Thread: GOP senator: Flynn 'not cooperating' in Russia probe

GOP senator: Flynn 'not cooperating' in Russia probe

BY KATIE BO WILLIAMS - 05/18/17 11:35 AM EDT 2,886

Former national security adviser Michael Flynn is not cooperating with the Senate Intelligence Committee's investigation into Russian election interference, Chairman Richard Burr (R-N.C.) said Thursday.

Burr initially said Flynn was not complying with a subpoena issued by the committee before quickly walking back his remarks to reporters.

While Flynn "is not cooperating" so far, Burr said, he hasn't gotten a "definitive" answer from Flynn's lawyers.

"I may have been premature," Burr said. "There may be a day or two left."

Flynn's attorneys "have not yet indicated their intentions" on the subpoena, Burr said later in a statement released by his office, but he added, "I welcome their willingness to cooperate."

Flynn's lawyers did not immediately respond to a request for comment or confirmation.

The demand is for documents related to the committee’s investigation into Russian interference in the presidential election.

Flynn — the former national security adviser who was fired in February for misleading Vice President Pence and other White House officials about the contents of a December phone call with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak — has been under scrutiny for accepting payments from Russia and Turkey and allegedly misleading the government about them.

Flynn had previously offered to testify before the Senate and House Intelligence committees — which are both investigating Russian interference in the election — in exchange for immunity, but it does not appear that either committee has accepted the offer.

In April, the committee sent a series of requests to several former President Trump associates asking for records on any dealings with Russia — a request Flynn’s lawyers declined to cooperate with through counsel, sparking the subpoena.

Trump’s former foreign policy adviser, Carter Page, informal adviser Roger Stone and former campaign chairman Paul Manafort were also asked to provide documents. As of last week, the committee had received two responses, according to Burr. One of these, Page, is publicly known. Burr declined to reveal the second.

The letters asked for the men to list any meetings they might have had with Russian officials between June 16, 2015 — the day Trump formally launched his presidential campaign — and Trump's inauguration on Jan. 20, as well as records of any communications during that period.

The senators also want details on any financial assets or real estate holding tied to Russia and a broader list of meetings between any Trump campaign aides and Russians.

In December 2015, Flynn was paid $45,000 to speak at an event hosted in Moscow by the Kremlin-backed network RT, during which he was seated with Russian President Vladimir Putin. He also received payments for additional speeches to Russian firms Kaspersky and Volga Dnepr.

As a retired military officer, Flynn is prohibited under the emoluments clause of the Constitution from accepting payment from a foreign government without advance permission from both the secretary of State and the secretary of the Army.

According to documents released by House Oversight Committee ranking member Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), Flynn did not disclose the RT payment when he applied to renew his security clearance in January 2016, just a month after he traveled to Moscow.

Flynn’s lawyers have claimed that he briefed the Defense Intelligence Agency “extensively” both before and after the 2015 trip.
— Jordain Carney contributed.
Updated 1:38 p.m.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-s...ttees-subpoena

People need to remember that Michael Flynn is a retired general and private citizen and has been for over 2 years. He is also under investigation apparently for some sort of wrong-doing unrelated to the "Russia Inquiry". He has rights to due process, rights to remain silent, rights to protect himself. He is not required nor should he be expected to "cooperate" with Congressional committees or any government investigation. To date, the only infraction that's been reported is not registering Turkey as one of his clients, but that's perfectly understandable because his client he signed a contract with and who was responsible for payment under the contract was a Dutch-based business that then had some side-line oh by the way can you help my friend the President of Turkey get extradition on the Imam believed to be responsible for a coup attempt. And with all the ta-do, the Dutch based business reported months ago they want their money back because with everything going on the lobbyin influence didn't achieve much for them. Most clients don't like bad publicity because it defeats the purpose of the contract.

What Can Congress Do If Flynn (Or Anyone Else) Refuses to Comply With a Subpoena?

By Susan Hennessey, Helen Klein Murillo
Thursday, May 18, 2017, 2:27 PM




U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, then director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, testifies before a congressional hearing in Washington D.C. on Feb. 4, 2014.

SSCI Chairman Richard Burr said former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn will not honor a subpoena issued by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence last week. According to Burr, “General Flynn’s lawyers said that he would not honor the subpoena and that’s not a surprise to the committee” and that they would “figure out what the next step if any is.” Burr then walked back his statements, indicating that he may have spoken too soon, and the committee then corrected Burr’s comments to say that Flynn’s lawyer has not yet responded.


So it isn’t yet clear whether Flynn in fact intends to not comply, nor it is clear what, if any, legal grounds he might be asserting for noncompliance. The subpoena reportedly covers a “large number of documents” relating to “his interactions with Russian officials.” The White House has not given any indication as to whether it believes any of the documents are protected under executive privilege.

If Flynn does refuse to comply with the subpoena, the Committee has two basic choices: let it go or pursue contempt remedies against Flynn. Notably, the Congressional Research Service issued a detailed report just last week on Congress’s contempt power and the enforcement of subpoenas—though the timing may be coincidental.

Back in March we wrote about the rules governing congressional investigations and Congress’s contempt options:

Just as the Supreme Court has long recognized congressional subpoena power, so too has it upheld the enforcement power of contempt. If a witness refuses to comply with a subpoena to either produce documents or testify, Congress has a few options: inherent contempt authority, the criminal contempt statute, and various civil enforcement mechanisms.

Congress has oversight and investigative powers, and inherent within those is power to issue enforceable subpoenas. In order for congressional investigations to be effective, Congress needs the ability to compel the production of information and enforce its orders. Inherent contempt authority flows from the same idea: the ability to punish those who do not comply is necessary to the execution of legislative functions, including investigations. Under the inherent contempt authority, the House or Senate could call the witness and try him for contempt before the entire chamber. This used to be fairly common, but hasn’t been used in over 75 years.

Today, Congress more often relies on the criminal contempt statute.

As we explained before,

2 U.S.C. § 192...makes it a misdemeanor to refuse to testify or produce documents. Under 2 U.S.C. § 194, the committee and full chamber of Congress must certify the contempt referral, which is sent to a U.S. Attorney ‘whose duty it shall be to bring the matter before the grand jury for its action.’ Notably, a criminal contempt charge was certified against Attorney General Eric Holder, but the U.S. Attorney refused to bring it before the grand jury.

Because Congress cannot force U.S. Attorneys to do its bidding, if a U.S. Attorney refuses—as the U.S. Attorney who received the contempt certification against Holder did—it might have to fall back on its inherent contempt authority. Relying on the criminal contempt statute here raises an interesting question: Would Special Counsel Robert Mueller be considered the “appropriate United States attorney” for the purposes of congressional contempt referral, since the documents subpoenaed by Congress bear on those matters which are part of his investigation? Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s order relies on 28 C.F.R. 600, which says that “the Special Counsel shall exercise, within the scope of his or her jurisdiction, the full power and independent authority to exercise all investigative and prosecutorial functions of any United States Attorney.”

The relevant statute, 2 U.S.C. § 194, directs the President of the Senate (Vice President Mike Pence or, in his absence, president pro tempore Orrin Hatch) to certify the contempt statement of facts to the “to the appropriate United States attorney, whose duty it shall be to bring the matter before the grand jury for its action.” Typically, certifications against sitting executive branch officials have been made to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia.

(Interestingly, the current U.S. Attorney for D.C. Channing Phillips was not yet asked to resign because of the nature of his appointment.) Flynn, however, is not a current official and, recent federal grand jury subpoenas to Flynn’s associates were issued by the Eastern District of Virginia. So it’s unclear precisely where a referral would go. It is also unclear whether, given the subject matter, there is any reason the Senate could not determine that Mueller is the appropriate U.S. Attorney for the matter. If the certification were issued to the U.S. Attorney for D.C. or EDVA (or any other district, for that matter), the relevant offices would report to Rosenstein, and not Attorney General Sessions who is rescued, in deciding whether or not to refuse to bring the matter to the grand jury. Even in that case, Rosenstein may well defer the issue to Mueller, since the production of documents bear on his investigative equities.

