The DEA has filed notice of intent to add Kratom to schedule 1

 

Mitragyna speciosa111.JPG

Various forms of kratom and teas made from the plant’s leaves are sold in cafes and on the internet. Their primary effect is to provide a short-lived peaceful and calm feeling that is described as pleasant. Consistent with this effect being opioid-like, anecdotal reports indicate that some users have used kratom to successfully recover from physical and psychological dependence on prescription opioids and heroin. Comments on my last report on kratom have also indicated the successful use of teas made from the plant in managing chronic pain without the side effects and addictive potential of prescription opioids like oxycodone, hydrocodone and morphine. LINK

Due to be published in the “Federal Register” on August 31st, 2016 is the DEA’s “Intent to reschedule” the opioids mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine  These are the “ingredients” of the plant Kratom and they are placing it into schedule I using the “temporary scheduling provisions” of the Controlled Substances Act.

Federal Register Kratom

The Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration, issued this document:

DOJ Kratom

There is a petition at Whitehouse.Gov that is asking the Federal Government to not go thru with this decision. 

KRATOM PETITION

 

The “drug war” has taken enough of our plants and enough of our lives.  We cannot continue to let them regulate us out of every plant of food and medicine which were given to us as Our “inalienable rights” as Human Beings and laid out in Our Constitution as such, and regulate it out of our reach through the use of “Agenda 21” as laid out by the United Nations, in which the United States is one of only five “permanent members”!

First, PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION, and then make phone calls and write letters to your Representatives concerning this issue!

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

RELATED STORIES:

“Rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to purposes and principles of the United Nations.” HOW THE UNITED NATIONS IS STEALING OUR “UNALIENABLE RIGHTS” TO GROW FOOD AND MEDICINE THROUGH THE U.N. CONVENTION ON NARCOTIC DRUGS AND AGENDA 21. Sheree Krider

The FDA Just Outlawed Hemp Oil – Secrets of the Fed.Com

FORBES announced today:  The DEA Is Placing Kratom And Mitragynine On Schedule I

Take Back Kentucky Legislative Action Alert

(KY) Oppose: Senate Bill 136: Banning of the Kratom Herb 2/22/2016
Advertisements

We, the people of America, demand reform of ; Kentucky Cabinet for Families and Children

Among Bevin’s campaign pledges was that he would reform the cabinet’s social services agency.

By:  Robin Rider-Osborne·Sunday, January 31, 2016

KENTUCKY REPRESENTATIVE EMAIL ADDRESSES AND ANNOUNCEMENT LETTER / ALL STATE PARTICIPATION. Copy and paste letter to email addresses listed below; Bulk email dump at bottom of page for one letter bulk sending.

We, the people of America, demand reform of ; Kentucky Cabinet for Families and Children & Family Law courtrooms. I request of your office the following;

1. Implement removal of Abusers, not children from Family units.

2. Remove Immunity for Kentucky Cabinet for Families and Children workers.

3. Restructure Family Law court into budget cutting mediation forums of two party negotiations.

4. Redirect Family Law Criminal allegations into Criminal court.

5. Restrict Judges and various interpretations of Family Law codes to abuse either party.

6. End Kentucky Cabinet for Families and Children abuse and Family Law abuse against the people of Kentucky. We demand an end to wasteful spending on agencies devastating families financially.

7 Allow a Jury trial in Termination of Parental Rights Cases

8. Amend or repeal that law that allows for children being removed due to disability and termination of rights without working towards reunification.

9. Release records upon request without redaction and revamp the Ombudsman to process the complaints in a timely and proper manner.

10. Revamp Foster Care Review boards as originally spelled out in CAPTA.

I cite the cases of ;

Pike Co. Circuit Judge Steve Combs DUI,

Garrard Co. Judge Ronnie Lane Drug trafficking,

Russell Co. Judge R. Maricle illegally distributing prescription drugs,

Judge Charles Huffman Extortion,

Russell Co. Judge Executive Kent Clark, Alcohol related charges,

Judge Executive Joe Grieshop charged with third-degree burglary; theft of items valued at over $10,000; 10 counts of retaliating against participants in a legal process; and one count of official misconduct,

Knox Co. Judge executive Raymond Smith(deceased)Attempted murder of Robin Smith, Murder of Mychael Smith and Micheal Smith,

Warren Co. Judge Margaret Huddleston DUI,

Marshall Co. Judge Executive Mike Miller, False entry/unauthorized act, .

This partial list of neglect of office, unethical professional conduct and evidence of failure within the Judicial branch of Kentucky. We strongly oppose Judges overseeing Families in crisis in the Family law division.

I cite the case of the failure of Kentucky Cabinet of Families and Children in protecting a nine year old, Amy from her adoptive siblings, known to have history in sexual abuse and undisclosed by the KCFC prior to the adoption. Problems were reported to indicate the adoptive parent, Kimberly Dye desire to ‘return’ the adopted girl shortly before her death This was an enormous failure of several to ignore all the warning signs of this broken adoptive home. While we acknowledge review and actions were taken as the result of the death of this girl, we feel more can be done to insure the safety of children seized and accountability by this agency.

We know there is rampant corruption in the government offices of Child services and Family law. This is a national epidemic of criminal activity within the programs, courtrooms and agencies that are bankrupting the American Families. We demand reform and strict laws on government seats of power placed with the power of office to seize children, financially destroy individuals, and racketeering to conceal internal corruption within our state and federal offices.

End legal abuse by Judges and Lawyers by instituting forums for successful dissolution/custody between spouses with guidelines without ruling Judges or lawyers. Enforce penalty of perjury, redirect criminal actions in Family Law to the Criminal courts. Remove immunity for Judges operating outside the rule of law. Reform Child services to an efficient team of child crime investigators and not our out dated model of Child protective services.

We, the people, unite and demand reform of CPS agencies and Family Law practices. We, the people, take back our rights to protect our children and families.

Robin Rider-Osborne can be contacted at:

Citizens Investigating the “Runaway Cabinet of Kentucky” Task Force

and by email to:  MercedesMcSweeney@gmail.com

Thank You for your attention in this matter!

EMAIL LINKS (EMAIL BULK DUMP AT BOTTOM OF PAGE / WINDOWS LINK EMAILS BELOW SITE LINKS. COPY /CUT PASTE LETTER BODY INTO EACH EMAIL LINK. NOT ALL REPRESENTATIVES PROVIDE EMAIL ADDRESSES.

BULK EMAIL DUMP / ONE SENDER; ONE EMAIL

Julian.Carroll@lrc.ky.gov;Bob.DeWeese@lrc.ky.gov;Ron.Crimm@lrc.ky.gov;Robert.Damron@lrc.ky.gov;Jim.DeCesare@lrc.ky.gov; Tom.McKee@lrc.ky.gov;MaryLou.Marzian@lrc.ky.gov;Jimmie.Lee@lrc.ky.gov; Jeff.Greer@lrc.ky.gov; Keith.Hall@lrc.ky.gov; Jim.Glenn@lrc.ky.gov; Jim.Gooch@lrc.ky.gov; Arnold.Simpson@lrc.ky.gov; Sal.Santoro@lrc.ky.gov; Tom.Riner@lrc.ky.gov; Marie.Rader@lrc.ky.gov; Rick.Rand@lrc.ky.gov; Tim.Moore@lrc.ky.gov; Richard.Heath@lrc.ky.gov; Richard.Henderson@lrc.ky.gov; Rick.Nelson@lrc.ky.gov; Charlie.Miller@lrc.ky.gov; Terry.Mills@lrc.ky.gov; Thomas.Kerr@lrc.ky.gov; kim.king@lrc.ky.gov; MarthaJane.King@lrc.ky.gov; Adam.Koenig@lrc.ky.gov; David.Osborne@lrc.ky.gov; RuthAnn.Palumbo@lrc.ky.gov; Joni.Jenkins@lrc.ky.gov; james.kay@lrc.ky.gov; sannie.overly@lrc.ky.gov; Jeff.Hoover@lrc.ky.gov; Dennis.Horlander@lrc.ky.gov; Jody.Richards@lrc.ky.gov; jill.york@lrc.ky.gov; Jimmy.Higdon@lrc.ky.gov; sara.gregory@lrc.ky.gov; Johnny.Bell@lrc.ky.gov; Kevin.Bratcher@lrc.ky.gov; Regina.Bunch@lrc.ky.gov; Robin.Webb@lrc.ky.gov; Robert.Stivers@lrc.ky.gov; Kevin.Bratcher@lrc.ky.gov; Regina.Bunch@lrc.ky.gov; Tom.Burch@lrc.ky.gov; Dan.Seum@lrc.ky.gov; Joe.Fischer@lrc.ky.gov; Kelly.Flood@lrc.ky.gov; Morgan.McGarvey@lrc.ky.gov; Alice.Kerr@lrc.ky.gov; Bob.Leeper@lrc.ky.gov; Brent.Yonts@lrc.ky.gov; Susan.Westrom@lrc.ky.gov; David.Watkins@lrc.ky.gov; Jim.Stewart@lrc.ky.gov; Tommy.Thompson@lrc.ky.gov; John.Tilley@lrc.ky.gov; Tommy.Turner@lrc.ky.gov; Myron.Dossett@lrc.ky.gov; Leslie.Combs@lrc.ky.gov; Dwight.Butler@lrc.ky.gov; John.Carney@lrc.ky.gov; Larry.Clark@lrc.ky.gov; Leslie.Combs@lrc.ky.gov

This issue was submitted by Robin Rider-Osborne, Lexington, KY.

Let’s talk about DOJ enforcement of marijuana laws…(on Tribal Lands)

 

15890419-cannabis-leaf-isolated-on-white-background.jpg

 

 

December 12, 2014

 

Sheree Krider

 

In reference to the last post regarding the enforcement of marijuana laws on tribal lands:

Justice Department on Thursday will tell U.S. attorneys to not prevent tribes from growing or selling marijuana on the sovereign lands

Today, via this link, the Department of Justice, as reported by the LA Times has/will produce a “Memorandum” concerning the enforcement of marijuana laws on Tribal Lands which seems to say that they will not bother prosecuting Federal laws on marijuana anymore.

The Justice Department will generally not try to enforce federal marijuana laws on Native American reservations.

“The new guidance, released in a memorandum, will be implemented on a case-by-case basis and tribes must still follow federal guidelines, said Timothy Purdon, the U.S. attorney for North Dakota and the chairman of the Attorney General’s Subcommittee on Native American Issues.”

The policy comes on the heels of the 2013 Justice Department decision to stop most federal marijuana prosecutions in states that have legalized the possession or sale of pot.

I would caution everyone to be very slow to rush in and shout a victory has been won.

The Federal Government has a way of making you think you have won freedoms which in effect you have not as the regulations surrounding that freedom end up making you into a criminal over and over again. Kind of like the CBD bill in Kentucky which it turns out you can buy CBD (with no THC) online all day long and it is legal without a prescription!  So why did we fight for the CBD bill?  So that the Physicians, Pharmas, and other corporate and government entities can make money on the bandwagon to “legalize” on the backs of all of us.

This MEMORANDUM which personally I have not seen published yet, should be studied closely as to what it actually MEANS, not just what it seems to say.

First of all a memorandum from the Department of Justice does not mean they have REPEALED the statutes in existence at the federal level regarding marijuana.  They can and likely will continue to interfere with marijuana production and sales.

This has been proven over and over again in all “legalized” or “medical” states that the Feds can and do still come in to support the “regulating” of the marijuana statutes.

As well, the U.N. has NOT at this point “repealed” any treaty regarding the use of marijuana in any form.  They have “talked about” changing the way that the “drug problem” is handled.  That being said, marijuana is still illegal. See these links:

U.S. states’ pot legalization not in line with international law: U.N. agency

More Police or More Doctors? How to Best Tackle Illicit Drugs: November 6, 2014

So while the Reservations get ready for their “grand openings” at the cannabis casino that they have most likely already planned for, I hope that they realize that once again they may be giving away their sovereign rights via pending “legalization”…

It’s all in the semantics…

Read between the lines first…

smk

The Nullification Door can Swing Both Ways

By Bruce Johnson  June 24, 2013

Patrick Henry, John Calhoun, and George Mason would be delighted that States are showing some backbone after 220 years of Federal power encroachment. States are again beginning to question Federal authority by, in effect, nullifying some Federal mandates. But the “nullification door” is swinging both ways. Is it not nullification of law by the Federal Government itself when they who hold the federal reins refuse to enforce the laws currently on the books? And when no enforcement of the law is at the whim of an administration, what recourse exists for the citizenry? For the States?

Both ends of the political spectrum have engaged in nullification, the rejection of Federal law. As noted in this piece by David Leib, the current focal points of dissonance between State and Federal revolve around a strange mix of topics; healthcare, guns, illegal immigration, citizen identification, and marijuana. We can clearly identify both ends of the sociopolitical spectrum and note they have become strange bedfellows in disobeying the federal government. Coloradans thumb their nose at federal marijuana laws while Montanans do the same with federal gun laws.

Mr. Leib in his article ” Federal Nullification Efforts Mounting in States”, lists a few of today’ de facto nullifications:

“About 20 states now have medical marijuana laws allowing people to use pot to treat chronic pain and other ailments — despite a federal law that still criminalizes marijuana distribution and possession. Ceding ground to the states, President Barack Obama’s administration has made it known to federal prosecutors that it wasn’t worth their time to target those people…

Federal authorities have repeatedly delayed implementation of the 2005 Real ID Act… about half the state legislatures have opposed its implementation, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

About 20 states have enacted measures challenging Obama’s 2010 health care laws…

After Montana passed a 2009 law declaring that federal firearms regulations don’t apply to guns made and kept in that state, eight other states have enacted similar laws…”

But the nullification door swings both ways. As States issue an affront to select federal law, the federal authorities elected and appointed seem also to have some issues themselves with federal law. Even though they have pledged via their oaths of office to enforce these laws, when it serves their political purposes we often get nonenforcement. Despite vowing diligence there is a steady record that is in effect “legislation via non action” by federal agencies and apparently done so at the direction of the Executive and Judicial branches.

