[DiscoBiscuit]

Nope, she's obtuse.

Michele Leonhart, DEA Chief, Won't Say Whether Crack, Heroin Are Worse For Health Than Marijuana

The Huffington Post | By Nick Wing Posted: 06/21/2012 10:50 am Updated: 06/21/2012 5:04 pm

Michele Leonhart, the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, ducked a tough line of questioning from Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.) on Wednesday, refusing to answer a number of questions about the comparative health impacts of marijuana and other, harder drugs.

Leonard was testifying before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. Polis, a top congressional advocate for marijuana law reform, took the opportunity to grill the DEA administrator on some specifics about marijuana, which has been decriminalized in some parts of his state and legalized for medical purposes in the rest.

“Is crack worse for a person than marijuana?” Polis asked Leonhart.

“I believe all illegal drugs are bad,” Leonhart answered.
Polis continued, asking whether methamphetamines and heroin were worse for a person's health than marijuana.

“Again, all drugs, they're illegal drugs,” Leonhart started, before being cut off by Polis.

“Yes, no, or I don’t know?” Polis said. “If you don’t know, you can look this up. You should know this as the chief administrator for the Drug Enforcement Agency. I’m asking a very straightforward question: Is heroin worse for someone's health than marijuana?”

Leonhart ducked again, repeating, "All illegal drugs are bad."

Since assuming the head position at the DEA, Leonhart has made controlling prescription drug abuse the top priority, a stance she had laid out so aggressively that it led one Democratic senator to block her confirmation.

Asked by Polis whether prescription drugs were more addictive than marijuana, Leonhart again skirted the question.

"All illegal drugs in Schedule I are addictive," she said, before avoiding a question about whether prescription pills were more harmful than marijuana.

Leonhart has been a controversial figure in the drug policy reform community since she was named acting administrator of the DEA in the wake of her predecessor Karen Tandy's departure.

While her opponents in the marijuana policy reform community were particularly upset at her nomination, due to suggestions that she would ignore an earlier announcement by the Obama administration about making marijuana crackdowns a low priority, she also ran into trouble when reports surfaced that DEA officials had become entangled in a Ponzi scheme.

Despite these concerns, she was eventually confirmed by a unanimous vote in late 2010. Meanwhile, the Obama administration's previous pledge to deemphasize marijuana enforcement appears to have gone by the wayside.



https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1615270.html

It's not it-is-or-it-isn't, bitch. It's degree... an aspect you obviously won't address.

[CannaBunkerMan]

Obtuse might be putting it lightly. I'd say it sounded like someone had their arm jammed so far up her ass as to make her mouth move with their hand.

Drugs are bad, mmmmmkay?

[DiscoBiscuit]

Couldn't have phrased it better. I half-expected laughs from the onlookers.

looks like nothing is going to be changing in washington any time soon

if she was a boxer her corner would have thrown in the towel in the first 2 minutes. it would have been nice if Polis had another 5 minutes with her ....... always good to watch some good verbal ground and pound

[Bi0hazard]

A little more detailed Recap:

Polis was talking to DEA Administrator Michele Leonhart, the rabidly anti-pot top cop in the DEA who said in 2010 she didn’t care about state medical marijuana laws, she was going to keep on arresting people, thankyouverymuch.

Polis was asking Leonhart yes-or-no questions about weed. And she repeatedly, and with much thought, refused to say that marijuana was less harmful than heroin. Or crack. Or meth. It’s a competition between Cheech and Chong and Requiem for a Dream, and the DEA is telling Congress they’re the same movie.

It’s a pain in the ass to transcribe things. Like, way more work than poor secretive Wonkette Jr. usually puts into these interblog things. But… man. This one’s a doozy, and you poor folks with “day jobs” and “bosses who care about you doing work” shouldn’t miss out because you can’t watch videos.

Polis: Is crack worse for a person than marijuana?

Leonhart: I believe all illegal drugs are bad.

Is methamphetamine worse for somebody’s health than marijuana?

I don’t think any illegal drug—

Is heroin worse for someone’s health than marijuana?

Again, all—

I mean either yes, no, or I don’t know. I mean, if you don’t know you can look this up. You should know this, as the chief administrator for the Drug Enforcement Agency. I’m asking you a very straightforward question: Is heroin worse for someone’s health than marijuana?

All illegal drugs are bad.

Does this mean you don’t know?

