, which is pocket change for a good week. Members are left $30 million short. Spread over 1,000 partners, that is $15,000 each in fees up front and $1,000 each in damages later. Brendan Lyon says disciplinary records at Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand @Chartered_Accts, known as CA ANZ, show no enforcement against any Big Four firm or partner from 2013 to 2026. Policing yourself works wonders when nobody is looking. ASIC @asic_connect chair Sarah Court told Parliament in September that ASIC is reviewing 551 complaints about the Big Four and that its powers reach individual auditors only. On 14 October the Australian Financial Review reported that ASIC found EY and PwC approved a combined $80 billion of unlisted super investments without enough evidence. Reviewing is such a brave word. Brendan Lyon is challenging the cap in the NSW Supreme Court against CA ANZ and the Professional Standards Council of New South Wales, which approved the scheme. He started a fundraiser for his costs and on 7 August won an order limiting what he can be made to pay CA ANZ to $25,000. CA ANZ says its scheme protects consumers through insurance backed compensation, which is a fine name for a shield. Trial is set for 22 June 2027, which leaves plenty of time for more complaints. Brendan Lyon says he lost his partnership for checking the numbers. In his example, getting them wrong costs a partner $1,000. Link to the slides in the comments. Sources: @FinancialReview @asic_connect @accgtimes @claudinecassar @Chartered_Accts, others. --- @stevemiddi1 @MLorrM @Wftproof @johnmcdonnellMP @premnsikka @nw_nicholas @JohnCleese @BankConfidenti1
2
12
2
22
1,495
Transparency Task Force retweeted
Dear @FBI, I just watched The Wolves of Real Estate: The Alexander Brothers on @peacock. I am in it. You know my part. I was asked to gather intelligence on Evan Torgan, the attorney representing the women who came forward against the Alexander brothers, and to work against his clients. I said no. I protected the women’s lawyer. I protected the women. And I brought what I had to you. I knew the women were being targeted. I did not know the full extent of it until tonight. What the film describes is very serious witness intimidation and the targeting of victims using PR firms and private investigators. They were intimidated. They were targeted. And on camera, the people who did it said the women bore responsibility for what happened to them. I watched it twice to make sure I heard it right. I did. That is wrong. I am asking you to investigate the investigators and the PR firm that did this. Not because I am angry, although I am. Because going after witnesses is not crisis management. It is a second crime committed against people who had already survived the first one. These women did their part. They spoke. They trusted that if they told the truth, someone would stand in front of them. I did. Now I am asking you to. Everyone who engaged in witness intimidation and the targeting of these women and their lawyer should be held accountable and should have to answer for their actions. You have the authority to make that happen. Please use it. I can look myself in the mirror because I turned down the money and stood with the victims. The people who took the money and went after them cannot say the same. They took a paycheck to make women who had already been hurt afraid to speak. That is not a job. That is a choice, and they should have to answer for it. Everett A. Stern HSBC Whistleblower Founder and Intelligence Director, Tactical Rabbit
5
109
3
272
8,213
Transparency Task Force retweeted
Revealed: Helen Bower-Easton, a former official spokesperson to two prime ministers, is quitting her role as communications director of the Financial Conduct Authority as the City regulator battles to salvage its £9bn motor finance compensation scheme. news.sky.com/story/mark-klei…
2
1
6,018
Transparency Task Force retweeted
🔴 𝐁𝐑𝐄𝐀𝐊𝐈𝐍𝐆 | 𝐍𝐄𝐖 𝐓𝐈𝐌𝐄: 𝟕𝐏𝐌 𝐔𝐊 | 𝐋𝐈𝐕𝐄 Due to the level of interest and demand surrounding my upcoming interview with former CIA officer and whistleblower John Kiriakou, we've brought the live broadcast forward to 7pm UK time tomorrow, Wednesday 21 October. John exposed the CIA's torture programme and subsequently went to prison. He knows first-hand what happens when an individual challenges the power of the state. We'll be discussing whistleblower retaliation, the weaponisation of legal processes, institutional accountability and the extraordinary personal price people can pay for speaking the truth. We'll also be examining the treatment of whistleblowers on both sides of the Atlantic, including the questions arising from the tragic death of Simon Andriesz. 𝐓𝐖𝐎 𝐃𝐈𝐅𝐅𝐄𝐑𝐄𝐍𝐓 𝐒𝐓𝐎𝐑𝐈𝐄𝐒. 𝐎𝐍𝐄 𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐘 𝐒𝐄𝐑𝐈𝐎𝐔𝐒 𝐐𝐔𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍. Who holds powerful institutions accountable when the people exposing wrongdoing become the targets? 📅 Wednesday 21 October 🔴 LIVE at 7pm UK | 2pm New York | 11am Los Angeles 📺 𝐇𝐎𝐖 𝐓𝐎 𝐖𝐀𝐓𝐂𝐇 To watch the interview live tomorrow, visit the RT programme schedule using the link below and select the live broadcast at 7pm UK time. rtrunews.com/schedule/ I hope you'll join us. #Whistleblowing #JohnKiriakou #CIA #Accountability #SimonAndriesz
2
4
263
Transparency Task Force retweeted
“Hester Bais, a Dutch lawyer and whistleblower who has exposed large-scale banking fraud involving interest-rate derivatives, added: “The proposal for just an internal FCA review troubles me deeply. The FCA’s proposal sends entirely the wrong signal. If a regulator can investigate itself whenever its own treatment of a whistleblower is questioned, then where does the whistleblower go when things have gone disastrously wrong?”” thebanker.com/content/2185f8…
4
62
1
112
2,777
Transparency Task Force retweeted
Replying to @mickmor16921994
Trying to expose these things & trying to support/ help people being turned over by banks is not a mission its just what you're faced with if you understand the Rules & how properly employing them can protect people. The very Rules @TheFCA & their predecessors wrote to protect consumers. Surely they should respect the fact I do understand them & apply them for the protection of vulnerable people. But no, instead I am seen by @TheFCA as an enemy, their vindictive actions ended my career, I can live with that I built a new one, I'm not a great businessman but I am an entrepreneur I'll always find a way to make a living. If I have to sweep a street to pay the bills I will. The point was simple, I have a business, I have a career but when I'm at 7 days a week trying to support vulnerable people, I was exhausted, just asking for help. I'm still at that level, but dealing every day with people in such distress takes its toll. People say take it easier don't take too much on. I say give me 10 requests where vulnerable/ suicidal people are in danger of losing their businesses, homes, marriages, family's & sanity tell me which 5 I should ignore and which 5 I should help because I have the time. I simply asked @TheFCA for help' I asked them to do their job, so I don't have to write off all the spare time in my life doing it for them. I'm still asking that because I want/ need a life back but in the interim some of us will keep trying to get SMEs/ consumers justice regardless. But I di not expect this response... @BankConfidenti1 @TransparencyTF
8
1
9
277
Transparency Task Force retweeted
🔹 The reported PRA review of Barclays’ total-return-swap treatment for private-credit exposures raises legitimate questions about how banks are measuring and capitalising risk in a rapidly growing & it has to be said - a lightly regulated sector. 🔹If derivatives used to finance private-credit loans were logged in a way that understated their risk, the bank would have held less capital than the economic exposure warranted and reported higher profits as a result. 🔹That is precisely the kind of outcome supervisors are meant to prevent. 🔹Private credit already sits outside the full banking regulatory perimeter, yet banks have built substantial direct and indirect exposures to it. 🔹When those exposures are further intermediated through derivatives whose classification is open to interpretation, transparency declines and the risk of under-capitalisation rises. 🔹Barclays’ defence that the treatment is consistent with the rules and was signed off internally and by advisers is noted, but rules can be applied aggressively, and as we have learned to our immense detriment - external advisers do not bear the capital consequences. 🔹The fact that the review was triggered by an insider rather than ordinary supervision is not reassuring - or given my own experiences - rather alarming. 🔹Given the recent losses banks have already suffered on private-credit-related failures & the redemption pressures seen in the sector, the public interest lies in a clear, timely account of what the PRA finds - not only for Barclays but for the industry. 🔹Until then, the combination of opaque exposures, favourable accounting treatments, and growing bank-shadow-bank linkages remains a source of legitimate & considerable concern. @Wftproof @tyillc @Muinchille @kenoflynnTD @JMcGuinnessTD @centralbank_ie theguardian.com/business/202…
3
15
1
31
2,048
Transparency Task Force retweeted
Sad to see the Canary close after 11 years. It says Lloyds closed its account in June and Metro Bank froze another in September without giving reasons, and debanking with no explanation is a serious worry for independent media.
The Canary will be closed for the foreseeable future. As of today (Monday 19 October), the Canary will be closed indefinitely. After multiple attacks this year, from Lloyds debanking us to former employees spreading malicious lies on social media, the situation has become unsustainable, both financially and operationally. After 11 years, we take this action with deep sadness and regret. The extent of the lies, defamation, and harassment by ex-staff - coupled with the constant attacks by the state and those who’d see us destroyed - has become too much. However, it is not over. This week, we will publish what really happened at the Canary and push back against the vicious campaign against our team and us. We may be down, but we’re not out yet.
2
11
20
685
Transparency Task Force retweeted
We look forward to reading the #CovidInquiry on the #Care sector later today. We submitted all of our 48 reports to the inquiry. We were the only UK #Whistleblowing Organisation publishing real time reports throughout the pandemic. We identified 48 different issues from our anonymised helpline data. Our reports were widely covered by the media at the time. Many will recall that our helpline was fielding a 60% increase in calls and that we extended the helpline hours from 10am to 10pm. We owe a huge depth of gratitude to all our volunteers for they made this possible. Our thoughts are with all those who have lost loved ones in the #CovidCareHomeScandal We hope the truth will prevail
20
29
719
Transparency Task Force retweeted
Secretary @SecScottBessent. Director @FBIDirectorKash. @HSBC paid $1.92 billion. No one went to jail. I was the whistleblower. 14 years later, @BankofAmerica admits it willfully broke the law, pays $1.2 billion, and no one goes to jail. 3.6 million Americans read my letter. You haven’t responded. So I’m asking on camera: who is going to be charged?
360
5,408
196
11,634
132,592
Transparency Task Force retweeted
The use of fabricated & forged documentation by banks to pursue alleged debts raises profoundly serious questions about the administration of justice in Ireland. See Steve’s post below. 👇 I repeat for new followers that in one recent case, a @talktoBOI Data Subject Access Request (DSAR) elicited an acknowledgement that no loan agreement had been signed by the borrowers. The case also involves allegations of forgery supported by a reputable expert witness. 🔹Nevertheless, Bank of Ireland pursued the alleged debt, subsequently transferring it to Mars Capital when met with resistance. 🔹Extraordinarily, the High Court judgment omitted reference to the DSAR evidence, despite its presence on the court file. 🔹Forgery is a criminal offence. So too is the knowing use of forged instruments with the requisite fraudulent intent under the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001. 🔹Why are banks permitted to pursue enforcement proceedings without the courts properly confronting evidence that calls into question the authenticity of the underlying debt documentation? 🔹And what of the judges who deliver judgments without addressing such potentially decisive evidence? 🔹The hidden credit line scandal, fraudulent derivatives sales and disputed mortgage documentation expose wider concerns about the enforcement of potentially invalid debts through Irish courts. 🔹Judicial independence is not immunity from scrutiny & a court ruling or judgment cannot transform a forged document into a legitimate debt. 🔹When banks pursue alleged debts through questionable documentation, the judiciary must be a safeguard against injustice, not the mechanism through which it is perpetuated.