The Senate has a final option for bringing contempt charges, as we referenced in our prior post:

Under a provision of the 1978 Ethics in Government Act, the Senate has another contempt mechanism: civil enforcement.

The Senate can authorize the Senate Office of Legal Counsel to bring an enforcement action in federal district court. If the court orders compliance with the subpoena and the witness refuses, they are then subject to contempt of court and imprisonment. This procedure cannot, however, be used against executive branch officers.

How the Committee proceeds may depend both on how much cooperation it anticipates from the Department of Justice—which may depend in large part of whether the relevant official is Mueller or Rosenstein—and on its own calculation about the wisdom of forcing the issue given the newly appointed special counsel.

Congress has tools at its disposal, but how it uses them is a strategic calculation.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-can...omply-subpoena

Congress’s Contempt Power and the Enforcement of Congressional Subpoenas: Law, History, Practice, and Procedure

PDF file @ https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34097.pdf

Russia probe ‘now a criminal investigation'

You can't force Flynn to cooperate or even testify because he is a target of the investigation. That's why he asked for immunity. No immunity, no testimony.

The Senate has a final option for bringing contempt charges, as we referenced in our prior post:
Under a provision of the 1978 Ethics in Government Act, the Senate has another contempt mechanism: civil enforcement.

The Senate can authorize the Senate Office of Legal Counsel to bring an enforcement action in federal district court. If the court orders compliance with the subpoena and the witness refuses, they are then subject to contempt of court and imprisonment. This procedure cannot, however, be used against executive branch officers.

It can't be used against a private citizen who is a target of the investigation either.

Lots of people say:
"They can't do this and they can't do that"
right up until the time they drag them into a prison cell.

Michael Flynn could face up to a year in jail for failing to comply with Senate Intel Committee’s subpoena


ELIZABETH PREZA
18 MAY 2017 AT 12:05 ET


Michael Flynn campaigning for Donald Trump during a prime speaking slot at the RNC Convention in 2016. Image courtesy of GOP.com

U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Richard Burr (R-NC) on Thursday said former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn will not honor a subpoena for Russian investigation documents, though he later clarified he has yet to receive a “definitive answer.”

Follow
Jamie Dupree
✔@jamiedupree

Burr: Flynn's lawyers refused to honor subpoena from Senate Intelligence Committee
8:13 AM - 18 May 2017

• 
  
• 
  232232 Retweets
• 
  198198 likes

Twitter Ads info & Privacy

7h
Chris Geidner
✔ @chrisgeidner

From Monday: "Why Flynn could easily beat his Senate subpoena" http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/15/flynn-senate-subpoena-russia-trump-238404 …pic.twitter.com/vnWB98UtgA

Follow
Chris Geidner
✔@chrisgeidner

Oh ... pic.twitter.com/Vnd2RRcB1T
8:47 AM - 18 May 2017

• 
  
• 
  1414 Retweets
• 
  2020 likes

Twitter Ads info & Privacy


“General Flynn’s lawyers said he will not honor the subpoena, and that’s not a surprise to the committee,” Burr said. “But we’ll figure out on General Flynn what the next step—if any—is.”

Flynn’s refusal would put him in contempt of Congress, a crime for which the former national security adviser could be jailed up to 12 months.

The committee last week issued a subpoena for documents regarding his interactions with Russia officials. The subpoena came after Robert Kelner, Flynn’s lawyer, told the committee Flynn would not voluntarily provide the documents they requested.

The Senate is investigating the “active measures” Russia took to influence the election. In addition to Flynn, the committee is also zeroing on former Trump camaign aide Carter Page, who has also expressed an unwillingness to cooperate. It’s also requested documents from the Treasury’s money laundering unit.

Follow
Ken Dilanian
✔@KenDilanianNBC

Senate intelligence committee has requested documents on Trump from Treasury's money laundering unit, NBC News confirms
6:26 AM - 10 May 2017

• 
  
• 
  10,33410,334 Retweets
• 
  15,59515,595 likes

Twitter Ads info & Privacy



The committee hopes to finish its investigation by years-end, one Congressional aide told Quartz.

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/05/mich...tees-subpoena/