Ann Graham retweeted
Read this whole letter and then tell me why anybody would ever blow the whistle. Everett Stern watched billions move for cartels and terrorists at HSBC, documented every bit of it, and took it to the FBI, the CIA and the SEC. The bank paid $1.92 billion, about five weeks of its profit, and not one banker was charged. Everett lost his career, his savings and his name, slept on a camping cot and waited tables to eat.
Now Bank of America just admitted it willfully broke the Bank Secrecy Act on more than $5 billion in suspicious transactions, fourteen years later, and once again not one individual is charged.
I know the cost of speaking up. Discrediting, slander, bullying, death threats, sanctions, a crooked judiciary full of activist rotted judges, and let's not forget the toll on your family while they smile and no one is held accountable… the whistleblower becomes the victim while the rot gets a fine, a press release and a bonus.
Here is the reality. Every person inside that bank watched what happened to Everett and learned the lesson. The last one who told the truth is the only policy anybody believes, and that is exactly how corruption gets rewarded and evil gets to thrive. This is the true cost of standing for truth against bad people.
@SecScottBessent, you said no institution is above the law. Then refer the executives for prosecution and put a banker in handcuffs.
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
Ann Graham retweeted
Hey @jonesjay, federal law enforcement has legitimate authority to enforce federal election laws. State officials cannot override that authority because they dislike federal involvement.
Therefore, the only thing that Jay Jones, @GovernorVA, and @vademocrats can do is put their big boy & big girl pants on and cooperate with federal law enforcement by following federal election laws or they can kick, cry, scream, and pout.
@HarmeetKDhillon @TheJusticeDept @POTUS
VIRGINIA'S ATTORNEY GENERAL IS PREPARING FOR A SHOWDOWN WITH FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ON ELECTION DAY.
The Virginia's Attorney General and Department of Elections issued a remarkable 10-page directive to election officials.
Here's what they're being told:
Pages 4–5: Local registrars can deny ordinary DOJ election monitors access to polling locations.
Page 7: Election officials should ask federal agents to leave polling locations and contact local police.
Page 7: Document federal agents' badge numbers, weapons, vehicles, and movements. Collect complaints from voters who say federal agents frighten them.
Pages 8–9: Consult attorneys about challenging federal subpoenas seeking election materials.
Page 3: And while all this is happening, Virginia has eliminated the ability to challenge a voter's qualifications at the polling place.
Think about what we're witnessing.
The Attorney General is preparing election officials to scrutinize federal law enforcement while Virginia has eliminated a longstanding Election Day safeguard for questioning voter eligibility.
The bulletin identifies no specific planned unlawful federal operation in Virginia. Federal law enforcement has legitimate authority to enforce federal election laws. State officials cannot override that authority simply because they dislike federal involvement.
So what exactly is the Attorney General afraid federal investigators might discover? And why is the Commonwealth treating federal election oversight as a threat rather than an opportunity to demonstrate election integrity?
Read the document yourself:
shorturl.at/DizI5
Ann Graham retweeted
Replying to @RollingStone
• Rolling Stone should have closed shop a long time ago
• Rolling Stone has published articles glamorizing Hamas terrorists
• Rolling Stone has celebrated Ilhan Omar, who frequently makes anti-Semitic statements
• Rolling Stone loves to construct strawmen, burn them down, and declare victory
• Rolling Stone cannot name one policy position of Mamdani that is not Communist aligned
• In the new vocabulary of their favorite Senator, Elizabeth Warren, Rolling Stone can eat dirt
Ann Graham retweeted
🚨Wasn't this Democrat Tom Perriello's last failed campaign? He couldn't beat Ralph Northam (on the left) for governor, so NOW he's running for Congress.
🇺🇸Vote to re-elect Congressman John McGuire, who GENUINELY cares about the 5th Congressional District, instead of this politically ambitious Soros ex-employee:
Replying to @Billy123ty @tomperriello @libsoftiktok @GovernorVA @VA_GOP @SchillingShow @jeffkatzshow @VaNewsVanguard
VOTE REPUBLICAN
Ann Graham retweeted
Proud to be selected by The Wall Street Journal as one of seven midterm candidates discussing the economy and the challenges facing working Americans.
America’s greatest days are still ahead of us. 🇺🇸
Click here 👇🏽
wsj.com/video/seven-midterm-…
@AlxRepublicans @FairfaxGOP @goparlington @VA_GOP @Republicans
Ann Graham retweeted
Dear @realDonaldTrump , please do not allow a public execution of that murderous traitor, Nidal Hasan. No one deserves to die more than he does, but don’t make a spectacle of his execution. We are not like medieval death-cult Islamists who celebrate death, blood and killing. We’re civilized people. When we carry out the death penalty with as much humanity as possible.
Ann Graham retweeted
As an Army JAG, I oversaw the post-trial legal proceedings following Nidal Hasan’s horrific attack at Fort Hood.
I believed then, and I believe now, that he should face the fullest consequences of the law.
But live-streaming his execution is what terrorists and authoritarian regimes do. It’s un-American.
Ann Graham retweeted
For what it's worth, I support capital punishment, and if anyone deserves the death penalty, it is Nidal Hasan. Should have been done years ago. But we have long ago stopped conducting public executions. We have witnesses for executions, for the purpose of making sure the state conducts them responsibly. The recent debacle in Tennessee is a good reason to do that. But it's not a show. So execute Nidal Hasan, with witnesses, but not a streaming audience.
Ann Graham retweeted
🚨REPOSTING for those who haven't seen this. Please share with Virginia parents! Vote N🚫 on the EXTREME Amendment 1!
🚨🚨🔥HERE'S PROOF: VIRGINIA'S AMENDMENT 1 CONFIRMS *NO* PARENTAL CONSENT: The Amendment 1 ballot question does NOT use the actual OFFICIAL language that would be inserted into the Virginia Constitution if this amendment passed.
As a former Lieutenant Governor & Member of the House of Delegates, Winsome Earle-Sears has expertise in state laws & delved further into what this Article in the state Constitution would declare in the OFFICIAL, Democrat-approved language.
▶️What she found was that all INDIVIDUALS would be granted nearly unlimited rights to “reproductive freedom” and abortion because the proponents did NOT carve out any exceptions for underage girls and boys. Therefore, any effort to enforce a law for parental consent or notification about reproduction-related behaviors, including abortion, contraception, gender transitions, & fertility care, would be ruled UNconstitutional, and no person could be penalized for assisting minor children with these behaviors.
▶️We know this because proponents DID place the word "adults" into the Amendment 2 ballot question on "marriage."
▶️As seen in other states with nearly identical constitutional language, courts have STRUCK DOWN laws intended to moderate and place guardrails around these permissive, open-ended behaviors.
☑️Watch Earle-Sears' explanation and follow along with this text verbatim:
☑️HERE is what the Virginia CONSTITUTION would say: FULL TEXT OF AMENDMENT
ARTICLE I
BILL OF RIGHTS
Section 11-A. Fundamental right to reproductive freedom.
"That every INDIVIDUAL has the fundamental right to reproductive freedom, including the ability to make and carry out decisions relating to one's own prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, contraception, abortion care, miscarriage management, and fertility care.
"An INDIVIDUAL's right to reproductive freedom shall not be, directly or indirectly, denied, burdened, or infringed upon unless justified by a compelling state interest achieved by the least restrictive means.
"Notwithstanding the above, the Commonwealth may regulate the provision of abortion care in the third trimester, provided that in no circumstance shall the Commonwealth prohibit an abortion (i) that in the professional judgment of a physician is medically indicated to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual or (ii) when in the professional judgment of a physician the fetus is not viable.
"The Commonwealth shall not discriminate in the protection or enforcement of this fundamental right.
"The Commonwealth shall not penalize, prosecute, or otherwise take adverse action against an individual based on such individual's own exercise of this fundamental right or such individual's own actual, potential, perceived, or alleged pregnancy outcomes, including miscarriage, stillbirth, or abortion. The Commonwealth shall not penalize, prosecute, or otherwise take adverse action against any individual for aiding or assisting another individual in exercising such other individual's right to reproductive freedom with such other individual's voluntary consent.
"For the purposes of this section, a state interest is compelling only if it is for the limited purpose of maintaining or improving the health of an individual seeking care, consistent with accepted clinical standards of care and evidence-based medicine, and does not infringe on that individual's autonomous decision making.
"This section shall be self-executing. Any provision of this section held invalid shall be severable from the remaining portions of the section."
elections.virginia.gov/elect…
☑️However, this BRIEF question is what you see on the BALLOT:
Question Amendment 1: Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to (i) protect the freedom to make personal decisions about prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, birth control, abortion, miscarriage management, and fertility care; (ii) protect doctors, nurses, and patients from being punished for these decisions; and (iii) allow for restrictions on access to abortion during the third trimester of pregnancy except when the patient's health is at risk or the pregnancy cannot survive?
🔥VOTE NO on this EXTREME Amendment 1!🔥
Video: 13News Now: Winsome Earle Sears
Ann Graham retweeted
Parents are the primary protectors of their children, not "domestic terrorists."
Today, @CivilRights Division & @usedgov urged all State AGs to ensure schools get prior, WRITTEN parental consent before a child receives any mental health screening. Opt-outs don't satisfy PPRA.
justice.gov/opa/pr/us-depart…
Ann Graham retweeted
Whole Foods' private-label '365' chicken comes from Perdue plants with salmonella issues: report trib.al/xWrT6dT
Ann Graham retweeted
I joined my House GOP colleagues in voting to condemn and denounce socialism in all its forms. This was a commonsense vote, but unfortunately, 192 of my colleagues across the aisle chose not to support it. I will always stand up for the values and principles that make our country strong and protect the freedoms that define our nation.
@HouseGOP
Ann Graham retweeted
Christa Pike is an evil witch who should rot in prison, but she shouldn’t be executed. Read my reasoning here for @Daily_MailUS : dailymail.com/debate/article…
Ann Graham retweeted
When asked directly if Islam and Sharia law can coexist with Western culture, Dr. Swain's answer was simple: no. It's a stance that reflects her broader belief that a nation cannot function under two competing legal and cultural systems. Curious about her reasoning? Submit your question for the next Swain Line.
#CarolSwain #SwainLine #ConservativeVoice #FaithAndPolitics #WesternCulture #Accountability
