Replying to @JennyPw12rugv
The use of false fabricated documents in the courts by @NatWestGroup & @LloydsBank is not an occasional, or one off issue. It is systemic, I have been investigating false documentation put forward in reviews & to the courts by @NatWestGroup & @LloydsBank & their lawyers such as TLT, Eversheds etc. for years. That's why you rarely see the bank managers in court, the bank disclosure 'experts' fabricate the files, extract & alter the PDFs etc. Then lawyers who have never been on the credit systems sign the disclosure statements of truth & the bank relies on remote witnesses to mislead the courts. In the Perks v RBS case Paul Sinclair KC told the court it took 17 days to print off the 2,000 plus RMP documents (see below). One of our whistle-blowers told @johnmcdonnellMP that if a printer is available you could print off the whole credit history in less than 30 minutes. In fact it took the lawyers 17 days to print off the credit applications, jumble the order up, extract the crucial Print Connection Summary documents (contain the Hidden credit Line evidence) and then mislead the court about liabilities. Time for the forgery to & the legal gravy train to stop & the miscarriages of justice in cases like Broomhead v RBS & @ClaytonPerks to be overturned. @premnsikka @labourlewis @IanByrneMP @NeilForPoole @Steffanaquarone @normanlamb @efgbricklayer @TransparencyTF @appgonifandffs @BankConfidenti1 @james_glanville @mickmor16921994 @CarshaltonArt @MLorrM @johncock_wayne
4
32
2
50
1,125
Transparency Task Force retweeted
For the full lowdown:
My book Rigged, exposing an establishment cover-up at the highest level on both sides of the Atlantic followed by a whole series of miscarriages of justice, has already sold out its initial print run and been reprinted in the UK. Now it's being published in the United States:
1
4
7
523
Transparency Task Force retweeted
In Perks v RBS TLT stated on 21 October 21 that they could not produce the Print Connection Summaries (PCS) I demanded to show the Interest Rate swap credit line as a live 'hard' facility. They are not saved in RMP its a live system they said. Screen Print 1. They have disclosed the RMP in full they said & we would get nothing more. Screen Print 2 When I explained it was not true, an application to recover them would be made, on 28 October just 7 days later & 2 weeks before the trial, they found 217 historical PCS. Screen Print 3 It had no doubt taken a week to fabricate the PCS documents, over 70 of which I can prove are fake as they contain facilities that were not in place at the alleged date of the PCS print out. The PCS dates had been removed instead they produced an excel spreadsheet allegedly confirming the date of each PCS document. They must have been in a panic as they produced one document 30 times over for allegedly 30 different date credit applications. We had the list of credit applications & there were circa 30 in total, not 217. If you have been up against @TLT_LLP in court representing a bank, I suggest you check the disclosure very carefully this firm has form. @efgbricklayer @BankConfidenti1 @james_glanville @ArturNadol7566 @MLorrM @mickmor16921994 @TransparencyTF @paulpygmy02
2
5
8
234
Transparency Task Force retweeted
The group chat is full of voice notes and the deadline is tomorrow. Upload them to Zendocs and get each one as text with timestamps, plus a summary of the key points. Copy the dates and tasks into your notes instead of replaying every note.

7
7
1
44
575,953
Transparency Task Force retweeted
Whistleblower Everett Stern lost everything for telling the truth about HSBC. He says that is why no one at Bank of America is saying a word about the $5 billion they didn’t report. “….A suit, a title, and a corporate badge should not be a shield from the consequences that apply to everyone else. If a street dealer goes to prison for what he sells, the banker who moved the cartel’s money should be standing next to him. …Why has no one inside Bank of America come forward the way I did? The answer is that everyone in American banking knows what happened to me, and to the whistleblowers who came after. The last person who spoke up is the only policy anyone believes. That is a culture problem, and it starts with leadership, in the banks and in the agencies that regulate them….” - @EverettStern1 to @SecScottBessent
Dear Secretary Bessent @SecScottBessent, My name is Everett Stern. In 2010 I was a compliance officer at @HSBC. From a back office in New Castle, Delaware, I watched billions of dollars move to drug cartels, sanctioned regimes, and terrorist organizations. The enemies of the United States. I documented it, I escalated it, and when the bank would not act, I took it to the @FBI, the @CIA, and eventually the @SECGov. The result was a $1.92 billion settlement. At the time, it was one of the largest in American history. It was also about five weeks of the bank’s profit. Not one banker was charged. Not one went to prison. I paid a different price. I lost my career, my savings, and my place in the industry I had trained for. I was blacklisted. Every door in American finance closed at once. I slept on a camping cot in a 300 square foot apartment because I could not afford a bed, and I waited tables at @PFChangs to eat. I tell you this not for sympathy, but so you understand that I know exactly what it costs to do the right thing in American finance, and exactly how little the system does in return. I made that sacrifice because I believed it would change something. Yesterday, your department fined @BankofAmerica $1.2 billion for failing to report more than $5 billion in suspicious transactions, some of it tied by your own findings to Chinese laundering networks, narcotics, and the southwest border, alongside 475 apparent sanctions violations touching Russia, Iran, and global terrorism. The bank admitted it willfully violated the Bank Secrecy Act. Fourteen years after HSBC. A bank with “America” in its name. And once again, not one individual charged. Secretary Bessent, I want to say plainly what I believe you already know. The fines are not working. A fine is paid by shareholders, absorbed by the balance sheet, and forgotten by the next earnings call. Bank of America reported earnings this morning. Nobody who set the alert thresholds, nobody who decided the 2024 cease and desist could wait, nobody who chose the backlog over the law will lose a single thing they value. Their lives are untouched. That is the entire reason the behavior repeats. This is money laundering. This is blood money. Money that reaches a cartel buys fentanyl that kills Americans. Money that reaches a terrorist organization buys the next attack. This country has fought a war on drugs and a war on terror for decades, at enormous cost in lives and treasure, and all the while we have allowed the financing to flow through institutions we charter and regulate. Cut off the money and we win. We have never seriously tried. There is also a question of equal justice that I cannot let go. Before I walked into the FBI building to report HSBC, I stopped in front of the Great Seal on the wall and read the words engraved beneath it: “Justice is the defense of our liberty.” I believed that. I still want to. But every day in this country, people go to prison for crimes that are nothing next to moving money for the people who want Americans dead. A suit, a title, and a corporate badge should not be a shield from the consequences that apply to everyone else. If a street dealer goes to prison for what he sells, the banker who moved the cartel’s money should be standing next to him. I also want to raise something that is rarely said in these conversations. Why has no one inside Bank of America come forward the way I did? The answer is that everyone in American banking knows what happened to me, and to the whistleblowers who came after. The last person who spoke up is the only policy anyone believes. That is a culture problem, and it starts with leadership, in the banks and in the agencies that regulate them. This is not a political issue. It has spanned administrations of both parties. It is a national security issue, and I am asking you to treat it as one. Three things would change the math overnight. Refer individuals for criminal prosecution. Not the analyst in the queue. The executives who set the thresholds and chose the risk. One banker in handcuffs would do more than every fine in Treasury’s history combined. End “too big to jail.” An institution cannot be too big to fail and too big to jail at the same time. If it is the first, it must be held to a higher standard, not a lower one. And if Bank of America will not act as America’s bank, review its charter. A national charter is a privilege granted on behalf of the American people. It should be conditioned on not moving money for the people trying to kill them. Secretary Bessent, you said yesterday that these actions send a clear message that even the biggest institutions are not above the law. With respect, the institution was never the problem. The people inside it are above the law, and they know it. Until that changes, I will keep writing letters like this one, and the next bank will keep paying the next fine. I gave up everything I had to stop this. I am asking you to use the power you have to finish it. Respectfully, Everett A. Stern HSBC Whistleblower Founder and Intelligence Director, Tactical Rabbit
