DEA Lawsuit (Minus the Trolls)

Finshaggy

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
And in 1 of the 4 Cases I won just this year, the Prosecutor told me "I've been to Lawschool" right before I beat her and she had to drop the ticket. And I won because I know the law. So that is just a funny thing for you to think.
 
I

Illinois Enema Bandit

Well-Known Member
wait a minute,isn't all cola soda pop made from the extract of a Kola nut ,not the coca plant ?

last I knew the cola flavor was developed from the Kola nutts found in the tropics ,a reduction made from the Kola nutts is then turned into "cola syrup " and used to make all cola flavored soda pops .

How is coca cola involved when the coke we drink has never contained cocaine & is derived from Kola nutts instead of coca ?

I'm more confused than the last time around .
 
Finshaggy

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
Illinois Enema Bandit said:
wait a minute,isn't all cola soda pop made from the extract of a Kola nut ,not the coca plant ?

last I knew the cola flavor was developed from the Kola nutts found in the tropics ,a reduction made from the Kola nutts is then turned into "cola syrup " and used to make all cola flavored soda pops .

How is coca cola involved when the coke we drink has never contained cocaine & is derived from Kola nutts instead of coca ?

I'm more confused than the last time around .
Click to expand...
Coca-Cola is made with both Coca and Kola. They took the Cocaine out at the beginning of the 1900s, but they still use Coca leaf extract that has the Cocaine taken out.

Read this:
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/07/01/business/how-coca-cola-obtains-its-coca.html
 
curious2garden

curious2garden

Well-Known Mod
Staff member
... divided by a common language...
Fin, what you think you read is not what it means.

PS Yeah I know you think I'm wrong but let me ask you whose couch you sleeping on now?
 
P

pabloesqobar

Well-Known Member
Finshaggy said:
Lol. Pablo thinks that when the City filed their Scheduling Order for the Lawsuit (which I told them to file) that they achieved some great victory over me.
Click to expand...
1. Please post where I claimed they achieved some great victory over you. I'll wait. You were ordered by Judge Pitman to file it. It's really not that big of a deal, but having them file it gives them an advantage.

2. You didn't sue the City, dummy. You should have, but you chose not to. That will hurt you in the near future.

Finshaggy said:
And he is one of the people who said I would never win my Religious Marijuana case. So he's 0 for 2 in regards to my cases. He is going to have to wait and see just like the rest of you.
Click to expand...
That case was never decided on the merits, was never a religious mj case, and you have an underlying conviction as a result. They simply chose not to pursue another conviction for the probation violations. Remember? The Army turned you down because of your conviction? After me and everyone else told you they would? Remember?

And yes, you have perjured yourself twice with the Court. In both of your cases when filing for indigent status. According to you, you have a good paying job at Oracle. But you told the Court in your 1st case you are not employed, and make 0 income. In your most recent case you claim you only get $300 a month from Bitcoin. Get your story straight, liar.
 
Finshaggy

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
curious2garden said:
... divided by a common language...
Fin, what you think you read is not what it means.

PS Yeah I know you think I'm wrong but let me ask you whose couch you sleeping on now?
Click to expand...
I like how you respond within 5 minutes after I post at least 20 pages of material, and pretend as if I am the one who doesn't understand what was posted.

It really makes it seem like you know what you are talking about and aren't just wasted (like you said you were) and trolling (which it is obvious you are).
 
I

Illinois Enema Bandit

Well-Known Member
Finshaggy said:
Coca-Cola is made with both Coca and Kola. They took the Cocaine out at the beginning of the 1900s, but they still use Coca leaf extract that has the Cocaine taken out.

Read this:
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/07/01/business/how-coca-cola-obtains-its-coca.html
Click to expand...
thanks,I'll read the link now,there's so much conflicting info about coca cola I never know wtf to believe ,I've seen old bottles claiming to contain cocaine yet the official coca cola history says no coca plant material at all,I'll read the link,thanks .
 
Finshaggy

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
pabloesqobar said:
1. Please post where I claimed they achieved some great victory over you. I'll wait. You were ordered by Judge Pitman to file it. It's really not that big of a deal, but having them file it gives them an advantage.

