Lynne F. Stewart, the former defense lawyer convicted of assisting terrorism, reportedly has been released from prison so that she can live out the final months of her life with her family. She is dying of cancer is believed to have less than 18 months to live.
As someone who has handled terrorism cases as defense counsel and worked under the often abusive limitations placed by the Justice Department on counsel, I was concerned over the prosecution of Stewart and felt that she received a very heavy sentence of 10 years for passing along messages between Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind Egyptian cleric who was convicted in 1995 of conspiring to blow up landmarks in New York City, and his supporters.
Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) can be used to harass prisoners and inhibit defense efforts. Nevertheless, Stewart clearly did violate those provisions. Stewart was implicated with interpreter Mohamed Yousry, an adjunct professor in Middle East studies at York College CUNY, and postal clerk Ahmed Sattar. She was was accused of passing along Rahman’s blessing for a resumption of terrorist operations to al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya members in Egypt after they inquired whether they should continue to honor a ceasefire agreement with the Egyptian government. The indictment detailed knowing efforts to trick the guards including an alleged statement by Stewart that she should get an award for acting. Notably, a material support charge was dismissed in 2003 but the Justice Department continued to press for a conviction and recharged her (and secured a conviction for) obstruction of justice and conspiracy to provide material support to terrorism. It is clear that she lost her objectivity in her relationship with the defendant and violated the SAMs. The question was the need for a ten year sentence, particularly after her defense raised questions regarding the translation of the key communication.
I was also surprised by the initial denial of a compassionate release by Judge John G. Koeltl of United States District Court in August. Stewart gave the court a 12-page handwritten letter to the judge saying that she did not want to die in prison, “a strange and loveless place. I want to be where all is familiar — in a word, home.” Koeltl turned her down.
It was clearly a valid and compelling motion but Koeltl insisted that he would do nothing unless the Bureau of Prisons made the motion. Why? The case seemed to be another example of how judges invest these agencies, particularly the Justice Department, with unilateral control on such questions. Medical reports showed Stewart’s cancer had spread to her lungs, lymph system and bones.
Finally, the BOP made such a motion given the medical record showing that Stewart has a life expectancy of less than 18 months.
I had some interaction with Stewart in an earlier criminal case in New York. She was known as someone who felt strongly about the rights of the accused, though she also had a bit of a reckless reputation. However, she committed her life to fighting for the rights of the accused. She deserves to be home with her family in these final months.
You know SS is supposed to be based on income earned…. You don’t put the required time in and if you’re wealthy you don’t get the dime…. Medicare across the board is supposed to be the same…. So just because someone has money and worked they should not be penalized for SS…. Other programs absolutely… They should be prohibited from collecting…..
davidm,
I wrote a post about wealthy people getting those agricultural tax breaks of which you speak a couple of years ago:
Wealthy “Faux Farmers” Get Huge Agricultural Tax Breaks on Their Properties
http://jonathanturley.org/2011/04/17/wealthy-“faux-farmers”-get-huge-agricultural-tax-breaks-on-their-properties/
Nice, Elaine. You could work for Fox News! LOL. Just kidding with you. Apparently some astute liberals have covered the story.
Thanks for the link.
pdm,
Yep. (And “slink away” describes it perfectly.)
AP
Some commenters just make things up and then slink away when their “stories” are challenged.
Some posters enjoy spouting off without doing their homework. (I’m not referring to you “pdm”.)
======= Here’s a good example:
davidm2575 1, January 2, 2014 at 1:35 pm
Bruce wrote: “Wonder if she has Obama care?”
If not, surely she is signing up as we speak. With no income, she should get a very healthy subsidy from the taxpayer.
======= I responded that Lynne Stewart is in her seventies and, as such, has Medicare.
His response? Something about not realizing that she is “that old”. Rather than just leaving it at that, he had to add:
“Did she wait until retirement age to become a terrorist or was she involved for a long time and only got caught late in life?” (Again, this from davidm2575.)
=======
Bringing this back around to Lynne Stewart:
Here is davidm2575’s “truth”:
“If not, surely she is signing up as we speak. With no income, she should get a very healthy subsidy from the taxpayer.”
