Cards Against Humanity buys land on Mexican border

[Au165]

This is kind of funny, but at the same time interesting. While eminent domain will be enacted they got the best lawyers in that realm to fight it with the intent of slowing the process down and making it painful for them to try and push it through.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/15/us/cards-against-humanity-land-grab-trnd/index.html

Quote:(CNN)Cards Against Humanity, an irreverent card game company known for its attention-seeking pranks, says it bought land on the U.S.-Mexico border to block President Trump from building his wall.

The Chicago company said on its website that this was part of a holiday promotion, for which customers could contribute to the wall-blocking project with $15 purchases for surprise gift packages.
On Wednesday morning, just a few hours after the launching the program on Tuesday, Cards Against Humanity said it was sold out.
"Donald Trump is a preposterous golem who is afraid of Mexicans," said Cards Against Humanity on its web site. "He is so afraid that he wants to build a twenty-billion dollar wall that everyone knows will accomplish nothing. So we've purchased a plot of vacant land on the border and retained a law firm specializing in eminent domain to make it as time-consuming and expensive as possible for the wall to get built."
Cards Against Humanity said that contributing to the land purchase and its legal defense was the first of six days of gifts that customers would be receiving in December.
close dialog


"On Day 1, all Cards Against Humanity Saves America recipients will get an illustrated map of the land, a certificate of our promise to fight the wall, some new cards, and a few other surprises."
Customers who wanted to join in had to complete a survey that included personal questions and the query: "Who did you vote for in the 2016 election?"
The company did not say where the land is located. In a video describing the project, it says that it bought "acres" on the US-Mexico border, while displaying footage of wild horses galloping across desert scrubland.

Cards Against Humanity did not immediately respond to an email from CNNMoney asking where the land is.
The company, known for its popular "party game for horrible people," engages in pranks like selling $50,000 worth of nothing on Black Friday, which they did in 2015, and raising $100,000 to dig a "Holiday Hole" to nowhere, which they did last year.

Earlier this year, the company launched a new card game making fun of the tech sector, called Cards Against Silicon Valley, with cards labeled "understated sexism" and "Nintendo-based drinking games."

The company also applied to trademark the term "fake news," Trump's favorite moniker for CNN.

[GMDino]

I'd love to see them build a giant gate or arch and wait for the wall to get to them to hook into it.

[*michaelsean*]

Clever SOBs. Glad they want to make the taxpayer pay more. That's noble.

[GMDino]

(11-15-2017, 03:16 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Clever SOBs.  Glad they want to make the taxpayer pay more.  That's noble.

That's on Trump.  If he decides his vanity project is worth spending our tax money on a prolonged fight then he'll do it.

Of course I haven't seen any of his supporters complaining about "the taxpayer" paying for the wall that he promised Mexico would pay for so I'm not expecting much of a fight about this either.  

[BmorePat87]

(11-15-2017, 03:16 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Clever SOBs.  Glad they want to make the taxpayer pay more.  That's noble.

If you believe the costs of attempting to seize the land via eminent domain (including the ensuing legal battles) will be far less than the cost of the wall (which it will be), then attempting to force a fight that you believe will end in a victory for your side could be the more tax payer friendly position. 

[*michaelsean*]

(11-15-2017, 03:43 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: If you believe the costs of attempting to seize the land via eminent domain (including the ensuing legal battles) will be far less than the cost of the wall (which it will be), then attempting to force a fight that you believe will end in a victory for your side could be the more tax payer friendly position. 

This wouldn't stop it.  Their stated goal is to make it as time consuming and expensive as possible.  

[Au165]

(11-15-2017, 03:58 PM)michaelsean Wrote: This wouldn't stop it.  Their stated goal is to make it as time consuming and expensive as possible.  

Actually it can stop it, they only have to buy time until the mid term election at the rate things are going.

[BengalHawk62]

(11-15-2017, 03:16 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Clever SOBs.  Glad they want to make the taxpayer pay more.  That's noble.

Two things.  1. How is this the taxpayer problem?  He's is the one wanting this wall.  Not the taxpayer.

