Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
You think over 4 years is "soon"?
Hey, anyone heard the one about the 9 years and RS fairytale bs?
Found the diluter
Thanks for the 600th reminder!
House Schedules Historic Vote on Decriminalizing Marijuana at the Federal Level
JERRY LAMBE
Aug 28th, 2020
House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) announced on Friday that lawmakers would be voting next month on a bill to decriminalize marijuana federally, leaving regulation up to the states. The vote would mark the first time either chamber of Congress ever voted on decriminalization of marijuana.
In a Friday email to lawmakers, Clyburn said the House would take up the Marijuana Opportunity, Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act, first introduced by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), which would remove marijuana from the Controlled Substances Act. The MORE Act would also expunge prior marijuana-related convictions, and impose a 5-percent sales tax which the federal government would reinvest in communities harmed by the “War on Drugs” through the creation of an Opportunity Trust Fund.
“This fund would include grant programs administered by the Department of Justice and the Small Business Administration to support individuals who have been adversely affected by the War on Drugs, provide assistance to socially and economically disadvantaged small business owners, and minimize barriers to marijuana licensing and employment,” Clyburn’s email stated.
Rep. Nadler, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, previously introduced the bill in committee last year where it passed by a 24-10 vote.
In a statement to Marijuana Moment, Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), a known advocate for marijuana reform, said the bill was an opportunity to make amends for decades of discriminatory law enforcement.
“Less than two years ago, we put out our blueprint outlining a path to cannabis legalization in the 116th Congress,” Blumenauer told the outlet. “Now, after many months of hard work and collaboration, we finally have a chance to end the failed policy of prohibition that has resulted in a long and shameful period of selective enforcement against people of color, especially Black men.”
“As people across the country protest racial injustices, there’s even greater urgency for Congress to seize this historic opportunity and finally align our cannabis laws with what the majority of Americans support, while ensuring restorative justice,” he added.
The bill’s lead sponsor is Democratic vice presidential candidate Kamala Harris (D-Calif.). Despite a somewhat recent Gallup poll showing that two-thirds of Americans support legalizing marijuana, Joe Biden, the Democratic Party’s presidential candidate, has declined to endorse full legalization.
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/house-schedules-historic-vote-on-legalizing-marijuana-at-federal-level/
4 years, and?
Sanctions? Hahaha.
A hot nothing burger.
That is an interesting take. Clearly you're a fan of the company.
Lookup docket 147 and tell us if Hemp Inc is implicated or not.
That's weird, because the public financials show the company earning a million per quarter, with steady growth year over year.
Who would spend so much time on a loser stock? hhmmmmm....
I didn't say it. The judge did. LOL! Can't twistiddy twist facts. Court records. Hemp Inc NOT implicated.
Anyone notice the shortage of paper towels and toilet paper lately, or how many cardboard boxes shipped through the mail?
hhhhmmmmmmmm..... if only there were a readily available, sustainable material that could help the supply.
hhhhmmmmmmmm.....
SUBSIDIES?
Hemp, Inc. is not implicated.
The SEC did not move for sanctions against defendant Hemp, Inc. I thus will not construe Judge Leen’s order to impose sanctions on it. The SEC provides several reasons why Hemp, Inc. should also be precluded from introducing the loan documents, but these arguments were not litigated before Magistrate Judge Leen. I cannot, and will not, conclusively determine that Hemp, Inc. is precluded from introducing evidence in the context of this limited review of whether Judge Leen’s order was clearly erroneous or contrary to law. So I deny the SEC’s request in this regard without prejudice to its ability to reurge it at the proper time.
You sure you have the right company? Because a lot of that info is inaccurate.
Neat story
Hemp has only been legal for over a year, now, and still legislative obstacles ahead of the company and industry.
HEMP has integrated well to get to where they are today, now will millions $ coming in quarterly. Still A LOT of room for growth, bud.
COVID the red carpet of cannabis?
