quote:

---

That's true. We'll always make fun of people doing stupid things. Pretty much the same thing I do each time you post.

---

quote:

---

- Claim: That his evidence invalidates the ownership claims over the trademark. Well considering no one involved in this internet debate is a trademark attorney, we're all full of **** no matter the opinion.

------------------

The salient point is that trademark attorneys for the Seahawks, Colts, Bills, etc have chosen to not use ANY of the these issues to try to continue the use of A&M's trademark. They have all stopped using it and removed mention of it from their material.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

That's true. We'll always make fun of people doing stupid things. Pretty much the same thing I do each time you post.

---

Are y'all gonna screw?

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

That's true. We'll always make fun of people doing stupid things. Pretty much the same thing I do each time you post.

---

Are y'all gonna screw?

---

FIFY

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Oh good lord! He's starting to sound like the sovereign citizen / Bundy crowd. It's just as solid legal reasoning, anyways:

quote:

---

And as far as your comment about the requirements to establish a claim of fraud, you seem to forget TAMU is a governmental entity. The powers of the state government are limited to those granted under the state constitution. All that needs to be proven is that the trademark application was false and that when the state (the university) knowingly filed the false trademark application, doing so was outside the legal powers granted the state.

Since you are such a keen legal scholar, perhaps you can point out where the state is granted the power to knowingly file false attestations under penalty of perjury. If the filing of the trademark application was outside the powers granted the government, the trademark is in big trouble. Fraud does not have to be proven. All that needs to be proven is that the government didn't have the constitutional authority to file the application they filed.

---

---

Where in the constitution does it state that Charlie Strong was allowed to lie to Malik about playing Mike LB? Where can I find the provision that allows him to make false promises to McNeal about catching the first pass against Notre Dame. Is there a clause that allows for multiple offensive coordinators to avoid legal damages from our northern neighbors?

These State employees must be held accountable. When Strong swore that Texas would never have a 5 loss season again, I was constitutionally assured that this would be true.

---

quote:

---

People stopped arguing with him couple of days ago, and yet he still posts his wordy diatribes like people are waiting anxiously for his next post.

---

quote:

---

News of this magnitude isn't dropped on a Friday. Enjoy your last weekend as a member of The Twelfth Man aggigegiggyyggegs

---

quote:

---

Think bigger. Certainly not a Chip Brown article, but if Chip doesn't use this opportunity to have fun with John "Cowchip" Sharp, he will be missing a great opportunity.

Besides, Chip would never pay the money to have the facts reviewed by attorneys and fully verified by professionals. Think much bigger.

---

quote:

---

Going to be glorious:

quote:

---

Think bigger. Certainly not a Chip Brown article, but if Chip doesn't use this opportunity to have fun with John "Cowchip" Sharp, he will be missing a great opportunity.

Besides, Chip would never pay the money to have the facts reviewed by attorneys and fully verified by professionals. Think much bigger.

---

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Going to be glorious:

quote:

---

Think bigger. Certainly not a Chip Brown article, but if Chip doesn't use this opportunity to have fun with John "Cowchip" Sharp, he will be missing a great opportunity.

Besides, Chip would never pay the money to have the facts reviewed by attorneys and fully verified by professionals. Think much bigger.

---

---

Burka. Texas Monthly is my guess. Is he that gullible, though?

---

quote:

---

I love that he assumes that it will ever get to the AG. He assumes that if he presents all of his bull**** they are required to act upon it.

I will laugh my ass off when, after he has put all of this "work" into this, that no one will even touch it.

FYI March 9th is his projected date of apocalypse or whatever. Feel free to call him out again starting on the 10th.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

People stopped arguing with him couple of days ago, and yet he still posts his wordy diatribes like people are waiting anxiously for his next post.

---

Yeah, kinda of making my point that me arguing with him isn't what empowers him to continue. He's just a crazy ****, and he'd do this without anyone watching (and has before, ****ing Iowa).

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

That's true. We'll always make fun of people doing stupid things. Pretty much the same thing I do each time you post.

---

Says the dumbace who fashions himself an expert on the 12thman trademarks but keeps losing his argument with an embecile.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

That's true. We'll always make fun of people doing stupid things. Pretty much the same thing I do each time you post.

---

Oh no I hurt Telco's feelings again....

---

quote:

---

Nothing against GBH, but whoever represented that site in the 6-team round table discussion, they did a really poor job.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

That's true. We'll always make fun of people doing stupid things. Pretty much the same thing I do each time you post.

---

Oh no I hurt Telco's feelings again....

---

And you tried to ninja edit so you wouldn't look like a ****ing moron. Bless your heart.

---

quote:

---

How did you edit that post twice and still mispell the word imbecile?

---