independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Sun 22nd Jul 2018 9:07pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > Attorney General blowin up the gov
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 1 of 2 12>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 01/07/18 6:18am

poppys

Attorney General blowin up the gov


popcorn


https://www.msn.com/en-us...ar-BBHXpnc

Sessions under fire from all sides


BBHX1o2.img?h=351&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=592&y=255

Attorney General Jeff Sessions's job security is in question after taking withering fire from fellow Republicans this week, including from two prominent House conservatives who called on him to resign.

Two leaders of the House Freedom Caucus, Reps. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) and Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), called on Sessions to step aside in an op-ed Friday, charging he has lost control of the Department of Justice and the FBI.

Sessions has also come under criticism from Republicans and Democrats alike for his decision to rescind the Obama-era Cole memo, which gave states the space to legalize marijuana without fear of federal interference...

Even though he opposed his nomination to head the Justice Department last year, Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Thursday that he wants Sessions to keep his job.

"My view now is very simple: nothing, nothing should ever interfere with the Mueller investigation," he said.


[Edited 1/7/18 6:30am]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 01/07/18 6:26am

djThunderfunk

avatar

We do already have a thread on Sessions: http://prince.org/msg/105/450799



That said, fuck that guy. He's gotta go!

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 01/07/18 6:30am

poppys

djThunderfunk said:

We do already have a thread on Sessions: http://prince.org/msg/105/450799



That said, fuck that guy. He's gotta go!

That one is about Sessions and Cannabis. This is another thing that is going on with the Attorney General.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 01/07/18 6:40am

poppys

Update. Now there are 3 house Repubs calling for his head.

https://www.nbcnews.com/p...th-n835251

...Three House Republicans — Chris Stewart of Utah, Jim Jordan of Ohio and Mark Meadows of North Carolina — called on Sessions to resign this week. In an op-ed in the Washington Examiner, Meadows and Jordan argued that leaks about the Russia investigation show the attorney general doesn't have control over his department. And there have been reports that EPA Chief Scott Pruitt is lining himself up to try to take Sessions' job.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 01/07/18 9:17am

DiminutiveRock
er

avatar

poppys said:

Update. Now there are 3 house Repubs calling for his head.

https://www.nbcnews.com/p...th-n835251

...Three House Republicans — Chris Stewart of Utah, Jim Jordan of Ohio and Mark Meadows of North Carolina — called on Sessions to resign this week. In an op-ed in the Washington Examiner, Meadows and Jordan argued that leaks about the Russia investigation show the attorney general doesn't have control over his department. And there have been reports that EPA Chief Scott Pruitt is lining himself up to try to take Sessions' job.


Think he will ride this out or will he be forced out? And WHO would take his place?

"'Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.'' - Thomas Jefferson
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 01/07/18 9:23am

poppys

DiminutiveRocker said:

poppys said:

Update. Now there are 3 house Repubs calling for his head.

https://www.nbcnews.com/p...th-n835251

...Three House Republicans — Chris Stewart of Utah, Jim Jordan of Ohio and Mark Meadows of North Carolina — called on Sessions to resign this week. In an op-ed in the Washington Examiner, Meadows and Jordan argued that leaks about the Russia investigation show the attorney general doesn't have control over his department. And there have been reports that EPA Chief Scott Pruitt is lining himself up to try to take Sessions' job.


Think he will ride this out or will he be forced out? And WHO would take his place?

Good questions. I'm wondering too. Cray-zie to ponder...

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 01/07/18 9:39am

DiminutiveRock
er

avatar

poppys said:

DiminutiveRocker said:


Think he will ride this out or will he be forced out? And WHO would take his place?

Good questions. I'm wondering too. Cray-zie to ponder...


Pruitt? Ugh.... the world's turned upside down.

"'Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.'' - Thomas Jefferson
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 01/07/18 10:54am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

No, it is big state fascism--against a little, innocent plant.

Here's what is crazy. Marijuana was a schedule one drug and cocaine and Meth schedule 2!! Can you believe that shit? That was under Obama!!!

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 01/07/18 11:24am

poppys

2freaky4church1 said:

No, it is big state fascism--against a little, innocent plant.

Here's what is crazy. Marijuana was a schedule one drug and cocaine and Meth schedule 2!! Can you believe that shit? That was under Obama!!!

That was waaaay before Obama and I'm old enough to remember it.


If you want to go to weed college, search Dupont and how they lobbied to outlaw hemp rope (hence the marijuana plant) in favor of their invention - plastic rope made from OIL - in the 1930s.

anslinger.jpg


[Edited 1/7/18 11:48am]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 01/07/18 11:35am

djThunderfunk

avatar

poppys said:

djThunderfunk said:

We do already have a thread on Sessions: http://prince.org/msg/105/450799



That said, fuck that guy. He's gotta go!

That one is about Sessions and Cannabis. This is another thing that is going on with the Attorney General.


Replies #7 & 8 suggest otherwise...

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 01/07/18 11:38am

poppys

djThunderfunk said:

poppys said:

That one is about Sessions and Cannabis. This is another thing that is going on with the Attorney General.


Replies #7 & 8 suggest otherwise...


Tell that to 2freaky4church, not me. He already posted on "your" cannabis thread.


[Edited 1/7/18 11:56am]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 01/07/18 11:48am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

You know how I am.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 01/08/18 11:18pm

Astasheiks

avatar

poppys said:


popcorn


https://www.msn.com/en-us...ar-BBHXpnc

Sessions under fire from all sides


BBHX1o2.img?h=351&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=592&y=255

Attorney General Jeff Sessions's job security is in question after taking withering fire from fellow Republicans this week, including from two prominent House conservatives who called on him to resign.

Two leaders of the House Freedom Caucus, Reps. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) and Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), called on Sessions to step aside in an op-ed Friday, charging he has lost control of the Department of Justice and the FBI.

Sessions has also come under criticism from Republicans and Democrats alike for his decision to rescind the Obama-era Cole memo, which gave states the space to legalize marijuana without fear of federal interference...

Even though he opposed his nomination to head the Justice Department last year, Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Thursday that he wants Sessions to keep his job.

"My view now is very simple: nothing, nothing should ever interfere with the Mueller investigation," he said.


[Edited 1/7/18 6:30am]

Didn't 45 appoint him as AG? If so, 2 of a kind... razz smile

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 01/09/18 5:48am

Musicslave

poppys said:

Update. Now there are 3 house Repubs calling for his head.

https://www.nbcnews.com/p...th-n835251

...Three House Republicans — Chris Stewart of Utah, Jim Jordan of Ohio and Mark Meadows of North Carolina — called on Sessions to resign this week. In an op-ed in the Washington Examiner, Meadows and Jordan argued that leaks about the Russia investigation show the attorney general doesn't have control over his department. And there have been reports that EPA Chief Scott Pruitt is lining himself up to try to take Sessions' job.

-

This is nothing but a ploy by Trump to get rid of Sessions (like he's been wanting to do since he recused himself) and appoint a lap dog that will do his bidding and work for him. Afterall, that's what all Attorney Generals supposed to do right? lol

-

So all of these republicans coming out of the wood work are nothing but political cover for Trump to fire Sessions. This way he can say he lost control of the DOJ, his people lost confidence in him, and now so do I, Jeff Sessions you're fired.

-

Considering Mueller is getting ready to interview him too. Trump is putting things in place to fire Sessions. He wants this investigation over and his name to be completely exonerated.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 01/09/18 6:21am

poppys

Musicslave said:

poppys said:

Update. Now there are 3 house Repubs calling for his head.

https://www.nbcnews.com/p...th-n835251

...Three House Republicans — Chris Stewart of Utah, Jim Jordan of Ohio and Mark Meadows of North Carolina — called on Sessions to resign this week. In an op-ed in the Washington Examiner, Meadows and Jordan argued that leaks about the Russia investigation show the attorney general doesn't have control over his department. And there have been reports that EPA Chief Scott Pruitt is lining himself up to try to take Sessions' job.

-

This is nothing but a ploy by Trump to get rid of Sessions (like he's been wanting to do since he recused himself) and appoint a lap dog that will do his bidding and work for him. Afterall, that's what all Attorney Generals supposed to do right? lol

-

So all of these republicans coming out of the wood work are nothing but political cover for Trump to fire Sessions. This way he can say he lost control of the DOJ, his people lost confidence in him, and now so do I, Jeff Sessions you're fired.

-

Considering Mueller is getting ready to interview him too. Trump is putting things in place to fire Sessions. He wants this investigation over and his name to be completely exonerated.

Methinks you are right on. Maybe a better thread title would be Repubs blowin up the Attorney General.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 01/09/18 6:49am

Musicslave

poppys said:

Musicslave said:

-

This is nothing but a ploy by Trump to get rid of Sessions (like he's been wanting to do since he recused himself) and appoint a lap dog that will do his bidding and work for him. Afterall, that's what all Attorney Generals supposed to do right? lol

-

So all of these republicans coming out of the wood work are nothing but political cover for Trump to fire Sessions. This way he can say he lost control of the DOJ, his people lost confidence in him, and now so do I, Jeff Sessions you're fired.

-

Considering Mueller is getting ready to interview him too. Trump is putting things in place to fire Sessions. He wants this investigation over and his name to be completely exonerated.

Methinks you are right on. Maybe a better thread title would be Repubs blowin up the Attorney General.

-

lol lol

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 01/09/18 6:57am

Musicslave

poppys said:

2freaky4church1 said:

No, it is big state fascism--against a little, innocent plant.

Here's what is crazy. Marijuana was a schedule one drug and cocaine and Meth schedule 2!! Can you believe that shit? That was under Obama!!!

That was waaaay before Obama and I'm old enough to remember it.


If you want to go to weed college, search Dupont and how they lobbied to outlaw hemp rope (hence the marijuana plant) in favor of their invention - plastic rope made from OIL - in the 1930s.

anslinger.jpg


[Edited 1/7/18 11:48am]

-

-

Video taken January 6, 2018

-

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 01/09/18 8:18am

poppys

Musicslave said:

poppys said:

That was waaaay before Obama and I'm old enough to remember it.


If you want to go to weed college, search Dupont and how they lobbied to outlaw hemp rope (hence the marijuana plant) in favor of their invention - plastic rope made from OIL - in the 1930s.

anslinger.jpg


[Edited 1/7/18 11:48am]

-

-

Video taken January 6, 2018

-

omfg omfg omfg He even LOOKS like Anslinger and he's saying the exact same thing - 3 days ago!

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 01/09/18 8:38am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

I am philosophically opposed to legal marijuana. I just do not think we 1) know enough about it 2) need another intoxicating substance 3) there are no good means to test the levels of THC for legal reason (but I think the levels of alcohol are ridiculously low--and the fact is better than 95% of all legal drunk drivers get to where they are doing just fine and many have been convicted when they were not impaired)


that being said: I do not see any reason to not let states make those calls.


and last: the pushback against this move (and I warned about it) for the FED to enforce these laws against the will of the people is going to be big... but it is nothing compared to what the pushback if libs try to mess with the 2nd amendment. (there was a rumor that hillay was going to sign an EO to effectively ban many kinds of guns and get a liberal on the SCOTUS (and her spawn said this) to back it up.

Anyone for banning the AR15 must be on the side of the criminal as once banned only criminals will have them.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 01/09/18 9:58am

djThunderfunk

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I am philosophically opposed to legal marijuana. I just do not think we 1) know enough about it

Not true. We know plenty. We would know even more if it wasn't schedule 1 and more research could be done.

2) need another intoxicating substance

Fine. Make alcohol illegal. It's far more dangerous yet it's legal, while those that make the safer choice are criminalized and have their freedom and rights taken away from them.

3) there are no good means to test the levels of THC for legal reason (but I think the levels of alcohol are ridiculously low--and the fact is better than 95% of all legal drunk drivers get to where they are doing just fine and many have been convicted when they were not impaired)

Testing for impairment is a completely separate subject.


We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 01/09/18 10:02am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

djThunderfunk said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I am philosophically opposed to legal marijuana. I just do not think we 1) know enough about it

Not true. We know plenty. We would know even more if it wasn't schedule 1 and more research could be done.

2) need another intoxicating substance

Fine. Make alcohol illegal. It's far more dangerous yet it's legal, while those that make the safer choice are criminalized and have their freedom and rights taken away from them.

3) there are no good means to test the levels of THC for legal reason (but I think the levels of alcohol are ridiculously low--and the fact is better than 95% of all legal drunk drivers get to where they are doing just fine and many have been convicted when they were not impaired)

Testing for impairment is a completely separate subject.


1) so which is it? do we know enough or do we not know enough do to reasons?

2) maybe we should...

3) It is related to it safe use.

Anyone for banning the AR15 must be on the side of the criminal as once banned only criminals will have them.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #21 posted 01/09/18 10:13am

jjhunsecker

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

djThunderfunk said:

1) so which is it? do we know enough or do we not know enough do to reasons?

2) maybe we should...

3) It is related to it safe use.

All drugs should be legal for adult use. Addiction is a mental and societal problem, and resources should be used to treat it as such. It should not be a criminal problem. ESPECIALLY because the criminalization of drugs has always been used to target CERTAIN groups, while others get a pass...

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #22 posted 01/09/18 10:35am

djThunderfunk

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

djThunderfunk said:

1) so which is it? do we know enough or do we not know enough do to reasons?

2) maybe we should...

3) It is related to it safe use.


1 We know plenty. We know it's safer than alcohol, cigarettes and prescription medication. Those that claim "we need more studies" are the same ones that keep it schedule 1, preventing "more studies".

2 Good luck with that. It worked out so well the last time.

3 Related issue? Yes. Same issue? No.

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #23 posted 01/09/18 10:39am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Marijuana is not safe, but it is safer than those others. How hard is this to understand? We forgot all about guns, the most dangerous thing in the country.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #24 posted 01/09/18 10:39am

djThunderfunk

avatar

jjhunsecker said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

1) so which is it? do we know enough or do we not know enough do to reasons?

2) maybe we should...

3) It is related to it safe use.

All drugs should be legal for adult use. Addiction is a mental and societal problem, and resources should be used to treat it as such. It should not be a criminal problem. ESPECIALLY because the criminalization of drugs has always been used to target CERTAIN groups, while others get a pass...


Agreed, except with the last 3 words. Clearly the War On Drugs has been used to target and marginilize "certain groups" disproportionally, but I know plenty of "others" that did NOT get a "pass".

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #25 posted 01/09/18 10:40am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

War on drugs is racist.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #26 posted 01/09/18 10:41am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

djThunderfunk said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

1) so which is it? do we know enough or do we not know enough do to reasons?

2) maybe we should...

3) It is related to it safe use.


1 We know plenty. We know it's safer than alcohol, cigarettes and prescription medication. Those that claim "we need more studies" are the same ones that keep it schedule 1, preventing "more studies".

2 Good luck with that. It worked out so well the last time.

3 Related issue? Yes. Same issue? No.

1) we do not know it is as there is very little research and you can not compare it to cigarettes as it is not always smoked and how many people have smoked 20+ a day for 30 years?


how about if it was moved off sch 1 and tested before we just make it legal?


2) that was your idea, not mine...

3) so then it is not completely separate is it?

Anyone for banning the AR15 must be on the side of the criminal as once banned only criminals will have them.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #27 posted 01/09/18 10:42am

jjhunsecker

avatar

djThunderfunk said:

jjhunsecker said:

All drugs should be legal for adult use. Addiction is a mental and societal problem, and resources should be used to treat it as such. It should not be a criminal problem. ESPECIALLY because the criminalization of drugs has always been used to target CERTAIN groups, while others get a pass...


Agreed, except with the last 3 words. Clearly the War On Drugs has been used to target and marginilize "certain groups" disproportionally, but I know plenty of "others" that did NOT get a "pass".

Nothing will ever be 100%, but I think your use of the word "disproportionally" is the most important part

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #28 posted 01/09/18 10:54am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

the issue with how drug laws are unfairly enforced is not a valid argument to make drugs legal as many other laws are abused to the same effect. From J-walking to driving to violent crimes... they all impact some groups more than others.

Anyone for banning the AR15 must be on the side of the criminal as once banned only criminals will have them.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #29 posted 01/09/18 10:56am

djThunderfunk

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

djThunderfunk said:


1 We know plenty. We know it's safer than alcohol, cigarettes and prescription medication. Those that claim "we need more studies" are the same ones that keep it schedule 1, preventing "more studies".

2 Good luck with that. It worked out so well the last time.

3 Related issue? Yes. Same issue? No.

1) we do not know it is as there is very little research and you can not compare it to cigarettes as it is not always smoked and how many people have smoked 20+ a day for 30 years?


how about if it was moved off sch 1 and tested before we just make it legal?


2) that was your idea, not mine...

3) so then it is not completely separate is it?


1 - There's plenty of research and if use your googles you can learn all about it.

2 - No, it wasn't my "idea". You gave we "don't need ANOTHER intoxicant" argument, I simply countered with the logic that maybe the wrong intoxicant is the legal.

3 - Yes. It's separate. Allowing adults to choose to smoke marijuana is a separate issue from testing impairment of drivers.

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 1 of 2 12>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > Attorney General blowin up the gov