========
Rubbish.
anonymously posted wrote: “Here is davidm2575′s “truth”: “If not, surely she is signing up as we speak. With no income, she should get a very healthy subsidy from the taxpayer.” ”
I think I made it clear that this previous guess from me was based upon me not knowing her age. Her age was not mentioned in the article. I agreed with you, that based upon the new information you provided, she would fall under Medicare. So my previous guess about what she might be doing has been retracted.
David, to dispute your last argument when you say ..”Also, notice on your link that insurance settlements are not reported as income. This is how many people on social security disability and food stamps come to have thousands of dollars sitting in the bank while still collecting the government entitlements.”
Again……no more than $3200 in the bank…..remember allowable resources.
The insurance settlement is not reported as “income” but it sure as heck would be a resource.
I need some documentation from you that this is happening at all, let alone “many” are doing this.
pdm wrote: “Again……no more than $3200 in the bank…..remember allowable resources.”
And again, READ the whole page and look at the table. Pay attention to what is said MANY times: “Most households no longer have an asset limit for the SNAP food stamp program.” That means they don’t want to look at your assets.
The $3200 only applies to households with an asset limit. MOST DO NOT HAVE AN ASSET LIMIT. Also, if a household does have an asset limit, when evaluating the asset, many types of assets do not need to be counted as contributing to that $3200.
Copied from the page you claim to have read:
=====================
What are the asset limits?
Most households do not have an asset limit. See Which households have an asset limit? for details.
For households with an asset limit :
Households with at least one member who is age 60 or older or disabled may have countable assets up to $3250.
Households without a senior or disabled member may have countable assets up to $2000.
Note: To be considered disabled, a person must be eligible for disability-related cash assistance, medical assistance, or retirement benefits, such as SSI, RSDI, or Veterans’ Administration disability benefits.
If your household has an asset limit, and you give away or sell your assets for less than they are worth just so you will be eligible for SNAP food stamps, you will be disqualified for a period of time, up to one year.
==========================
What assets are counted?
The asset limit has been eliminated for most households applying for SNAP food stamps. See Which households have an asset limit? above.
For households with an asset limit, certain assets are counted and other assets are not counted toward the asset limit. Your DTA worker can give you a complete list.
These assets are counted:
cash
bank deposits (savings and checking accounts)
stocks, bonds, and other securities
one-time lump-sum payments, such as insurance settlements and refunds of security deposits
income tax refunds and credits (except the federal and state EIC)
property other than your home or business
deemed assets, if you are a sponsored noncitizen subject to sponsor deeming
In some cases, the assets of disqualified individuals who live and share meals with the household are also counted
These assets are NOT counted:
your home
vehicles (cars, trucks, boats, etc.)
personal belongings and household items, including jewelry
life insurance, burial plots, and prepaid funeral arrangements
pension plans, including IRAs, 401(k)s, and Keoghs
education accounts (529s)
inaccessible assets (assets you are not allowed to use)
income-producing property
assets of household members getting TAFDC, EAEDC, or SSI
federal and state Earned Income Credit (EIC)
================
David, I don’t think you are being honest.
First, you have ignored how property taxes are paid by someone with no income on your hypothetical multi-million dollar home on 5000 acres. You say you know these people. Then it should be easy to tell us how they do it. Please explain.
Second, you suggest the person can sell his business for millions – pay a one time capital gain – stash the remaining in the bank and collect SNAP benefits. David, as you pointed out, no more than $3200 in the bank is allowed. They are called allowable resources. Keep that in mind…..ALLOWABLE RESOURCES. Please explain how they get around that rul e.
David, I think you are either hanging out with a bunch of tax frauds (called crooks and a man of such high moral turpitude such as yourself should report them) or you are in the business of writing scare stories for Faux “News” and the TeaParty newsletter. Or maybe you are a “Better See Saul” tax lawyer. Whatever it is that is that you are playing with – your accounts are not reporting real life.
It is pretty disgusting that you are playing the heartless granny-starver when your beloved Tea Party wants to cut $47 billion from food stamps. Please give us a warning the next time you tell us how you are feeding the poor and sheltering the homeless so I can run and get my vomit bowl.
pdm wrote: “First, you have ignored how property taxes are paid by someone with no income on your hypothetical multi-million dollar home on 5000 acres. You say you know these people. Then it should be easy to tell us how they do it. Please explain.”
I really don’t have the time to hold your hand through every little detail. You can figure it out for yourself with just a little bit of thinking and maybe a little research.
Here is one example of how a multimillionaire avoids large taxes on large plots of land. Bruce Springsteen learned that if he has at least 5 acres and produces $500 in produce, he can get a huge tax break. So his adjoining property of 200 acres is taxed at the rate of just $4,639 for all 200 acres. This is the kind of information that hits Fox News but not the liberally biased outlets too much, so I am not surprised if you are unaware of it.
http://www.humanevents.com/2012/03/12/bruce-springsteen-a-taxdodging-farmer/
I did NOT say that I knew these people. You even used the word “hypothetical” so I don’t know what you mean by saying that I know these people.
pdm wrote: “Second, you suggest the person can sell his business for millions – pay a one time capital gain – stash the remaining in the bank and collect SNAP benefits. David, as you pointed out, no more than $3200 in the bank is allowed. They are called allowable resources. Keep that in mind…..ALLOWABLE RESOURCES. Please explain how they get around that rule.”
You are only reading the first part of the rule, and ignoring what has to be reported as assets. Look at the chart in the link YOU provided. It says the following regarding what is NOT counted as assets:
These assets are NOT counted:
your home
vehicles (cars, trucks, boats, etc.)
personal belongings and household items, including jewelry
life insurance, burial plots, and prepaid funeral arrangements
pension plans, including IRAs, 401(k)s, and Keoghs
education accounts (529s)
inaccessible assets (assets you are not allowed to use)
income-producing property
assets of household members getting TAFDC, EAEDC, or SSI
federal and state Earned Income Credit (EIC)
http://www.massresources.org/snap-financial-eligibility.html#assetscounted
So if you take that money and put it in an IRA, viola… money not reportable for food stamps. In the right kind of IRA, the money is not taxed when it is taken out, because it already has been taxed, so that income stream does not have to be reported as income. That money can be used for living expenses and to pay property taxes.
Even if you can’t navigate the law yourself, just pay attention to what the website tries to make abundantly clear:
“Assets are the cash, savings, and valuable things you own that you can use to pay for food and other things you need. Most households no longer have an asset limit for the SNAP food stamp program. THE ASSET TEST HAS BEEN ELIMINATED IN MOST CASES.”
pdm wrote: “Please give us a warning the next time you tell us how you are feeding the poor and sheltering the homeless so I can run and get my vomit bowl.”
You have now made it abundantly clear that you do not help the poor or you would know that what I have said is 100% true. I doubt you have ever sat with a person at the food stamp office helping them get food stamps.
The prosecution of this case needs more scrutiny. I am glad that they let her go.
http://lynnestewart.org/
“When Stewart landed in LaGuardia Airport Wednesday, she was surrounded by some of the folks who have been fighting for her release for years.
“We had tremendous support, tremendous support,” Stewart said. “We had over 40,000 people sign the petition.”
“Eighty countries. Every continent except Antarctica. Every state in the United States,” Ponyter said.
Stewart said that she got a firsthand look at some of the issues plaguing the prison system, so in addition to focusing on her health, she wants to fight for reform parts of the criminal justice system.”
Interesting background article:
Left Behind
By George Packer
Published: September 22, 2002
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/22/magazine/left-behind.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
Excerpts:
“One Saturday morning in November 1994, Ramsey Clark, attorney general under President Johnson and more recently a spokesman for radical Arab causes, met in his Manhattan office with a criminal defense lawyer named Lynne Stewart. Clark wanted Stewart to take on a new client — Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, a blind Egyptian cleric and the spiritual leader of the worldwide jihad movement, whose most recent address before the Metropolitan Correctional Center was a fourth-floor apartment in Jersey City. The sheik was about to go on trial for directing a conspiracy among his followers to bomb sites around New York City, including bridges, tunnels and the United Nations. His previous attorneys, the left-wing lawyers William Kunstler and Ronald Kuby, had been taken off the case because they represented other defendants who had conflicts of interest with Abdel Rahman. The sheik had dismissed his court-appointed lawyer. A month before trial, Clark told Stewart that only she could do the job.
