NATIVE AMERICAN CONNECTIONS

NON PROFIT ACCUSED OF DEFAMATION AND RETALIATION IN LIGHT OF DAMAGING INVESTIGATIVE REPORT

A distinguished employee of the Phoenix nonprofit organization, Native American Connections, was terminated under dubious circumstances after being falsely accused of misappropriations he did not commit. An estimated 20% of wrongful termination lawsuits filed in the U.S. involve false allegations of theft. However, what makes this case particularly notable was that the accused was finalizing a year-long internal investigation that would have exposed extensive corruption and financial mismanagement within the organization.

​

Bruce Tucker, who held roles as division controller, VP controller, and twice as interim CFO at Native American Connections (NAC), is a former contracted intelligence officer with a distinguished career spanning over two decades. Despite his exemplary record, Tucker was abruptly placed on administrative leave over allegations of misappropriation without any indication what it pertained to or the chance to defend himself. “I was blindsided.” Tucker asserted, “There was no indication anything was wrong.”  He was assured in a letter from CEO Trula Breuninger that an investigation would take place. He believed he would be cleared of any wrongdoing once the investigation was complete. “It was obviously a misunderstanding,” Tucker recalls, “but I was very disappointed that they [CEO Trula Breuninger and CFO Theresa Perkins] did not come to that same conclusion. I had served the organization faithfully for over a year. They should have given me the benefit of the doubt. This was a betrayal.”

​

Despite the promise of an investigation, Tucker was officially terminated via email the following day. “There was no way they could have completed an investigation in half a day,” he said. “They didn’t even attempt to find the truth. They accused, tried, and convicted me before I even knew there was a problem.”

​

The lack of proper investigation not only violated NAC’s own policy but also raised questions about the true motives behind Tucker’s termination. The decision by Breuninger, and Perkins, has made others believe it was an attempt to impede Tucker’s ongoing investigation and nothing short of preemptive retaliation.  

​

 “When I argued how unfounded their accusations were they quickly changed their official reason from ‘misappropriation’ to ‘failure to protect NAC assets.’  It was clear to me they were determined to fire me, no matter what I said, no matter how innocent I was.” added Tucker. “I am convinced now this was all about stopping my investigation and this would give them a reasonable cause.”

​

Lewis Roca Law Firm, representing NAC, informed Tucker that his termination for “failure to protect NAC assets” was justified and that similar action would have been taken against anyone in such circumstances. However, Tucker disputes this assertion, pointing out that his supervisor, Theresa Perkins, recently transferred $140,000 to a fraudulent bank account based on a phone call from someone posing as a vendor, yet she faced no consequences. “She was conned into making that transfer just a week or two before I was terminated. That was considerably more money than the $18,000 transfer they accused me of, and they [NAC] recovered all that money. I doubt they will recover any of the money she lost,” Tucker disclosed. He went on to clarify that the fraudulent transaction he was accused of was initiated by the recipient bank—a bank located on the East Coast that no one at NAC had access to. “It is impossible to protect something you have no control over,” Tucker argued.

​

Despite the organization’s refusal to investigate further, Tucker was required to report the potential breach to Operations Security (OPSEC) at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). Given Tucker’s history with the intelligence community and classified projects, the incident was considered serious. “There are additional ramifications when crimes are committed against officers of the U.S. Government, and they must be addressed immediately,” stated Michael Reaves, the Security Chief for Section 5105 Operations. “Identity theft of anyone with access to classified programs is a major concern, and there is a prescribed process in place to deal with it.”

​

Investigators from Reaves’ Washington D.C. office tracked the IP address of the perpetrator. With information provided by Tucker and a detailed log of his network activity, they identified the primary suspect, who revealed pertinent details in his confession, including accomplices. Reaves’ office concluded there was no evidence indicating the suspects were aware of Tucker’s government connections; their actions appeared to be financially motivated. The case was subsequently transferred to the Cybercrimes Unit for further investigation. Tucker was cleared of any wrongdoing, though the investigation remains ongoing as authorities continue to search for the second suspect.

​

Despite the true perpetrators behind the crimes that led to Tucker’s dismissal being identified, the nonprofit has continued to stonewall and ignore his calls for accountability, refusing to address what he claims is a wrongful termination. Meanwhile, his reputation has been severely damaged, and his once-promising career with the organization has ended abruptly.

​

“I’ve tried everything to get through to them to make this right. They responded with threats of lawsuits and attempts to intimidate me into silence. It all comes back to the internal investigation. I even offered them a chance to extend the investigation so they could make improvements and self-report the findings, knowing they had a better chance of getting a simple reprimand. They ignored my offer and now face serious consequences,” Tucker said. “They went as far as to accuse me of harassment when all I wanted was for them to is correct their mistake. I think most people would want their name cleared of this type of thing.”

​

Regardless of the severity of the situation, NAC remains silent. The organization’s failure to uphold due process and properly investigate the matter has left Tucker’s future uncertain, raising questions about the integrity and motives of the nonprofit’s leadership. Tucker’s ongoing involvement in government programs requires a Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI) clearance, which could be jeopardized by these allegations. Tucker states he may be forced to file a defamation lawsuit if they do not retract their false statements. 

​

According to the Office of Foundation Oversight, Tucker’s investigation uncovered significant evidence of internal misconduct, implicating several senior officials at the nonprofit in acts of corruption, including the misappropriation of funds meant for charitable initiatives. These revelations pose a serious threat to the organization’s reputation and financial stability, leading some to speculate that the leadership is taking extreme measures to suppress the findings. “Harassment and intimidation work on most people; however, Mr. Tucker is not like most people,” the report noted.

​

Legal experts argue that the nonprofit’s refusal to allow Tucker an opportunity to defend himself not only violates basic principles of due process but also indicates an attempt to suppress his findings. “It is deeply troubling when whistleblowers, especially those with such an exemplary background, are silenced in this way,” commented an attorney familiar with the case. “The timing of his termination is no coincidence.”

​

Despite these obstacles, Tucker remains resolute in his pursuit of justice. “I have dedicated my life to dismantling criminal networks, and now I’m being accused of being a criminal. That’s something I will not tolerate.”  he said in a recent statement. “I will not allow my reputation to be destroyed by lies and corruption. The truth will come out—it always does—and those responsible for these injustices will be held accountable.”

​

The case has drawn significant attention from advocacy groups, who say it underscores the risks faced by whistleblowers exposing wrongdoing within organizations. Several watchdog groups have called for an independent investigation into NAC’s actions, demanding an apology and restitution for the treatment of the employee.

​

As public pressure mounts, the nonprofit faces growing demands to respond. Whether it will finally accept responsibility or continue to ignore the controversy remains to be seen.

AS DISCUSSED ON YOUTUBE PODCAST: