Which is kind of important, considering her job.
This woman uses "believe" between nervous gulps. She is so rattled you can tell she is scrambling to think of answers besides the obvious one, the truth. You don't have to endorse marijuana to acknowledge that heroin and crack are more dangerous. Numbers, facts and statistics do that for her, if she would answer honestly. He didn't even ask the golden question, whether alcohol's numbers show it is more dangerous than marijuana. I was waiting, but he ran out of time. She stalled him out. She simply refused to answer his questions until time ran out, and made an ass of herself and the DEA in the process.
For those who cannot watch, I'll give the rundown. But seriously, you're missing out. Here are some highlights:
Polis: Is crack worse for a person than marijuana?
Leonhart: I believe all... (gulp) all illegal drugs are bad.
Polis: Is methamphetamine worse for someone's health than marijuana?
Leohart: Again, I don't think any illegal drug...
Polis: Is heroin worse for someone's health than marijuana?
Leohart: All illegal drugs are... are bad.
This was their golden opportunity to make a valid argument. There are some points worth considering, and she surely was armed with facts whether she chose to speak them or not. Instead, she couldn't have made her side look worse. She is a disgrace, by refusing to use her position and knowledge to answer questions in a simple discussion.
What I find refreshing is that the "believe" and "think" bullshittery that has worked for so long is starting to wear thin. When this broad can't bring herself to say that methamphetamine is more dangerous than marijuana, you know she is lying through her teeth. Here it's so obvious you cannot escape the refusal to answer honestly. I almost feel sorry for her but then I watch her bring it on herself. This man was not tricking her, he was asking straightforward and legitimate questions.
Facts speak for themselves. Idiots speak for the DEA.
Here's an even more eloquent speech on drug use: