Yeah, like that's going to happen!

resolutions.

Federal prosecutors can bring cases, but that doesn't mean state and local cops will enforce their Federal law.

They all receive significant federal grants. They can threaten to withhold those if they refuse to enforce. Federal money always has conditions and strings attached.

End the insane war on drugs.

We can't even eliminate dandelions which nobody wants.

What lunacy makes them think they can win against plants we do?

Oh yeah! The for profit prison system.

My Congresscritter is a Tea Party Repug so that's useless....

this is a rare instance where the "tea party" republicans' knee-jerk impulse to destroy the federal government could work in our favor.

what say you to the idea that the entirety of the Sovereign State Government Beaurracry (as the functional proxy of the Will of The People) of Colorado and Washington are engaging in an overt act of Civil Disobedience, on behalf of the People? Yes, the Governer could, in theory, be arrested for breaking the law and leading others to follow his example, but really, is Holder dumb enough to try it? I know it begs the questions "Can an entire organization be engaged in an act of Civil Disobedience, AND do States possess the same Rights to PEACEFUL Protest as any other sovereign agent (you and me)?"

It might could work....If I were the Governor of Colorado I'd do it...I'd DARE the atty. gen. to come up here and arrest me.

He's a special type of Democrat, a DC Democrat.

In contrast to those of us who are registered as Democrats, make campaign contributions to Democrats, and who vote for Democrats, Holder is a Washington, DC Democrat who will do whatever he wants regardless of whatever communications that he receives from us.

without his bosses say so. Not for long, anyway. He is doing what he is told.

and goes after state-approved medical marijuana dispensaries, why wouldn't he have job security as the U.S. Attorney General?

Or are you saying that he has plans to cash in on his Attorney General status and move on to further help the super-rich as one of their employees?

be going after pot smokers unless that is what his boss wants him to do.

In fact, as we can recall in the Clinton days, the DoJ can and will prosecute a sitting president, so your assertion that Holder can't act without permission from the president is ill-informed.

(1) he could pick up the phone and inform Holder of that,
(2) he could call a press conference and make his views known to the public, and
(3) he could choose to not re-appoint Holder as the Attorney General.

The DOJ, as you say, "can and will prosecute a sitting president."

Have you noticed that Holder did not prosecute former Vice-President Cheney who went on television and openly admitted his participation in war crimes by being involved in the water torture (nominally called "water-boarding&quot ?

Have you noticed that Holder did not prosecute other war criminals?

And that he has not gone after banksters?

Holder and Obama are in alignment on those policies. Holder is doing exactly what Obama wants.

DOJ is a part of the Executive.

And, it was a Special Prosecutor, independent from the DOJ, Ken Starr who prosecuted Clinton.

Janet Reno hired the Special Prosecutor Robert B. Fiske to investigate President Clinton in January 1994.

And after Congress passed the Independent Counsel law in 1994, Robert B. Fiske was replaced with Kenneth Starr in August 1994.

My guess is that it isnt the legislative branch that MAKES the laws.

My guess is that it isnt the judicial branch that INTERPRETS the laws.

My guess is that it is the executive branch that ENFORCES the laws.

If anything's gonna turn off the younger voters, fighting them on pot legalization would. And WILL.

a most passionate advocate, with a lot less to lose. How badly does one want to win? A bonus, it might do the racists among them some good to associate with others for awhile, see another way to live.

(Our state rep just won again. He got popped a while back for pulling a gun on an unarmed man in a road rage incident, but it doesn't seem to have impacted his popularity. I bet he wouldn't like this AT ALL, though I haven't heard his opinion on the weed vote.)

There is a huge group with interests all over the place here who could be organized among, to support the person who gets arrested by the feds with a 1/4 ounce on state or private property.

