Spicer said Trump going after recreational pot not medical

Whatever happened to State's rights? Oh right, the Rs only believe in that when it is convenient.

>> Whatever happened to State's rights?

The supreme court said they didn't matter in this case. Blame Congress who passed the laws and the judiciary who said said Congress had the right to override them through the commerce clause. 

Gonzales v. Raich (previously Ashcroft v. Raich), 545 U.S. 1 (2005), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court ruling that under the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution, Congress may criminalize the production and use of homegrown cannabis even if states approve its use for medicinal purposes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Raich

BTW, the liberal justices are the ones ruled in the majority: The ruling was 6–3 with Justice Scalia joining Justices Kennedy, Stevens, Ginsburg, Souter and Breyer for the majority. 

So bathrooms/LGBT rights are 'states rights' but pot is a federal issue. Got it.

Strangely, I thought I made a post that didn't end up in this thread.

Nancy, I was just noting that Repubs in Texas are taking sides in either direction regarding the "gender restroom" issue.  Seems that Lt. Gov is taking the "moral" stand while the business Repubs are against the amount of money that will be lost, should Texas adopt a very unpopular stance.  They are talking about billions of dollars lost from potential boycotts, ala North Carolina.

Is there a similar argument regarding MJ?

Repubs like Thom love to live under iron- fisted rule.

"Fuck those pot-smoking liberals! Lock 'em all up!"

Enjoy your king!

Even more dangerous than pot growers are..Protesters!!!

but asset forfeiture apples to both.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-arizona-legislation-idUSKBN1622LB

>> Republicans only believe in states rights when it leads to what they want.

Re pot: It doesn't matter what they believe. They can't override SCOTUS, they can only change the law at a federal level.

^^Gee-Wiz, I wonder if March 4 Trump marchers will be affected by this (Arizona)...

PHOENIX, ARIZONA – 12:00 PM MST
Arizona State Capitol Building
1700 West Washington Street
Phoenix, AZ 85007
Facebook Group – EventBrite Page

http://www.deplorablepress.com/2017/02/16/trump-supporters-fight-back-or...

I may show up for the Berkeley March    

they will leave it up to jeff sessions

we all know how that's going to go

If the proposed law  allowing asset forfeiture to occur if a protest becomes violent is applied to the proTrump parades in Arizona, then the organizer's assets would be seized, as would the participants' assets. hmmm..

Where will they go first?

what happened the last time? 

At the pace they're going, when do they ban blacks and women from voting?

Bastards. 

Bet they go after a couple high high profile convictions within the year. What a buzz kill. 

>>, when do they ban blacks and women from voting?

first they pass the legislation making protesting a crime, then they arrest the women and blacks for protesting. some  will go to jail, the women in their pink pussy hats will be felons and no longer have the right to vote or protest.

Politics follows public opinion and these days a solid majority of folks support legalization.   We will see what happens if the feds start raiding rec shops and grows in legal states.  Assuming there is a big backlash, I can see the Trumpers holding off on additional aggressive enforcement of the federal cannabis prohibition (they have a lot of illegals to catch instead) until Congress votes to get the federal government out of the weed regulation business.

Hey Nancy. In the words of Larry Wilmore, "YOU CAN GO FUCK YOURSELF!"

dude. I in  no way condone the Trump regime tactics or agenda, I was just saying how they are planning to attempt to accomplish their despicable goals.

Then I apologize Nancy. Guess I'm a little "triggered" today.

No problem. Trump/Bannon are following the Hitler playbook. And no, I don't condone that either.

PS

I love my pink pussy hat that was gifted to me at a recent support for women's health care/PP rally.

>>>I love my pink pussy hat that was gifted to me at a recent support for women's health care/PP rally

LOL. Right on!  I think the " pink pussy hat" part of your original post made the whole post slip past my sarcasm radar.

Maybe they'll prevent corporate growing. 

Fuck Beauregard. 

We are in a civil cold war.

>>>We are in a civil cold war.

Check out the comment section of a breitbart article sometime. Those loons want an actual civil war.

Great job going after weed..... Because we obviously don't have anything better to go fix in this country..... smh....

Old Spicer

the strain that never was.....weak, diseased, and extremely low T(hc)

Oregon is collecting more taxes than anticipated on much larger sales than anticipated... hard to think they'd let go of that.

re states rights >>>It doesn't matter what they believe. They can't override SCOTUS

An administration's opinions regarding state's rights can absolutely inform their enforcement priorities.  Not just in criminal law, but in labor issues, environmental issues, enforcement of civil rights issues, etc.   Double duh.  No, triple duh.

