Tag Archives: obama

The Future of Renewable Fuel

by Posted on September 16, 2015

back

The Future of Renewable Fuel

Posted 16 September 2015 in

National

Biofuels industry leaders wrote a letter to President Obama urging him to support a strong Renewable Fuels Standard.

Dear Mr. President,

As leaders in the advanced and cellulosic biofuels industry, producers of the lowest carbon fuel in the world, we are writing to express our serious concerns about modifications your Administration is proposing to make to the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS).

As a general matter, we commend your commitment to addressing climate change, and look forward to continuing to work with you to create innovative solutions to reduce GHG emissions. We stand behind your recent declaration that Americans are innovators by nature, and your statement that “there should be no question that the United States of America is stepping up to the plate,” as we head into pivotal climate talks in Paris later this year.

However, our industry is also dealing with the reality that on May 29th your Administration re- proposed to insert a loophole into the RFS – a Clean Air Act (CAA) program that is the most aggressive U.S. climate policy enforced today – that would allow oil companies to avoid their obligations under the law.

As you know, the point of the RFS was to require oil companies to buy and sell an increasing amount of renewable fuel to address the fact that the oil industry would otherwise use its market position to cut off market access for competitors and thereby smother investment in cellulosic ethanol and advanced biofuels that have the lowest carbon footprint in the world. And yet, for the first time in RFS history, EPA is proposing to change the rules in the middle of the game to allow challenges related to the “distribution” of renewable fuel by oil companies – i.e. the oil industry’s refusal to buy and distribute low carbon, renewable fuel and its willingness to block brand-licensed gasoline retailers from selling higher renewable content blends under their branded canopy – to be cause for waiving the RFS on a year-to-year basis. Such a provision would gut the core concept behind the law.

From an investment perspective, billions of dollars of private capital flowed into U.S. biofuel projects – in the face of an historic global recession – largely because the RFS was seen as breaking the chokehold the oil industry has on fuel distribution and market access. RFS implementation was predicated on a market-based system of credits, much like the cap-and-trade plan you supported, and the most likely compliance mechanism for your Clean Power Plan. If portions of the oil industry choose not to purchase and use renewable fuel, they are required to purchase “Renewable Identification Numbers” (RINs) from market participants that did purchase and use renewable fuel in order to encourage good behavior and ensure fairness. As such, as RIN prices increase, so too does the economic incentive to blend more biofuels into the system. In essence, the policy rewards actors who do their part to meet the policy’s objective, and ensures that no one gets a free pass. This is how so many oil companies reported profits from selling RINs in recent years.

As acknowledged by EPA and former economic advisors to your Administration, this regulatory dynamic drives consumer choice at the pump with more American-made, renewable fuel without increasing average fuel prices. But EPA’s decision to change its waiver methodology, under pressure from the oil industry, upends the system and sends the market signal that the RFS volumes can be lowered if the oil industry simply drags its heels. The point of the RFS was to reward those who made the investments necessary to use more renewable fuel. Parts of the oil industry refused to do so starting in 2013, and now they’re being rewarded. No market-based system can survive if regulators are willing to overhaul the system to reward intransigence among obligated parties.

It is important to note that our industry has fought and won this battle once before. In 2005, Senator Inhofe and other oil industry champions tried to get “distribution waivers” included in the RFS from inception. Congress considered this path, but the language was struck from the bill in conference because Congressional champions for our industry knew that providing such waivers would result in the oil companies continuing to use their market position to stop the growth of biofuels.

Mr. President, the ramifications of your decision on this issue are substantial for America’s largest renewable energy sector. If the final rule includes distribution waivers, the global market signal will be that your Administration is backing away from its support of the most transformative U.S. energy and climate policy on the books today; and one that is widely regarded to be the best cellulosic and advanced biofuels policy in the world. While our companies will not fail to deploy advanced biofuels, we will continue to be forced to look overseas where renewable fuel policies are more stable.

The good news is, and notwithstanding claims to the contrary, the inclusion of distribution waivers is not necessary to put the RFS on a reasonable and stable path going forward. We would like to work with your Administration to forge a better path forward that is reasonable from an RFS implementation and motor fuel market perspective, protects U.S. investment in low carbon fuels, and ensures that the United States is true to its word going forward in Paris and beyond.

We hope to have your support on this important matter, and firmly believe that with your leadership we can get this critical innovation/climate program back on track.

View the signatures of all the leaders here.

Fuels America News & Stories

Fuels
Visit source:  

The Future of Renewable Fuel

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Future of Renewable Fuel

Here’s the Most Offensive GOP Response to Obama’s New Syrian Refugee Plan

by IgnacioZavala Posted on September 10, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

As my colleague Tim McDonnell reported earlier today, the Obama administration has announced that the United States will take in 10,000 Syrian refugees starting October 1, in what the White House described as a “significant scaling up” of the US commitment to the ongoing migrant crisis.

Cue the terrorism-conflating saber-rattling of one Congressman Peter King (R-N.Y.), who issued the following statement this afternoon:

There’s evidently much wrong with King’s statement, not least of all the fact that the Tsarnaev brothers who bombed Boston spent time growing up in the former Soviet republic of Kyrgyzstan, and were part of a family originally from war-torn Chechnya. Not Syria.

It also takes a long time for a Syrian refugee to apply for a coveted spot in the United States—precisely due to the fact that the United States is going to extraordinary lengths to prevent terrorists from slipping in, according to the Washington Post:

The United States has so far lagged far behind several European countries in this regard, largely due to the time-consuming screening procedure to block Islamist militants and criminals from entering the United States under the guise of being legitimate refugees.

As a result, it takes 18 to 24 months for the average Syrian asylum seeker to be investigated and granted refugee status. The process takes so long that the UNHCR takes biometric images of some applicants’ irises to ensure that when refugee status is eventually granted, it goes to the same person who applied.

King hasn’t been the only politician warning of an increased terror threat if the United States allows more Syrians into the country. But fellow Republican Marco Rubio struck a less incendiary tone this week. “We would be potentially open to the relocation of some of these individuals at some point in time to the United States,” he said, according to CNN, but added that, “We’d always be concerned that within the overwhelming number of the people seeking refugee status, someone with a terrorist background could also sneak in.”

According to an investigation by Mother Jones in 2011, Rep. King might possess one of the most hawkish voices in Washington, but his record on terror has raised some eyebrows. King was one of the nation’s most outspoken supporters of the Irish Republican Army and a prolific fundraiser for the Irish Northern Aid Committee (NorAid), allegedly the IRA’s American fundraising arm. (King’s office didn’t respond to a request for comment on that article.) You can read Tim Murphy’s fascinating report here.

King had previously told the Daily News, “Obviously, we have to take refugees… But we have to be extremely diligent, very careful.”

Link to article – 

Here’s the Most Offensive GOP Response to Obama’s New Syrian Refugee Plan

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, Mop, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here’s the Most Offensive GOP Response to Obama’s New Syrian Refugee Plan

There Is a "Truck Line" Tearing America Apart

by PollyGraf09 Posted on September 6, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

A few minutes ago, President Obama’s former “car czar” Steven Rattner tweeted the map below. Marcy Wheeler tweaks him for calling Hondas and Toyotas “imports” even though most of them are made in the US. I’d tweak him for saying the map shows the best-selling “cars” in each state, since it also includes trucks. Trucks aren’t cars.

But that’s enough tweaking. I’m willing to cut people a lot of slack on Twitter. Here’s what I’m curious about. You’ve no doubt heard of the famous “soda line” in America: in New England and the West, most of us call fizzy sweetened drinks soda. In the South, it’s coke. Up north, from Washington to the Ohio Valley, it’s pop.

Apparently we also have a truck line in America. In the Midwest and mountain states, people buy Ford F-series trucks. In the Great Lakes region, the Chevy Silverado reigns supreme. Out West, we seem to prefer Dodge Rams.

What’s up with that? Is this just a weird coincidence? Or is there some genuine historical reason that different trucks are popular in different regions?

More here:  

There Is a "Truck Line" Tearing America Apart

Posted in Citizen, FF, GE, LG, Mop, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on There Is a "Truck Line" Tearing America Apart

A Republican’s Guide to Gotcha Questions

by Danny81R8157 Posted on September 5, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Are “gotcha” questions unfair? It depends. I’m personally averse to Jeopardy-style factual quizzes, but not because it’s out of line to probe presidential candidates about what they know. Rather, it’s the form of the question itself. It treats presidential candidates like schoolchildren being quizzed in front of the class. It’s inherently demeaning for any self-respecting adult—and for politicians too.

That said, there are gotchas and there are gotchas, and some are worse than others. Here’s a taxonomy:

SEVERE: “Can you name the president of Chechnya? The president of Taiwan? The general who is in charge of Pakistan? The prime minister of India?” Only an asshole asks questions like this.

Recommended answer: “Oh, go fuck yourself.”

HIGH: “Have you ever used cocaine?” This is moderately nasty, but there are dangers to a straightforward refusal to respond. Humor is worth a try.

Recommended answer: “Once, but only accidentally when I picked up a friend at Mena airport in the 90s and left the car door open.”

