Ron Paul: "Jeff Sessions Should Be Fired" Over Marijuana Crackdown

Attorney General Jeff Sessions sent pot stocks tumbling earlier this week when, just days after California started selling marijuana legally, he rescinded an Obama-era order that helped states circumvent federal drug laws and experiment with legalization and taxation.

His decision has angered politicians on both sides of the aisle, perhaps nobody more than former Texas Congressman Ron Paul, who has long advocated for the legalization of all drugs in keeping with his libertarian views.

In an interview with CNN, Paul said President Trump should fire Sessions over the AG's decision to empower local federal prosecutors to decide whether they want to enforce federal marijuana laws, possibly throwing a wrench in the works for states like Massachusetts, Colorado and Nevada, where marijuana sales are essentially legal and subject to taxes.

“The war on drugs to me is a war on liberty I concentrate on the issue of freedom of choice when doing things that are high risk. We permit high risk all the time. Generally we allow people to eat what they want. We do overly concentrate on what people put in their bodies,” Paul said.

Recreational marijuana is legal in eight states and the District of Columbia. Twenty-two states also allow some form of medical marijuana, and 15 allow a lesser medical marijuana extract.

Paul said freedom is integral to the American identity, and that Sessions actions are “unamerican.”

"He represents something that is so un-American, as far as I'm concerned," Paul said. Paul also described the war on drugs as "a totally illegal system" that functions as "a war on liberty."

"The war on drugs, to me, is a war on liberty. I think that we overly concentrate on the issue of the drug itself, and I concentrate on the issue of freedom of choice, on doing things that are of high risk," he said. "And we permit high risk all the time. ... Generally, we allow people to eat what they want, and that is very risky. But we do overly concentrate on what people put into their bodies."

"Just because you legalize something doesn't mean everyone's going to do it, and then if you look at the consequences, of the war? Why don't the people just look and read and study Prohibition? failure. And the war on drugs is every bit as bad and worse," he said.

"People should have the right or responsibility of dealing with what is dangerous," Paul insisted. "Once you get into this thing about government is going to protect us against ourselves, there's no protection of liberty."

However, Paul said he didn't expect Sessions to be successful.

"I predict that Sessions is not going to be victorious on this," Paul told his interviewer.

“And unfortunately, it's for reasons that I don't get excited about. It's because the states want to collect all of those taxes (on marijuana), so it becomes this tax issue," he said.

Sessions has long been critical of liberalizing drug laws, famously claiming that “good people don’t smoke marijuana.” But the attorney general has also come under pressure lately from conservative, Trump-allied lawmakers who feel he’s allowed Special Counsel Robert Mueller to run amok.



Bes eforce Sun, 01/07/2018 - 18:42 Permalink

"I would use the greatest minds. I know the best negotiators. I know the ones that are no good that people think are good. I know people that you’ve never heard of that are better than all of them."

- Trump


In reply to by eforce

A Sentinel wildbad Mon, 01/08/2018 - 03:59 Permalink

I’ll go one further: this undermines the clarity of law, the most basic requirement for rule of law

This is actually a very dangerous idea - letting local prosecutors (of all the shitstain  choices, that’s pretty bad) to decide, all by themselves, whether the state’s laws apply??!!? 

Imagine how the dems will use that! 

It multiplies the hellish effect of a gazillion regulations.

This Guy has got to go! And this idea needs a stake through its heart and to be buried.

In reply to by wildbad

Mango327 eforce Sun, 01/07/2018 - 18:45 Permalink

The legal & illegal drug trade (Big Pharma, vaccines, opium trade) is the last leg standing for the Cabal. It's about to be toast, as a combination of the Cannabis industry (which Sessions can't stop) and the takedown of human trafficking ratlines (which Sessions is overseeing). All is proceeding wonderfully. Cheers.

In reply to by eforce

mkkby Mango327 Sun, 01/07/2018 - 19:34 Permalink

You must be on something strong than pot. Big corps pretty much dominate every industry.

Who ever is writing in Ron Paul's name is pretty ass backwards.  Sessions said he would enforce a ban on interstate commerce of pot.  That STRENGTHENS democracy and state's rights. 

Look at it this way.  If a legal pot state causes weed to flow into surrounding states, then that takes away those voter's right to chose "no".  If you value liberty, you have to value dissenting opinion.

I don't expect more than 1% of hedgers to get this.  99% just emotionally react to the headline, or endlessly repeat bullshit conspiracies about the fed or jooz.

In reply to by Mango327

FilthyPhil37 mkkby Sun, 01/07/2018 - 20:06 Permalink

You are a bloody moron. Interstate Commerce clause regulates legal trade. No legal marijuana in one state going to any other state (legal or not) is legal interstate commerce. It is only and forever a law enforcement issue. I can assure you, all of the legal states do as much as they can to keep their legal weed from entering non-legal states. 

Your logic is full of fallacy for a number of points. Firstly, other states (non-legal weed) have not voted to make weed illegal. The feds did that for all of us. Therefore, your argument is bolloxed. Secondly, if, for instance, Utah outlawed alcohol it would be no fucking business of the feds to help Utah keep amazing micro-brewed Colorado beer out of Utah. Finally, and to summate, making weed legal in a state does not mean that the state "causes" weed to flow into an illegal state--drug dealers do that. 



In reply to by mkkby

redmudhooch mkkby Sun, 01/07/2018 - 20:15 Permalink

Let's play fill_in_the_blanks:

 ____ own the banks.

____ own the network and print media.

____ own Hollywood.

____ dominate the ivy league colleges.

____ directly influence the political decisions of most western governments.

____ think the rest of the world's citizens are dirty, ignorant, subhumans that must be controlled and enslaved.

 But none dare call it conspiracy.

In reply to by mkkby

wildbad mkkby Mon, 01/08/2018 - 03:50 Permalink

the feds should have zero say on this issue. and you are right but if the neighboring state is so opposed to that then that STATE can choose its own remedy. it would also be anti individual of that state to remove the choice from its citizens but people of that state could choose from differing options on how to deal with it and they do this now.

new mexico and wyoming are benefitting enormously from colorado's cannabis freedom by fining and arresting cross border users and transporters.

In reply to by mkkby

Dickweed Wang eforce Sun, 01/07/2018 - 19:02 Permalink

Go anywhere near them and Big <insert industry competing with hemp/marijuana> will do everything it can to prevent it.


And here are the two major multi-national corporate players in the anti-cannabis crusade for all you folks watching at home:

  • The alcohol (booze) industry
  • The pharmaceutical industry 

In reply to by eforce

Baron von Bud eforce Sun, 01/07/2018 - 20:34 Permalink

Nobody has ever died from cannabis in 5000 years. The laws are stupid. It shouldn't be illegal. Queen Victoria used it along with Carl Sagan and Shakespeare. Why are people being arrested for smoking a genuinely helpful and pleasant plant given to us by our creator? Money and power - that's the criminal element in this story. I live in a state that punishes potheads severely. I pay $250/yr for a card that allows me to buy 5oz/month because I pay protection money to the state. Is that nuts or what?

In reply to by eforce

uhland62 DollarMenu Sun, 01/07/2018 - 20:27 Permalink

Nailing Clinton is not about international 'law' enforced by UNODOC. Federal laws require prohibition. States legalizing it was only tolerated.

What would Sessions write in his annual report to UNODOC if he keeps tolerating it? He might make these noises and not do anything. At any rate, he shouldn't be sacked and then pop back up in Congress in the midterms, so needs to be sacked after closing dates. Messy topics, Clintons and the international Conventions. 

In reply to by DollarMenu

LetThemEatRand DivisionBell Sun, 01/07/2018 - 18:45 Permalink

"This is not up to Jeff Sessions.  It is up to Congress"

Congress absolutely should act, but it is not a legal prerequisite to standing down by the Feds.  There is a conflict between state law and federal law.  When prohibition started, it was via a Constitutional Amendment for a good reason -- trumping any conflicting state law.  Here, there is a simple conflict.  One reasonable way to resolve it (other than creating a Constitutional crisis and forcing a decision by the Supreme Court), is to respect the right of the States under the Tenth Amendment to make their own decisions on this.  The Feds can still bust people who engage in interstate commerce with pot between states where it is not legal (thus no conflict with state law) if they have such a hard on about it.

In reply to by DivisionBell

Koba the Dread DivisionBell Sun, 01/07/2018 - 19:39 Permalink

No, it is up to Jeff Sessions. It is up to Congress to change the law, but it is up to Sessions how strictly to enforce the law. It's a very old tradition because law enforcement/prosecutorial manpower (personpower in newspeak) is limited. Do we prosecute giant criminal corporations or mom and pop? Unfortunately mom and pop are often prosecuted, giant criminal corporations less so.

In reply to by DivisionBell