Banks can now do business with the Weed business

C

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
(CNN) -- The U.S. government issued rules on Friday for the first time allowing banks to legally provide financial services to state-licensed marijuana businesses.
The Justice Department issued a memorandum to prosecutors that closely follows guidance last August largely limiting federal enforcement priorities to eight types of crimes.
These include distribution to children, trafficking by cartels and trafficking to states where marijuana isn't legal. If pot businesses aren't violating federal law in the eight specific priorities, then banks can do business with them and "may not" be prosecuted.
The Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued guidelines that Director Jennifer Shasky Calvery said was intended to signal that "it is possible to provide financial services" to state-licensed marijuana businesses and still be in compliance with federal anti-money laundering laws.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/14/politics/u-s-marijuana-banks/index.html?hpt=po_c2
 
squarepush3r

squarepush3r

Well-Known Member
Hard really to trust the Fed's on a "memo" which mean they can change their opinion at any time they feel they want to.
 
TheMystified420

TheMystified420

Well-Known Member
I'm so mixed on this one. On one hand, I think the more people like banks/businesses that start dealing with this industry, the harder it will be to reverse all the progress that has been made. But on the other hand, without them actually changing the laws the feds could still decide to enforce them at any time. I'm just so impatient, I wish they would just change the laws already, lol.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
ChesusRice said:
Better than nothing. Do you agree?
Click to expand...

When they pay reparations to all the living people that were jailed, had homes stolen, kids stolen and dogs shot etc. they'll be heading in the right direction. Until then it's all about control.

It's pretty obvious many states and possibly the FEDERAL assholes will soon grant limited permission to own yourself and then they'll be cashing in via taxation and banker theft and let the enforcer dickwads capture people that color outside the lines with an extra plant or two.

As long as there is a system of control, they will cash in. They are just flipping the pancake and will make money whether things are like you want them, prohibited, or if people are allowed to kinda sorta own themselves with a permission slip from the nanny state. So yeah, fuck them. Anybody with money in a bank is asking for it to be stolen.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
TheMystified420 said:
But I do agree, it is better than nothing. Hopefully it's a way to help get marijuana accepted in society.
Click to expand...

Marijuana IS accepted by many people. Those that don't want to use it are free not to. Those that have prevented or advocate forcefully preventing people from using it have always been the problem. The prohibitionists, in a just world, would restitute those they stole from. Theft is theft, and legal thievery is still thievery.

A system that allows one group of people to dictate what another will do, does not stand for freedom. Politicians do not care about freedom, they care about control and have figured out by jumping on the "legalization" band wagon they will get to stay in charge. Thieves and freedom robbers. Fuck them.
 
Canna Sylvan

Canna Sylvan

Well-Known Member
Rob, what about smell? How is it freedom when you're polluting their property with combusted cannabinoids they didn't ask for? Marijuana stinks, while I now like the smell as a user, over 94% who aren't regular users don't. How would you like it if Buck dumped his kitty litter next to your fence rather than marinating his bud with it?
 
desert dude

desert dude

Well-Known Member
ChesusRice said:
(CNN) -- The U.S. government issued rules on Friday for the first time allowing banks to legally provide financial services to state-licensed marijuana businesses.
The Justice Department issued a memorandum to prosecutors that closely follows guidance last August largely limiting federal enforcement priorities to eight types of crimes.
These include distribution to children, trafficking by cartels and trafficking to states where marijuana isn't legal. If pot businesses aren't violating federal law in the eight specific priorities, then banks can do business with them and "may not" be prosecuted.
The Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued guidelines that Director Jennifer Shasky Calvery said was intended to signal that "it is possible to provide financial services" to state-licensed marijuana businesses and still be in compliance with federal anti-money laundering laws.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/14/politics/u-s-marijuana-banks/index.html?hpt=po_c2
Click to expand...
I doubt banks are going to play along with this until it is codified into law. Simply too much risk for them to take.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Canna Sylvan said:
Rob, what about smell? How is it freedom when you're polluting their property with combusted cannabinoids they didn't ask for? Marijuana stinks, while I now like the smell as a user, over 94% who aren't regular users don't. How would you like it if Buck dumped his kitty litter next to your fence rather than marinating his bud with it?
Click to expand...
Demonstrable harms can be and should be addressed, mediated, restituted or peacefully compromised.

Anybody professing to believe in Jesus that whines about pot smoke though is missing out. Jesus was a head. I mean the hair, the sandals, the peace and love shit...it's obvious.

