From the article.:
Quote:
In this case, Flynn initially retained Covington and Burling to help him make disclosures under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) for work through his consulting firm prior to Donald Trump's inauguration. Later, the government launched a criminal investigation into whether those FARA filings were false and whether Flynn had made false statements about an unrelated telephone call with the Russian ambassador while Trump was the president-elect. Covington represented Flynn in this criminal investigation and his subsequent guilty plea, which almost certainly constituted a conflict of interest, as I've previously explained.
That first sentence is not entirely accurate. Flynn's company, Flynn Intelligence Group, retained Covington, Burling to advise them which federal disclosure laws they needed to comply with regarding the Inovo deal. On its face that deal was with a Dutch company. (Contract was signed in mid-August 2016.)
Initially, Covington advised that a FARA filing was not required, so one was not prepared. But at the end of the day, they are the lawyers, they are supposed to know which questions to ask and if their client doesn't know the answer instruct them to find out with written documentation,
before coming to the conclusion that a FARA filing was not required in this instance.
To be fair to Covington, Burling, FARA (pre Mueller) was and administrative matter and not treated as a criminal matter in the past. So at best, if their conclusion was incorrect, a small fine, making the filing and everyone gets on down the road. I'm sure it came as quite a surprise to them when all hell broke loose. And their legal advice was at the heart of it although not the sole cause.
Still think that Inovo deal was a complete set-up.