I wonder what they would do if 5 or 6 hundred thousand people (of the potentially millions interested) in a couple cities started showing up on state land around their nice federal offices, sitting down until they are arrested for the joint they have in their hand too? Well, ok, the roach. It would shut the justice system down and create a huge crisis. They want to send 60 new coal trains through here every day, for China. Imagine those folks just go sit on the tracks until their vote is respected. Because if we are gonna be railroaded, we might as sit on real tracks.

Big place, lots of people, and the IWW did some good work and dying here. Some people just don't take being dictated to well.

That whole demographic change that is pointed to in the last election is what carried these initiatives, I think. Those are the same ones that might get this thrown back in their face, so I don't know how wise it might be to pursue this. 2014 and 2016 need to be kept in mind, with 4 more years of 10,000 people a day turning 65 and economic conditions that may not be markedly different than they are now.

It will be interesting to watch the organizing, if any.

...until the Administration drops these insane, excessive policies.

People need to be taught about jury nullification, and prosecutors in these states need to learn they will no longer be able to get convictions on these ridiculous charges.

My public defender friend says that's who usually shows up. He goes absolutely insane when he hears his liberal friends talk about avoiding jury duty.

The feds are brutal in their prosecution. I would hate to see someone end up with 10 years in the federal clink. Would YOU want to risk it?

You would have to file a motion to dismiss. Absent victory based on that, you would have to plea bargain to avoid serious time.

groups come back and sue the Congress and the Justice Department, on the grounds that they made marijuana a class level one drug period? Get it into a forum with competing experts. Then go to the issues of Constitutionality. Let Congress and the Justice Department prove why it should be illegal. Take it to the U.S. Supreme Court if you have to. I don't think Congress or the Justice Department can win this issue with the current research on marijuana. They had none of that in 1930.

What section of the Constitution prohibits Congress from passing a law and the President from signing a law making MJ a class one drug?

have the right to do that, under the right definition of MJ, but their evidence is weak about the characterization of MJ. If Congress has no evidence to prove what they are characterizing should be restricted, then they can basically make anything illegal, even a glass of milk.

That is where the fight meeds to be. MJ has been falsely characterized. How can this be a Level one drug when it is useful for medical purposes? The evidence did not exist at the time of its useful purposes. Now there is evidence. MJ was Labeled a narcotic under the Controlled Substance Act of 1970. It was also painted as addictive. A lot of successful people have smoked it and led successful careers. You get rid of the myths, then Congress has no reason to mis characterize it. When medical marijuana reached the U.S. Supreme Court, the plaintive used the Commerce Clause and lost the case 5-4. All the lIberals on the court voted against using medical marijuana, but the conservatives voted for except Scalia, who voted concurred. The case needs to be argued on different grounds. I think at the lower level, the labeling of marijuana by Congress needs to be challenged with scientific evidence by experts. The proponents need to show cases of harmful effects, such as addiction. I just don't think the Federal Government can prove it's case now. That needs to be re litigated.

Actually the Federal Government can't, they are limited by the Commerce clause and the 10th amendment. As long as the states are using home grown pot, and only allowing it to be distributed in their borders, the DOJ is likely powerless, and they know it which is why they have resorted to threats.

howling their heads off about THIS one? Hmmmm?

inteferes with their religious Manifesto of Hypocrasy.

or maintain personal and/or party power.

They're for "big government" they just want a different type of "big government" one that will readily invade the privacy/sanctity of your home, bedroom and body.

But I guess pot is different.

the prison industrial complex by locking people up for pot.

which might be the most pathetic part of this whole pathetic mess.

Even as high officials within the Obama administration reportedly weigh action against two states which legalized use of marijuana, a number of other politicians and celebrities — including a former president — are pushing for wider international reform of drug laws.

Former president Jimmy Carter signed onto a declaration to “Governments and Parliaments” to begin re-examining the existing stringent criminalization of drug use worldwide. Carter was joined as a signatory by a number of current and former global presidents, including those from Mexico, Columbia, Guatemala, Poland and elsewhere. George Schultz, a secretary of state for President Ronald Reagan, also lent his support, as did Hollywood stars such as musicians Sting and Yoko Ono and director Bernardo Bertolucci — as well as many others.