>> An administration's opinions regarding state's rights can absolutely inform their enforcement priorities.  Not just in criminal law, but in labor issues, environmental issues, enforcement of civil rights issues, etc. 

If the legislature authors a law and the judiciary validates it trumps any state law, who is the executive to ignore it? Do you not believe in checks and balances?

You want to give Trump that power? 

CA Medical 215 Is" Recreational'' Has Been All Along Going On 21 Years ..........That Train Has Left The Station .....

As every grade-schooler knows, Congress has sole authority to make laws. The president has a corresponding duty to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed." When one branch of government exceeds its authority, separation of powers is violated, and representative government breaks down.

Presidents have power to fill gaps or ambiguities in laws passed by Congress. They do not, however, have power to ignore laws as written. For example, when President Obama unilaterally raised the minimum wage for federal contractors' employees, he directly contravened the Fair Labor Standards Act, which says that "every employer shall pay to each of his employees" a minimum wage of $7.25 per hour.

President Obama has shown a penchant for ignoring the plain language of our laws. He unilaterally rewrote the employer mandate and several other provisions of the Affordable Care Act, failing to faithfully execute a law which declares, unambiguously, that these provisions "shall" apply beginning Jan. 1, 2014. Similarly, in suspending deportation for a class of young people who entered this country illegally, the president defied the Immigration and Nationality Act, which states that any alien who is "inadmissible at the time of entry" into the country "shall" be removed.

The only strength gained by unilateral presidential lawmaking is raw speed: policies can be implemented more swiftly by unilateral presidential action than by congressional deliberation and debate. But the dangers are many, and should counsel any American — of whatever political persuasion — that such dispatch comes at a high constitutional cost. 

When the president fails to execute a law as written, he not only erodes the separation of powers, he breeds disrespect for the rule of law and increases political polarization. The president's own party — for example, the current Democrat-controlled Senate — will face intense pressure to elevate short-term, partisan victory over defending constitutional principles. If partisan preferences prevail, Congress will be unable, as an institution, to check presidential ambition and defend its lawmaking prerogative.

Once such precedent is established, damage to the constitutional architecture is permanent. The next president of a different party will face similar pressures and undo all the previous actions. He will initiate a new round of unilateral lawmaking, satisfying his own political base. The law will fluctuate back and forth, and our legislature will become little more than a rubber stamp for a single elected individual, which is not how representative government is supposed to work.

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/01/29/presidential-power-vs-co...

I don't give Trump that power. Every agency and administration in the world makes decisions about when to call out the troops and when to say whatevs. One president believes federal environmental laws should have teeth and the next thinks the feds should let the states take the lead. Kind of like your local cops/mayor decide whether to arrest homeless people for illegal camping, or just roust them, or just let them be. Thats why we care about elections. An asshole president can do stuff that sucks. A good one can do other stuff.  Raich doesn't require the feds to arrest people, just says they can.

Btw, nytimes op eds are opinions. In this case from some Tea Party lady who may or may not celebrate Scott Pruitt's position on EPA enforcement infringing on states rights.

Keep your campaign pledge to respect state marijuana legalization laws.

 https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/keep-your-campaign-pledge-resp...

Making America straight again?

"Protector of the lame
Straight Arrow is his name"

First they came for the immigrants and I said nothing, because I wasn't one. Then they came for the bathrooms I still I said nothing. Then they came for my nugs and I was all like whoa brah, but by then it was too late because I was already spaced.

This guy is so enamored with Reagan era policies, I bet he makes his wife wear a ronnie mask to get an erection. Fuck him.. Fuck him right in his stupid ear. 

My opinion

The Feds shut down ALL recreation weed and then within 2 years (just in time for re-election) open it up for ALL states and the government will make fuck loads of taxes on the previously labeled evil weed.

Will make tobacco and alcohol taxes seem like chump change.

Disp. buds are already over-priced, over-trimmed, and under-whelming, THC-wise. If this happens - not convinced - it would be a giant windfall to the black market.

Law enforcement never cared about weed one way or the other. What they have always wanted is an easy way to arrest and intimidate people who don't have the resources to fight back. Sessions isn't about to give that up. Law enforcement wants to be able to walk up to any house or car and say I smell something now I get to search you.

And then they came for the journalists

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/24/us/politics/white-house-sean-spicer-b...

Unreal

^^ Whoa...! This is really ugly.

Good on the Time Magazine and AP reporters who sat out in protest. 

When Adolf Hitler took power in 1933, the Nazis controlled less than three percent of Germany’s 4,700 papers.

The elimination of the German multi-party political system not only brought about the demise of hundreds of newspapers produced by outlawed political parties; it also allowed the state to seize the printing plants and equipment of the Communist and Social Democratic Parties, which were often turned over directly to the Nazi Party. In the following months, the Nazis established control or exerted influence over independent press organs.

During the first weeks of 1933, the Nazi regime deployed the radio, press, and newsreels to stoke fears of a pending “Communist uprising,” then channeled popular anxieties into political measures that eradicated civil liberties and democracy. SA (storm troopers) and members of the Nazi elite paramilitary formation, the SS, took to the streets to brutalize or arrest political opponents and incarcerate them in hastily established detention centers and concentration camps. Nazi thugs broke into opposing political party offices, destroying printing presses and newspapers.

Sometimes using holding companies to disguise new ownership, executives of the Nazi Party-owned publishing house, Franz Eher, established a huge empire that drove out competition and purchased newspapers at below-market prices. Some independent newspapers, particularly conservative newspapers and non-political illustrated weeklies, accommodated to the regime through self-censorship or initiative in dealing with approved topics.

"ARYANIZATION" 
 
Through measures to “Aryanize” businesses, the regime also assumed control of Jewish-owned publishing companies, notably Ullstein and Mosse.

Ullstein, which published the well-known Berlin daily the Vossische Zeitung, was the largest publishing house company in Europe by 1933, employing 10,000 people. In 1933, German officials forced the Ullstein family to resign from the board of the company and, a year later, to sell the company assets.

Owners of a worldwide advertising agency, the Mosse family owned and published a number of major liberal papers much hated by the Nazis, including the Berlin Tageblatt; the Mosse family fled Germany the day after Hitler took power. Fearing imprisonment or death, reputable journalists also began to flee the country in large numbers. German non-Jewish newspaper owners replaced them in part with ill-trained and inexperienced amateurs loyal to the Nazi Party, as well as with skilled and veteran journalists prepared to collaborate with the regime in order to maintain and even enhance their careers.

PROPAGANDA MINISTRY AND THE REICH PRESS CHAMBER 
 
The Propaganda Ministry, through its Reich Press Chamber, assumed control over the Reich Association of the German Press, the guild which regulated entry into the profession. Under the new Editors Law of October 4, 1933, the association kept registries of “racially pure” editors and journalists, and excluded Jews and those married to Jews from the profession. Propaganda Ministry officials expected editors and journalists, who had to register with the Reich Press Chamber to work in the field, to follow the mandates and instructions handed down by the ministry. In paragraph 14 of the law, the regime required editors to omit anything “calculated to weaken the strength of the Reich abroad or at home.”

The Propaganda Ministry aimed further to control the content of news and editorial pages through directives distributed in daily conferences in Berlin and transmitted via the Party propaganda offices to regional or local papers. Detailed guidelines stated what stories could or could not be reported and how to report the news. Journalists or editors who failed to follow these instructions could be fired or, if believed to be acting with intent to harm Germany, sent to a concentration camp. Rather than suppressing news, the Nazi propaganda apparatus instead sought to tightly control its flow and interpretation and to deny access to alternative sources of news.

TOWARD THE END OF WORLD WAR II 
 
By 1944, a shortage of newspaper and ink forced the Nazi government to limit all newspapers first to eight, then four, and finally, two pages. Of the 4,700 newspapers published in Germany when the Nazis took power in 1933, no more that 1,100 remained. Approximately half were still in the hands of private or institutional owners, but these newspapers operated in strict compliance with government press laws and published material only in accordance with directives issued by the Ministry of Propaganda. While the circulation of these newspapers was approximately 4.4 million, the circulation of the 325 newspapers and their multiple regional editions owned by the Nazi Party was 21 million. Many of these newspapers continued to publish until the end of the war.

https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007655

ThePots issue aside, Americans of all stripes or party affiliations should be appalled and deeply concerned by this administration's attempts to lock out certain press networks from access and their missions to freely report. 

...but, of course, congressional gop'rz look the other way, instead flipping over stones looking for more Hillary emails.

Has he killed any reporters yet?

As I asked when Dipshit Donnie made his now stricken travel ban what will this look like?

Nationalized Guard invading Colorado?  

What will legal states do? What will DC do?

At what point is action self defense?

And the showdown begins! Glad to see state AG's stepping up to defend the will of voters...but Chickenlooper seems like a real 'wuss, again/still:

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/officials-legal-marijuana-states-slam...

Sure spooked the MJ on the stock market. AGTK down over 15%.

