With him realized that what they had done with him working with o convicted nazi agent, they realized what they had done wita him was probably going to come out at that trial and that would be a bad look, so they decided to take action. One particularly powerful senator who was implicated in p this thing went to the attorneyi general and basically threatened the Attorney General that he would tie the doj up in knots, he would go after the Attorney General himself unless the Attorney General fired the prosecutor who was leading this case. And the senator had kind of a hook for doing this. The prosecutor he wanted fired had just been criticized by the court because when he was n prosecuting that nazi agent, th court said he spoke with basically too much passion, witk too much emotion about that defendant in front of the jury. So the prosecutor had been criticized in court. That was the hook they used for going after him. And you know, thats not exactly a Capital Offense as a prosecutor.
the washington post reported this week that president trump asked his advisors about his power to pardon aides, family members and even himself. as an amateur constitutional scholar, if i can kel you thcal, does the president have the authority to pardon him snefl. i think in all likelihood he z i think some hasn t been adjudicated. i think what the courts typically find is when something happens politically between separation of powers or between a power of one particular body, a lot of times they kind of say it s up to the electors to decide this. so a lot of things get kicked back in to political sphere. i think in a political sphere i would caution someone to think about pardoning themselves or family members or et cetera. i also understand his frustration. you know, what s going on here and i think the person who put it best say guy named herbert butterfield, he said if you look back at something in history, even recent history and say, well, there must be collusion, you find