counsel we hurt all the other basic rights that a person has the  section which we need to know whoever in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive legislative or judicial branch of the government if we took your interpretation congress shouldn't change the statute in a different way and just take in the words judicial and perhaps the word legislative was well out of subsection a but that's not what it did well and we're stuck trying to interpret this with instructions not to read it in such a way that is to make a word meaningless is there something you can get down to five that would be particular thing had to be addressed and i think that's where congress said well let's then act basically the judicial function exception but perhaps the best example is if an if the c g attorney filed a financial statement requesting payment to a court court look at it mystery because i think the legislative history cited in the brief makes it fairly apparent as to what congress trying to do the congress was attempting to cover the judicial branch from false statements made by me within the jurisdiction j branch by the story that judicial function exception in trying to distinguish between administrative functions and adjudicated functions of the court and specifically that legislative history says that the section is amended this is in this appeal that this happens before anything happens within the adversarial process and if i have questions about that section you know i it seems to me that  of appointment of counsel or before any warnings have been awarded given and so your question judge gruber is that the language in that proceeding at the end is your second prong of the question in that proceeding function which the congress was attempting to restore was stamps saying we want to be able to criminalize things that are done within the housekeeping functions in this case the defendant was asking for benefits that's different than the jus to get a function that only kicks in once the serial process begins to think yeah well i think it i think it's difficult to know whether it happens during an initial appearance at all where at that point the defendant is now under oath there are many trials tactics that are in question it may begin at the time of the detention hearing but when somebody is going to get me asking for benefits from the government comes in and says will you pay for a lawyer there isn't anything that's happening so the court has already scorched already and again obviously that's before the member the statute but the court has already said it's false statement on a c j twenty three did not occur during a judicial proceeding and that's because it is one of intended here but given this text isn't there some concern that someone's not unfair notice as to what the statute ribot's if it is worded in the way that congress one of the statute well the the question is this what happen to help them in the proceedings so it's a little too hard to say that it has nothing to do with it it's connected to the scene and are now and i mean if there weren't  roscoe this is not something that is beyond the scope of one thousand one congress is merely attempting to restore that so in power you know the sexual problem because in politics this exception of section b hadn't been put in it was usually created exception to try to save the application of one thousand and one situations where it wasn't intended healthily says and i think it's an important observation in language that may apply to subsection language in the legislative history says we've got to do something to ensure the integrity of the proceedings be it in the executive branch judicial branch legislative branch and this is a circumstance in which the only way to police behavior particularly given course can be a consistently there are other things that an employee of the judicial branch could do or someone else could do that would be criminalized under one thousand wanted and not barred by one thousand  think a false statement from a probation officer is covered by and it's that and you know i guess you have to decide yeah that's right that's well and i'm sure somebody would argue that a probation officer is a judicial officer and trial yet but they've done all the pretrial motions and so forth and now that appointed counsel is asking for additional compensation quite frankly i don't think you could get an idea but that's it's still all part of the same  twenty one a false declarations before court or a grand jury obstructions of justice and false claims against united states yup he signed it financial affidavit that said