It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


DEA is Investigating Montana State Legislators Over State Laws

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 02:33 PM
But to the feds a roach clip IS trying to overthrow the government so under their demented system she is a terrorist. Mostly this is just meant to scare people through psychology where force would be impossible.

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 04:17 PM

Originally posted by AutOmatIc
Why doesn't the DEA do it's friggin job and bust all the drug dealers in all the ghetto neighborhoods everywhere instead???? I mean, you can literally walk just about anywhere, in any neighborhood in the USA and get whatever you want...crack, coc aine, weed, pills, name's not hard to find that crap at all. And drug dealers are everywhere...and it's rampant. I'd be willing to bet that everyone you know is on or illegal.

So where are the busts? There's crackheads and prostitutes everywhere! :p

I hope this is satire?Are you saying the DEA should ramp up the WAR ON DRUGS but as long as it's in black neighbourhoods not white populated states?I think the problem is the DEA and the WAR ON DRUGS not the where it's fought.

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 04:42 PM
Please be careful with what we are discussing. I could go on for hours about why something is illegal, but it would be against the T&C. Plus, we're discussing the DEA's intimidation here.
What I will say is I'm quite sure there is money behind this as the driving force. BigPharma, or some other constituants. Then again, an earlier poster could have well been correct about a Senator recall vote over their vote to detain Americans.

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 05:01 PM

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
IMO, the DEA is UnConstitutional. Can anyone tell me what part of the Constitution grants them their power?

The DEA is part of the executive branch of the constitution. The President is the head of the executive branch, but basically Congress has to fund them. They were created in 1973 by President Nixon in conjunction with Congress in an arrangement that consolidated several other agencies. DEA history wiki link

Basically created and ultimately answer to the President, but, since they are funded by congress that's usually who they answer to. Money talks......

edit on 1-2-2012 by webpirate because: spelling

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 05:40 PM
this whole "war on drugs" thing (of which this investigation certainly is a part of) stinks to high heaven of money greasing the wheels. although the question remains, is it really corporations that are greasing the wheels? Or, maybe its an alphabet agency within the government that has a hardy steak in keeping certain substances illegal?

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 06:00 PM

Originally posted by chiefsmom
Well, I hate to tell you, but it will be illegal in your state again soon.
We just went though this in Michigan. It no longer matters what the people want, or vote for. The Feds come in and tell you what is going to be. Just proved to me yet again that your vote does not count.

Exaclty, i'm here with ya in Mich...It does not matter what WE the people want. We may vote a law into being a law, but they will step al lover it any chance they get.

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 06:25 PM
its time the dea be taken to court and dismantled for their treason and crimes against the United States Of AMERICA!

when the states decide, that is final!!! the fed is supposed to respect that, this rogue group in our nation is a threat to us all!

they are the REAL criminals and MUST be stopped

this is nothing more then a mafia style hit for someone encroaching on their business and they MUST be stopped

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 06:55 PM
The Montana state Sheriff needs to step in and kick the Feds out of the state. Wyoming seems to have a handle on things:

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 07:09 PM
This may be a little off topic, but people need to know. The date of the Montana Primary is June 5, 2012.

See this link, and do a ctrl+f and type in Montana:

Primary Schedule 2012

I think we know which candidate wants to defend true justice, liberty, and freedom for all. Anybody from Montana needs to register to vote this year, and choose carefully.

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 07:24 PM
reply to post by ARandomAfflictionOfSense

Um, no it was not satire, it's the truth. And no, I wasn't just saying "hey go after black neighborhoods" at all. It was in no way intended to be stereotyping whatsoever. Which is why I said "ANY neighborhood in America". Because it is true. The "War on Drugs" is indeed a total failure, which was my point, because you CAN go into any neighborhood and find drugs wherever you want, they are everywhere. It's not hard to find drug dealers anywhere, so why does the DEA not go after them, heck, I could walk outside and point them out if need be

But it is sad that drugs are as rampant and available everywhere and anywhere as they are. All the DEA has to do is step outside...

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 07:35 PM
What has your State Attorney General said about this development? Has he given any clue as to his thoughts on the situation? He is the first line of defense for Montana's rights as a State.

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 02:18 AM
The DEA seems to be worried about their profits and the idea of increased competition can't have that now, can we? as for threatening Sate Reps that's just outrageous.Y'all need to get your attorney general involved in this.

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 03:06 AM
reply to post by webpirate

I hate to be the one to point out the fallacy in your topic post: McCarthy was more or less right(something leftist's love to ignore). Over 1/3rd of the People he accused of being Communist spies where in fact communist spies.

I believe you owe McCarthy's descendants an apology.

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 03:18 AM
I have been wondering for some time now how the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Crime Act (RICO) would apply to federal agencies such as the DEA.

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, commonly referred to as the RICO Act or simply RICO, is a United States federal law that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization. The RICO Act focuses specifically on racketeering, and it allows for the leaders of a syndicate to be tried for the crimes which they ordered others to do or assisted them, closing a perceived loophole that allowed someone who told a man to, for example, murder, to be exempt from the trial because they did not actually do it.

The Drug Enforcement Agency, one of many who fairly qualify for prosecution under RICO, has a long record of criminal abuse, consider just one example:

On August 6, the U.S. House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, chaired by Rep. Bill McCollum (R-FL), held a hearing on "drug diversion investigations by the DEA," in which witnesses testified about abuses by the DEA (Bill McCollum, "Crime Subcommittee Hearing on Drug Diversion Investigations by the DEA," Press Release, August 6, 1998). Late in 1997, with no prior warning, two dozen pharmacists in the Wichita Falls, Texas area received letters from the US Attorney demanding up to $400,000 in civil fines for alleged record keeping violations which involved no diversion of controlled substances (Michael Slozak, "Texas Pharmacists Fight DEA Nightmare," American Druggist, March 1998, p. 15).

I don't know if it could work, but there sure seems to be some poetic justice to the idea of states using RICO to file suit against rogue administrative agencies with no Constitutional mandate, acting like any other criminal gang or mob does.

edit on 2-2-2012 by Jean Paul Zodeaux because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 05:46 AM
I tried to post a similar discussion about Michigan laws awhile back and it got busted just like that. I decided I would just be a lurker after that, but seeing how this post got through the screening, I thought I'd contribute.

IMO Some of the ATS animals are more equal than the others here on the ATS Animal Farm.

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 06:24 AM
The government hates competition they need to protect thier markets....

It's too bad the people in this country and in the great state of Montana are largely ignorant of thier history and the law on what authorities are granted the federal government. The simple fact is the DEA along with all alphabet agencies has no jurisdiction on the states and all a state need do is throw them out via thier county Sheriff and problem solved.

Unfortunately most county Sheriffs and local Police enable these goons to continue to carry out their harassment and extortion of the people due to federal grant money they all get. So basically the federal government has bought off local police and Sheriffs to allow them to continue to plunder the people. The sad part is most people think that is the way things should be.

edit on 2-2-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 12:49 PM

Originally posted by korathin
reply to post by webpirate

I hate to be the one to point out the fallacy in your topic post: McCarthy was more or less right(something leftist's love to ignore). Over 1/3rd of the People he accused of being Communist spies where in fact communist spies.

I believe you owe McCarthy's descendants an apology.

There is a fallacy in you're belief my argument contains a fallacy. Wait...that came out all wrong.

First off, that wasn't my initial comparison. It was Representative Sands.

If you look long and hard enough, of course you're gonna find what you're looking for. How many innocent people did Joe McCarthy trample upon and ruin the reputations of just to find the evil communists he actually found? Besides...what he initially found weren't just communists lurking in the shadows, but were treasonous associates or citizens of the US immediately after WWII ended. Yet he kept looking.

It wasn't his looking for them so much as his method of looking. He violated civil liberties, he violated protections afforded to Americans by the Constitution itself...that same one which he claimed he was upholding.

Now...if you wanna use the argument that the ends justified the means, well...that actually would have made him as bad as the evil Soviet Empire itself. They were also able to silence the infidels and critics who were against Stalin, Khrushchev, and Mother Russia herself.

No...Ole Joe was as bad as what he was claiming to be fighting against. In reality..mostly what he did, was silence his political opponents. If you criticized him, surely you yourself were also a communist.

Let's end this by going one step further. Are you for or against the Guantanamo Bay "prison?" I would venture to guess that at least 1/3rd of the residents there who have never had a trial or even had the opportunity to face their accusers, are indeed, actually al-Qaeda, or the evil Muslim extremists they are proclaimed to be. The rest, are probably not. But we may never actually know, since they will never get their day in court. They will never have a trial.

Now...Representative Sands is claiming that the US Federal Government and it's agencies are doing the same type of thing to the lawmakers of the states, and possibly the government itself, just because they speak their mind or vote a certain way.

McCarthy used a type of profiling to find his communists. I'd argue that most least 2/3rd's in Git Mo are there not because they ever did anything wrong, but because of racial or religious profiling. Now....the DEA seems to be profiling certain political figures it disagrees with. I seriously doubt it actually comes from the DEA though....they are just the tool being used to accomplish the feat of intimidation.

If I were allowed to run roughshod over the American people too, I bet I could find a few bad guys myself. But ya know what? I honestly don't care who you are, or what you're looking for. Trampling civil rights or political intimidation is wrong.

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 02:44 PM
reply to post by korathin

so umm what about the other 2/3rds do them getting falsely labled as communist sympathizers and getting screwed with by the government justifies the fact that you caught some of them? those arent good odds for the people being labled sorry if this is off topic.....

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 03:25 PM
reply to post by KilrathiLG

That was my point too, and I don't think it;s off topic. Rep Sands is who brought up the initial comparison, and the other poster said Joey Mac was right at least 1/3rd of the time! But you're right. What about the rest? They were ruined for life, blacklisted and often became outcasts. Just because they were investigated.

Rep Sands was saying this is like that was. And now, her name is being smeared by the DEA as a potential criminal associated with conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance. We all know those charges will never stick, but....if this was a retaliation for the Senator recall vote as proposed earlier in this thread..which I don't think actually happened, at least yet, then it's retribution. Either way, yeah...she is getting smeared because she opened her mouth, and voted a certain way.

Sounds more like some of those other countries we don't get along least on the record. because they do the same thing there.

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 06:37 PM
reply to post by webpirate

The DEA is part of the executive branch of the constitution.

Could you show me Constitutional Law that says the POTUS gets his own drug police force? I don't recall seeing that.

new topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in