3
99
2
329
5,956
Transparency Task Force retweeted
Dear Secretary Bessent @SecScottBessent, My name is Everett Stern. In 2010 I was a compliance officer at @HSBC. From a back office in New Castle, Delaware, I watched billions of dollars move to drug cartels, sanctioned regimes, and terrorist organizations. The enemies of the United States. I documented it, I escalated it, and when the bank would not act, I took it to the @FBI, the @CIA, and eventually the @SECGov. The result was a $1.92 billion settlement. At the time, it was one of the largest in American history. It was also about five weeks of the bank’s profit. Not one banker was charged. Not one went to prison. I paid a different price. I lost my career, my savings, and my place in the industry I had trained for. I was blacklisted. Every door in American finance closed at once. I slept on a camping cot in a 300 square foot apartment because I could not afford a bed, and I waited tables at @PFChangs to eat. I tell you this not for sympathy, but so you understand that I know exactly what it costs to do the right thing in American finance, and exactly how little the system does in return. I made that sacrifice because I believed it would change something. Yesterday, your department fined @BankofAmerica $1.2 billion for failing to report more than $5 billion in suspicious transactions, some of it tied by your own findings to Chinese laundering networks, narcotics, and the southwest border, alongside 475 apparent sanctions violations touching Russia, Iran, and global terrorism. The bank admitted it willfully violated the Bank Secrecy Act. Fourteen years after HSBC. A bank with “America” in its name. And once again, not one individual charged. Secretary Bessent, I want to say plainly what I believe you already know. The fines are not working. A fine is paid by shareholders, absorbed by the balance sheet, and forgotten by the next earnings call. Bank of America reported earnings this morning. Nobody who set the alert thresholds, nobody who decided the 2024 cease and desist could wait, nobody who chose the backlog over the law will lose a single thing they value. Their lives are untouched. That is the entire reason the behavior repeats. This is money laundering. This is blood money. Money that reaches a cartel buys fentanyl that kills Americans. Money that reaches a terrorist organization buys the next attack. This country has fought a war on drugs and a war on terror for decades, at enormous cost in lives and treasure, and all the while we have allowed the financing to flow through institutions we charter and regulate. Cut off the money and we win. We have never seriously tried. There is also a question of equal justice that I cannot let go. Before I walked into the FBI building to report HSBC, I stopped in front of the Great Seal on the wall and read the words engraved beneath it: “Justice is the defense of our liberty.” I believed that. I still want to. But every day in this country, people go to prison for crimes that are nothing next to moving money for the people who want Americans dead. A suit, a title, and a corporate badge should not be a shield from the consequences that apply to everyone else. If a street dealer goes to prison for what he sells, the banker who moved the cartel’s money should be standing next to him. I also want to raise something that is rarely said in these conversations. Why has no one inside Bank of America come forward the way I did? The answer is that everyone in American banking knows what happened to me, and to the whistleblowers who came after. The last person who spoke up is the only policy anyone believes. That is a culture problem, and it starts with leadership, in the banks and in the agencies that regulate them. This is not a political issue. It has spanned administrations of both parties. It is a national security issue, and I am asking you to treat it as one. Three things would change the math overnight. Refer individuals for criminal prosecution. Not the analyst in the queue. The executives who set the thresholds and chose the risk. One banker in handcuffs would do more than every fine in Treasury’s history combined. End “too big to jail.” An institution cannot be too big to fail and too big to jail at the same time. If it is the first, it must be held to a higher standard, not a lower one. And if Bank of America will not act as America’s bank, review its charter. A national charter is a privilege granted on behalf of the American people. It should be conditioned on not moving money for the people trying to kill them. Secretary Bessent, you said yesterday that these actions send a clear message that even the biggest institutions are not above the law. With respect, the institution was never the problem. The people inside it are above the law, and they know it. Until that changes, I will keep writing letters like this one, and the next bank will keep paying the next fine. I gave up everything I had to stop this. I am asking you to use the power you have to finish it. Respectfully, Everett A. Stern HSBC Whistleblower Founder and Intelligence Director, Tactical Rabbit
3,175
30,592
2,531
94,507
3,714,439