Replies

Middie wrote: "...He know the law and applies it scrupulously and without fear or favor..."

The Judge may know the law, Middie, but he did not scrupulously apply anything except a huge incentive to any future traitors and terrorists.

From the article: "...But in departing from federal guidelines that called for 30 years behind bars, he cited Stewart's more than three decades of dedication to poor, disadvantaged and unpopular clients."
Bleeding heart Judge.

The federal guideline set a proposed standard that, absent reasons for departure therefrom, are suggestions not mandates. Before a convicted defendant is sentenced there are extensive background investigations and a report by the probation department and a reccomendation as to sentence. A good judge takes into account the defendant as well as the offense.

I take no backseat to those who want to protect the USA. I spent 30 years of my life doing exactly that and now have sons and a step-grandson engaged in the same career with all three in either of our two combat zones- and the older one with a Purple Heart earned in 2004.

The sentence of an elderly lawyer with no previous legal decalfactions represents the end of her license and career. The sentence is sufficient with relation to the law violation. It's OK if others disagree, that's part of the system and why Article III judges don't have to answer at the polls to a transitory majority and play to the crowd to remain on the Bench. The administration of justice is nonpartisan.

"... he cited Stewart's more than three decades of dedication to poor, disadvantaged and unpopular clients.."

I guess these would be murderous thugs like the black panthers and the weather underground.