ELEVATED: “Do you know the difference between a Sunni and a Shiite?” This is a double-edged sword. Answer it properly and you sound like you actually know something about Islam. Waffle and you sound stupid. Your best bet is to turn it into an attack.

Recommended answer: “ISIS terrorists are Sunni. President Obama is a Shiite. That’s why he hates those guys so much. It all goes back to the seventh-century, when Obama’s 18th cousin 43 times removed insisted that someone from Mohammad’s family should take up the leadership of the Muslim Ummah.”

GUARDED: “What’s your favorite Bible verse?” This is basically a hanging curve. If you ever went to Sunday School, you shouldn’t have any trouble hitting it out of the park.

Recommended answer: “Eye for eye, tooth for tooth. I try to live up to this every single day. There will be no appeasement of America’s enemies on my watch.”

LOW: “What newspapers and magazines do you regularly read?” This is pretty much the opposite of a gotcha. It’s the human interest version of “hello,” a way of easing into an interview with a friendly little softball.

Recommended answer: “All the usual suspects. The Times, the Post, Human Events, and the Journal of Econometrics. Did you see their paper last month critiquing the Fed’s easy money policies by applying a Tobit regression to a fixed-effects nonparametric model with time-aggregated panel data? It was killer.”

Link:  

A Republican’s Guide to Gotcha Questions

Posted in Citizen, FF, GE, LG, Mop, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on A Republican’s Guide to Gotcha Questions

Coal Companies Are Dying While Their Execs Grab More Cash

by Myrna Posted on September 2, 2015

The industry is collapsing, but its corporate bigwigs are doing just fine. VGstockstudio/Shutterstock These are dark days for coal. In July, the industry hit a milestone when a major power company announced plans to shutter several coal-fired power plants in Iowa: More than 200 coal plants have been scheduled for closure since 2010, meaning nearly one-fifth of the US coal fleet is headed for retirement. President Barack Obama’s recently completed climate plan, which sets limits on carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, is designed to keep this trend going over the next decade. But the industry was in deep trouble even before Obama’s crackdown, thanks to the rock-bottom price of natural gas made possible by America’s fracking boom. In case the shutdown of hundreds of coal plants wasn’t a sufficient indicator of the industry collapse, here’s another clue: coal companies’ rapidly deteriorating bottom lines. A study this spring from the Carbon Tracker Institute found that over the past five years, coal producers have closed nearly 300 mines and lost 76 percent of their value. In August, Alpha Natural Resources, the country’s second-largest coal company, filed for bankruptcy, making it the biggest domino to fall in a string of more than two dozen corporate collapses during the past couple of years. On Monday, one of the company’s top executives resigned. Meanwhile, shares of Peabody Energy, the world’s biggest coal company, hit their lowest price ever, dipping below $1. A year ago, Peabody’s share price was hovering above $15; it peaked at $72 back in 2011. The stock plunge at Arch Coal was even more extreme—it fell from $3,600 to under $2 between 2011 and August 2015. (It has since rebounded slightly.) This year, both companies have been among the worst performers in the S&P 500. You might think that the leaders of coal companies would be made to pay the price for these failures. But in the perverse world of American corporate compensation, they are, in fact, getting a raise. According to a report today from the Institute for Policy Studies, which bills itself as the country’s oldest progressive think tank, executive salaries and bonuses at the top 10 publicly traded coal companies increased an average of 8 percent between 2010 and 2014, even as the companies’ combined share price fell 58 percent. Meanwhile, the same executives cashed in well over $100 million in stock options, according to the report, which analyzed the companies’ public filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. In other words, coal execs are cashing in while their companies tank. “That [stock-based] part of their compensation package is not so valuable right now, so the value of their cash-based pay has been going up,” said Sarah Anderson, the report’s author. “We’re seeing this move to insulate them from the implosion of the coal sector by handing out more cash.” The chart below, from the report, shows how cash compensation started to rise just as the share prices took their second dive in five years: At Peabody, for example, CEO Greg Boyce cashed in $26 million in stock before the price collapse that began in 2011. At Arch Coal, cash compensation for the company’s top five executives grew 94 percent between 2010 and 2014, to an average of $2.3 million. Arch, Alpha, and Peabody did not return requests for comment. To be clear, there’s no evidence of anything criminal happening here. But you can include this trend in the pantheon of corporate executives getting rewarded for their companies’ bad performance. Even the world’s best CEO probably wouldn’t be able to save these corporations—the fact is, the American coal market is disappearing and isn’t coming back. But, Anderson argues, if these execs were truly interested in fixing their business models, they could have invested in alternative forms of energy, such as gas or renewables. “The smart thing,” according to Anderson, “would have been to diversify their portfolio so they wouldn’t be so vulnerable.” See original article:  Coal Companies Are Dying While Their Execs Grab More Cash ; ; ;