2. I thought Mexico is going to pay of this wall.  ????  That's what he told us all in the beginning.

[*michaelsean*]

(11-15-2017, 04:21 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: Two things.  1. How is this the taxpayer problem?  He's is the one wanting this wall.  Not the taxpayer.

2. I thought Mexico is going to pay of this wall.  ????  That's what he told us all in the beginning.

The wall will either be built or not built regardless of this purchase.  Their stated intent is to make it as expensive as possible for the government to get this property.  That expense is borne by the taxpayers including all those who don't want a wall.  Now it may be a comparatively small amount, but I'm curious why they wish to make it as expensive as possible.

[Belsnickel]

In case anyone is interested: https://www.cardsagainsthumanitysavesamerica.com/

I posted that in the jokes thread. I may or may not have signed up.

[*bfine32*]

(11-15-2017, 04:21 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: Two things.  1. How is this the taxpayer problem?  He's is the one wanting this wall.  Not the taxpayer.

2. I thought Mexico is going to pay of this wall.  ????  That's what he told us all in the beginning.

Plenty of taxpayers want a wall. 

Quick solution: Build the wall and just put their property on the south side of it. 

[GMDino]

I wonder if any current landowner tries to fight against their land being taken for the vanity project if Trump supporters will take to the streets to complain about them wasting taxpayer money?

[Yojimbo]

(11-15-2017, 06:39 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Plenty of taxpayers want a wall. 

Quick solution: Build the wall and just put their property on the south side of it. 

The taxpayers that support the wall? Fine with me.

[Benton]

(11-15-2017, 03:58 PM)michaelsean Wrote: This wouldn't stop it.  Their stated goal is to make it as time consuming and expensive as possible.  

Which could save taxpayers billions.

If landowners fight land acquisition and drag it out long enough, then a new congress or president could stop the dumbest construction project of the last century.

I’d settle for a few million in legal fees if it saves several billion.

[Benton]

(11-15-2017, 06:39 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Plenty of taxpayers want a wall. 

Quick solution: Build the wall and just put their property on the south side of it. 

I’d be interested to know if there’s a significant number of people supporting construction of the wall if they realized how much it’s costing them in tax dollars.

[*bfine32*]

(11-15-2017, 09:41 PM)Benton Wrote: I’d be interested to know if there’s a significant number of people supporting construction of the wall if they realized how much it’s costing them in tax dollars.

I'd be interested to know if there's a significant number of people supporting a great many things if they realized how much it's costing them in tax dollars

[Vas Deferens]

(11-15-2017, 10:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I'd be interested to know if there's a significant number of people supporting a great many things if they realized how much it's costing them in tax dollars

Like the price of reigning depleted uranium munitions on brown people. Well oiled machine that.

[*michaelsean*]

(11-15-2017, 09:39 PM)Benton Wrote: Which could save taxpayers billions.

If landowners fight land acquisition and drag it out long enough, then a new congress or president could stop the dumbest construction project of the last century.

I’d settle for a few million in legal fees if it saves several billion.

They didn’t even mention that as a goal. They did mention making it as expensive as possible however. My question is still why is that one of their goals?

[Au165]

(11-16-2017, 08:49 AM)michaelsean Wrote: They didn’t even mention that as a goal.  They did mention making it as expensive as possible however. My question is still why is that one of their goals?

Because at some point the cost outweighs the gain for everyone, even the federal government. There are bad optics associated with the continued pursuit to spend millions taking someone's land from them that can sway legislators into rethinking things if dragged out long enough. To think this is all being done without the hope it can stop them, even if not expressly stated, would be willful ignorance of an obvious desire.

[BmorePat87]

(11-15-2017, 03:58 PM)michaelsean Wrote: This wouldn't stop it.  Their stated goal is to make it as time consuming and expensive as possible.  

(11-15-2017, 04:16 PM)Au165 Wrote: Actually it can stop it, they only have to buy time until the mid term election at the rate things are going.

Yea, and considering the inability of the GOP to pass any major legislation, it's safe to say the wall will not begin the initial stages of construction before 2019.