- See more at: http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2012/12/07/pols-celebs-push-for-further-drug-reform/#sthash.Q5LA7CEN.dpuf

I called this months ago - WA state will never get to the point where state stores are opened to legally sell MJ.

The Feds will step in with an injunction as soon as the state Liquor Control Board issues its proposed regulations in Sept 2013, if not sooner.

This HAS to go through the federal court system sooner or later. Since we've all been used to MJ being a Schedule 1 narcotic for our entire lives, might as well be sooner.

The states are slowly waking up to the fact that the war on drugs is unnecessary and a waste of resources.

Although I do not smoke MJ, I don't believe its effects are any more destructive than those of alcohol.

If MJ is legal the state can license and TAX it. No more 3 strikes you are out for minor drug offenses. Selling MJ outside of the scope of the state licensing protocol becomes just that, a violation of the state licensing code (just like alcohol) and nothing more.

I am not so naive to believe that licensing MJ will significantly reduce the criminality associated with more substantive drugs such as Crack, Heroin, etc.

But this is a start.

Period.

Go prosecute some of those wack job military types, that gunned down women and children.

I'd much rather face these drug-warriors in court when public opinion is decidedly swinging in our favor.

If we can have open hearings where scientific evidence is utilized, we have a chance at making some fundamental, science-based changes.

I've been convinced to join yall side in this fight. Obama needs to back off and join the right side. They need to help the states that have legalized marijuana and down grade the classification also. That is where DOJ needs to be. They need to get the research and join these states against those advocates, against marijuana. Put it in the politcal arena and see who wins the fight. I'm on the side of legalization.

OR anyone else! Holder is doing exactly what he spent the last term doing, going after states rights. Enough.

Bad idea.

n/t

eom

The states are picking up the tab for trials and incarcerations, lets see if the Feds want to start picking up the tab on the National level. The issue has finally reached the tipping point.

That's how that worked, even though many states didn't like doing it.

I think "federal officials" ought to wake up, smell the coffee, and see the light of damn day.

How long can Big Pharma and the prison industry and liquor producers' lobbyists push them around?

It's a frigging WEED that grows WILD, fachrissake.

It is used as an ornamental plant all over the middle east--it used to grow outside the police station and my bank in Iran. My neighbor had a MASSIVE bush of the stuff, that he shaped to make it look like a giant Christmas-like, pine tree. It added a lot of green to a brown land. They'd cut the worst part of the plant (the thick, woody stem), dry it, and add it to their flavored tobacco in the hookahs for a bit of added relaxation. They'd take the seeds and toast them in sesame oil and salt 'em--in pre-Khomeini Iran, those were sometimes found in downtown bars as a freebie snack, like popcorn or pretzels in USA. No one gave a shit.

The world won't end if the feds just let this go. And if the booze industry and the pharma industry had a brain, they'd start figuring out how to jump on the bandwagon, and create delivery systems that are more efficient than growing/rolling one's own, that would enable them to "get a piece of the pie." Because, in truth, that's what this objection is all about--some businesses will LOSE money if this legalization (of a frigging WEED) is allowed to, forgive the pun, take root.

I hope they "consider" the plan to crack down, and find it wanting.

They had Bush's AT Gonzalez on to discuss the issue and he mentioned the possibility of the federal government withholding health care dollars to the state of Washington as smoking cannabis might have a detrimental effect on health care.

finding spontaneous (since you can't argue for it) jury nullification from a federal criminal jury. The Feds have been prosecuting people for federal crimes related to medical cannabis that would be otherwise legal in California for several years now. We certainly haven't seen any jury nullification out there. That's a nice thought, and something we all would hope for, but it's not really part of the solution.

n/t

What a waste of time, energy and money.

is that I know growers in California who have told me they would make more money if the Feds crack down. If they are forced to go back underground, the demand for their product would increase from them directly and then they will be able to raise their prices from what they are currently getting from selling to the medical marijuana clinics in Cali.

I have always been taught that we the people run this country, not the politicians. Yes we elect them to represent us but at the end of the day we run this country. The will of the people trumps everything and every law of the land. We get enough citizens to either vote for or against a law or idea once the votes are cast and counted whichever way the chips fall that is the end of the story, period. So when the government advocates against a legally resolved issue by way of vote they are going against the will of the people. Thus they need to shown the error of their ways.

Why does the Federal agency get to act within a state without notification?

If the feds want to trump the state then, why can't the state trump the feds by using the National guard?

Might makes right?

This whole thing is so stupid.
It just amounts to a power play between two factions who are too stupid to talk thru a solution to the problem.

That said Joe Biden was the reason Obama is taking such a tough stance. Is that so?

I had no idea...we need to work on Joe.

As chairman of the International Narcotics Control Caucus, Biden wrote the laws that created the U.S. "Drug Czar", who oversees and coordinates national drug control policy. In April 2003, he introduced the controversial Reducing Americans' Vulnerability to Ecstasy Act, also known as the RAVE Act.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden

Joe Biden's Awful Record on Drug Policy

Biden has sponsored more damaging drug war legislation than any Democrat in Congress.Hate the way federal prosecutors use RICO laws to take aim at drug offenders? Thank Biden. How about the abomination that is federal asset forfeiture laws? Thank Biden. Think federal prosecutors have too much power in drug cases? Thank Biden. Think the title of a “Drug Czar” is sanctimonious and silly? Thank Biden, who helped create the position (and still considers it an accomplishment worth boasting about).

Tired of the ridiculous steroids hearings in Congress? thank Biden, who led the effort to make steroids a Schedule 3 drug, and has been among the blowhardiest of the blowhards when it comes to sports and performance enhancing drugs. Biden voted in favor of using international development aid for drug control (think plan Columbia, plan Afghanistan, and other meddling anti-drug efforts that have only fostered loathing of America, backlash, and unintended consequences). Oh, and he was also the chief sponsor of 2004’s horrendous RAVE Act....

http://stopthedrugwar.org/speakeasy/2008/aug/24/joe_bidens_awful_record_drug_pol

f biden the drug warrior

in the conference committee, so that neither house actually ever got to vote on it by itself.

They consider our petitions, phone calls, and protests merely as evidence of the size of "the problem", and something to be worked around.
They would not ever consider actually listening to us on this issue.

The war on pot is the most sacred cow in Washington. They'll take away our Social Security and Medicare to fund it if necessary. They have been stealing resources from DoD for this for some time. (The fighter planes that were supposed to guard against a 9/11-style attack were diverted by then Atty General John Ashcroft to look for pot in mid 2001).

Can we hear the story again about he used to ride the train? I kinda miss that.

When will the bizarre, in-our-face hypocrisy end?

They turned a blind eye to Wall St. crooks. Fucking rat bastards. I hope you're reading this agent Mike.

Off to find a big, juicy crow.

That would obviate the possibility of federal-state wrangling. Let the federal powers deal with enforcement effort and expense if they want to do that.

I gotta say this one issue would probably make me lose respect; regardless of the reasons. I can't help but feel our government is more and more broken; congress can't get @#$@# done anymore and all politicians treat us Americans like we are ignorant trash with misleading campaign ads, tons of lies spoken in public but never challenged. I feel the blame is on the republicans for much of this; but this side of the coin still gets lobbied and tailors towards special interests.

Lets do simple chart here:

Worst drugs in US by classification:
Herion. Crack. Meth. Pot.

Second tier:
Opium. Cocaine. Morphene. Methadone.

Gotta say, whoever had it out for MJ was more than successful at making it illegal as @#$@#; as it carries worse penalties than coke?

