HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031673.jpg

COVINGTON The Honorable Richard Burr 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 “[bJecause 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