Heroin causes an addiction that causes many problems and is very hard to kick.

So does that mean that the health impact of heroin is worse than marijuana? Is that what you’re telling me?

I think you’re asking a subjective question.

No, it’s objective. Just looking at the science. This is your area of expertise. I’m a layperson but I’ve read some of the studies and am aware of it. I’m just asking you ask an expert in the subject area, is heroin worse for someone’s health than marijuana?

And I’m answering as a police officer and as a DEA agent that these drugs are illegal because they are dangerous, because they are addictive, because they do hurt a person’s health.

OK. So heroin is more addictive than marijuana? Is heroin more addictive than marijuana?

I think generally the properties of heroin, yes, it’s more addictive.

Is methamphetamine more addictive than marijuana?

Well, both are addictive.

Is methamphetamine more highly addictive than marijuana?

I think some people become addicted to marijuana and some people become addicted to methamphetamine.

You mentioned that your top priority, I believe you indicated to us, is abuse of prescription drugs. Is one of the main classifications of prescription drugs painkillers that you’re concerned about?

That’s correct.

And are those painkillers addictive?

Yes they are. Very addictive.

And are those painkillers more addictive than marijuana?

All illegal drugs are in Schedule I are addictive.

Well, again, this is a health-based question and I know you’re a, obviously you have a law-enforcement background, but I’m sure you’re also familiar, given your position, with the science of the matter. And I’m asking you know, again, clearly, your agency has established abuse of prescription drugs as the top priority — is that therefore an indication that prescription drugs are more addictive than marijuana?

All illegal drugs are addictive.

OK, your agency has established abuse of prescription drugs as its top priority, you’ve indicated as much to us. Does that mean that abuse of prescription drugs is a greater threat to the public health than marijuana?

Because it’s an emergent, an emerging threat, because people are turning to prescription drugs faster than any other drug, that is why we prioritize it.

In many states, including my home state of Colorado, we have a legalized and regulated regime of medical marijuana, and we have found some great degree of success in combating the abuse of prescription drugs by making sure the patients have access to medical marijuana, which the science indicates, and I would certainly encourage you to look at the science, is less addictive and less harmful to human health than some of the narcotic prescription drugs that are abused. And when they’re used on-label than can be very harmful to health as well.

Would your agency consider supporting medical marijuana provisions when that can be used to, in pursuit of your top priority, which is reducing abuse of prescription drugs. If it can be documented that use of medical marijuana helps reduce the abuse of prescription drugs, is that something you’re willing to pursue?

Well, Congress has determined that marijuana is a controlled substance, and DEA is tasked with enforcing federal law.

You mentioned priorities though, and you said top priority, reducing abuse of prescription drugs. One tactic to do that would be use of medical marijuana and I wanted to make sure that top priority, in pursuit of your top priority, are you willing to look at the use of medical marijuana as a way of reducing abuse of prescription drugs?

We will look at any options for reducing drug addiction.

Youtube Video of the Exchange: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFgrB2Wmh5s

[mr.brunch]

puppets! i dont know how the words dont stick in her throat!
human parrot

[supermanlives]

are you really suprised? you expect them to admit all the wrong they have done. aint ever happening till we get all these assholes out of power. the evil weed made me say this

[Tony Aroma]

She may be obtuse (or high), but that's besides the point. For a politician it's always better to appear (or actually be) stupid than to say something that directly contradicts one's boss, in this case the president.

Granted, it would have been better to have had a prepared BS answer ready for that question. But these drug warrior types are not used to being questioned about their drug war, or anything really. They're used to being in absolute control, no questions asked. Why do you think some one like Leonhart could be in such a position?

The Drug Czar is much better at spewing the party line, which is why he is supposed to be answering these questions, not someone from the DEA. No self-respecting drug warrior in their wildest imagination ever considered the possibility that the drug war would be questioned. Especially by Congress. If any of them have even half a brain, they'll be better prepared next time that question comes up.

[supermanlives]

they need to be hooked to lie detectors when answering questions. even then i wouldnt believe half the shit they spew out their damn smug ass mouths. fuck you we already know the answers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

politicians are the only ones who are on the clock when they are being "questioned" by congress

if it was one of us "little people" answering questions like that we would be sitting in that chair for as long as it took to burn us to the ground ......... but our "leaders" and their bitches either don't have to last more than 5 minutes OR they don't have to swear to tell the truth in the first place