Submitted by gyokuro t3_10quqor in Connecticut
AhbabaOooMaoMao t1_j6rwwqa wrote
Just one more thing to derussify.
gyokuro OP t1_j6s3cae wrote
This will be a litmus test for whether Lamont cares more about the performative theatrics or the money. Democrats are allergic to Russia.
AhbabaOooMaoMao t1_j6s9pa9 wrote
Lamont doesn't really have anything to do with this. This is a tiny office inside Department of Consumer Protection.
Not sure what the penalty is for failing to disclose a loan. Probably a small fine.
youmustbeanexpert t1_j6t5dhg wrote
Lamont is who legalized you think they didn't have meetings with these people before he was in office? The Jim beam kid already is being investigated in other states for bribery.
gyokuro OP t1_j6sa111 wrote
DCP's primary interest in cannabis is protecting the revenue stream and therefore protecting the incumbent 4 licensed producers. Think about why only one oversight action has occurred during their entire decade-plus tenure as regulator. And that only happened because one of the lab directors accidentally told on himself.
Connecticut Dems sure do love their identity politics and theater, though. It's gonna be a tough choice for them!
Glasscubething t1_j6sxiv1 wrote
You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the DCP is. Only one oversight action in a decade? I think you’re being overly conspiratorial on this in general.
For example.
> Through its Legal Division, the Department enhanced enforcement of consumer protection laws by effectively resolving issues of concern with persons and establishments it regulates. These initiatives included 191 compliance meetings, 37 formal hearings/administrative complaints, 64 formal hearing decisions, 174 Settlement Agreements, Consent Decrees and Stipulations, 28 Assurances of Voluntary Compliance, 12 subpoenas/civil investigative demands, and 0 Declaratory Ruling were issued.
gyokuro OP t1_j6t27iy wrote
....related to cannabis?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments