HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Drug Policy (Group) » re: Tues. Hearing on mari...

Wed Sep 11, 2013, 07:00 PM

re: Tues. Hearing on marijuana laws [View all]


A deputy attorney general told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday that the Justice Department had begun working with Treasury officials and financial regulators to clarify how it legally deals with banks and other businesses that serve marijuana dispensaries and growers in states that have legalized the drug for medical or recreational use.

The deputy attorney general, James M. Cole, said the Obama administration was dedicated to enforcing federal drug laws and was choosing the best among a number of imperfect solutions by relying on states to regulate marijuana ďfrom seed to sale.Ē

Financial institutions, security providers and landlords that serve marijuana businesses can be prosecuted for racketeering, money laundering and trafficking under current federal laws, which Mr. Leahy said also hinder states in regulating the banking and taxation of growers and dispensaries.

But Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the panelís ranking Republican, said the Justice Department move was a step toward broad legalization of marijuana that would result in disastrous consequences for public safety and might violate international treaties. More broadly, he and other critics said, the Justice Departmentís new policy was another example of the Obama administrationís picking which laws to enforce and which to disregard.

Grassley went on to claim prohibition of marijuana was based upon science, not a whim. Of course, Grassley was also lying out his ass or else too stupid to know that the reality of marijuana prohibition was entirely based upon the whim of racists and, later, yeah, still racists.

Is Grassley too fucking stupid to be in office if he can deny the claims of medical benefit in decades of research? Should someone ask him why the U.S. holds a patent for cannabinoids based upon medical utility if marijuana has no medical benefit? Should someone ask him if he knows how to read an abstract from a scientific journal?

Should someone ask him why he denies the scientific record?

Is this person competent to do the job required of him?

Or does the beltway just sooo entirely not give a fuck about truth that any one of them will lie in a hearing and not care if their claims can be disputed in less than 5 minutes?

What sort of govt. has such imbeciles deciding the life and death of anyone?

6 replies, 1456 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 6 replies Author Time Post
Reply re: Tues. Hearing on marijuana laws [View all]
RainDog Sep 2013 OP
immoderate Sep 2013 #1
Scuba Sep 2013 #2
eShirl Sep 2013 #3
RainDog Sep 2013 #4
bunnies Sep 2013 #5
RainDog Sep 2013 #6