Senate Issues Two Subpoenas to Flynn’s Businesses
Fifth Amendment doesn’t apply to corporations.
On Monday, former national security adviser Michael Flynn refused to honor a subpoena from the Senate Intelligence Committee for documents connected to the investigation into its Russian probe. He invoked his Fifth Amendment right.
The committee has tried another way to receive the documents by issuing two subpoenas for two of Flynn’s former businesses. From Reuters:
“While we disagree with General Flynn’s lawyers’ interpretation of taking the Fifth … it’s even more clear that a business does not have a right to take the Fifth,” the panel’s vice chairman, Democratic Senator Mark Warner, told reporters, referring to Flynn’s decision to invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
Committee Chairman Richard Burr (R-NC) told the media that the lawmakers will use all the options on the table they can to get the documents they need for the investigation. From Politico:
“If in fact there’s not a response, we’ll seek additional counsel advice on how to proceed forward,” Burr said at a joint press briefing with Warner. “At the end of that option is a contempt charge, and I’ve said that everything is on the table.”
Burr added that the committee has sent a letter to Flynn’s lawyer, Robert Kelner, questioning his assertion that Flynn can invoke the Fifth Amendment when it comes to producing documents.
Flynn’s lawyer released this statement when he invoked the Fifth:
“The context in which the Committee has called for General Flynn’s testimonial production of documents makes it clear that he has more than a reasonable apprehension that any testimony he provides could be used against him,” Flynn’s lawyers wrote in a letter to Burr and Warner.
But Burr stressed that contempt of Congress will remain the last option they will use. Reuters continued:
“That’s not our preference today. We would like to hear from General Flynn. We would like to see his documents,” Burr said. “We would like him to tell his story because he publicly said: ‘I’ve got a story to tell.’ We’re allowing him that opportunity to tell it.”
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
I really don’t care about these stupid Senate Republicans and their show trials. They are just preening for the cameras and don’t actually do anything. Screw them. They can kiss my grits.
“At the end of that option is a contempt charge, and I’ve said that everything is on the table.”
What percentage of Americans have contempt for congress and politicians in general?
Give Flynn immunity and he will testify.
Isn’t this the place where lawyers tell us if Flynn can be forced to supply documents from his business if it incriminates him.
I wonder if he’ll say “FU” for years like Eric “Dick” Holder did.
What was Holder’s punishment for contempt??? Anything at all ??
It’s up to the US Attorney for DC to prosecute him before the statute runs out. I believe there’s still time, and Sessions should instruct the USA to charge him.
“The committee has tried another way to receive the documents by issuing two subpoenas for two of Flynn’s >former< businesses. "
Ok, are these documents that are required to be preserved after a business is closed?
If not, they're gone, and the Senate can (censored) up a rope.
So Flynn decides which of his documents are pertinent to the Russia probe, turns those over, shreds the rest and explains they were just about yoga.
Clown Car Congress.
But Burr stressed that contempt of Congress will remain the last option they will use.
Right, threaten to use their last option first. Champion negotiating strategists, these guys are not. Particularly when their biggest hammer will just leave their victim quaking in Eric Holder’s boots.
That statement is a general rule of law, and like most general rules there are several exceptions.
Corporate oral testimony and production of documents is governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6). The 30(b)(6)subpoena, or other type of notice specify particular topics on which the organization is required to testify. The organization must then designate one or more individuals (usually officers of the corporation) to testify on its behalf.
The designated individual or individuals must testify about information known or reasonably available to the organization. If the corporate information requested under the subpoena can only come from the individual’s personal knowledge and disclosure would subject the individual to a “real and appreciable” risk of self-incrimination, the fifth amendment may be invoked.
Thank you. I did some research and that’s what I understood. It made no sense that they could go around constitutional protection. Burr’s interpretation would take away fifth amendment rights from anyone who is a corporate officer. Many professionals incorporate to prevent unlimited legal liability. They are the corporation. Burr would make them testify against themselves.
Instead of investigating who is leaking classified intelligence to the FakeNews outlets they are stuck on stupid with this Trump-Russia delusion thing. The Roll-Over Party Congress at its best.
Until Hillary Clinton is prosecuted for violating the Espionage Act in regard to her home brew server, destroying evidence (smashing phones, wiping computer hard drives – with a clothe? – deleting emails, lying to FBI and Congress), deriliction of duty in the death of ambassador Stevens, et al, at Benghazi, lying to Congress, money laundering, selling access to office via her slush fund ‘charity’, the Emoluments Clause, and obstructing justice via her pervert hubby who met with A.G. Lynch in a secrtet meeting at an airport while she was under FBI investigation…..
I. DON’T. CARE. ABOUT. RUSSIA!