Lawyer Stewart Gets 10 Years for Aiding Terrorists

[JudyInTheHeartland]

Source: Bloomberg

July 15 (Bloomberg) -- Lynne F. Stewart, the lawyer convicted in 2005 of helping an extremist cleric pass messages from prison to his terrorist followers, was sentenced to 10 years in prison, compared with a 28-month term imposed earlier.

U.S. District Judge John Koeltl sentenced Stewart, 70, today in New York. A federal appeals court in November ruled that his first sentence didn’t reflect the seriousness of her actions.

The judge said his sentence was “sufficient but not greater than necessary” to punish Stewart, who “abused her position as a lawyer” and said she would do it again. Making such statements showed a lack of remorse, he said.

“It also indicates the original sentence was not adequate,” he said.

The lawyer was convicted by a jury in 2005 of helping her former client, the blind Egyptian sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, smuggle messages to followers in defiance of so-called prison special administrative measures imposed on him.

Read more: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-07-15/lawyer-stewart-gets-10-years-for-aiding-terrorists.html

[rug]

1. Ridiculous. All while Cheney's heart keeps beating.

[bettyellen]

2. I'm glad. She seems like she identified with her murderous client waaay too much

just goes to show the smartest people can do some waaay stupid shit.
like doing favors for the dude who caused the massacre at Luxor.

[SunnySong]

3. Maybe a longer sentence than she deserved bu she was looking at some serious jail time

and rightfully received it.

[alarimer]

4. This is bullshit

I predict a chilling effect on people willing to defend unpopular clients. That's all this is about.

[Posteritatis]

5. The conviction was not for defending an unpopular client. (nt)

[cowman]

6. Thats right

the conviction was for aiding a terrorist and the govt. had her cold and her saying she would do it again shows a clear lack of remorse for her actions. She deserves what she got and I have no sympathy for her at all

[glitch]

30. Bullshit. Clinton's DOJ wouldn't prosecute but Ashcroft would, kudos on who you agree with. nt

:sarcasm:

[cowman]

32. Bullshit

she broke the fucking law. You can excuse her all you want, doesn't change the fact she broke the law and now has to pay for it and I have zero, none, nada sympathy for her. Good fucking riddance.
And what fucking difference does it make who prosecuted her, SHE BROKE THE LAW!!!!!!!
Thats right, I agree with those that think she got off easy or deserves this, what of it?

[mcollins]

59. She broke the law

providing assistance for a illegally detained person, a prisoner in an illegal war, started by a lying Imperial government. The UN should step in and release her.

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProudDad]

86. And your post

is on the way to the ash heap of history...

Way out of line...

She's the patriot! You're just full of hot air...

[cowman]

94. Wow

you had me deleted, I'm so sad.:rofl:

[ProudDad]

119. Post a stupid post and suffer the consequences...

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Robb]

70. You can't be serious.

[msanthrope]

74. How, exactly, is the mastermind of the 1993 WTC bombing an

illegally detained person?????

BTW, have you met EFerrarri, downthread?

[cowman]

95. I'll bet you wish you

knew what you were talking about

[No Elephants]

104. 100% wrong. Read the article linked in the OP.

She broke the law by running messages back and forth, for 4-5 freaking years, between a terrorist leader, lawfully arrested and duly convicted in civiian court of the 1993 terrorist bombing of the WTC and his terrorist followers--while taxpayers were paying her to defend his terrorist ass.

[ProudDad]

120. I read the article

and your interpretation of the Bloomberg hit piece is entirely WRONG...

Thanks for playing though... :shrug:

[No Elephants]

103. no middle ground between not defending at all and passing messages to your client's fellow

terrorists?

Lawyers know how to draw a line like that.

[McCamy Taylor]

7. Abuse of federal power to make sure no Muslim can get a lawyer.

Where is our new and supposedly improved DOJ on this?

[cowman]

8. Thats bull shit

She signed an agreement not to pass messages from this POS terrorist and she willingly and happily broke that agreement and said she would do it again. She got what she deserved.

[msanthrope]

11. No abuse of federal power, here.

She violated the SAM. She allowed herself to be used.

Make no mistake---I am sorry for her and her sentence, but she knew precisely what she was doing.

[cowman]

13. You are so correct

when she had her assistant distract the guard to accept the message, she knowingly and willingly broke the agreement and became an accomplice, she got what she deserved.

[glitch]

31. Tragic and sick to see Obama's DOJ doubling down on an Ashcroft abuse, and DUers cheering. nt

[cowman]

33. What abuse? She broke the law

and she said she would do it again. She showed no remorse at all. She got what she deserved.
End of story

[Name removed]

91. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cowman]

96. Your post is on its way to the ash heap of history

[msanthrope]

37. No one's cheering.

I'm sad for her. It's a tough sentence, and she might die in prison.

But, she deliberately violated the SAM, and she's unrepentant about it.

[cowman]

39. Your right

I'm not cheering, but she got what she deserved, If she had kept her mouth shut she would have served her original sentence and been out of prison, now she is going to serve 10 years more because of her unrepentence.

[Robb]

42. I'm beginning to doubt your sincerity.

You're going to be speaking in defense of all felons prosecuted since Obama became President? :rofl:

[EFerrari]

46. No kidding. n/t

[tiny elvis]

9. the double secret probation restrictions on representing a terrorist

are unjustly intimidating
the variation on double jeopardy resulting from the appeal is unjustly intimidating

[msanthrope]

41. No double secret probation restrictions--the SAMs were read and

signed by Stewart.

They formed the basis for her convictions. She knew what the terms were.

[ProudDad]

92. She knew they were Unconstitutional bullshit

She now has regret that she didn't take that tack then, fighting this unconstitutional (Clinton/Demoncrat) crap...

[snort]

10. In related news:

Dick Cheney is still an asshole.

[cowman]

12. Now that is a true statement, N/T

[guruoo]

14. 28 mo., and losing her right to practice law was enough, IMO. nt

[cowman]

15. I think the people at the Luxor in Egypt who were killed

because of this POS terrorist would disagree with you

[guruoo]

16. I don't recall her being accused of responsibility for that, or transfering any information

related to the planning of any past, or future terrorist activity.

Perhaps memory has failed me. If so, feel free to enlighten.

[cowman]

17. I didn't say anything like that

what I meant is that by passing messages from that POS to his followers, more people were sure to die and I'm sure the people who died at the Luxor would think that even the 10 years were not enough. She has no remorse for what she did and she said she would do it again.
Just my opinion but she should spend the rest of her miserable life in prison, at her age, she probably will.
What she did was pass a message that the Sheik was withdrawing his support for the cease fire with the egyptian govt which greenlighted his followers to commit terrorist acts, so yeah in a way she is responsible for future terrorist acts.

[guruoo]

23. I should have done my wiki first...

'Stewart claims that the dispute was over one communication on behalf of her client to his supporters via a Reuters article, followed by a clarification after it appeared to have been misinterpreted. The clarification said: "I am not withdrawing my support of the cease-fire, I am merely questioning it and I am urging you, who are on the ground there to discuss it and to include everyone in your discussions as we always have done."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynne_Stewart

IMO, 10 years is reasonable, if indeed she was aware that her actions could promote, or enable a terrorist act.

[Name removed]

90. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cowman]

97. Wow

your stalking me, that's pretty, well, warped

[David__77]

18. Are you alleging that she is responsible for the actions of her client prior to representing him?

If so, I cannot understand why. The Luxor killings took place in 1997, a very long time before she became his attorney.

[cowman]

19. No I'm not

but she is complicit for future acts because she passed a message to his followers that he had withdrawn his support for the cease fire with the egyptian govt.

[David__77]

22. I guess I'm just hopeful that such limitations on communications aren't too widespread.

...

[msanthrope]

43. They are relatively rare. SAMs of the type that Stewart broke

are extremely rare---Chertoff said that there were only 20 or so federal prisoners who had their attorney-client sessions taped.

Of course, SAM's exist on people like Matt Hale, some mafioso...

[No Elephants]

106. She signed an agreement. Besides, we don't know every code.

[No Elephants]

107. Could have been code, too. We may have no idea what it meant to his followers.

[Robb]

24. Wrong. She was his attorney from 1995 onward.

Luxor is mentioned in the article:

Prosecutors’ evidence during Stewart’s trial included videotapes made during four prison visits with the cleric from 1997 to 2001 in which she smuggled messages.

Rahman relied upon Stewart and co-defendants to send a message withdrawing his support for the group’s cease-fire with the Egyptian government, U.S. authorities contended.

The organization suspended its violent activities after a 1997 attack that left 62 people dead at a temple in Luxor, Egypt, prosecutors said. Testimony showed the Islamic Group later demanded the cleric’s release from a U.S. prison U.S. and planned an attack in Egypt that was thwarted in 2000.

She got off lightly.

[LostinVA]

25. That says 1997, not 1995

[Robb]

27. The prosecution presented videotapes from 1997 onward.

She was his attorney from 1995. It was in the news. And in her 2002 grand jury indictment: http://www.lynnestewart.org/indictment.pdf

[David__77]

29. I'll read up more on it.

I have no problem stating though, that I do know I have a very similar ideological orientation of Ms. Stewart...

[saigon68]

20. Nice strawman

[cowman]

36. WTF are you talking about a strawman?

[Name removed]

87. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saigon68]

100. Nice strawman from this guy

You have him pegged correctly

[cowman]

101. And I'll bet you wish

you knew what you were talking about.
On a side note, Saigon 68? Dong Ha 69.

[No Elephants]

111. Is this the incident in Luxor, Egypt to which you are referring?

http://www.kuwaittimes.net/read_news.php?newsid=NTUwMDg5Njg2

[David__77]

21. So what should be the limitations for muzzling an attorney?

I am not saying there should be limitations, but I think we should be clear on it, and the rules should be relatively immutable to avoid state caprice.

[Robb]

26. I advise you to read the original indictment.

You seem to have a confusion as to timeline. It is available in PDF from a website set up in her defense, although I don't know for how much longer:

http://www.lynnestewart.org/indictment.pdf

[EFerrari]

28. As if this woman could ever in her wildest dreams compete with the US government

in motivating terrorists.

It's ridiculous, really.

[msanthrope]

44. The death of 62 tourists at Luxor wasn't ridiculous. It was horrible.

Sadly, she had a role in it.

[EFerrari]

45. What utter baloney.

She's being given a post 9/11 punishment for a pre-9/11 infraction. She's guilty of representing her client.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

47. Um

What is the proper punishment for contributing to a terror attack that killed 62 people?

[EFerrari]

48. I hope that strawman also waters your plants or something.

[cowman]

51. I that the best you got?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

52. What strawman? I asked an honest question.

Another poster says Stewarts actions facilitated the attack on a hotel that killed 62 people.

You didn't dispute the statement you disputed the length of the sentence.

So I asked what would be an appropriate sentence.

Even if Stewart never passed a note responsible for such an attack any where at any time, the fact that she would pass anything on behalf of such a person that wasn't directly related to her duties as legal representative is extremely unsettling.

So what is an appropriate sentence?

[EFerrari]

57. "that fact that she would pass anything on behalf of such a person"

belies your framing.

Such a person was her client at the time.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

60. Yes I know he was a client

But no attorney has the right to aid someone--client or otherwise--in the commission of a crime.

So what is the appropriate penalty for passing messages for an organization that killed 62 people?

[EFerrari]

65. You have a nice broken record there but that doesn't make your frame true.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

67. I'm just asking a question

You refuse to answer it. So I keep asking.

What should be the penalty for facilitating the murder of 62 people?

It looks like the answer is she may be a bastard but at least she's our bastard.

[EFerrari]

78. See above. You've been answered fully. n/t

[Nuclear Unicorn]

81. You dismissed the killing of 62 people and applauding hostage takers

as "an infraction".

Those aren't infractions, that is cold-blooded crime and Stewart is a disgusting person.

You complain about post-9/11 law being used in Stewart's case but you turn a blind eye to murder and kidnapping?

That's not principle, that's partisanship and partisanship that seems overly comfortable with destroying the lives of innocent people with bombs and kidnapping.

I ask you to seriously consider what it is you claim to stand for.

[cowman]

73. And you keep refusing

to answer her question, all your doing is attacking her.

[EFerrari]

80. Well, no.

And the word is "you're".

[cowman]

84. Well, yes

and thank you for the spelling lesson:sarcasm:

[AngryAmish]

113. It is not a spelling lesson.

It is a usage lesson.

[cowman]

53. On behalf of all reasonable people here

I apologize for the idiotic personal attack against you by Eferrari.

[EFerrari]

55. LOL

[cowman]

50. Thats utter balony

to coin your phrase, what part of she broke the law don't you understand?
She puposely had her assistant distract the guard so that the Sheik could pass a message to her which she then, with full knowledge that she was breaking the law, pass on to his followers which could have resulted in the deaths of many innocents, but hey, if you want to defend her, thats your right, go ahead and look like a fool

[EFerrari]

54. Because how you look is the most important consideration, right, cowman?

It's always amazing to me how the right wing narratives get immediate cred here.

And when you "coin a phrase", you're inventing one, not repeating one.

[Robb]

58. Let's hear your narrative.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

62. Being against the facilitating the murder of 62 people is a RW narrative?

I would have thought being anti-war, pro-peace is a progressive narrative.

That's MY narrative at least. I don't know where that puts me on the right/left spectrum because I'm starting to have doubts.

[EFerrari]

64. I doubt that. n/t

[cowman]

69. You doubt that

then tell us how the govt was wrong. tell us how she didn't break the law by passing messages to his followers in clear violation of the law, tell us how she was defending her client by passing messages to his followers that would result in the possible deaths of innocents in Egypt.

[cowman]

66. RW creds?

Is that the best you got? Then you got nothing. Once again, what part of breaking the law don't you understand?

[msanthrope]

68. Sigh--an infraction? Please. She helped a terrorist pass messages---

and that terrorist ordered people dead. This was done pre-9/11, investigated pre-9/11, and subject to penalties, pre-9/11. Unless, of course, you can cite the law that you claim is being applied, ex-post facto to Ms. Stewart.


This is not representing your client:


Unbeknownst to them, the government, pursuant to a warrant,
7 videotaped the meetings. Yousry told Abdel Rahman that Abu
8 Sayyaf -- an Islamic terrorist group in the Philippines -- had
9 taken hostages to be used in bargaining for the release of Abdel
10 Rahman and others. When Yousry explained to Stewart that he was
11 "telling the Sheikh about the Abu Sayyaf group in the
12 Philippines" and how "they took hostages," Stewart replied, "Good
13 for them." Transcript of First Audiovisual Recording involving
14 Omar Abdel Rahman, Mohammed Yousry, and Lynne Stewart, May 19,
15 2000, at 27.
16 From the beginning of the visit, Stewart was aware of
17 the prison guards' presence. For example, she asked Yousry, "Do
18 they usually sit like this and watch us?" Id. at 10. And during
19 this meeting, Stewart and Yousry took overt steps to ensure that
20 the nature of their communication with Abdel Rahman would be
21 concealed from the prison guards. As she suggested to Yousry,
22 they "should give them something to watch."
6 "UI" stands for "unintelligible."
-20-
1 Id. at 11. When the guards were standing close to the window of
2 the conference room in which Abdel Rahman, Stewart, and Yousry,
3 were meeting Yousry told Stewart to "look at me and talk a little
4 bit because they are watching us closely." Id. at 51. While
5 Yousry read the message to Abdel Rahman, Stewart uttered a
6 meaningless series of phrases to Yousry so that it would appear
7 to an observer as though she was taking part in a three-way
8 conversation: "I am talking to you about. . . him going to have
9 a, uh, chocolate eh . . . heart attack here . . . . Why don't
10 you stop a minute now. And (UI)6 say to him that, you know, 'You
11 understood what we are saying, (UI).'" Id. As Stewart spoke,
12 Yousry said to Abdel Rahman, "I don't know, Sir, they are
13 standing very close by the glass. . . . Lynne says, (UI) when
14 they look, you look at me a little, talk, then look at the
15 Sheikh." Id.
16 Stewart continued to talk while Yousry read aloud
17 Taha's statement in Sattar's letter. Yousry explained to Abdel
18 Rahman that "Lynne just says anything, (UI) Sir." Id.
19 at 52 (bracketed material in original). Stewart remarked, "I can
20 get an academy award for it." Id.
21

http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/9c3b90ce-7f54-4a95-ac46-397c7ec4643c/1/doc/06-5015-cv_opn.pdf

Yukking it up and letting your terrorist client and his translator have conversations you don't understand, for the purpose of passing private messages that are clearly not allowed is NOT representing your client.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

72. What the--???

When Yousry explained to Stewart that he was
11 "telling the Sheikh about the Abu Sayyaf group in the
12 Philippines" and how "they took hostages," Stewart replied, "Good
13 for them."

These are innocent people and she's cheering?!?!

How absolutely repugnant.

I hope she never claimed to be a peace activist.

[msanthrope]

76. Catch the part where she claims she should get an 'academy award?'

Sickening.

[msanthrope]

38. The limitations she was under with regard to this client were

clearly disclosed to her. A SAM isn't an ephemeral thing. The thing is, she's on tape clearly circumventing the rules.

[cowman]

40. And happily doing it.

[EFerrari]

49. She is. And all the good citizens willing to follow these rules

are exactly how we got to the point where people can be held FOR YEARS pre-trial in solitary confinement.

USA!

[Robb]

56. OK, can you defend her actions?

What right did she wrong, or whatever you believe about this case?

[EFerrari]

63. As far as I know and understand this case

Stewart violates the SAMs in place rather than fight them at the time and that was a mistake.

However, this was pre-9/11 and she was not Kreskin. The draconian practices that are routine today were not routine then.

As I understand it, after she violated the SAMs in place at the time, new ones were written up and she did sign on to those and didn't violate them.

This situation was much more fluid that it appears to be now, in hindsight.

Did she violate those SAMs? Yes, she did. On the other hand, who else was looking out for her client in a rapidly changing situation?

She was convicted. Fine. But the penalty is excessive. And it is partially based on her free speech out of court to a reporter and so, punishment for free speech. And it damages not only this individual but any attorney that has to defend someone the state is prosecuting. Which means, it damages us all, imo.

[msanthrope]

71. She is on tape, covering for a terrorist as he explains to the translator

what he wants said to the cells in Eqypt--I posted a clip of it upthread....

http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/9c3b90ce-7f54-4a95-ac46-397c7ec4643c/1/doc/06-5015-cv_opn.pdf


She made being a criminal defense attorney harder through her malfeasance....Because now, the government can point to her as a reason to institute highly restrictive SAMS.....

NOTE--have you noticed that not a single reputable group of the defense bar has defended her? There's a reason.

[cowman]

75. Well said.

I wasn't aware of the fact that no reputable defense firms have come to her defense. Seems to prove that what she did is not defensible except to a few here.

[msanthrope]

82. Oh--she's got the Socialists and the Anarchists. And the usual assortment of

hipster doofuses....

And Ramsey Clark and the CCR. She got a few organizations to file amicus briefs, but they were in 2003-- mostly toothless--they certainly didn't defend her, merely suggested that her sentence not be too long.

So she got herself Terry Nichol's lawyer and was tried with the other two defendants.

[No Elephants]

108. Proves squat.

[Robb]

77. Well, I disagree, clearly.

You think the penalty is excessive, I think it's appropriate. 35 years would have been excessive.

You want to think of it in terms of "post-9/11," forgetting this is really "post first WTC bombing." Remember her client and his buddies all got put away for decades without setting off a single bomb on US soil. That was pre-9/11.

[EFerrari]

79. That's right. Post the first bombing and pre the second one.

Where exactly has the harsh repression of the prisoners in custody gotten us?

Here.

And, with that, I'm out of this thread.

[Robb]

83. Crimelords are "repressed" from continuing their business while incarcerated.

I think you've got an overly glorified idea of the struggle of Al-Gama al-Islamiya. :eyes:

[slackmaster]

34. Being a smartypants never pays off for someone who has just been convicted of a crime

:nuke:

[cowman]

35. You are so correct

She should have kept her pie hole shut but she just couldn't resist and now she is going to pay the price. Too bad so sad.

[BreweryYardRat]

85. Good goddamned riddance.

She helped a terrorist organization kill 62 people. Personally, I think she ought to dance on air for it, but apparently the court disagrees.

And certain people in this thread are now on ignore for being either morons or right-wing plants created to spread a "liberals are anti-American" meme.

[ProudDad]

89. She didn't have ANYTHING to do with killing anyone...

If anyone's a moran, it's folks who don't even check out the facts of the case before deciding that someone should "dance on air"...

:puke:

[ProudDad]

88. S.O.P in the fucking USAMERIKAN EMPIRE!!!

A leftie lawyer who "violates" an unconstitutional piece of shit "law" to demonstrate how piece of shit it is gets 20 years...

