[quote=mdk]
Probably indirectly, but yes. Build awareness for a campaigning group, by which she directly profits both financially (more money), politically (more influence), and personally (more weed).Regardless of the specific motivations, it's absolutely a ploy. It can be noble, I'm okay with that; looser regulations, hey, you know I love that. The moral high-horse strongarm thing though..... not crazy about that. It's pure grandstanding and we shouldn't reward it, but we almost certainly will.
[/quote]
Well, the thing is that the DEA funds itself [i]entirely[/I] through licensing-fees of legal dealers (like the one being discussed) and due to the escalation of the war on drugs and stringent regulations, less companies are out there and the DEA's budget has grown several thousand fold each year solely to burn weeds. [i]Literal fucking weeds[/I].

Care to guess what that does to her company? And every other American-legal drug-company?