Trump says he 'probably' will support bill to protect states that have legalized marijuana

[jpak]

Source: Portland Press Herald

President Trump said Friday that he is likely to support a bipartisan congressional effort to give states autonomy over their marijuana laws — a move that would put the White House in direct conflict with the Justice Department.

Trump was asked about a bill introduced Thursday by Sens. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) that would protect the nine states and D.C. that have legalized marijuana from any federal interference. This would allow businesses that sell marijuana to operate without fear of prosecution by the Justice Department.

Trump told reporters that he supports Gardner and is considering backing the bill.

“I know exactly what he’s doing,” Trump told reporters as he prepared to leave the White House on Friday to a Group of Seven economic summit in Canada. “We’re looking at it. But I probably will end up supporting that.”

Trump’s attorney general, Jeff Sessions, has long been an impassioned opponent of marijuana, and in January the Justice Department rescinded Obama administration guidance that instructed federal law enforcement not to waste resources targeting marijuana operations in states where they are legal.

<more>

Read more: https://www.pressherald.com/2018/06/08/trump-says-he-probably-will-support-bill-to-protect-states-that-have-legalized-marijuana/

---

I bet he said this just to piss off Sessions...

[The Mouth]

1. It's a losing issue for them

and even some pretty conservative Republicans realize it's a 'State's Rights' issue.

[Major Nikon]

7. They only give a fuck about "State's Rights" when it concerns a "right" to discriminate

If it puts them in a hypocritical position to say no and the bill passes, so much the better. Might as well use their fucked up ideology against them.

If this bill passes, it will be a tipping point for cannabis legalization. The remaining states will fall like dominoes.

[The Mouth]

15. Politicians and people in general only care about 'State's Rights'

When it's to the advantage of their ideological agenda, regardless of ideology.

Cuts both ways, although generally more in our favor than theirs, although they are too stupid to see that often. But sometimes the other way. Cannabis, reproductive choice, guns, marriage equality, all end up being effected by how one views where one views the 10th amendment (and which rights are implicit in the others) verses the 'General Welfare' clause.

Conservatives are quick as hell to leverage the power of the federal government to hammer states on cannabis, corporate personhood and anything else that suits their agenda and to hell with the 10th, we liberals are pretty quick to defend State's rights when it comes to cannabis, restricting the ownership of guns and the application of the Full Faith and Credit clause in regards to marriage equality. In general it tilts our way; as you say, best to use their own ideology against them. But one should be aware that the very same part of the constitution that requires a marriage in one state to be honored in every other state ('full faith and credit') can also come back on Democrats (not that YOU aren't aware, I mean the rhetorical 'one')

Here's hoping that, as a California resident in an area that will benefit greatly from full legalization, the Republicans actually do something right for once.

[Major Nikon]

18. "States' Rights" didn't become a rallying cry till the Civil Rights Era

It’s basically bigoted codespeak for “fuck you” to all protected classes after the Southern states tried unsuccessfully to repudiate federal Civil Rights laws.

[The Mouth]

19. Yep.

As you wisely said upthread: use their own evil against 'em. Although I'd also argue that 'State's Rights' became a post war excuse for the South's revolt as a deflection from slavery (utter bullshit, of course, look at any of the writings of the Southern leaders, it was ALL about owning slaves, but after they lost they claimed it was about SR). If they want to use 'States Rights', damnit, so can we. And enumerated Constitutional rights trump States Rights, so the arc of things will eventually bend somewhat towards us (I hope).

[Major Nikon]

20. That too didn't come into fashion until much later

During the Civil Rights Era neo-confederates started the historical revisionism that the Civil War was really fought over “States’ Rights” and not slavery. The opposite is actually true. One of the justifications the Southern states used for secession was the Northern states’ right to free slaves from the South once they were inside their jurisdiction.

[DownriverDem]

2. Michigan

Who would trust trump on anything he says? Michigan has legal medical marijuana. It was just approved that we will be voting on recreational marijuana in November. And thanks to Voters not Politicians we will get to vote on using a committee to draw district lines. Michigan is hugely gerrymandered. These two issues will motivate a lot of left leaning voters come November. So hoping we can make a change.

[Still In Wisconsin]

3. All he's doing here is sticking his thumb in Jeff Sessions' eye

As the article says, Sessions has been on an anti-weed campaign his whole career. Therefore, Trump does this.

[C Moon]

5. Sounds like a Trump reason to me. Doesn't care how his actions affect others...

only how they affect him, and/or if they get him his vengeance.

[TeamPooka]

4. For conservatives the smart play they have ignored is to back these cannabis state's rights issues

to help their arguments about abortion.
But they don't realize arguing against it weakens their argument for states rights anti abortion stuff.
They just cant' let their "we know best for you" judgemental attitude go.

[NewJeffCT]

6. He also said he would support raising the gun purchase age to 21

how did that go?

[C_U_L8R]

8. "probably" "we'll see"

in other words... "grease my palms"

[Dave Starsky]

23. Exactly! He's shaking down the liquor, pharma, and tobacco.

He's basically into open protection rackets now.

[Hekate]

9. We'll see... Maybe later... Wouldn't you like to know?

My Dad used to tell us kids, "I'll give it my thoughtful consideration." Took me years to figure out he meant the same thing as W. C. Fields' "Go away kid, ya bother me."

Trump is just a much nastier version of that.

[LeftInTX]

16. My dad was the opposite, "We'll see" and "We'll think about it" usually meant he would

Usually there were some strings attached instead of a blanket, "Yes".

"Think about it" usually meant drawing up a plan with both parties involved (Kids and parents)

I had a good father...

[duforsure]

10. Which means nothing,

He said lots of positive things about the DACA kids to, so this is just another scam. He'll demand something , probably something bad for everyone except himself. This could be just another PR campaign to gain support when Mueller exposes him, and for votes. His words can't be trusted for anything. Let him sign the Senators bill then. He won't. Just another ploy .

[CanonRay]

11. What ever comes out of his mouth is meaningless

just ignore it.

[BigmanPigman]

12. He changes his mind ever other second.

He is insane and saying "unpredictable" is like calling lies "alternative facts". I will believe it when I see it.

[marble falls]

13. So now he locks down the Republicans who want to smoke pot legally vote...

you know, Libertarians. The people who'd rather not vote than vote Democratic.

At the same time, I'm glad he's considering it at all.

I wouldn't bet either way.

[Calista241]

14. I think it's to remove motivation from some millennial voters. n/t

[LeftInTX]

17. Ignore him...

He's like a weather vane in tornado alley.

[ansible]

21. Isn't this already pointless since recreational weed is already legal in many states?

[jmowreader]

22. It's going to take more than this to steal the Filthy Hippie vote from the Democrats

[hatrack]

24. Oh bullshit!

Like I would believe a single fucking thing this pile of cat logs says.