PDA

View Full Version : Barr signals support for ending marijuana legalization or making it federal




Swordsmyth
01-16-2019, 12:58 AM
Attorney general nominee William P. Barr said Tuesday afternoon that he would support a federal law prohibiting the recreational use of marijuana by in all 50 states — even those that have legalized it at the state level.
During his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Barr argued that the U.S. government’s increased tolerance for marijuana in recent years has been a mistake. Under questioning by Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., Barr said the current discrepancy between federal law and state laws is untenable.
“We either should have a federal law that prohibits marijuana everywhere, which I would support myself. Because I think that it’s a mistake to back off on marijuana. However, if we [don’t] want a federal approach, if we want states to have their own laws, then let’s get there and let’s get there the right way,” Barr told Booker.


When Booker asked Barr whether he thought Sessions was correct in rescinding the Cole memo, Barr said it was important not to upset the interests and expectations of the businesses and investors who have entered the legal marijuana industry.
“However, I think the current situation is untenable and really has to be addressed. It’s almost like a backdoor nullification of federal law. To me it’s a binary choice. Either we have a federal law that applies to everybody —” Barr said, before being interrupted by Booker.
“How would you address that? Do you think it’s appropriate to use federal resources to target marijuana businesses that are compliant with state law?” Booker asked.
“No,” Barr responded. “I said I’m not going to go after companies that have relied on the Cole memorandum.”
Later in the hearing, Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., asked again if he intends to use “the limited federal resources” at his disposal to enforce federal marijuana laws in the states where the drug has been legalized.
“No, I thought I answered that by saying, to the extent that people are complying with the state law’s distribution and production and so forth, we’re not going to go after that. But I do feel we can’t stay in the current situation,” he said. “You can imagine any kind of situation. Can an existing administration and an attorney general start cutting deals with states saying, ‘We’re not going to apply the federal law.’ Some gun law or some other thing saying, ‘We’re not going to apply it in your state.’”
Barr said it is incumbent upon Congress to decide whether marijuana law will be established and governed by a federal government or state-based system.
“This is breeding disrespect for the federal law,” he said.

More at: https://news.yahoo.com/barr-signals-support-ending-marijuana-legalization-212041886.html

enhanced_deficit
01-16-2019, 01:47 AM
There have been rumors that MAGA had private meetings with his top funder and distinguished neocon Adelson.

Sheldon Adelson Behind 85% of Florida’s Anti-Medical Marijuana Campaign (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?462297-Sheldon-Adelson-Behind-85-of-Florida’s-Anti-Medical-Marijuana-Campaign&)

Swordsmyth
01-16-2019, 01:49 AM
There have been rumors that MAGA had private meetings with his top funder and distinguished neocon Adelson.

Sheldon Adelson Behind 85% of Florida’s Anti-Medical Marijuana Campaign (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?462297-Sheldon-Adelson-Behind-85-of-Florida’s-Anti-Medical-Marijuana-Campaign&)
Legalization isn't going away, it is going federal.

nikcers
01-16-2019, 01:59 AM
This guy totally wants to enforce federal gun controls and doesn't want people on both sides of the political spectrum thinking you can legalize something that is federally illegal like guns at the state level.

Swordsmyth
01-16-2019, 02:07 AM
This guy totally wants to enforce federal gun controls and doesn't want people on both sides of the political spectrum thinking you can legalize something that is federally illegal like guns at the state level.
Yup.

Stratovarious
01-16-2019, 04:39 AM
''we must control it at the Federal level so we can tax it ...at the Federal level''

DamianTV
01-16-2019, 04:51 AM
As long as we dont do it like Hawaii did it. Smoking Pot does NOT revoke GUN RIGHTS. Bet thats gonna be the avenue try to take tho, guns kill people, joints dont. Well, maybe stupid people with guns kill people, not the guns themselves since guns dont fire themselves...

Stratovarious
01-16-2019, 05:33 AM
''as long as we don't inhale'' ?
Bill Clinton teaches people how to legally smoke pot;
''Yes but I didn't inhale''
:frog:

shakey1
01-16-2019, 06:28 AM
No better than JS... why does Trump continue to hire this brand of swamp shit?

Schifference
01-16-2019, 06:45 AM
I don't like this guy. Why have states if they cannot make their own laws? This could be good. Could be a blessing in disguise. Maybe Trump does this on purpose. Get this guy in and have many states claim sovereignty.

dean.engelhardt
01-16-2019, 06:57 AM
I think Barr is trying to protect Civil Assets Forfeiture policies. The government still collects billions of dollars from pot smokers, I don't see them giving it up without a fight.

