Jeff Sessions unilateral recusal


I’m sorry Mike, but neither you nor RET have answered the issue to why the War on Drugs can’t continue.

You’re pretending that a moral objection to the use of drugs, means that enforcement works. But we know it doesn’t.

Netherlands doesn’t enforce criminalization of Marijuana, and they have less usage than we do. This isn’t a new trend, it’s been that way since the start.

If enforcement doesn’t work, then you’re throwing non-violent drug users in jail for nothing.

As conservatives, we need to be pragmatic, and acknowledge the role efficacy plays. If we don’t, were no better than the left on gun control.

You can’t pretend that simply banning something that’s used in committing evil, makes the evil go away.


Lie number one to lay a false premise, Prohibition failed.

Lie number two built upon lie number one, enforcement of current drug laws is a failure.

Prohibition improved everything across the board and made nothing worse, the current drug laws do the same. As we gradually embrace legalization our citizens will suffer an increase in the Rights they lose, this is the price that we will pay for refusing to hold those accountable who take the Rights of others.

As in many things I have already lost this debate in the court of public opinion, all that is left is saying “I told you so” as the innocent bodies pile up.

Liberty without accountability equals chaos for the innocent and responsible, and when the innocent and responsible get tired of burying their dead they will swing that pedulum to a frightening opposite position; when that day comes I will oppose them as well but they will be just as deaf to reason as the “give me dope” crowd is today.


Uh, Prohibition increased under-aged drinking, increased organized crime, increased deaths from alcohol poisoning, and saw the largest surge in police corruption in decades.

Homicide rate peaks in 1933… when Prohibition ends.

Age of formation of drinking habit:

"***I have been told that before prohibition we had a saloon at every corner; since prohibition we have a distillery in practically every home, and only lately, in one of the exclusive suburban towns near Newark they have discovered the so-called community distillery, where all of the people living on one block club together and contribute to the making of synthetic gin, which is then distributed pro rata among those that were contributors to that weekly.

I want to say that in my duties as secretary I come in contact with people of classes all walks of life, but particularly among the workers in different sections of the State. Thousands of them that I have been personally acquainted with, that I knew have never touched hard liquor before prohibition, drink it now and make it in their own home, and in consequence they not alone pollute their own home but contaminate their wives and children in that respect.***"

  • Testimony of Henry Hilfers, President, New Jersey State Federation of Labor

“*Inability of the prohibition law to enforce prohibition is causing an increase in the number of young boys and girls who become intoxicated,” declared Judge H. C. Spicer of the juvenile court at Akron, Ohio, a short time ago when two boys, aged 15 and 16 years, respectively, were arraigned before him. “During the past two years,” he added " there have been more intoxicated children brought into court than ever before."

  • Statement by Hon. William Cabell Bruce, 1926

> the current drug laws do the same. As we gradually embrace legalization our citizens will suffer an increase in the Rights they lose, this is the price that we will pay for refusing to hold those accountable who take the Rights of others.

> As in many things I have already lost this debate in the court of public opinion, all that is left is saying “I told you so” as the innocent bodies pile up.

Laws need efficacy RET, there is no more sense in enforcing a drug law in the age of 3D printers than enforcing music copyright in the age of the internet.

If you try to enforce unenforceable laws, the inevitable casualty is rule of law. Every Conservative understands this when it comes to guns, trans fats, and large cup sizes; it is high time they connect the dots to other things.

Wield law wisely, or don’t wield it at all.


I’ve seen hundreds of people whose lives have been destroyed by substance abuse…oftentimes people who weren’t themselves the abusers. I watched helplessly as a couple lost their only son because he needed to keep pursuing a “better high.” I warned them when he was a teen that he was headed for trouble and they thought I was just being “mean” to their precious son. Within 2 years, he was dead of an overdose and the father came to me and apologized for not believing me. They are living what remains of their lives in misery. I saw an honor student go off to Harvard, only to come home 10 years later a virtual vegetable who stripped naked and jumped through a picture window, believing it was a pool of cool water! But for quick response by the police and EMTs, he’d have bled to death. He’s currently in a mental institution where he’ll remain for life. I saw a doctor’s son, his HS’s valedictorian, steal his father’s $220,000 airplane and fly it to Columbia where he sold it for drugs, which he tried to smuggle back into the US. He’s serving his sentence in the Texas Penitentiary today. No. I know of a young man, driving a 1-ton truck, high on pot, slam at 75 mph into the back of a line of cars stopped on the highway, killing a grandmother and her two grandkids, ages 9 and 5. Not only was he HIGH, he was texting while driving. He wasn’t injured in the slightest himself. There is NO GOOD REASON to make pot smoking “legal,” and hundreds of reasons not to. Tobacco smoke contains 70-odd carcinogens. Marijuana smoke contains 173!


More likely Dave, people who had problems, and they used drugs as a way to hide from them.

Anything can be a compulsive addiction; gambling, video games, food, sex. Banning the excess or those things completely wouldn’t make the problems associated with them go away either.

Law is simply the wrong tool for the wrong job.

> There is NO GOOD REASON to make pot smoking “legal,”

It has more medicinal uses than Alcohol, and its naturally grown anywhere, thus, impossible to control.

There is no practical model for enforcability. You may not like marijuana, but there is a cause to not to want unenforceable laws on the books. Because it erodes rule of law.


That’s not what I’m hearing.


Me either, FC. The claim is simply BS. Alcohol is THE best antiseptic available anywhere…bar none. Pot MAY help cancer patients with nausea problems and it MAY alleviate some of the symptoms of glaucoma. Other than that, all other claims are simply BS, claimed by the pro-pot people who want unfettered access to their doobies.


And Epilepsy.

And Multiple sclerosis.

And Nail Patella Syndrome, according to George McMahon, one of the 8 Federally legal marijuana patients.

Regardless, it’s not for you to decide what is “treatment” or not DAVE. That is not your business. That is nanny state nonsense.

Also; check your facts; the types of marijuana used to treat Epilepsy and MS, are strains you can’t get high on.

Yet it’s still illegal, for reasons that are BS. Reasons you support, because you fail to analyze anything about this critically.


Prohibition did not increase crime
Prohibition reduced alcohol consumption considerably
Prohibition reduced incidents of alcohol poisoning significantly
Prohibition reduced domestic violence incidents significantly

Prohibition did not regulate the consumption of alcohol, only the production and sale of alcohol were prohibited; one could brew and consume their own alcohol. Yet this relatively small change implemented in a Nation that had always had alcohol readily available was nonetheless a catalyst that significantly reduced alcohol related travesties in just a few years time, this is because the “Law” does indeed effect what many consider to be moral or acceptable behavior.

Legalized Abortion increased the baby killing from hundreds to millions.
Making car seats mandatory for children raised the usage of child car seats from less than 5% to essentially 100%.
No fault divorce almost tripled the divorce rate in just 10 years.
Stringent gun laws reduce the number of law abiding citizens who own firearms to a paltry percentage compared to places who do not discourage gun ownership via legislation.

It simply cannot be argued that Law does not effect the behavior choices of those who live under the authority of those Laws, it makes no difference how “available” any regulated commodity is; most citizens still avoid making decisions that they know will run them afoul of the Law.

A black market which received a lot of press was created by Prohibition but it did not increase any general crime statistics, which makes perfect sense when one considers that mob crime existed and prospered before Prohibition and after Prohibition.

I am not an advocate for Prohibition, I am an advocate for accountability without excuse or mercy for those who willingly pollute their mental capacity to reason; then proceed to make decisions that deprive the innocent of their Rights to life, security and Property.

But a society that is too immature to implement such an accountability structure is a society that is not mature enough to have the liberty to consume recreational mind altering substances, they are a society of children; children must be Prohibited from things that they are not ready to do in order to avoid them harming others and themselves.

But those immature children are who is in charge now, so like children always do they are demanding things that they have no capacity to utilize responsibly, the results will be entirely predictable for anyone willing to look at the realities without a biased filter.

Every word I have written here will be proved very soon, it is already being proved in many jurisdictions and many more are lining up to be next; I will refuse to pretend that the “give me dope” crowd ever had a defensible argument when the problems that alcohol burdens us with are multiplied many fold by the moral approval given to other types of dope by today’s citizens.

This is all self evident, the idea that a society which rarely votes but sues the innocent successfully when they fall down due to their own carelessness or burn themselves with hot coffee that they ordered can incorporate more mind altering recreational drugs on their menu of choices without horrific consequences is laughable.

But I guess children also believe that they can eat chocolate cake and candy for every meal without anything bad happening, so while ludicrous it is not surprising.


There is NO reputable research that confirms ANY of this…only a few anecdotal claims made by the “let me have my doobies” crowd. Even if it WERE true, there’s NOTHING that says marijuana extracts in pill form are not JUST as effective. The pro-pot people don’t WANT that, though. They want an unfettered right to those doobies…period.


Dave… THC content. If its below a certain level, you can’t get high off it, and there are strands of Marijuana known for their low THC content.

Most are a derivatives of Cannabis sativa, one that has higher level of CBD than other strains, and far lower THC. It’s used in the production of Hemp, and in the cannabinoid oil used to treat epilepsy.

Don’t tell me “nothing is verified”, it’s that people like you didn’t care, and supported blocking research on the issue. You put the cart before the horse, because you assumed you knew the answer.

Now that the studies happen, guess what we find Dave?:

"Published in The New England Journal of Medicine, the findings stem from a double-blind, placebo-controlled study—the most scientifically rigorous type of investigation possible. “***This study clearly establishes cannabidiol as an effective anti-seizure drug for this disorder and this age group,***” says principal investigator Orrin Devinsky, director of the Comprehensive Epilepsy Center at New York University Langone Medical Center. “***It certainly deserves to be studied in other types of epilepsy.***”

A total of 120 children and teenagers with Dravet syndrome—a rare disorder marked by drug-resistant seizures that can be nearly continuous in some cases—were part of the study. They were divided into an experimental group, which received the test drug, and a placebo group, which was given a medically inactive compound. Over the course of 14 weeks the youngsters receiving CBD experienced a median number of 5.9 convulsive seizures per month (down from 12.4) compared with 14.1 convulsions per month (down from 14.9) for the placebo group. The new findings are consistent with previous, less-stringent studies of the same drug, a compound called Epidiolex, made by U.K.–based GW Pharmaceuticals. (GW funded the new study.)"

Scientific America - Marijuana Treatment Reduces Severe Epileptic Seizures


…and THIS is your excuse for favoring making pot legal for anyone???


“excuse”? What’s your justification for making it illegal?

It took a constitutional amendment to do it for alcohol; so how is your war not runaway statism?

You don’t have a practical for doing this; it doesn’t work. Over 40 years of enforcement, and, yet, we have more average consumption of marijuana **than the Netherlands. **

The Government’s purview to involve itself in people’s live grew immensely under the War on Drugs, we went across 4 continents to stop it. And it doesn’t work.

We massively grew our own internal enforcement apparatus, and militarized our police to do it. And it doesn’t work.

We’ve eroded civil liberties, and gave ourselves the largest prison population on Earth to restrict the supply. And it doesn’t work.

Right now Dave, a little girl lives here in Colorado, an epilespy victim who can only use canibinoid oil to treat her seizures.

She doesn’t use it to get high, she’s a ******* toddler, and what she uses couldn’t get her high anyway. Yet, her treating herself like this is illegal under Federal law.

Numerous other drugs her parents tried to give her for this condition could kill her, and the one thing that worked, and does nothing to harm her, is illegal?

What is your justification Dave? Why have you allowed your nanny state impulses to do something that doesn’t work, to stop people from using a form of marijuana, that doesn’t get you high?

What. The. Hell. Dave?


He addressed that with examples of tangible harm to society.


No – you’ve given the example of actions that individuals have taken. It’s no different than holding up people who use guns to commit a shooting, then using that to blame all gun owners for the result.

Holding up the few whose usage harms others, is no excuse to block it from people who aren’t even using it to get high. There’s no excuse to block industrial strains of marijuana, there’s no excuse to block it as medication, and there’s no excuse to block herbal usage.

**This was always wrong, and you know it was wrong. ** Banning all use, just because one type of use has problems attached.

And yes, even when it does come to that accursed recreational use that you despise, you’re far afield from proper assumptions of state power.

The Constitution does not give you this power to prohibit a product this way, nothing in the Founding ideology gives you this power. This is overreach, plain & simple.


