There's a quote in the Congressional Record in which your
council,
I'm sorry, your client said through council,
no former office holder is immune from investigation and prosecution.
Well, that may be true of subordinate officers,
but as to the principal office of the president,
he is immune unless he is impeached and convicted.
Again, it comes back to the point he was he
was president at this time and his position was that
no former office holder is immune.
And in fact the argument was.
There's no need to vote for impeachment because we have
this backstop,
which is criminal prosecution and it seems that many senators
relied on that voting to acquit the court.
I think that's the ability to intuit what senator motivated
senators votes in a pension process.
What the Constitution says is you must be impeached.
The position or your client did during the impeachment proceedings
that there would be an option for criminal prosecution later
and it's in the Congressional record and I guess the
question is? What has changed or why have you changed
your position?