Superfluous Man
01-16-2019, 07:26 AM
When Booker asked Barr whether he thought Sessions was correct in rescinding the Cole memo, Barr said it was important not to upset the interests and expectations of the businesses and investors who have entered the legal marijuana industry.

He's not even trying to hide what drives his decisions.

Notice that there was no expectation for him to explain how he could harmonize his position with an oath to uphold the Constitution.

Superfluous Man
01-16-2019, 07:29 AM
I think Barr is trying to protect Civil Assets Forfeiture policies. The government still collects billions of dollars from pot smokers, I don't see them giving it up without a fight.

That is one factor. But there are a number of others. And they all in one way or another revolve around money and power for various special interest groups (police, private prisons, prosecutors, pharmaceutical companies, etc.).

Notably, in my opinion, the social conservative wing of the GOP, has much less to do with this issue than people blame them for.

CCTelander
01-16-2019, 07:56 AM
No better than JS... why does Trump continue to hire this brand of swamp shit?


Why indeed.

Sonny Tufts
01-16-2019, 08:01 AM
''we must control it at the Federal level so we can tax it ...at the Federal level''

Untrue. The law's been clear for a long time that the federal power to tax isn't limited to things that Congress can otherwise regulate.

Stratovarious
01-16-2019, 08:21 AM
Untrue. The law's been clear for a long time that the federal power to tax isn't limited to things that Congress can otherwise regulate.
What law is that, that makes Feds allowed to create a new tax without a new law?

Superfluous Man
01-16-2019, 08:38 AM
What law is that, that makes Feds allowed to create a new tax without a new law?

A guy with a gun stops you alone in a dark alley and points it at your head demanding that you give him money.

Imagine saying to that mugger, "What law is that that makes you allowed to create a new tax without a new law"?

As far as that mugger is concerned, his demand for your money is the law, and the authority of that law is founded on nothing other than the gun pointed at your head, without any pretense of appeal to some deeper underlying law authorizing this law.

The government is the same as that in all respects.

Indeed, that mugger is an example of a state, just a very small and temporary one, having all the defining characteristics that make larger states, like the US federal government, what they are. All of these larger states' hocus-pocus laws that legitimize their other laws (e.g. the Constitution) are nothing but propaganda diverting the attention of their victims away from their true illegitimate nature.

Stratovarious
01-16-2019, 08:45 AM
A guy with a gun stops you alone in a dark alley and points it at your head demanding that you give him money.

Imagine saying to that mugger, "What law is that that makes you allowed to create a new tax without a new law"?

As far as that mugger is concerned, his demand for your money is the law, and the authority of that law is founded on nothing other than the gun pointed at your head, without any pretense of appeal to some deeper underlying law authorizing this law.

The government is the same as that in all respects.

Indeed, that mugger is an example of a state, just a very small and temporary one, having all the defining characteristics that make larger states, like the US federal government, what they are. All of these larger states' hocus-pocus laws that legitimize their other laws (e.g. the Constitution) are nothing but propaganda diverting the attention of their victims away from their true illegitimate nature.
Right , I think most of us are well aware, I'm waiting for 'The Law' from Tufts, will
continue and add to this when Tuft shows me 'that' law.

Superfluous Man
01-16-2019, 08:54 AM
Right , I think most of us are well aware, I'm waiting for 'The Law' from Tufts, will
continue and add to this when Tuft shows me 'that' law.

The tax itself would be that law. Of course Congress would have to legislate that tax law. But, as ST said, there is no prerequisite that the feds must first regulate marijuana in other ways before being allowed to tax it.

Stratovarious
01-16-2019, 08:57 AM
The tax itself would be that law. Of course Congress would have to legislate that tax law. But, as ST said, there is no prerequisite that the feds must first regulate marijuana in other ways before being allowed to tax it.
There you go, as I inferred.
''What law is that, that makes Feds allowed to create a new tax without a new law? ''

Sonny Tufts
01-16-2019, 10:32 AM
What law is that, that makes Feds allowed to create a new tax without a new law?

The point was that it's not necessary for Congress to regulate pot in order to tax it, which is what I thought you were saying ("we must control it at the Federal level so we can tax it "). If Congress were to repeal all federal laws criminalizing or otherwise regulating pot it could still tax it (although the tax could be problematic if pot was illegal under state law -- see below). See The License Tax Cases, 72 U.S. 462 (1866), upholding federal taxation of things (intrastate sales of lottery tickets and liquor) that at the time were outside of Congress' regulatory authority.

