Senate Intel Continues To Pursue Flynn Documents In Russia Probe

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., right, and committee Vice Chairman Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va. confer on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 12, 2017, during the committee's confi... Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., right, and committee Vice Chairman Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va. confer on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 12, 2017, during the committee's confirmation hearing for CIA Director-designate Rep. Michael Pompeo, R-Kan. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

The Senate Intelligence Committee is continuing its efforts to obtain documents from former national security adviser Michael Flynn, after he refused to comply with a committee subpoena this week in its investigation of Russia interference in the 2016 election.

Intel committee Chair Richard Burr (R-NC) and Vice Chair Mark Warner (D-VA) announced Tuesday after a closed door committee meeting that they would be sending a written response to Flynn’s lawyers, questioning their rationale for invoking his 5th Amendment right against self incrimination as the basis for not complying with the committee’s subpoena of his documents.

They committee leaders also said they were in the process of sending subpoenas to two of Flynn’s businesses, seeking additional documents. The lawmakers said they did not believe the businesses could invoke the 5th Amendment.

“While we disagree with General Flynn’s lawyers interpretation of taking the 5th, it is even more clear that a business does not have the right to take the 5th if it’s a corporation,” Warner said.

The two Flynn businesses that will be issued subpoenas, according to Warner, were Flynn Intel, LLC and Flynn Intel, Inc.

The letter the committee sent to Flynn’s lawyers would also address claims by the lawyers that the committee’s document requests lacked specificity, Burr said.

“We have been very specific in the documents now that we have requested from General Flynn,” he said.

Burr did not rule out further steps, including holding Flynn in contempt, if he continued to refuse to comply.

“We have taken the actions that we feel are appropriate right now,” Burr said. “If in fact there is not a response, we will seek additional counsel and advice on how to proceed forward. At the end of that option is a contempt charge, and I’ve said that everything is on the table. That is not our preference today.”

Burr also explained why the committee is not considering offering Flynn immunity. “It’s a decision that the committee has made that we are not the appropriate avenue in a potential criminal investigation,” Burr said. “As valuable as General Flynn might be to our counter intelligence investigation, we do not believe that it is our place today to offer him immunity from this committee.”

Latest DC

Notable Replies

  1. Avatar for drtv drtv says:

    So, Flynn–Your corporation has to hand over the docs, and you are not getting immunity from these guys.

    What was it you said earlier about “Taking the Fifth?”

  2. ”The lawmakers said they did not believe the businesses could invoke the 5th Amendment.”

    “Traitorous, Kremlin-funded, money-laundering shell corporations are people, my friend!”

  3. Q: Does he have any kind of monthly benefits from his time in the military, monetary or otherwise? Can they go after that? Does that ever happen?

  4. Avatar for zsak zsak says:

    Flynn Intel, LLC and Flynn Intel, Inc.

    Modest fella, isn’t he

  5. I’m kind of surprised we didn’t see one for Flynntel LLC.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

10 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for lestatdelc Avatar for austin_dave Avatar for leftflank Avatar for crackerjack Avatar for irasdad Avatar for sandyh Avatar for joelopines Avatar for cincypix Avatar for timothytim Avatar for bankerpup Avatar for zsak Avatar for drtv

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: