General Flynn former attorneys Covington & Burling file court doc April 28, 2020 revealing 6800 more documents and emails found, Miscommunication with IT staff
“Immediately after President Trump won election, opponents inaugurated what they call ‘The Resistance’ and they rallied around an explicit strategy of using every tool and maneuver to sabotage the functioning of the executive branch.” …Attorney General Barr
And I’ve now found a witness who says the original 302 did in fact say that Flynn was honest with the agents.”...Attorney Sidney Powell
“Instead of doing so, the government has continued to defy its
constitutional, ethical and legal obligations to this Court and to the defense, and to hide evidence that it knows exonerates Mr. Flynn. As is the essence of the problem here, instead of protecting its citizens, the “government” is protecting its own criminal conduct and operatives.”…Attorney Sidney Powell October 23, 2019
COVINGTON & BURLING LLP’S SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL NOTICE
REGARDING TRANSFER OF CASE FILE TO SUCCESSOR COUNSEL
filed April 28, 2020.
On April 8, 2020, Covington & Burling LLP (“Covington”) submitted a Supplemental Notice Regarding Transfer of Case File to Successor Counsel (“Supplemental Notice”), in which Covington informed the Court that it had found emails that were not transferred to successor counsel last year due to errors in the process of collecting and searching electronic materials,
as well as two pages of handwritten notes that inadvertently were not transferred. Covington submits this Second Supplemental Notice to apprise the Court of the current status of this matter and to describe documents that were transferred today.
As context, Mr. Flynn’s new counsel delivered a letter to Covington terminating its representation of him on June 4, 2019. The Court granted Covington leave to withdraw on June 7, 2019. [June 7, 2019 Minute Order]. One week later, on June 14, 2019, Covington transferred the vast bulk of its client file, consisting of its working case file, as well as additional documents to supplement it.”
In the Supplemental Notice, Covington noted that it had discovered, during the course of responding to this Court’s March 6, 2020 Order [ECF No. 174], emails that had been inadvertently omitted from the previous file transfer. Since then, we have worked diligently (a) to understand the reason that the email collection in June and July 2019 had been narrower than intended, (b) to re-execute the email searches that we had intended to conduct last year, and then
(c) to collect, process, review, and transfer the emails promptly to Mr. Flynn’s current counsel.
Covington determined that an unintentional miscommunication involving the firm’s information technology personnel had led them, in some instances, to run search terms on subsets of emails the firm had collected for its response to document requests in United States v.Rafiekian, the case involving Mr. Flynn’s business partner and their FARA-related work through their consulting firm, rather than on the broader sets of emails that should have been searched.
The subsets that actually were searched nevertheless contained a large volume of emails concerning our representation of Mr. Flynn and his consulting firm. All of the emails resulting from this search were transferred to successor counsel in June and July 2019.
Covington has now re-executed the email collection and searches on the broader set of emails, correcting the error made as a result of the miscommunication. In so doing, we again used electronic search terms and manual reviews to target documents in the client file. This effort yielded an additional set of approximately 6,800 documents and emails (including attachments) that were not produced during the client file transfer in July 2019.1
These documents, comprising approximately 1% of the 669,800 total documents transferred in this case, were produced to successor counsel today.”