Visit site:

Coal Companies Are Dying While Their Execs Grab More Cash

Posted in ALPHA, eco-friendly, FF, For Dummies, G & F, GE, Monterey, ONA, OXO, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Coal Companies Are Dying While Their Execs Grab More Cash

Inside the Most Expensive Nuclear Bomb Ever Made

by KelleyGresswell Posted on August 30, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Engineers at the United States’ nuclear weapons lab in Albuquerque, New Mexico, have spent the past few years designing and testing the B61-12, a high-tech addition to our nation’s atomic arsenal. Unlike the free-fall gravity bombs it will replace, the B61-12 is a guided nuclear bomb. A new tail kit assembly, made by Boeing, enables the bomb to hit targets far more precisely than its predecessors.

Greg Maxon

Using “Dial-a-yield” technology, the bomb’s explosive force can be adjusted before launch from a high of 50,000 tons of TNT equivalent to a low of 300 tons—that’s 98 percent smaller than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima 70 years ago.

Despite these innovations, the government doesn’t consider the B61-12 to be a new weapon but simply an upgrade. In the past, Congress has rejected funding for similar weapons, reasoning that more accurate, less powerful bombs were more likely to be used. In 2010, the Obama administration announced that it would not make any nuclear weapons with new capabilities. The White House and Pentagon insist that the B61-12 won’t violate that pledge.

The B61-12 could be deployed by the new generation of F-35 fighter jets, a prospect that worries Hans Kristensen, a nuclear weapons expert at the Federation of American Scientists. “If the Russians put out a guided nuclear bomb on a stealthy fighter that could sneak through air defenses, would that add to the perception here that they were lowering the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons?” he asks. “Absolutely.”

So far, most of the criticism of B61-12 has focused on its price tag. Once full production commences in 2020, the program will cost more than $11 billion for about 400 to 480 bombs—more than double the original estimate, making it the most expensive nuclear bomb ever built.

This story comes from our friends at Reveal. Read more of their coverage of the B61-12 and national security.

Originally posted here:

Inside the Most Expensive Nuclear Bomb Ever Made

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Inside the Most Expensive Nuclear Bomb Ever Made

After Hurricane Katrina, Poor Black Women Were Largely Ignored, Study Says

by Myrna Posted on August 28, 2015

Ten years later, some women say they feel like they were better off before the storm. Protesters block demolition equipment from entering a portion of the B.W. Cooper public housing complex in New Orleans in December 2007. Alex Brandon/AP Ten years after Hurricane Katrina displaced 40,000 people in New Orleans, opinions about the recovery can be traced along racial lines. A pair of new studies underscores that African American women, particularly those who lived in public housing, faced some of the biggest hurdles after the storm. Nearly four in five white residents in New Orleans say their state has “mostly recovered,” while nearly three in five African American residents say it has not, according to survey results released Monday by the Louisiana-based Public Policy Research Lab. More than half of all residents, regardless of race, said the government did not listen to them enough during the recovery, but African American women struggled more than any other group to return to their homes in the months and years after the hurricane, PPRL noted. On Tuesday, a study by the Washington-based Institute for Women’s Policy Research found that recovery policies in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina largely ignored the needs of African American women who lived in four of the city’s largest public housing complexes. These women were forced to move into more expensive housing, and some had to relocate to areas where they faced racial intimidation. Read the rest at Mother Jones. View article:  After Hurricane Katrina, Poor Black Women Were Largely Ignored, Study Says ; ; ;

Visit site:  

After Hurricane Katrina, Poor Black Women Were Largely Ignored, Study Says

Posted in alo, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, Monterey, ONA, OXO, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on After Hurricane Katrina, Poor Black Women Were Largely Ignored, Study Says

Watch Ted Cruz Turn a Simple Immigration Question Into an Attack on Obama and the Mainstream Media

by CaridadC21 Posted on August 26, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Megyn Kelly tried to nail down Ted Cruz last night on a simple question: If a pair of illegal immigrants have two children who were born in the United States and citizens, would he deport the citizen children?

Cruz did not answer the question, but instead launched into an explanation of how he thinks the immigration system should be changed, starting with finding areas of bipartisan agreement such as securing the border, and then streamlining legal immigration.

“But that doesn’t sound like an answer,” Kelly said….”You’ve outlined your plan, but . . . you’re dodging my question. You don’t want to answer that question?” Kelly asked.

….”Megyn, I get that’s the question you want to ask. That’s also the question every mainstream media journalist wants to ask,” Cruz said.

