Fire the DEA Chief
- Thread starter Rrog
- Start date
TheMan13
Well-Known Member
He's a connected career political lawyer and his cronies will never even entertain the idea, it's clearly a moot point in reality and sadly laughable among them. "He did nothing wrong, and if he did it's someone else's fault." Sound familiar? Welcome to the land of lawyered up "leadership" we now call government. What's changed and how do we get back to reality and accountability?
TheMan13
Well-Known Member
Like the DOJ's Fast & Furious scheme, the IRS's Tea Party scandal or State Department's failures in Libya? How many millions of dollars in legal fees have been wasted on those endeavors to hold politically connected career lawyers accountable?
"They did nothing wrong, and if they did it's someone else's fault." Have we not just simply accepted the filibustering, costs and wasted time of all these well paid lawyers and just moved on as if there is nothing to see here? Seems to be a new status quo to me, just ask Wall Street and our current Secretary of the Treasury ...
Jack Lew - chief operating officer of Citigroup's Alternative Investments between the Clinton and Obama administrations. You just cannot make this shit up.
Last edited:
Vikerus Forrest
Active Member
Sometimes I think these people come from another universe lol. How can you be so closed off from the wider body of knowledge that you actually think something doctors have decided is a medicine is not one?
Last edited:
TheMan13
Well-Known Member
It's a misdirected effort though. Try a signature campaign to have the US Attorney General (Rosenberg's boss) address marijuana's wrongful placement as a Schedule I Controlled Substance as it is clearly spelled out in the law. There is no question that it is now her job to request the scientific study specifically from the Secretary of Health and Human Services just to get the ball rolling, a fact of the matter simply obstructed by all of her predecessors (politically connected career lawyers) for decades now. You do not need to be a lawyer to identify this clear linchpin in our law ...
"What's obvious to one is perhaps not obvious to another."
Last edited:
Rrog
Well-Known Member
I agree 100% with your post. You shouldn't petition to have somebody fired, you should petition the specific issue. No question
You can see the hot potato that cannabis is no more clearly than in that response from Holder. There was no way Obama was going to have a potentially nasty black cloud hanging over his legacy. His predecessor will forever have his own cloud
There has to be enough public pressure to make it politically dangerous to continue to defy it. Like gay rights. Same arguments were made for gay rights 20 years ago. No new argument or data. No new Constitution to interpret. There needed to be a shift in the collective voting base such that you can't get around it. It can then be used as a weighted weapon by your next political opponent, so you change your tune
You can see the hot potato that cannabis is no more clearly than in that response from Holder. There was no way Obama was going to have a potentially nasty black cloud hanging over his legacy. His predecessor will forever have his own cloud
There has to be enough public pressure to make it politically dangerous to continue to defy it. Like gay rights. Same arguments were made for gay rights 20 years ago. No new argument or data. No new Constitution to interpret. There needed to be a shift in the collective voting base such that you can't get around it. It can then be used as a weighted weapon by your next political opponent, so you change your tune
TheMan13
Well-Known Member
The recent gay rights win did not have the economic cost ($$$) that taking marijuana away from the Justice Department and it's associated industries will. 50 years of having lawyers built empires in order to fight our "drug problem" via criminal prohibition has not only been foolish and a complete failure, it's costs are immeasurable.
Last edited:
Rrog
Well-Known Member
I would submit that the gay-rights thing was about as polarizing as corporate greed because of the religious spin. Gay rights was still unstoppable, however.
Similarly, I think if they have more mothers out there showing epileptic babies being treated with oil, that's public pressure you can't stop.
The pressure is mounting and while you'll have some corporate influence / associated industries to stop this, the reality is that shit tons of money and industry has been hedging their positions in anticipation of the new multi billion $ weed products market.
I think it likely at this time that any corporate influence would not be the prevention of rescheduling/ legalization, but rather the delay of it so as to control the situation for future positioning and profits. Like the Canadian bridge asshat
Similarly, I think if they have more mothers out there showing epileptic babies being treated with oil, that's public pressure you can't stop.
The pressure is mounting and while you'll have some corporate influence / associated industries to stop this, the reality is that shit tons of money and industry has been hedging their positions in anticipation of the new multi billion $ weed products market.
I think it likely at this time that any corporate influence would not be the prevention of rescheduling/ legalization, but rather the delay of it so as to control the situation for future positioning and profits. Like the Canadian bridge asshat
Elwood Diggler
Well-Known Member
He's a connected career political lawyer and his cronies will never even entertain the idea, it's clearly a moot point in reality and sadly laughable among them. "He did nothing wrong, and if he did it's someone else's fault." Sound familiar? Welcome to the land of lawyered up "leadership" we now call government. What's changed and how do we get back to reality and accountability?
he was owned my the chicago outfit through the kansas city crew. politicians have always been cunts