Saving the planet
Prosecutors handling the case against Lt Gen Michael Flynn requested the authorization of his former attorneys to provide documents detailing their representation of Flynn to the government. The step followed the move of Flynn to withdraw his contrary plea with the notion that his former attorneys had misrepresented him. The prosecutor requested for time to deliberate with the attorneys before responding to the request. Initially, Flynn retained the lawyers to facilitate his disclosure under the Foreign Agents Acts for using his firm before Donald Trump’s inauguration. The government then investigated the correctness of the filings Covington represented Flynn in this case, where he pleaded guilty, elaborating a conflict of interest. The defense confirmed its willingness to delay the fillings and asked the court for time to deal with the delicate issue. The court granted the request until the issue is resolved. The judge directed that the parties should communicate on their stand by March 2, 2020, for him to pass a decision. If the council is found ineffective, the attorney-client privilege is waivered, leading to the disclosure of the information for adjudication of the claim. In Flynn’s case, the attorney-client privilege works the former attorney may be allowed to the likely outcomes of the case include disclosing the information to the government in the absence of Flynn or his new attorney. In the absence of an agreement between defense and prosecution, both Covington attorneys and prosecutors are likely to testify. Also, Brandon Van Grack will testify for the government if there is a hearing regarding ineffective counsel. He could also be excluded from the discussions between the Covington lawyers and the prosecutors. The case is the first of its kind over the years, where high profile lawyers are accused of misrepresentation.