The reason there's no federal tax on pot currently goes back to Leary v. U.S., 395 U.S. 6 (1969), in which the Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 because it required persons subject to the tax to incriminate themselves.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
01-16-2019, 10:50 AM
Right , I think most of us are well aware, I'm waiting for 'The Law' from Tufts, will
continue and add to this when Tuft shows me 'that' law.


He might very well do that, but it's not because he is here to help us. Sonny Tufts once acknowledged he is a tax attorney. He is like ZippyJuan, Influenza, TheCount (and a cast of thousands) in that he is a shenaniganist. He is very likely connected with the Open Society Foundations (https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/). He mostly posts contrary and discouraging information. Just check all his posts from the beginning. I did. That's his purpose here. I am 100% sure of it.

dannno
01-16-2019, 10:50 AM
He's not even trying to hide what drives his decisions.

Notice that there was no expectation for him to explain how he could harmonize his position with an oath to uphold the Constitution.

What are you talking about?


However, if we [don’t] want a federal approach, if we want states to have their own laws, then let’s get there and let’s get there the right way,” Barr told Booker.

Sounds like he is going to be flexible on this one.

Sonny Tufts
01-16-2019, 11:31 AM
double post

Sonny Tufts
01-16-2019, 11:38 AM
He might very well do that, but it's not because he is here to help us.

I think that it would be very helpful to know what the law really is, as opposed to inaccurate descriptions or (at the other extreme) crackpot and paranoid versions.


He is very likely connected with the Open Society Foundations (https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/).

I had never heard of this organization before you mentioned it. Better come up with a different delusion.


He mostly posts contrary and discouraging information.

It may be discouraging to shatter ignorant fantasies, but that's what exposure to the facts often does.

Stratovarious
01-16-2019, 12:52 PM
He might very well do that, but it's not because he is here to help us. Sonny Tufts once acknowledged he is a tax attorney. He is like ZippyJuan, Influenza, TheCount (and a cast of thousands) in that he is a shenaniganist. He is very likely connected with the Open Society Foundations (https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/). He mostly posts contrary and discouraging information. Just check all his posts from the beginning. I did. That's his purpose here. I am 100% sure of it.
Thanks NLC , noted, what about superfluous man?

NorthCarolinaLiberty
01-16-2019, 01:00 PM
Thanks NLC , noted, what about superfluous man?


SF gets annoyed when I point out the paid trolls here. Not exactly sure why that is. Anyway, I like some of SF's insights, especially in the religion section.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
01-16-2019, 01:02 PM
I think that it would be very helpful to know what the law really is, as opposed to inaccurate descriptions or (at the other extreme) crackpot and paranoid versions.

Why?




I had never heard of this organization before you mentioned it. Better come up with a different delusion.

You don't know who you work for?




It may be discouraging to shatter ignorant fantasies, but that's what exposure to the facts often does.

To what end?








.

Stratovarious
01-16-2019, 01:08 PM
Why?




You don't know who you work for?




To what end?








.

Thanks NCL...

Swordsmyth
01-16-2019, 03:22 PM
As long as we dont do it like Hawaii did it. Smoking Pot does NOT revoke GUN RIGHTS. Bet thats gonna be the avenue try to take tho, guns kill people, joints dont. Well, maybe stupid people with guns kill people, not the guns themselves since guns dont fire themselves...

If it is legalized at the federal level that will pull the rug out from under Hawaii and the other states that did that.

Swordsmyth
01-16-2019, 03:27 PM
Thanks NLC , noted, what about superfluous man?
He is an anarchist leftarian.

Stratovarious
01-16-2019, 04:04 PM
He is an anarchist leftarian.
Thanks.

Dr.3D
01-16-2019, 04:12 PM
Since 33 out of 50 states allow folks to smoke marijuana, why haven't their "representatives" brought it up to a vote to legalize marijuana federally?

Swordsmyth
01-16-2019, 04:13 PM
Since 33 out of 50 states allow folks to smoke marijuana, why haven't their "representatives" brought it up to a vote to legalize marijuana federally?
Exactly.

Superfluous Man
01-16-2019, 05:19 PM
Thanks NLC , noted, what about superfluous man?

I'm a traditional conservative, along the lines of Ron Paul.

And you?

Swordsmyth
01-16-2019, 05:21 PM
I'm a traditional conservative, along the lines of Ron Paul.

And you?

LOL

Stratovarious
01-16-2019, 05:55 PM
I'm a traditional conservative, along the lines of Ron Paul.

And you?
Good boy, but Christis' you sure get tedious and nit pickity' .....