The two leaders of the House oversight committee said there was no evidence Flynn complied with federal law. They said Flynn could be criminally prosecuted, and they said Flynn should surrender the money he was paid.
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump's former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, appeared to break U.S. law when he failed to seek permission or inform the government about accepting tens of thousands of dollars from Russian organizations after a trip there in 2015, leaders of a House committee investigating possible Russian ties with the Trump campaign said Tuesday.
They congressmen also raised new questions about Flynn's consulting firm accepting $530,000 from a company tied to Turkey's government.
Reps. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, and Elijah Cummings, D-Md., said Flynn could be criminally prosecuted because, as a former Army officer, he was barred from accepting the foreign payments. Flynn, who headed the military's top intelligence agency, is a retired lieutenant general and was Trump's national security adviser until he was fired.
"That money needs to be recovered," said Chaffetz, chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. "You simply cannot take money from Russia, Turkey or anybody else."
Cummings also criticized the White House for refusing to turn over documents the committee requested about Flynn's foreign contacts during his three-week stint as national security adviser.
"That is simply unacceptable," he said.
Flynn campaigned vigorously for Trump before the presidential election and was chosen as national security adviser in January. But Trump fired him in February on grounds that he had failed to notify senior administration officials about his contacts with Russian officials before his appointment.
Cummings said Flynn's failure to formally report the Russian payments on paperwork requesting his security clearance amounted to concealment of the money, which could be prosecuted as a felony.
Flynn's lawyer said in a statement that Flynn disclosed the trip, organized by the Russia Today news organization, in conversations with the Defense Intelligence Agency, where he was its former director.
"As has previously been reported, General Flynn briefed the Defense Intelligence Agency, a component agency of (the Defense Department), extensively regarding the RT speaking event trip both before and after the trip, and he answered any questions that were posed by DIA concerning the trip during those briefings," attorney Robert Kelner said.
Chaffetz spoke publicly after a closed-door briefing with Defense Department officials. "There was nothing in the data to show that Gen. Flynn complied with the law," he said
The new details about Flynn's actions came as Congress returned from recess and investigations into Trump associates' potential ties with Russia moved forward.
Earlier Tuesday, a Senate Judiciary subcommittee announced a public panel May 8 to hear testimony for the first time from the former acting attorney general, Sally Yates, who played a role in Flynn's firing.
Yates was supposed to testify publicly before the House intelligence committee in March, but that was canceled and has yet to be rescheduled. Some Democrats believe the White House wants to limit what Yates says publicly, but the White House has denied this. Former National Intelligence Director James Clapper is also to testify at the May 8 hearing.
The House and Senate intelligence committees are the main congressional bodies investigating Russia's interference in the 2016 election and possible ties with the Trump campaign.
Yates' testimony will mark her first appearance on Capitol Hill since she was fired in late January after refusing to defend President Trump's travel ban on certain foreigners.
Yates told the White House in January that Flynn had been misleading in his account of a December phone call with the Russian ambassador to the United States in which economic sanctions against Russia were discussed. Flynn was ousted after those discrepancies were made public.
The White House said last month that it had never tried to prevent Yates from testifying. The assertion followed the publication of a series of letters in which her attorney pushed back against what he suggested was Justice Department guidance on what Yates could say about conversations she had with the White House.