Is the NY Times in violation of Title 18, section 798 of US Criminal Code?

The Weekly Standard ^ | June 27, 2006 | Navyguy

[navyguy]

Since the NY Times made no allegation of criminal wrong doing when they published the story it would seem to me that this statute applies. But will our wobbly government have the jewels to prosecute?

[wmileo]

The NYT picks up where PRAVDA left off.

[tomzz]

That's GGGGGGOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooood.

My actual prefeence for the ****heads running the NY Times would be something along the lines of an auto de fe, but I'd settle for hanging them for treason.

[afnamvet]

Enforcement falls to the Executive branch of government.

IMO, there is no will in Washington to prosecute the NY Times.

[Gay State Conservative]

The Slimes knows that there'll be no legal action taken.The bloodshed in such a battle would make Billy Bob's impeachment look like a Sunday picnic in comparison.

And the battle would last for years!

[ark_girl]

Yes, but our President needs to think long and hard about the precident his administration is setting if they let this go. Very long and very hard. We're six inches from going to war with two other countries and Russia and China aren't exactly our best friends right now. The Times needs to be put in their place and it needs to happen NOW because it's clear that things are going to get worse before they get better security-wise and the Times and their ilk needs to learn they can't screw us over on national security just because they didn't like how the elections turned out.

We can prosecute them now or we can wait and let them continue to do more damage (which they CLEARLY will do....over and over and over again). But, sooner or later this is gonna come to a head.

It needs to stop NOW nad the NYT isn't responsible enough to stop on thier own! Someone's gonna have to fork over some dough for lawyers and spend some time in federal "pound you in the ass" prison for this to stop.

[Wristpin]

Not punishing the leakers has only emboldened the Dems to leak more. It's getting dangerous.

[DejaJude]

Enforcement falls to the Executive branch of government.
IMO, there is no will in Washington to prosecute the NY Times.>

That's my view also. Why not? Please give me a real hero that will enforce our laws.

[ExTexasRedhead]

IMO, the American people have to scream loud enough that it gives the Executive Branch the incentive to prosecute the NYT. Unfortunately, our elected officials have forgotten that they were elected to "serve the people" and to defend the United States of America. That goes for the whole crowd in DC as well as those at the local and state level. There seems to be a severe shortage of gonads to do what is right for the country and for our security as well as for our freedom. Believe it or not, there is right and wrong. Gray areas are reserved for Liberals/Leftists.

[ExTexasRedhead]

IMO, the American people have to scream loud enough that it gives the Executive Branch the incentive to prosecute the NYT. Unfortunately, our elected officials have forgotten that they were elected to "serve the people" and to defend the United States of America. That goes for the whole crowd in DC as well as those at the local and state level. There seems to be a severe shortage of gonads to do what is right for the country and for our security as well as for our freedom. Believe it or not, there is right and wrong. Gray areas are reserved for Liberals/Leftists who have no clue about right and wrong.

[Wally_Kalbacken]

Whether the administration will go after the NYT as a matter of enforcing Federal Law remains to be seen. I'd rather look at it from a civil law perspective. Remember the tobacco suit by the state's Attorney's General? The one that led to the massive tobacco settlement? Well - the theory of that action was:

1. that tobacco led to tobacco related illnesses,
2. that those with tobacco related illnesses sought health care reimbursed by the taxpayer via Medicare and Medicaid,
3. therefore the taxpayers deserved to be compensated by big tobacco.

Well, what's to stop a citizen/taxpayer from articulating:

1. taxpayers built the system that utilized the foreign financial transaction data, at a cost of $Y
2. their investment has been diminished by X% by the disclosure by the NYT,
3. therefore taxpayers are owed X% x $Y by the publishers of the NYT.

No first amendment issues here - they can publish, there's no prior restraint, no censorship, just the articulation of responsibility to the taxpayer. End of story.

 

[Polybius]

Is the NY Times in violation of Title 18, section 798 of US Criminal Code?

That's what I have been saying in multiple threads for the past four days:

9 posted on 06/28/2006 7:10:09 PM PDT by Polybius

5 posted on 06/28/2006 4:27:50 PM PDT by Polybius

41 posted on 06/28/2006 7:54:36 AM PDT by Polybius

8 posted on 06/28/2006 6:41:37 AM PDT by Polybius

103 posted on 06/27/2006 8:09:53 PM PDT by Polybius

22 posted on 06/24/2006 3:39:52 PM PDT by Polybius

Hello? Mr. Attorney General? Are you lurking out there?

[Cobra64]

But will our wobbly government have the jewels to prosecute?

Now that's a silly question.

[Cicero]

Yes, there's no question that the two reporters in question, Bill Keller, and Pinch Sulzberger are guilty of treason.

And by condoning and excusing their actions, the President of the United States is becoming complicit in their treason. He is assenting to it. He is encouraging them to do it again. He is failing in his sworn duty to uphold the law and defend our country against its enemies.

[george76]

Good find.

"Is the NY Times in violation of Title 18, section 798 of US Criminal Code ?"

[mathurine]

Put them in jail with the other odds and sods.

[GOPJ]

Or even ggggrrrrrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaattt

[nutmeg]

ping

[Suzy Quzy]

Congress doesn't even have the stones to NAME the New York Times and The LA Times in thier weak sister resolution!! Call David Drier, Hastert, Boehner!

[swheats]

Bump