‘Vote No on 2’ Campaign Releases Three Questions for Hillary Clinton

Back in 2014, when Hillary Clinton was asked about “medical” marijuana, she said:

“I don’t think we’ve done enough research yet.”

But as recently as July 2016, the Democratic presidential nominee was on Jimmy Kimmel Live saying,

“I think what the states are doing right now needs to be supported. I absolutely support all the states that are moving toward medical marijuana.”

Her recent change of tune is odd seeing as how the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) and the American Epilepsy Society (AES) are all still opposed to state medical marijuana programs because, according to them, there’s a lack of conclusive evidence (i.e. we still haven’t done enough research yet).

Not to mention the Obama Administration, which she supposedly also fully supports, very recently reaffirmed marijuana would remain a Schedule I Drug. They said: “This decision isn’t based on danger. This decision is based on whether marijuana, as determined by the FDA, is a safe and effective medicine,” he said, “and it’s not.”

Her newfound support of “medical” marijuana begs the question as to how Hillary Clinton could possibly be privy to scientific studies which are not only unknown to the AMA, AAP, AAFP and the AES, but which are also apparently unknown even to the White House. Is there a secret email she’s not telling us about?

Here are three questions the “Vote No on 2” campaign has for presidential nominee Hillary Clinton:

1. Hillary Clinton – Might your newfound support for “medical” marijuana have anything to do with the fact that John Morgan (a.k.a. Mr. Marijuana) is hosting his second presidential campaign fundraiser for you this evening?

2. Hillary Clinton – Do you really support a “medical” marijuana law that allows pretty much anyone to get their hands on would be permanently embedded into Florida’s constitution where it can’t be changed, limited or fixed?

The Florida Medical Association (FMA) unanimously passed a resolution in opposition to Amendment 2, stating: “There is nothing medical about this proposal.”

Orange County Sheriff, Jerry Demings, agreed “Though it’s being billed as about medical, we know it’s about recreation. It’s the wolf in sheep’s clothing.”

Finally, five former Florida Supreme Court Justices published a column in the Tampa Bay Times exposing Amendment 2’s gaping pot legalization loophole. The Justices agreed: “The result is an amendment that will open wide the door to marijuana use regardless of its need as a compassionate, alternative treatment option.” They go on to say: “If we enshrine Amendment 2 in the Florida Constitution, the people of Florida will forfeit their ability to legislatively improve the law and to address the inevitable unintended consequences.”

3.  Hillary Clinton – Do you really support a law that specifically authorizes and legalizes kid-friendly pot candy with no limits on levels of THC, and which would inevitably increase a child’s risk of unknowingly ingesting THC?

In medical marijuana states like California and Colorado, children are being rushed to the emergency room after unknowingly ingesting candy that looks just like the junk foods they know and love, but is actually infused with THC.

RELATED ARTICLE: Denver DA speaks out about Nevada’s proposed marijuana law

---