NORTH CAROLINA INDUSTRIAL HEMP REGISTERED PROCESSORS (JUNE 2020)
https://www.ncagr.gov/hemp/documents/ProcessorListForWeb.pdf
Mentioned as recently as last week.
https://www.facebook.com/KingOfPot/posts/10221010470067907
"Still on track for a buyback in 2020"
This is why I keep coming back to the Hemp Inc Msg Board - it's just too darned funny!! And we can all use this type of humor in today's environment - thank you for lifting everyone's day! :)
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
wait for the huge rs then think about it ...he going to run out the shares then you will see the rs..
mark it HUGE RS COMING FOLKS ....HE STILL HAS TONS OF MORE SHARES TO RS......REMEBER HIS SHARES ARE PROTECTED AND MANY WILL GET PUCKED.....
AGAIN DONT FORGET TO MARK IT BECAUSE I WILL POST IT AFTER THE RS .
THIS MAN STATED A BUY BACK GOING ON 3 YEARS. NO BUY BACK
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry to see folks not able to trade. Stinks when stuff like that happens. My sell EOD executed instantly, tho, which kinda seemed bullish to me, in addition to a close above 0.05, with low volume (obviously due to a lot of people not able to trade.) Probably gonna see some sideways trading and would like to see the daily RSI dip below 70. Money flow looks good still. If talks about 10, 20 cents is real, I'll require new pants. I am doubtful...
Investors have made money here, multiple times.
Forgot about 2014?
Can confirm, was there.
There is no trading afterhours. Form T
OTC opted not to renew subscription to service during SEC investigation. Hemp Inc is suing. There is no requirement to use OTC Markets to file.
List any stock split, stock dividend, recapitalization, merger, acquisition, spin-off, or reorganization either currently
anticipated or that occurred within the past 12 months: NONE
"Worthless" but provide "High Low Open Close total volume and static studies such as buy/sell, momentum and such"
Got it.
Ok, but they're meaningful. Guess someone was wrong.
Thanks for clearing that up, let's keep it on the record.
Not sure what cow or milk you are referring to. Hemp Inc is on the farm, but nothing to do with cows. Must be mistaking for a different co.
I thought "charts are meaningless in pinks", as some have said...
All of a sudden they become relevant when suitable?
#1 ON GOOGLE
https://kingofhempusa.com/
Ordering things online and having them shipped directly to your door is not awesome?
Afraid? of what? profits?
Paid in converted to assets?
Not CFO. Not during time PERIOD.
Stretch, stretch, stretch.
Featured in harvesting miles and miles.
Some of the sanctions were upheld. Not all. Not against Hemp Inc. So Bruce and Barry might be met with an additional fines, and the court will hear limited evidence, plus the possibility for the SEC to remind the jury of Bruce and (more clearly) Eplings negligence during discovery (not disclosing personal tax returns, no contract, etc)
None of which appears to help the SEC support the basis of their allegations, just court tactics to decredit the defendant. SOP, really.
The article was not accurate and neither is stating that Epling is/was a principal of Hemp Inc. Consultants don't have ownership control nor are they officers of co's they consult for. The SEC is alleging Epling was an affiliate which cannot be substantiated. All these years and there has been zero factual matter to support the basis of those claims. Zero. You should go back through the dockets.
Jerry Norton needs a call ASAP
Hemp, Inc. is not implicated.
Epling is not a Principal of Hemp Inc.
Article was poorly written with important facts omitted and some clear errors.
Hemp, Inc. is not implicated.
Epling is not a Principal of Hemp Inc.
Article was poorly written with important facts omitted and some clear errors.
If these people wanted Hemp Inc out of town, then why hasn't the NCIHC, chaired by local officials, law enforcers, and "Fen" the farmer, revoked IHM's manufacturers license?
BECAUSE IT IS NOT TRUE! LIES! LIES! LIES!
Where are the labs? I don't see them.
We can talk about labs all day, but where are the actual labs?
Oh and by the way, hemp's crops aren't planted next to oil refineries, but some of their products are being shipped there.
Hey, thanks for pointing out another benefit for hemp products.