dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
Former Qwest CEO Leaves Jail, Still Blames NSA
by Karl Bode 10:28AM Monday Sep 30 2013
Back in 2009, you'll recall that former Qwest CEO Joe Nacchio headed to prison to serve a six-year prison sentence for cooking the books and insider trading. You might also recall that Nacchio claimed he was being punished in part because Qwest (now CenturyLink) was the only US telco to refuse to participate in the government's warrantless wiretapping program.

Nacchio got out of jail last week, and the Wall Street Journal has a paywalled story on his experiences in prison (and some new drug dealing friends Nacchio made while in there). More interesting perhaps is that Nacchio is still blaming his refusal to cooperate on domestic spying as the reason he was particularly singled out amidst an ocean of cooked books and dodgy financial dealings:
quote:
Mr. Nacchio said he still believes his insider-trading prosecution was government retaliation for rebuffing requests in 2001 from the National Security Agency to access his customers' phone records. His plans to use that belief as a defense at trial never materialized; some of the evidence he wanted to use was deemed classified and barred from being introduced.

To Mr. Nacchio, the revelations of former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, who leaked documents saying the agency monitors the email and phone records of Americans, have justified his own stance. He contended the NSA's request was illegal. "I feel vindicated," he said. "I never broke the law, and I never will."
Nacchio adds that the former CEO is "still well-off financially, and still owns several residences"-- and plans to write a book on his dealings with the government.

view:
topics flat nest 

elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO

Likely

it would not surprise me at ALL
any one that thinks VZN and ATT arnt cooking the books is nuts
dynodb
Premium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN

He's a crook

The only injustice here is that he wasn't sent to rot in prison for eternity.

He broke a lot more laws than those he was convicted for, and fired anybody who tried to stop him.

The only conspiracy at play was his own criminal conspiracy to defraud stockholders.

just a crook

@comcast.net

Re: He's a crook

said by dynodb:

The only injustice here is that he wasn't sent to rot in prison for eternity.

He broke a lot more laws than those he was convicted for, and fired anybody who tried to stop him.

The only conspiracy at play was his own criminal conspiracy to defraud stockholders.

He got what he deserved. And his whining that others didn't get convicted is the same as all criminals. They all think that because others didn't get caught, they should get a free pass.

johnthackr

@57.80.144.x
Hard to say about his particular case, since evidence he wanted to introduce was deemed classified and barred from court.

It's certainly plausible that rejecting a government demand could cause the loss of government contracts, even those already awarded (particularly classified contracts.) And that would cause the stock to tank. That's his argument, but I certainly can't know for sure.

Are you arguing that a CEO has a fiduciary duty to cooperate with government spying, since that's the way to make as much money for the stockholders? It's an argument.

RWSI

join:2012-11-27
Albuquerque, NM

Breaking bad.

Sounds like a real breaking bad story possible.
Qwest ewe and yuck.
raythompsontn

join:2001-01-11
Oliver Springs, TN

Our Government Vindictive?

Surely you jest. Just ask Martha Stewart.

batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ

I don't think so.

quote:
some of the evidence he wanted to use was deemed classified and barred from being introduced.
If the government denied evidence under subpoena the charges must be drooped like they were/are when the NSAs involvement in common criminal invitations would be disclosed.

meeeeeeeeee

join:2003-07-13
Newburgh, NY

Re: I don't think so.

said by batterup:

If the government denied evidence under subpoena the charges must be drooped like they were/are when the NSAs involvement in common criminal invitations would be disclosed.

That's not how a police state works. In a police state, like Amerika, the government makes up and changes the rules as they go along, whenever needed, retroactively if necessary. It gets a little confusing sometimes, but you'll get used to it. It's easier if you just go with the premise that there ARE no rules except what the government says this minute and that anything you do can be deemed to be criminal if it suits the government..
--
"when the people have suffered many abuses under the control of a totalitarian leader, they not only have the right but the duty to overthrow that government." - The U.S. Declaration of Independence