…
In his autobiography, William Kunstler wrote that when he took the sheik’s case in 1994, he felt as if it were 1969 again and this were the Chicago conspiracy trial. A better analogy would be to the 1950’s, when the foreign enemy was real, the domestic support marginal and the hard questions had to do with the appropriate legal response. There’s nothing new about the post-Sept. 11 era, says the man who will try to keep Stewart out of prison, the renowned criminal defender Michael Tigar. He mentions the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, the Palmer raids in 1920, the internment of Japanese-Americans, the McCarthy years: ”The point is that all times of this kind are different times.” At trial Tigar will argue that, although Stewart violated the SAM’s in May 2000, she didn’t intend to when she signed them. He will claim that, in speaking out on behalf of the sheik, Stewart was doing what lawyers do, under the protection of the First Amendment.
Dozens of New York criminal defenders showed up for Stewart’s arraignment. They talk about the indictment’s ”chilling effect” on the defense of unpopular clients. They say that the charges would never have been brought if not for the terror attacks, and that John Ashcroft is making a scapegoat of an easy target. The leaked affidavit also suggests that Ramsey Clark may have violated the SAM’s (he denies it), but he remains unindicted. (David Kelley, the deputy U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, wouldn’t comment on the case.)
Frederick Cohn, who represented one of the defendants in the Nairobi Embassy bombing trial, is suing Ashcroft over new Justice Department regulations that allow eavesdropping on lawyer-client conversations without a court order. ”Lawyer jokes are funny, and frequently they’re apt,” Cohn says, ”but a core of lawyers serve a very important function, which is to make sure everybody gets a fair trial. Ashcroft wants the tools to take this away. Then we all march off to the camps.” The case against Stewart, Cohn says, is inconsequential.
But in conversations with criminal lawyers, including members of what might be called the terror bar, I found many of them less decisive in Stewart’s defense than the public chorus suggests. Carl Herman spent a year and a half fighting to keep Mohammed Saddiq Odeh from receiving the death penalty for the Nairobi Embassy bombing. He waited for the day when Odeh would have a change of heart, but it never arrived. On Sept. 11 Herman lost a friend in one of the towers. A few weeks later he had to visit Odeh in the downtown Metropolitan Correctional Centers, and Herman found that he couldn’t look his client in the eye. Afterward he heard that the embassy bombers, when told what the loud noise at the World Trade Center had been, exchanged thumbs up. Herman has sworn off defending terrorists. ”We’re not talking about phony revolutionaries, or Mafia guys, or nuts,” he says. ”These guys are really dedicated to wiping out me and my family. I can just find something else to do with my time.”
Even Ron Kuby, a strong defender of Stewart, has rethought many things since Sept. 11. He now regrets having defended El Sayyid A. Nosair, accused of killing the Jewish extremist Meir Kahane. When Sattar, the sheik’s paralegal, was arrested along with Stewart, Kuby was ready to represent him at the bail hearing, until Kuby’s wife said, ”You don’t know what he was doing.” Kuby reached a decision: ”I sure as hell don’t think people who would take my family, put them in purdah and put me up against a wall and shoot me are entitled to my support in that struggle.”
Lawyers are cowards, Kuby told me — he far more than Lynne Stewart. They live vicariously through their clients. ”Movement” lawyers, especially, identify with the people they represent. When the lawyer is as loving and committed as Stewart, he said, and the client as charismatic as Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, the identification becomes passionate. ”In the best of cases we identify with their determination, with their courage, and we see the people that maybe we could have been had we the courage to do what they did. And as a result, if you’re a good lawyer, you spend a lot of time doing gut checks. And because it’s a profession that is so cowardly, enjoying the aura of being those people without ever taking the risks of being those people, it’s easy to say: this is the right thing to do, I’m not hurting anyone, this is morally justified. I’m refusing to do it out of fear because I’m a coward, and I’ve got to change that. I can’t succumb to that kind of fear, because if I’m afraid of the government here, I can’t do this job.”
Kuby escorted me from his office out onto lower Broadway. He lighted a cigarette and grew melancholy. He asked what I thought of Stewart’s case. I said that the men of the legal left had been more savvy, and now she was all alone to pay the price. ”Lynne is dying for our sins?” Kuby considered it. ”Maybe. History is very unforgiving of people who pick the wrong side at the wrong time in the wrong place. And even if she wins, Lynne is ruined as a lawyer.”
Forgot to suscribe.
Special Administrative Measures are abusive. They prevent those under them from complaining about their treatment in prison, limit their ability to mount a defense and limit communication with family.
