As @Techno_Fog linked earlier, Gov't filed surreply in Flynn's case. He also hits some main factual issues. And @SidneyPowell1 sur-surreply will likely nail those and other factual issue as well as three other huge issues. 1/
@Techno_Fog @SidneyPowell1 2/ First, the gov't completely fails to explain how Flynn's statements were material. They knew what Flynn said from the tapes AND in fact were gloating when Flynn denied it right after the meeting. The gov't analysis in this regard is completely lacking. 
@Techno_Fog @SidneyPowell1 3/ Second, the gov't's analysis of the conflict of interest speaks of Flynn's first attorney as having told gov't Flynn waived the conflict. BUT some conflicts cannot be waived and the one involving Flynn appears to be one of those.
@Techno_Fog @SidneyPowell1 4/ Finally, gov't ignores fact that Sullivan's standing order said if it believes something is immaterial, it must present to court to decide.
@Techno_Fog @SidneyPowell1 5/5 And one interesting tidbit: The "lock in" in a chargeable way, didn't refer to Flynn. So whom else was the gov't trying to set up??? END
