Re: Something we can all agree on


"Keith" <krw@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.12.18.03.57.17.926555@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 18:50:40 -0800, Richard Henry wrote:
>
> >
> > "John Larkin" <jjlarkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message
> > news:c7j9q153sftkt709i50pttvls7t7tcf1gn@xxxxxxxxxx
> >> On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 17:49:52 -0800, "Richard Henry" <rphenry@xxxxxxxx>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >So now that W has admitted committing a crime, and has confirmed that
he
> >> >will do it again, when do the impeachment hearings start?
> >>
> >> Don't be silly. Members of Congress of both parties were briefed on
> >> what was going on. And these same people are going to vote to impeach
> >> him? And, during those hearings, reveal who leaked?
> >>
> >> I suspect not.
> >
> > So you don't deny that it's a crime?
>
> Of course it's not a crime.

IANAL, but here's the law: 50 USC Chapter 36, sections 1801-1811. Ignorance
in the age of google is inexcusable.

Here's a good starting point:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/usc_sec_50_00001801----000-.html

The penalties in the final sections are interesting: $10,000, 5 years, and
the possibility of civil penalties of at least $100/day to each offended
"United States person", which I believe means citizens, associations, and
corporations.

> Good grief you leftists are limp-wristed.

Are you calling me a "leftist"? On what basis?

And what does that mean to you?



.

Loading