While the FUCKS who robbed you and me and thou and thee of 20 TRILLION dollars, Goldman Sachs, "pay" a piddling 550 million dollar "settlement" (after handing out over $20 BILLION of bonuses) without admitting guilt, money that they make back that afternoon on a 5% jump in their stock price...

How fucked up is that?

And Obama still tortures and illegally detains and runs more fucking wars -- robbing all of us...for the fucking Empire...


Lynne Stewart's "crime", as she freely admits now, was in not FIGHTING an unconstitutional doctrine instead of "violating" it once with no harm to anyone to demonstrate how stupid and useless and WRONG it was...

The Clinton Admin. didn't think it warranted prosecution. It wasn't until after that false flag bullshit operation of 9.11.01 that Ashcroft (fucking John Ashcroft) decided she should "pay"...

What she did had NO effect on the Empire except to defy it's evil actions!

She did NOT "smuggle messages to followers" -- that's PURE bullshit. She issued a public press release that mentioned harmless thoughts and opinions of her client and righteous complaints about his cruel and unusual punishment.

[No Elephants]

109. Did Goldman Sachs really rob us?

Put another way: If investment bankers in financial straits have the power to rob us, how come Bear Stearns didn't rob us?

I have to be honest. If I were in serious financial trouble and the President (Bush and, later, President-Elect Obama), the Sec. Of Treasury (Paulsen and, later, presumptive Sec. Geithner) and Congress all said I should have access to bail out money for the asking, I'd ask for it.

So, should I blame Goldman Sachs (about whose owners, director ad policies I can do nothing anyway), or should I blame the pols?

[ProudDad]

116. "Did Goldman Sachs really rob us?"

By definition...

By design...

By means of usury and theft of the Commons...

Yep...

Capitalism is Organized Crime...

[Pavulon]

112. Dude. She is on TAPE. She will now die in Florence ADX because of her choice

we all make choices. Should I rob a bank. She passed on messages about a cease fire. She choose a side and now she is paying the price.

[ProudDad]

93. Fucking "Businessweek"!!!

Lying about what happened...typical corporate capitalist spin...

"The lawyer was convicted by a jury in 2005 of helping her former client, the blind Egyptian sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, smuggle messages to followers in defiance of so-called prison special administrative measures imposed on him."

That is NOT true, it's a crock of capitalist bullshit!

:puke:

[cowman]

98. If you don't settle down

your going to have a heart attack, being a 35 year veteran of the Fire Service in Las Vegas, I know the signs and symptoms. Just saying. In the immortal words of Sgt. Hulka in the movie Stripes,
"Lighten up Francis"

[cowman]

99. Believe what you want to believe

but the jury heard the evidence, listened to the tapes and came to the conclusion that she did indeed break the law and did punish her for it, all your ranting and raving is not going to change that FACT.

[ProudDad]

117. The law is patently unconstitutional

But then the fucking USAmerikan Empire doesn't give a shit about the Constitution...

And neither did the "jury"...

And neither, is appears, do you...

What are you doing on a board that cares about such silly trivialities as Civil Rights and Due Process and, oh, that Pesky Constitution?

And what are you doing defending bush era bullshit on this board? :puke:

[MikeW]

102. sorry but she was warned

She asked for it and gets it.

For someone who's supposed to be brilliant that was a very very stupid move for her to make.

And considering the comments she made on record ... god riddance she can spend the rest of her days

rotting in a cell.

[Hepburn]

105. Mother fucking bullshit...

...The members of the Evil Bush Empire are walking around...and this woman gets 10 years?????

GMAFB! :mad:

[Pavulon]

110. How is that relevant? Like saying the same when someone is convicted of Rape..

she knew the law. She broke it. Simple. Guess she is not going to do a dime standing on her head like her last smart ass comment.

Decisions have consequences.

[Hepburn]

114. Hello...

...decisions have consequences??? Care to list the ones for Bush???

:eyes:

You really think she was guilty???

[Pavulon]

115. She is guilty as shit on tape. Has nothing to do with bush,

just like of someone steals your car or shoots your kid, bush not a factor. focus. She broke the law, she knew she did it. She helped a very bad man, in different times she would hang. The she told the court to fuck its self that she could do 3 years standing on her head.

Well now she will spend the next ten years in florence, not a nice place.

no tv no beer make homer go crazy...

[depakid]

118. The cowardice runs deep on this thread...