No kidding. Maybe tRump and "his attorney general" Sessions can duke it out over the potential job losses across the industry, which are already projected to overtake manufacturing growth by 2020.

FUCK THAT SHIT BAG PIECE OF SHIT PHONEY DONALD TRUMP - YOU SUCK DONKEY BALLS !

"Whatever happened to State's rights?"

Horrors!  A President is actually (like immigration) enforcing the law as it stands on the books.  What is this world coming to??????

I know you folks are used to having a President and party that ignores the law when it doesn't advance their agenda.  But ignoring the law to get your desired end isn't how it's supposed to work (unless you're a person of the left, then it's the only way it's supposed to work).  A nation of laws, not men, and all that.  You don't like the law you get people elected who will change it to the way you do like it.  If you can't accomplish that, you loose.

So you're for a Government crackdown on marijuana, Thom?

FUCK OFF THOM2 !

So when all the Republicans say "states rights, states rights!" they are full of shit?

Thanks for making that clear.

 >>>>>If you can't accomplish that, you loose.

Uh, it's "lose", Thom. Go to the library and look it up.

Oh, wait; you're already there.

“We have respect for the press when it comes to the government — that it is something you can’t ban an entity from,” Spicer said. “Conservative, liberal or otherwise. That makes a democracy a democracy versus a dictatorship. I think there is a vastly different model when it comes to government and what should be expected, and that’s on both sides.”

There just doing this to tank marijuana stocks so they can buy them up and profit.. you watch

>>you watch

I have those sunglasses from They Live so it show be interesting.

>So you're for a Government crackdown on marijuana, Thom?

I doubt it. I think Thom just likes being a self righteous prick. 

Hey Thom why will you not comment on the mouthpiece for white nationalists, Steve Bannon, holding the position of chief strategist for the POTUS, and his being named a principal member of the national security council?

OK, if you will not repudiate Bannon, tell me how you feel about this guy...

Hmmmmm. 28 billion?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/the-cost-of-a-pot-crackdown-dolla...

How much will private prisons and share holders make putting people in jail .Private prisons are back in fashion

^the private prison industry will do well.  

And don't forget about assest forfeiture. 

Plus, with the exception of Alaska, the states with legal recreational cannabis went for Clinton. Trump gets some retribution, and he doesn't have to worry about losing votes.

Much more to this than legal gage. 

Civil forfeiture, for profit prison, disproportionate sentencing based on race.

Oh wait, they want to lock up the dark brown people.

Make the Anglosphere great again.

Fuck Jeff Sessions and the Klansman he rode in on.

Make America like Alabama Again! NOT!!

Hickenlooper was on NBC's Meet The Press this morning. His name is being kicked around for President in 2020 and they were discussing new leadership at DNC, among other things, and then fracking and Cannabis came up (of course) and Chuck Todd asked him if, after seeing it play out relatively painless and trouble free over the last few years, he was now convinced it was OK and if he "supports" the issue and its movement towards the mainstream (or something to that affect, I am not quoting), he said, "Not Yet!"

WTF is this guy waiting for? At least show some support for the voters and a strong stance against Sessions et al. 

He made his money in the alcohol industry so I guess he just cant make that leap.

I saw Hickenlooper  on local news last night. He said the people of Colorado voted to legalize through a constitutional amendment. He said that he would defend the state constitution above federal law every time even though he personally did not favor legalization. 

He did state that CO's Constitution was modified accordingly and he would certainly defend that, as he should. It is just sort of lame that in more casual conversation he seems to engage in too much hand-wringing to see which way the wind blows.

....I guess I personally prefer the fire-branded resistance as seen from WA & NV (and soon CA?) leadership. 

 Evangelicals, privatized prisons, big pharma and asset forfeitures ( powerful minority) vs  ambitious stoners, investors, and folks that get relief from a non toxic plant. ( voting majority).

It's a good thing many powerful investors have already thrown down or the recreational cannabis industry would be screwed for sure.

Surfdead is right though;  federal enforcement would be a big shot in the arm for the black market and the cartels.

it's gonna be interesting no doubt.

I dont think this administration can survive long with all the shit it's stirring on so many

fronts. 

Good thing cannabis industry can survive under the "medical umbrella'.

Nancy, I appreciate your awareness of Trump's Fascist tactics, but I see mor of a Mussolini follower than strictly Hitler. I don't think Trump is going to need a Reichstagg fire.

Some updates and quotes from yesterday, again/still showing just how out of touch Session remains:

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58b4b189e4b0780bac2c9fd8