HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031673.jpg
2.32 MB
Extraction Summary
4
People
4
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal correspondence / letter (page 4)
File Size:
2.32 MB
Summary
This document is Page 4 of a legal letter from the law firm Covington to Senators Richard Burr and Mark Warner (Senate Intelligence Committee), dated May 22, 2017. It argues that a subpoena issued to General Michael Flynn is overly broad and that complying with it would violate his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination because the Committee lacks 'reasonable particularity' regarding the existence of the documents. The text details specific subpoena demands for records of Flynn's meetings and communications with Russian officials and the Trump campaign between 2015 and 2017. Note: Despite the user prompt, this document pertains to the Russia investigation/Michael Flynn, not Jeffrey Epstein.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Richard Burr | Senator / Recipient |
Addressed as 'The Honorable', likely in his capacity as Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
|
| Mark R. Warner | Senator / Recipient |
Addressed as 'The Honorable', likely in his capacity as Vice Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
|
| General Flynn | Subject of Subpoena |
Michael Flynn; the document argues against a subpoena issued to him.
|
| Ponds | Legal Precedent Subject |
Referenced in a case citation regarding the Fifth Amendment and act of production.
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Covington |
Law firm sending the letter (Header).
|
|
| The Committee |
Likely the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (based on addressees), the body issuing the subpoena.
|
|
| Trump campaign |
Mentioned in the context of communications records requested by the subpoena.
|
|
| House Oversight |
Referenced in the footer stamp (HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031673).
|
Timeline (1 events)
June 16, 2015 - January 20, 2017
Time period specified in the subpoena for requested meetings and communications.
Various
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Subject matter of the investigation and requested documents.
|
Relationships (2)
Subpoena requests records of meetings and communications between Flynn and Russian officials.
Subpoena requests communications between Flynn and members/advisors of the Trump campaign.
Key Quotes (4)
"General Flynn’s act of production would be testimonial in nature."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031673.jpg
Quote #1
"The great breadth of the Committee’s subpoena to General Flynn suggests that his act of producing the requested documents, if they even exist, would be testimonial in nature"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031673.jpg
Quote #2
"In sum, the subpoena demands a list of 'all meetings' with 'any Russian official,' 'all communication records' with 'any Russian official,' and 'all communication records . . . related in any way to Russia'"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031673.jpg
Quote #3
"The broad sweep and lack of specificity of these demands clearly reflect that the Committee does not have specific knowledge regarding"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031673.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,922 characters)
COVINGTON
The Honorable Richard Burr
The Honorable Mark R. Warner
May 22, 2017
Page 4
The Honorable Mark R. Warner
May 22, 2017
Page 4
The court contrasted the concept of "reasonable particularity" with mere general knowledge of an event or topic, finding that mere "prior knowledge [of a topic] . . . cannot suffice to establish [the government's] prior knowledge of the existence and location of the documents relating or referring to those topics." Id. at 326. Ultimately, the court held that "[b]ecause the government has failed to show with reasonable particularity that it knew of the existence and location of most of the subpoenaed documents . . . Ponds' act of production was sufficiently testimonial to implicate his right against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution." Id. at 316.
B. Because the Committee's subpoena fails to demonstrate with reasonable particularity prior knowledge of the requested documents, General Flynn's act of production would be testimonial in nature.
The great breadth of the Committee's subpoena to General Flynn suggests that his act of producing the requested documents, if they even exist, would be testimonial in nature, given that the Committee has not demonstrated knowledge of the "existence, possession, and authenticity of the subpoenaed documents with reasonable particularity such that the communication inherent in the act of production can be considered a foregone conclusion." Id. at 324. Schedule A of the subpoena requests production of:
1. A list of all meetings between you and any Russian official or representative of Russian business interests which took place between June 16, 2015, and 12pm on January 20, 2017. For each meeting listed, please include the date, location, all individuals present, and complete copies of any notes taken by you or on your behalf.
2. All communications records, including electronic communications records such as e-mail or text messages, written correspondence, and phone records, of communications that took place between June 16, 2015, and 12pm on January 20 2017, to which you and any Russian official or representative of Russian business interests was a party.
3. All communications records, including electronic communications records such as e-mail or text message, written correspondence, and phone records, of communications related in any way to Russia, conducted between you and members and advisors of the Trump campaign prior to 12pm on January 20, 2017.
In sum, the subpoena demands a list of "all meetings" with "any Russian official," "all communication records" with "any Russian official," and "all communication records . . . related in any way to Russia" conducted with unnamed "members and advisors of the Trump campaign," that occurred over an 18-month period. The broad sweep and lack of specificity of these demands clearly reflect that the Committee does not have specific knowledge regarding
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031673
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document