Sula Benet, a Polish anthropologist did a good bit of work on the idea that the ancients were a bunch of tincture making, oil rubbing, smoke inhaling partiers.

Where I live is too wild for Buck, the tigers would eat him, his ax just won't cut it.


 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
ChesusRice said:
If the FEDs went back on their word and prosecuted the banks. You would never find a jury willing to convict
Click to expand...

Juries convicted thousands of pot users out of a reverence for obedience instilled in them by the Prussian model of schoolng prevalent in the USA. Many JURORS will do as they are told and obey. The FEDS purpose is to say. Yours and your brethren is to obey.
 
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
When they pay reparations to all the living people that were jailed, had homes stolen, kids stolen and dogs shot etc. they'll be heading in the right direction. Until then it's all about control.

It's pretty obvious many states and possibly the FEDERAL assholes will soon grant limited permission to own yourself and then they'll be cashing in via taxation and banker theft and let the enforcer dickwads capture people that color outside the lines with an extra plant or two.

As long as there is a system of control, they will cash in. They are just flipping the pancake and will make money whether things are like you want them, prohibited, or if people are allowed to kinda sorta own themselves with a permission slip from the nanny state. So yeah, fuck them. Anybody with money in a bank is asking for it to be stolen.
Click to expand...
so you do agree with me?
 
desert dude

desert dude

Well-Known Member
ChesusRice said:
If the FEDs went back on their word and prosecuted the banks. You would never find a jury willing to convict
Click to expand...
You cannot be this naive. You know as well as I that any jury would never be allowed to even hear that the feds ever said a word about allowing the banks to ignore the money laundering laws, which is what this fed "promise" implies. The prosecutor would insist that it is irrelevant and the judge would agree. That is exactly how federal prosecutors send people to federal prison in states with "state legal" marijuana laws, e.g. the guy in Montana who was just convicted despite being fully compliant with Montana law.

The best that could be hoped for by a bank's officers being prosecuted for money laundering is that one of the jury members is aware of the "promise" by the feds to allow money laundering, and that jury member would nullify the prosecution despite "never hearing that piece of evidence". Given the hatred of Korporations expressed by lefties such as yourself, I am sure that you guys would be chomping at the bit to send a bunch of "Koch suckers" (evil bankers) to jail given the chance, and most righties would be delighted to send a bunch of "money-laundering, drug cartel supporting, dirt bags" to jail.

Any officer of a bank that engages in money laundering of drug profits based on a flimsy promise from DOJ will be properly shit canned by the bank's board of directors. To put at risk of forfeiture the entire bank's holdings, and to put at risk of arrest for federal felonies of the bank's officers and board of directors, is not going to happen at any bank where an ounce of brains exists.

Let me make a prediction right here: some bank is going to fall for this flimsy promise and engage in "money laundering" and the feds are going to prosecute them for money laundering, just like the promise to not prosecute cannabis dealers who are compliant with state laws was broken.
 
desert dude

desert dude

Well-Known Member
The Colorado Bankers Association seems to agree with my assessment of the DOJ's permission to launder money...



http://cloudfront-assets.reason.com/assets/db/13926500993160.pdf

In a press release issued on Friday, Don Childears, president of the Colorado Bankers Association (CBA), does not sound grateful for the new guidance:
After a series of red lights, we expected this guidance to be a yellow one. This isn't close to that. At best, this amounts to "serve these customers at your own risk," and it emphasizes all of the risks. This light is red.



​
 
Canna Sylvan

Canna Sylvan

Well-Known Member
desert dude said:
The Colorado Bankers Association seems to agree with my assessment of the DOJ's permission to launder money...



http://cloudfront-assets.reason.com/assets/db/13926500993160.pdf

In a press release issued on Friday, Don Childears, president of the Colorado Bankers Association (CBA), does not sound grateful for the new guidance:
After a series of red lights, we expected this guidance to be a yellow one. This isn't close to that. At best, this amounts to "serve these customers at your own risk," and it emphasizes all of the risks. This light is red.



​
Click to expand...
When Brazil was in our situation, their final step was confiscating savings accounts called, Plano Collor. That was before abandoning their previous currency.
 
desert dude

desert dude

Well-Known Member
Trust us, it's safe to accept deposits from drug dealers and launder their money... LOL


"Nothing herein precludes investigation or prosecution, even in the absence of any one of the factors listed above, in particular circumstances where investigation and prosecution otherwise serves an important federal interest."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top