I wonder whether Aafia Siddiqu also imprisoned in FMC Carswell is under SAMS.i
pdm
1, January 3, 2014 at 12:17 am
When we communists take over, that will no longer be true. (That will be right after we take away all your guns and religious freedom.)
========================================================
is that before or after we force them into a same sex marriage?
David, Pensions are counted as income. You may have been confused between assets that are not counted. But pensions are counted. See chart:
http://www.massresources.org/snap-financial-eligibility.html#assetscounted
I would be glad to see documentation that corrects the above in which case I will revise my opinion that your reporting is not credible.
pdm wrote: “Pensions are counted as income. You may have been confused between assets that are not counted. But pensions are counted. See chart:
http://www.massresources.org/snap-financial-eligibility.html#assetscounted
Yes, I meant pension assets are not reportable as assets rather than income. This includes not having to report IRAs, 401(k)s, and Keoghs.
Also, notice on your link that insurance settlements are not reported as income. This is how many people on social security disability and food stamps come to have thousands of dollars sitting in the bank while still collecting the government entitlements.
DavidM, regarding your hypothetical person in a multi-million dollars home on 5000 acres….
How does he pay his property taxes?
And the person you know with “thousands” in the bank gets SNAP? Guess those thousands must be under $3250 (by your accounting).
Forgive me, David. But I find your reporting unreliable. Now you’ve got me wondering about those pension plans that don’t get counted.
Nick, please note Elaine’s documentation is referring to increased Medicare taxes on the affluent. Do not confuse that with the income requirements to get ACA subsidies.
Nick, ACA subsidies rely on Adjusted Gross Income. That will include dividends, interest, pensions, ss, etc. as per the following:
http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/healthcare/MAGI_summary13.pdf
And yes, billionaires get SS. When we communists take over, that will no longer be true. (That will be right after we take away all your guns and religious freedom.)
It would be a service to mankind if you would contact your friends with whom you had dinner and told you of their other friends who hoped to screw the taxpayers, that they are full of crap.
pdm wrote:
ACA subsidies rely on Adjusted Gross Income. That will include dividends, interest, pensions, ss, etc. as per the following:
http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/healthcare/MAGI_summary13.pdf
=====
Read a little closer. Only TAXABLE pensions are reported. Also read toward the bottom: “An amount received as a lump sum is counted as income only in the month received.”
If a person receives a large sum from selling a business, he pays the capital gains tax for that year in which he received that income. He is NOT taxed again years later on that income. It can sit in the bank and be drawn upon to pay expenses for years.
Tax Provisions In New Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
http://www.bbdcpa.com/articles/tax-provisions-in-new-patient-protection-and-affordable-care-act/
Excerpt:
Representing a sweeping overhaul of the U.S. health care system, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was signed into law on March 23, and its companion reconciliation act will be signed into law early next week. Here’s a brief summary of the main tax provisions affecting individuals and businesses.
Individual tax provisions
Important tax provisions affecting individuals include:
Penalties for the uninsured. Beginning in 2014, most individuals who aren’t eligible for Medicaid, Medicare or other government-provided coverage will be required to purchase minimum essential health coverage. Those who fail to do so will be hit with a penalty (with exceptions for the poor and certain others).
Premium assistance for those with lower incomes. Beginning in 2014, people with income between 133% and 400% of the federal poverty level (FPL) are eligible for tax credits or cost-sharing subsidies on a sliding scale to help pay insurance premiums.
Higher taxes on the affluent. To help offset the act’s cost, affluent taxpayers will face higher taxes. Beginning in 2013, taxpayers with more than $200,000 in earned income ($250,000 for families) will pay an additional 0.9% Medicare tax on the excess. In addition, those with an adjusted gross income (AGI) over $200,000 ($250,000 for joint filers) will pay a new, 3.8% Medicare tax on unearned income, such as interest, dividends, rents, royalties and certain capital gains. The tax doesn’t apply to retirement plan distributions.
Also starting in 2013, the act raises the threshold for deducting unreimbursed medical expenses from 7.5% to 10% of AGI and limits contributions to flexible spending accounts for medical expenses.
pdm, I’m a professional skeptic that’s why I threw it out there. However, there are billionaires who get monthly SS checks.
One of the many reasons I will always hate and curse the Bush family.