BS. YOU claim “it doesn’t work,” but data shows us otherwise. When Colorado “legalized” recreational pot use, pot use SKYROCKETED. When Vegas did the same, pot shops ran out of “product” within 48 hours! When Kalifornia made “medical marijuana” “legal,” all of a sudden, nearly half the population was diagnosed with “glaucoma”. Prohibition doesn’t always work because lots of people DEFY the law. Sometimes in pursuit of a “high.” Sometimes for profit. Almost NEVER because smoking pot makes their health “better.”


I could theoretically agree with AS if, IF, IF, there were EXTREME consequences should the “user” inflict harm to another and/or property damage to another’s stuff while under “the influence”!
'Course we know how likely that is, don’t we??!!


And… so what?

You weren’t preventing usage: per person usage of Marijuana has grown by a factor of ~10 since the war on Drugs started.

Arrests have grown with it, and it still didn’t stop:

You enforce a policy, and you get the opposite result intended of that policy? It’s a failure Dave, there’s no other way to describe it.

It’s like Obamacare claiming they made prices go down. We’ve known for years it’s BS.

> Prohibition doesn’t always work because lots of people DEFY the law.

Yes, and proper legal-craft is asking if a law can be expected to be followed. This matters Dave, if you want law to be respected, you need to acknowledge efficacy, it’s a two-way street.

If there is no popular consensus, a law will never be properly enforced. No matter how many resources you throw at it.

> Sometimes in pursuit of a “high.” Sometimes for profit. Almost NEVER because smoking pot makes their health “better.”

Yet you also arrest people for having non-psychoactive strains of marijuana, who use it for treatment and industry. Which is wrong, there’s no way you can argue around that.

By definition, nothing those people have done will harm others, but you harm them Dave.

It doesn’t help society at all that you stop people from using hemp, yet you do it anyway. It doesn’t help society at all that you stop a toddler from getting a drug she needs, yet you do it anyway.

This is a law & policy clearly run amok; overreach, plain and simple.

You can call them lawbreakers all you want, it is you who is in the wrong.

  1. Go ahead and try to convince me that the examples he cited are just abberations and not an inevitable consequence of widespread availability.
  2. Few? Did you say few? My hogwash meter just exploded.
  3. Right; convince me that the vast majority of these efforts to legalize it for non recreational purposes aren’t intended to make “legitimate” use a gateway to legalizing recreational use…
  4. Except that recreational use does indeed harm society. One can make the argument that so does alcohol, but to say that marijuana doesn’t is pure bull.


Missing the point; you’re claiming absolute numbers, but I’m invoking the disparity between users and violent or negligent criminals.

How big is this disparity? The 2015 National Survey on Drug Use and Health estimated people who had used marijuana within a month as 22.2 million.

The number of total marijuana arrests, whether they were violent or not, was 643,121. Strip out people who were only being charged with possession, and you’re left with 68,480.

68,480, out of 22.2 million. That is 0.003%, and that’s assuming each arrest was a distinct person.

This shows that most users, even recreational ones, are functional, and don’t harm others.

Thus, you blame the actions of the few on the vast majority who harm no one. No different than if you were banning guns or alcohol.

> 3. Right; convince me that the vast majority of these efforts to legalize it for non recreational purposes

And again you missed the point.

Someone who uses non-psychoactive marijuana for treatment, harms no one. Someone who uses marijuana for industrial purposes harms no one. By definition.

So where is the justification for you punishing people for using the drug for productive purposes?

Answer: you don’t have one. You use the Gov’t to victimize these people, because you fail to draw a distinction in Marijuana law that even cocaine and heroine, as schedule 2 drugs, somehow get. This is a clear failure in policy.

You could absolutely make Marijuana for these things legal, while still outlawing THC content. You don’t, because, lawmakers are ******* lazy, and the anti-drug lobby doesn’t want to have to always go after harder targets.

> 4. Except that recreational use does indeed harm society.

And Enforcement doesn’t work as a means to control that harm. Prohibition showed us that; it’s the wrong tool, for the wrong job, creating more evils than it prevents.

This is tied to human nature, and the limits of civil power. Hence why, the Constitution does not grant the Federal Government power to police this in the first place.

It’s an overreach, and always has been.