In some instances the federal authorities reject any local, police, or State assistance in enforcing federal law as in the Arizona illegal immigration situation. In many marijuana cases, the federal government seems uninterested that State law conflicts with the law on the federal books. Illinois and Chicago in particular drag out a federal mandate to comply with the Second Amendment. Yet most assuredly those same federal authorities will expect local enforcement of new gun laws in Montana.

When polling place violations go unprosecuted, when sanctuary cities invite illegal immigrants and guarantee no pursuit, when immigration agents are told to ease up, and when the War Powers Act that requires the president to consult with Congress but the president only delivers mere notification… are these not de facto nullifications of law?

When States detect that they are being harmed by new federal law, it is more justifiable for them to act than those oath obligated federal office holders channeling their political wishes by choosing which laws to enforce and which to ignore.

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”

As Madison noted in his Federalist Paper #45,

“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.”.

Article I, sect 8 of the Constitution clearly delineates that which the Federal Government “can” do, and section 10 of the same Article clearly states what the States “can’t” do. State governments preceded the “federal experiment” and it was from these 13 States the powers so delegated to the “federal experiment” originated. But now add in the Supremacy Clause noting State law can not be in conflict with Federal Law, and if such occurrence arise, Federal law will be “supreme’. More complications arise when the powers of Article I, sect 8 are deemed unbound by how activists interpret the “necessary and proper” clause. All of this sets before us a cauldron of countervailing double- entendre laden documents that often seem internal contradictory. Is it a ‘mish mash’ or a brilliant work of governance?

The Federal Papers lend guidance to the Constitution. These papers fill in the gaps and clarify instances in which the English language within the Constitution sometimes falls short. In Federalist #32 and #33, Hamilton, a devout federalist, points to a certain sovereignty status retained by the States.

32nd:

As the plan of the convention aims only at a partial union or consolidation, the State governments would clearly retain all the rights of sovereignty which they before had, and which were not, by that act, exclusively delegated to the United States.

Today’s resurgence of nullification of federal law by the States is perhaps the greatest since 1861. John C. Calhoun led a nullification movement in South Carolina in 1832 regarding the collection of federal tariffs on imports. Prior to that, there were the instances of opposition to a National Bank, New England’s opposition to the War of 1812 voiced in the Hartford Convention and also New England’s opposition to the Mexican War and their sending of troops to that effort. Thomas Jefferson himself led nullification efforts in 1798 with the Kentucky Resolution in which “the states had the right and the duty to declare unconstitutional any acts of Congress that were not authorized by the Constitution”. Madison followed with the Virginia Resolution in the same spirit.

“If prudently limited and wisely directed, almost any government can be a blessing; yet unless firmly constrained, any government of whatever form will tend to augment its powers in excess, going beyond even the plainest legal limits on its just authority, and will sooner or later become dangerous.” Thomas Jefferson (A Constitutional History of Secession, Graham)

Nullification has three stages. (as noted by Graham pp. 108, 109)

Interposition: This involves the identification of the grievances by the offended party (State), adopted by the legislator of that State, and noting the unconstitutional nature of the proposed act by the Federal Government or by other States as being injurious to the offended State. A demand for “appropriate redress” is included.

State Declaration of Nullification: The State will call for assemblies and authorities within the State to then empower such bodies to then craft an ordinance of nullification.

Ordinance of Secession: If the ordinance of nullification should fail to restore proper balance between the Federal Government and the State, by act of sovereign power and ordinance of secession will be adopted.

Secession is unlikely today, but the concept was unresolved in 1861. State sovereignty was a more justifiable position. Virginia, Rhode Island, and New York all ratified the Constitution with the proviso that if they became harmed by the “federal experiment”, they retained the powers to withdraw. To extrapolate, and because these ratifications were unconditionally accepted at the convention in which all States were equal partners, these rights to ‘withdraw’ radiated to all the States ratifying at that time.

State resistance to harmful federal legislation is an important component to our federal system. Nullification must be promoted cautiously but once committed, States must hold firm even if it draws an extortion such as the withholding of Federal highway funds. Turnabout is fair play, and as an administration selectively ignores passed law, States gain traction in challenging new Federal law. Principle must trump financial consideration and the promise that is our form of government must not be whittled away.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/06/the_nullification_door_can_swing_both_ways.html#ixzz2XB1xZEFz

Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Judge Andrew Napolitano & Rob Kampia: Federal Government & Marijuana Legalization

« Mike Malloy: The Greatest Lie Glenn Beck Ever Told

Mission Incomplete Veterans Speak Out Against DADT »

Judge Andrew Napolitano & Rob Kampia: Federal Government & Marijuana Legalization

By jr

This entry was posted on December 13, 2010 at 2:05 am and is filed under

 andrew napolitano, medical marijuana, news, politics, video.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.