Keep hoping, because it ain't coming. The Big Pharma monopolists that own Barack Obama and the rest of Washington don't want it legalized. Neither do the corporate interests that push alcohol on you. Same as Obamacare: selling out to corporate interests is the answer, no matter what the question was.

Oh, and remind me again whether or not Obama smoked pot and did coke... And Bush ... And Clinton ...

Not as progressive or liberal as I thought. Is it Holder, Obama, Michelle? Who in this administration is pushing this 'reefer madness' BULLSHIT!!!!!!!!! If I in smoking a joint from a plant that I grew for personal use and am not hurting anyone, the feds need to fuck off. IDIOTS!!!! Go find a war to stop. Stop rethug thuggery. Stop the sale of all liquor, it destroys livers, kidneys, stomachs and causes untold death on the highway.

but I can't tell anymore

in case you're not, they tried that before

he was speaking to the fact that medically, Alcohol has been proving to be more damaging. If only this argument were that simple.

not, I know.

very sarcastic. I get frustrated by these people who call themselves Justice Department??? personnel. Not one wall street crook in jail, yet years in prison for a joint. This is insane! Yeah, yeah I know about prohibition, just trying to make a point.

Like you can grow the stuff anywhere. The legal drug cartels and many other interests have a large investment in trying to keep the stuff illegal and off the over the counter market or any kind of other market

Now you can resume your thug tactics against marijuana.

Time to repay all those drug company donors who contributed so handsomely to your campaign.

But I guess that's what happens in a 2-Party system, where one of the parties is a complete AHole, and the other is pretty much a constant disappointment, no matter what benefit of the doubt you give them.

with actions like holder's et al, not hard to think this way.

Don't the feds have anything better to do?

I am so fucking sick of this! We have money problems I hear. Legalize it and tax it. The two BIG obstacles, Big Pharma and the prison industrial complex will be hard to overcome. Still, the money legal weed would generate should have at least someones attention!

Cracking down on WA. and CO is guaranteed losing house seats in '14
Letting the states be guarantees the young and the activists are rewarded and they turn out and good chance of flipping the house

There must be mobilization here. Any ideas ? Pissing on your base is wrong

If the feds leave this alone without changing federal laws does it set some kind of a precedent regarding other types of laws? Just asking, because I don't have a clue. But would having a policy of selective enforcement of laws open the door to successful challenges of civil rights laws if states wanted to pass laws which violate various civil rights, for example?

The Feds should be enforcing all the laws on their books regardless of any interference on any level above or below them.

Theory in this case is bull though. Bush/Cheney and cronies are still running free, and so are Goldman Sachs and the other professional looters. That proves selective enforcement.

If we have selective enforcement...why are victimless crimes being pursued more zealously than crimes against humanity, treason or grand theft treasury??

Where was this initiative with Wall Street fraud? They broke the law, textbook fraud, trashed pension funds and other funds and where is the move to hold them accountable? It's nowhere but Obama just may go all Nancy Reagan and crack down on pot in these states.

Yet Obama is still getting ripped on the right for being a socialist. Sigh, America 2012 going on 2013 and the going gets stranger.

And pot got more votes than Obama here too...Enough to pass it in my area.

neighbor!

We will meet soon!

then Raygun came along and held highway funding over those states heads, oh, around 1985. It has been done before as a precedent.

There was Prohibition and it was a disaster. Alcohol is now legal.

The DRUG WAR is a total failure and we now need total decriminalization

It's a new day and lets hope we do not regress.

DECRIMINALIZE.

The President needs to put a stop to this. He would never be where he is if HE had gotten caught.

follow the money.

It's a bad thing that Obama was our only other choice.

Not on our side.

Never was.

I hope that they don't do this.

I applaud President Obama for weighing legal action against those who have killed tens of thousands and caused the collapse of our economy.

these guys:

http://www.alternet.org/11-enemies-marijuana-legalization

Or us.

I'm pretty sure I know who it is.