finding that a U.S. Department of Justice prosecutor serving in an investigator capacity who committed perjury has undertaken "an activity beyond the scope of his authority, in clear violation of the law and far removed from the discretionary areas of judicial process traditionally protected by the quasi-judicial immunity doctrine"

noting that per se prohibition of section 406(b) is consistent with the remedial purpose of ERISA, for "at the heart of the fiduciary relationship is the duty of complete and undivided loyalty to the beneficiaries of the trust"

stating that ERISA1s "legislative history also instructs courts to interpret [the statutory requirements] `bearing in mind the special nature and purpose of employee benefit plans'"

intervening defendants were entitled to fee award from plaintiff pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988

suggesting a willingness to limit judicial inquiries solely on the basis that they would "impugn or question the nobility of a foreign nation's motivation"

admitting "statement" made while declarant was "talking privately with his friend"