Drug WarRant

My very first post as a blogger, back on July 27, 2003, was about an amendment to get the federal government out of states’ medical marijuana laws, sponsored by Maurice Hinchey.
Back then, I marveled at such nonsense as this from John Mica:

“We also heard here that the medical use of marijuana will relieve pain. Well, I can say also from chairing that subcommittee that that is not the case. In fact, anything that we do to encourage use, whether for this purpose or other purposes, will not relieve pain, it will cause pain. Certainly, I am sure if someone smoked enough marijuana or took enough crack or enough heroin or methamphetamines, they would not have any pain.”

and this gem from sado-moralist Mark Souder:

“This is about when Congress passed a law under the Constitution that said in interstate commerce, which narcotics move across interstate commerce, which was not a liberal interpretation of that clause but a strict interpretation of that clause from a conservative perspective, all except the more anarcho-libertarians, as we used to call them, believe that in drug laws the Federal Government historically has had the right to enforce a Federal law.”

The amendment, of course, lost. And now I have covered the Hinchey amendment 5 times. During that time, we have written countless letters to Representatives, done extensive lobbying, and changed the leadership party in the House.
Just look how far we’ve come in those 5 votes…

At this rate, the Hinchey amendment will pass sometime around mid-July in the year 2027, and I’ll have a party in the retirement home.
Congress. What a bunch of spineless, hopeless, un-American nitwits.
Tomorrow, however, I’m planning on celebrating anyway. It’ll be my 4 year blogiversary. And there’s a lot we have accomplished in that time.

“bullet” Hinchey amendment (to prevent federal harassment in states with medical marijuana laws) may be coming up for a vote today. Jacob Sullum reminds us why we should care.

Radley Balko has the latest from the Cleveland Plain Dealer:

The decision by U.S. Attorney Greg White to release a woman from prison and drop charges against two men could be the tip of the iceberg in a federal perjury investigation.
Dozens of convictions and pending cases in which DEA agent Lee Lucas investigated and Jerrell Bray was paid for information will come under scrutiny, several lawyers said Monday.
Bray told police in May that he made up testimony and lied on the witness stand in several drug cases.

Lying in criminal trials. From an agency in the Justice department.
But wait, you say — this is just an individual agent (Lee Lucas) working with an informant who lied. How can I infer blanket statements about the entire DEA?
Because the attitude about doing whatever it takes to get a conviction (including lying) goes all the way to the top.
I wrote about the current Deputy Administrator of the DEA (Michele Leonhart) almost four years ago when she was nominated. The story was about her, and also about super-snitch Andrew Chambers, who was also guilty of perjury in criminal trials, though he was never punished for it and instead received over $2 million from the DEA.
Here are some excerpts:

For years, some prosecutors and many defense attorneys had expressed concerns about Chambers’ perjury. In 1993 in California, a 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling agreed that Chambers lied on the stand. In 1995, the 8th U.S. Court of Appeals in St. Louis added its voice: “The record, however, clearly demonstrates that Chambers did in fact perjure himself . . .”
The DEA protected Chambers repeatedly, and avoided notifying prosecutors and defense attorneys about Chambers’ past. At one point, the Drug Enforcement Agency and Justice Department lawyers stonewalled for 17 months, fighting a public defender who was trying to examine the contents of DEA’s background check on Chambers.
Later, Assistant U.S. Attorney Stephen Wolf stated that it was clear that the drug agents never put any damaging reports into Chambers’ file — even though DEA regulations require it.
Finally, the DEA conducted an internal review of Chambers’ career, and although there was some talk of reprimanding DEA supervisors, the report was never made completely public, and the DEA refused to agree to stop using Chambers. […]
The most startling statement in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch investigation of Andrew Chambers was from Michele Leonhart:

“The only criticism (of Chambers) I’ve ever heard is what defense attorneys will characterize as perjury or a lie on the stand.”

She continued by saying that once prosecutors check him out, they’ll agree with his admirers in DEA that he’s “an outstanding testifier.”
That’s the key. To an agent like Leonhart, getting the bust and getting the conviction is all that matters. The testimony is good if it leads to a successful conclusion (from her perspective). Why nitpick about the truth?

After all, this is war, right? Anything goes in war. Lie, cheat, steal, suspend the constitution, … kill.
The entire drug war apparatus in this country needs to be completely dismantled, and something resembling America put back in its place.

Not that we need any more… but in his testimony today, he was asked by Republican Senator Jeff Sessions, who has introduced a bill to reduce the crack-powder cocaine sentencing disparity, what the DOJ thought of it. Gonzales replied:

“Personally, as I sit here today, I’d say that where we’re at today is certainly reasonable. We think crack is more dangerous. It’s related to, I think, addiction more quickly. It’s more related to more dangerous crimes. The effects of it, I think, are more dangerous. So from a law enforcement perspective, it makes sense to have the kind of sentences that exist today.”

Where we’re at is reasonable? Makes sense?
I’m sorry, but why isn’t Gonzales spending the next 55 years in prison for what he’s done to this country? He’s much more dangerous than crack.

Ian Welsh has a very good article at firedoglake: The Assault on Due Process and Civil Liberties, where he notes that the current attacks on our rights related to the war on terror and the increase in executive power didn’t just spring to life out of thin air — they were spawned from the drug war.

The joke about the ‹War on TerrorŠ is that it‰s the ‹War on Drugsá on crackŠ. As with most good jokes, it hurts and it‰s funny, because it‰s true – the ‹War on DrugsŠ is where America lost a lot of its civil liberties and due process. […]
Of course, many things did start under Bush – torture, repeal of habeas corpus and so on. But it‰s worth remembering, at the end of the day, that what has happened in the last 6 years did not happen in a vacuum – it was an acceleration of a trend that already existed towards the land of liberty becoming a land where due process was only something that some people, the right sort of people, had access to.

It is, of course, something we’ve been talking about for years.

Link
A woman in her forties and her daughter in her twenties were smoking marijuana together in their parked car “in advance of a Nickelback concert at Centennial Park in Sarnia [Ontario], part of the Bayfest festival.”
What a nice moment. An adult mother and daughter spending some nice quality time together, enjoying a concert. It should be a Hallmark moment. Until…

Police seized 14 marijuana cigarettes and arrested and charged the pair.

There’s something really sick in our society to allow these two to be arrested (or anyone else for that matter who simply wants to enjoy some good music in a time-honored way).
The Chatham Daily News misses the point entirely in their editorial Family Values Going Up in Smoke

Call us old-fashioned, but we find it deeply unsettling when parents take recreational drugs with their kids.

No, I’m not calling you old-fashioned. I’m calling you stupid.
This mother and daughter have more family values than most people, including the editorial writers at the Chatham Daily News. And what happens to family values when you promote a drug war that rips apart families, jails parents, fills family members and steals children away?
Or is family values just for the father and son in beer commercials?
And I just want to add another point to this. There’s a reason the police go to concerts in search of drug busts. They know that people like to use marijuana when listening to music. But they don’t talk about why.
Marijuana isn’t necessary to enjoying good music. Neither is good speakers. You can listen to music through crappy little speakers and have a wonderful experience. However…
I know someone who is a genius with sound reproduction and speakers. He once invited me to his home and had me sit in “the chair.” He had built all of his speakers himself and had the exact perfect spot in this large room for the very best sound. And I admit, I had never heard sound like that before. It was breathtaking.
Marijuana affects many people listening to music in a similar way. Time shifts, and subtle effects of the music come through with a power as though a dormant tuning fork had been activated inside you. Why do you think the history of jazz is tied to marijuana?
But of course, this is just another aspect of marijuana that the government would prefer not to articulate — it doesn’t fit their propaganda of marijuana alternately causing violent behavior or making you sit for hours on Pete’s couch.
“Don’t use marijuana — it’ll make music sound like you’re listening to the best speaker system on earth and it’ll make Hostess Ding-Dongs taste like a 5-star French restaurant’s Creme BrulÚe.” Hard to sell a drug war that way.
[Tanya at Blame the Drug War reacts to this story as well.]

Marie had a very interesting idea in comments — an annual Anslinger award.
I like it. I think we might be able to do something good with this, so let’s work out some details.

1. Timing. What’s the best time of the year to give out the award — end of the calendar year? Some other time?
2. Graphics. We need a logo and/or award design. Any ideas?
3. Categories. I think we’ll do better by having several categories, rather than just one overall award. Here’s some off the top of my head:
   • Elected official (Souder, etc.)
   • Bureaucrat (Walters, Tandy, etc.)
   • Private operator (DuPont, Califano, Bensinger, etc.)
   • Media outlet (network, newspaper, wire service, etc.)
   • Reporter (a specific reporter or feature writer)
4. Criteria: I’m thinking that we’d want a representative item or statement to show off the depths of their propaganda, but the decision could be made based on their body of work over the year. Or should it be solely based on a single propaganda item?
5. Selection: All Drug WarRant readers would be able to nominate individuals/pieces throughout the year. Then open voting at the end?

Just some initial thoughts. What are your ideas?
Update: Feel free to give your suggestions and ideas either in comments or at the messageboard.

It was a good day when Dennis Hastert was no longer the Speaker of the House.
Now, Think Progress reports…

According to the Politico, columnist Robert Novak will report this weekend:

Former House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert has indicated to a close former aide that it is likely he will not run for a 12th term from his northern Illinois district and may even resign from Congress before his present term concludes.

I have no love for Hastert, and would be thrilled to see him leave power entirely. The question is why he would leave before his term is up (if the rumor is true).
Could it have anything to do with his alleged connection with the Turkish drug mafia?

“bullet” An interesting feature in the New York Tmes: The Antiwar, Anti-Abortion, Anti-Drug-Enforcement-
Administration, Anti-Medicare Candidacy of Dr. Ron Paul
“bullet” Chicago Tribune article about the drug war and racism: Drug war enforcement hits minorities hardest

“There was a thought back in the 1980s that it was better to be tough on crime than to be said not to be tough on crime; that if you just lock these people away that somehow that’s going to solve everything,” Evans said. “Hasn’t worked. And I believe now the pendulum is swinging away from lock ’em up and throw away the key back toward trying to find a rational way of solving this problem.”

“bullet” Nonsensical drug war article from Reuters. This fails even rudimentary journalistic standards. I’m not even sure what it’s about. But they did get a chance to highlight this quote:

Drug traffickers, said Donovan, are “the epitome of evil.”

Here’s another really stupid editorial from Danny Zahara of the Central Peace Signal (whatever that is) in Alberta
“bullet” A couple of good articles from Montana (thanks, Tom)

• Meth Project founder critical of ‘crazy’ drug policy
• Rehberg praised for medical pot

“bullet” Ninth cabinet minister admits smoking dope Should be a non-story, if it wasn’t for the overall blatant hypocrisy of politicians wanting to lock everybody else up that does what they did.
“bullet” Good article at Grits for Breakfast: If you don’t have probable cause just fabricate it, say drug enforcers and some TX prosecutors. It’s scary the degree to which conventional thinking says anything law enforcement does is justified if it’s part of the drug war.
“bullet” Councilman Michael Polensak (Cleveland) has a little too much time on his hands. He actually wrote a letter (on City of Cleveland official stationary) berating an alleged drug dealer who had been arrested, including these gems:

Mr. Winston, you have to be “dumber than mud.” […] In closing, I told you just recently to stay out of my neighborhood, you crack dealing piece of trash. […] Go to jail or the cemetery soon,…

“bullet” LA City Beat reminds people about the History of Federal Confusion and Persecution Over the ‘Evil Weed’