“Is it unfair?” Kelly asked. “It’s a distraction from how we actually solve the problem. You know it’s also the question Barack Obama wants to focus on,” Cruz said.

“But why is it so hard?” Kelly asked. “Why don’t you just say yes or no?”

This is Ted Cruz showing off his debating skills. His supporters hate the mainstream media and they hate President Obama, so Cruz adroitly turns this into a show of defiance against both. “I’m not playing that game,” he insists, the courage practically oozing out of his pores.

Nice job, senator!

Credit – 

Watch Ted Cruz Turn a Simple Immigration Question Into an Attack on Obama and the Mainstream Media

Posted in Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Watch Ted Cruz Turn a Simple Immigration Question Into an Attack on Obama and the Mainstream Media

It’s Now Open Season on China

by GitaOov11667597 Posted on August 24, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In the midst of Trumpmania, it’s good to see that some things never change. Here is Scott Walker today:

Americans are struggling to cope with the fall in today’s markets driven in part by China’s slowing economy and the fact that they actively manipulate their economy….massive cyberattacks….militarization of the South China Sea….economy….persecution of Christians….There’s serious work to be done rather than pomp and circumstance. We need to see some backbone from President Obama on U.S.-China relations.

China bashing is the little black dress of presidential campaigns: always appropriate, always in style.

Of course, Donald “China is killing us!” Trump got there before Walker. And more than that: he not only bashed China, but was able to claim that he’d been warning of this all along. If only we’d sent Carl Icahn over there from the start, things would be OK today.

Read the article – 

It’s Now Open Season on China

Posted in alo, Cyber, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on It’s Now Open Season on China

The Head of a Major Law Enforcement Group Described Nonviolent Drug Offenders As "Peddlers of Death"

by PiperThornton Posted on August 22, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Last month, President Barack Obama commuted the sentences of 46 nonviolent drug offenders detained in federal prisons. Given that 35,000 nonviolent inmates had applied for reduced sentences, some activists said the clemency grant did not go far enough. Apparently, not everyone agrees.

In an opinion piece Thursday, Jon Adler, the president of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association (FLEOA), blasted Obama’s decision by describing these nonviolent offenders as “peddlers of death.” Arguing that Obama ignored the risks of drug traffickers and instead chose to “perpetuate a narrative that these felons are harmless hippies,” Adler went so far as to compare the offenders to lions in an overcrowded zoo:

With limited space, rising labor, and lodging costs, which animals would the president let go? Using the president’s methodology, the lions would likely be set free. Why? They eat the most food and therefore cost the most to maintain. During the 10 years of their captivity, they haven’t eaten anyone or attacked their handlers. They have no known affiliation to any violent lion groups. They are totally safe to release into the public. The president’s rationale for release of these federal prisoners does not benefit the American public, nor keep it safe.

Adler’s FLEOA provides testimony at congressional hearings and represents more than 25,000 federal law enforcement officers from some 65 agencies. But his description of nonviolent drug offenders seems unfair for people like Antonio Bascaro, an octogenarian grandfather in a wheelchair who has been incarcerated for 35 years because he worked on a fishing boat used by Cubans to smuggle cannabis to Florida. Or what about John Knock, a first-time offender serving life in prison for conspiracy to traffic large quantities of weed that the government never even seized? (Neither man was granted clemency.)

In an investigation of weed lifers, my colleague Bryan Schatz writes:

Every year, more people are arrested for pot possession than violent crimes. Around 40,000 people are currently serving time for offenses involving a drug that has been decriminalized or legalized in 27 states and Washington, DC. Even as Americans’ attitudes toward pot have mellowed, the law has yet to catch up, leaving pot offenders subject to draconian sentences born out of the war on drugs. As David Holland, a criminal-defense attorney in New York City who filed a presidential clemency petition for marijuana lifers in 2012, puts it: “The world has changed, but these poor bastards are still sitting in jail.”

It’s important to note that the war on drugs has disproportionately affected black and Latino men. And Obama’s clemency last month went to a group of nonviolent inmates who had served more than 10 years in prison with good behavior, and who would not have received such severe sentences under today’s sentencing rules. “These men and women were not hardened criminals,” the president said, adding that 14 of the 46 nonviolent offenders had been given life sentences. “So their punishments didn’t fit the crime.”

See the original article here – 

The Head of a Major Law Enforcement Group Described Nonviolent Drug Offenders As "Peddlers of Death"

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, Everyone, FF, GE, Green Light, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, The Atlantic, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Head of a Major Law Enforcement Group Described Nonviolent Drug Offenders As "Peddlers of Death"