NSA: Helix 4 Funding Line of Evidence

This content is Helix 4. It outlines the line of evidence linking the financial flows, with the illegal NSA domestic surveillance activity.

* * *

The funding and corporate goverance issues below are linked to Narus, and Viet Dinh, former US Asst. Attorney General.

* * *

Case Study: Illegal data mining and Corporate Involvement

Ref: Discussion

The discussions in Hewlett Packard show the range of corporate liability as it relates to the illegal NSA domestic surveillance. Ref. Note the board of director discussions, similar to those within the National Security Council, White House, AT&T, and Verizon.

Note the corporate board well understand the activity is illegal. Once the board has a meeting like this, those meeting minutes become subject to subpoena.

* * *

State Interest In Prosecuting Illegal Surveillance

Corporations are charted by the states andd corporate governance state issue. The State Attorney Generals can prosecute the NSA contractors involved in the illegal domestic surveillance-transcription process, which violates state privacy laws. This clarfies the State-level options against the President and his unconstitutional abuse of power:

1. Ref State prosecution of the Executive;

2. Ref State-directed DoJ staff attorney disbarment proceedings;

3. Ref State prosecution of NSA contractors, intermediaries, and corporate officers; and

4. Ref State-level proclamations calling for impeachment of Exectutive Officers using Rule 603.

There are other power which the states have and can assert: Ref

* * *

NSA Litigation Discovery

The lessons of Hewlette-Packard are noteworthy and are applicable to the discovery process in re NSA contractors. Note carefully in the Verizon and AT&T internal e-mails:

Evidence

Sample Legal Issues: Obstruction of justice, evidence destruction

The timing of board of director discussions;

Subsequent e-mails and written notes;

How the presented minutes compare or contrast with the recollections of the individual board of directors;

Who was notified after the discussion;

How the outside parties were notified, what form that communication took, and what responses routed through counsel memorialized the initial notification;

Actions

Sample Legal Issues: Criminal Fraud, Legal Malpractice, Recklessness, Breach, Negiligence

What action the boards took;

How did the board's fiduciary duties of due diligence and duty of care guide or not guide their appropriate or inappropriate actions;

To what extent are the actions beyond the "business judgment rule"-defense;

What resignations occurred; and were these resignations correctly reported, as required, to the Securities and Exchange Commission [8K];

Reporting

Sample legal issues: False official statements, failure to report, fraud on the market, 1933/4 violations

Have public statements by AT&T and Verizon violated the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act;

To what extent were shareholders given or denied material information to make informed decisions about voting for or against directors; or holding, selling, or buying shares on the open market;

What e-mail communication occurred subsequent to resignations; and whether this information was consistent with or inconsistent with information provided to the open market, SEC, the audit committee; and

Audits

Sample legal issue: Audit malpractice

To what extent the adverse information was or was not appropriately included in Statement on Accounting Standard 99 assessments: Extent to which audit scope should or should not be increased to identify internal control weaknesses related to indicators of fraud.

* * *

Ref U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee asks for records on H-P pre-texting investigation.

Ref AT&T, Helix 1, linked: FCC sent Letter of Inquiry, wants info on AT&T disclosures to H-P. [ FCC Open Meetings: Sept. 26 and Oct. 12]

Ref AT&T -- How long has it known about weaknesses in its accounts; and how was this exploited by the intermediaries working for NSA?

Ref CA Attorney General investigating.



Ref FISA requirements date back to 1978. Verizon well knows about Telestrategies, and the lawful interception requirements. The requirements outlined at the Conference were clear enough for the Board Members to immediately know they had a problem: They did not lawfully obtain warrants to engage in the constitutional violations. These are serious matters. There is no excuse for the H-P Board of Directors to have used this illegal method of pre-texting, or in using intermediaries to gather protected data. Telestrategies, Verizon, NARUS, and AT&T are linked through CALEA to this conference. Telestrategies is one of the conferences listed on the former NSA-employee Klein Affidavit in re NARUS STA 6400 use in San Francisco.

Ref The US government criminal investigators are well positioned. There is a great deal of information which is open, non-privileged, and immune to claims of attorney-client privilege. Information has been provided to the Securities and Exchange Commission, FCC, FTC, and FBI.

Ref War crimes prosecutors' subpoenas can be submitted to the Bank of International Settlements [BIS]. The funding flows cross international borders: United States, Thailand, Korea, Japan, and China.

Ref H-P outside counsel -- Larry Sonsini, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

Ref Larry Babbio, of Verizon, is on the Hewlett Packard Board of Directors.

Ref Viet Dinh, former US Attorney General, is involved.

Ref There is precedent for State Attorney Generals prosecuting those who engage in pretexting. The conduct is similar to conduct by intermediaries working for NSA.

Ref Tom Perkins, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.

Ref NARUS, associated with AT&T and the NARUS STA 6400, is connected to Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.

Ref The financing company, as with Helix 1, 2, 3, is broadly associated with entities implicated in the illegal NSA domestic surveillance.