2. You didn't sue the City, dummy. You should have, but you chose not to. That will hurt you in the near future.
Click to expand...
1. Ok. We already had this whole discussion, here was what you said and what I said:
pabloesqobar said:
Wrong. "Order for Proposed Scheduling Order. Plaintiff shall submit a proposed scheduling order to the Court within sixty (60) days after the appearance of any defendant. Proposed Scheduling Order due by 9/5/2016." You're the Plaintiff. You were ordered to submit the scheduling order, not the Defendant.
Click to expand...
Finshaggy said:
I never said they were ordered, I said I told them to do it. And I did, my exact wording was:
"The Federal Judge rejected your removal, submit a proposed scheduling order by September 5th. If you don't then I will make the Schedule"
So they filed it. Me being the one ordered to do it does not change the facts. And I did submit mine, so your whole point is moot.
Click to expand...
2. You are just like them. They tried to claim that they had immunity from Lawsuits (which is hilarious), which is what I assume you think also.

Go ahead and read this.

TEXAS CODE
TITLE 5. GOVERNMENTAL LIABILITY
CHAPTER 110. RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
Sec. 110.001. DEFINITIONS.
(2) "Government agency" means:

(A) this state or a municipality or other political subdivision of this state; and

(B) any agency of this state or a municipality or other political subdivision of this state, including a department, bureau, board, commission, office, agency, council, or public institution of higher education.

(b) In determining whether an interest is a compelling governmental interest under Section 110.003, a court shall give weight to the interpretation of compelling interest in federal case law relating to the free exercise of religion clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Sec. 110.002. APPLICATION. (a) This chapter applies to any ordinance, rule, order, decision, practice, or other exercise of governmental authority.

(b) This chapter applies to an act of a government agency, in the exercise of governmental authority, granting or refusing to grant a government benefit to an individual.

(c) This chapter applies to each law of this state unless the law is expressly made exempt from the application of this chapter by reference to this chapter.

Sec. 110.008. SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY WAIVED. (a) Subject to Section 110.006, sovereign immunity to suit and from liability is waived and abolished to the extent of liability created by Section 110.005, and a claimant may sue a government agency for damages allowed by that section.

(b) Notwithstanding Subsection (a), this chapter does not waive or abolish sovereign immunity to suit and from liability under the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution.
 
Finshaggy

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
Illinois Enema Bandit said:
thanks,I'll read the link now,there's so much conflicting info about coca cola I never know wtf to believe ,I've seen old bottles claiming to contain cocaine yet the official coca cola history says no coca plant material at all,I'll read the link,thanks .
Click to expand...
They say no Cocaine because they never actually added Cocaine. They did use Coca leaf, which means there were "trace amounts" of Cocaine, so they officially say that there was never Cocaine, because it was just trace amounts.

But even today they use Coca extract.
 
Finshaggy

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
He's filed a lot more motions with the court than you have.

Why do you hate him?
Click to expand...
Thanks.

And to add to that, I didn't just file, I won 4 cases this year, and a Religious Marijuana case last year doing it. So they weren't just frivolous or random, they were meaningful motions.
 
Finshaggy

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
curious2garden said:
My service dog just had surgery. He is the one who made it possible for me to go out alone for the first time in 22 years. I owe him my life. I'm paying him back it's the least I can do. Now how about you explain your logic without a quote and paste?
Click to expand...
Do you want an explanation of the DEA Lawsuit of the Police Department Lawsuit? Because we have kind of gotten in to both now. Everything Coca/Monopoly related is the DEA case (supported by the DOJ, a case from 2004 and a decision the DEA made this August), and everything relating to Texas Law and what Pablo is talking about is the Police Lawsuit.
 
curious2garden

curious2garden

Well-Known Mod
Staff member
Finshaggy said:
Do you want an explanation of the DEA Lawsuit of the Police Department Lawsuit? Because we have kind of gotten in to both now. Everything Coca/Monopoly related is the DEA case (supported by the DOJ, a case from 2004 and a decision the DEA made this August), and everything relating to Texas Law and what Pablo is talking about is the Police Lawsuit.
Click to expand...
Wow, actual words. I had begun to think you were an aggregation bot and not actually human.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top