Originally Posted By andyll This is what a real scandal looks like: "Emails tie Chris Christie staff to bridge flap" <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/chris-christie-aides-bridge-emails-101897.html#ixzz2ppgJyS4A">http://www.politico.com/story/...ppgJyS4A</a> Christie will deny knowledge and there will be a few firings but this can't help him in 2016. The text messages that were sent are damning.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Wow, I am surprised by this. When I heard about the lane closure thing, I was confident that Christie (or even his staff) would never be involved in something such as this. Seemed like something out of a made for TV movie, not reality. Amazing.
Originally Posted By ecdc This really is something else. I've thought Christie was the future of the GOP, and perhaps he'll weather this storm. But with social conservatives clearly unelectable, Christie was their guy, and I actually didn't think that badly of him. But how freaking vindictive do you have to be to deliberately cause traffic jams just to get revenge?
Originally Posted By andyll Text messages: “I feel badly about the kids,” the person said in a message on the week of the lane closures, apparently referring to school buses caught in the jam. ... “They are the children of Buono voters,” replied Wildstein, who is slated to testify about the issue on Thursday. Wildstein will be gone.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Wow. I've seen Christie as a bully for some time now and really don't like him (we see a LOT of him here in the NY area); looks like a lot more people might start seeing him that way now. I like Talking Point Memo's take on it (this is from BEFORE today's revelations): <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/more-trouble-on-the-bridge-over-troubled-waters?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Talking-Points-Memo+%28Talking+Points+Memo%3A+by+Joshua+Micah+Marshall%29">http://talkingpointsmemo.com/e...shall%29</a> "There's no proof Christie knew about this or had a direct hand in it. Even if he did, I'd be shocked if he left any sort of paper trail that could prove it. But it seems very likely that someone did this as political payback on Christie's behalf. There's simply no other credible explanation. And those are his people. Unless he gets out ahead of it quickly by disciplining or firing people on his own - which he hasn't done and shows no signs of doing - that's plenty to besmirch his emerging national reputation in a big way. At its worst, it's definitely not fatal. But can become the sort of identifying scandal which colors his reputation permanently." Turns out they were right; this wasn't some "traffic study" (which WOULD have had a paper trail of someone ordering such a study, which Christie could never produce - which leads to the possibility of flat-out lying on Christie's part...); it was payback on Christie's behalf. The only credible explanation is in fact the correct one. Then they highlight a reader comment, from a guy who generally LIKES Christie, that I think really gets to the heart of the problem: "People who like Christie (and I count myself among them most days of the week) don't like him in spite of the fact that he's a bully. They like him because he's our bully. Whether it's unions, bureaucrats or the intolerance of the GOP he seems to be fighting for you and me. I agree that ft lee is far from from fatal especially because there are almost certainly no fingerprints. But the risk isn't that he's perceived to be more of a bully than we thought. It's not that he appears petty and vindictive. We pretty much knew that. The problem is that he didn't give a {damn} about stealing hours from thousands of commuters lives. The risk is that ft lee shows that he doesn't actually give a {damn} about you and me at all." Good point. There are two schools of thought about if being seen as a bully is a problem - in Jersey, being a bully isn't fatal (obviously, given Christie's re-election) as long as people perceive you as THEIR bully - but would it play in the south where people see themselves as more genteel? Or would it not be a problem there either, since the GOP base tends to have little problem being bullies themselves much of the time (while telling themselves they're the "truly oppressed.") But, as this guy says, forget about bullying. Forget petty and vindictive - which we knew about Christie already. What this shows, if he knew about it at all, is that he cared more about getting his little political revenge against a mayor who snubbed him than he did about all those ordinary people he claims to champion who were gridlocked for days and could have been REALLY up the creek if any of them needed an ambulance or anything like that.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Wildstein will be gone.> Wildstein's already gone. Resigned last month, though not officially for this. (It was the usual "I was planning on leaving soon anyway, and this is a distraction, so I'm going to pursue other opportunities" thing.) Considering Christie's senior staffer Bridget Lee was the one who wrote to Wildstein, saying "“Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee,” - which then prompted Wildstein to act - I'd say Christie has little choice but to fire her and then pray nothing else comes up to show that he knew about it.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Oh, and Christie cancelled his public appearance scheduled for today. Something tells me he wanted to regroup, synchronize everyone's stories, and prepare something plausible for when he has to face the press next.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I think this is far enough away from the election cycle to be all that damaging. Local scandals don't seem to stick nationally, even though political enemies certainly try (Whitewater comes to mind). I think GOP rivals will be the most likely to bring it up and use it against him, should he decide to run in 2016.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 < I think GOP rivals will be the most likely to bring it up and use it against him, should he decide to run in 2016.> Me too. I think they're far more likely to use it against him than, say, Hillary Clinton would be. The Clintons, for all their merits, play hardball politically, and always have. It probably wouldn't be too hard to come up with an example of Hillary - or certainly Bill - doing something that at least on the surface would be similar enough to muddy the waters. So Hillary might not want to go there. If Hillary doesn't run or the Democrats nominate someone unexpected and super-clean (which would be... Elizabeth Warren? No other names come all that readily to mind on the "super-clean" front!), then maybe. Otherwise, I think it's the Republican rivals most likely to bring it up - and the stink from something like that can last into the General election season, even if the Democrat doesn't bring it up specifically. It was Romney's GOP rivals who first got on him about refusing to release his income taxes, his Caymans haven, his shutting down plants and laying off workers... that narrative was set before Obama ever said a word. <I think this is far enough away from the election cycle to be all that damaging.> I'm not so sure we're THAT far away any more. By mid 2015 - in other words, less than a year and a half from now - it will be "pre-Iowa" season with both parties' hopefuls in full campaign mode and 24-hour news breathlessly following. If Christie seems strong, it wouldn't surprise me at all if a Republican rival (or more than one) made this an issue - certainly if it looks like Christie knew about it, or did anything to cover it up. Of course, if THAT comes out in an unmistakable way soon, Christie might not even run. If it's ambiguous, much depends on who takes the fall, and how. Will Christie be teflon on this? Or velcro?
Originally Posted By ecdc Reports are coming out that people died because they couldn't be reached by emergency vehicles. Let's be clear here: This isn't some sort of mismanagement, where Christie's staff goofed and didn't properly plan. This was a calculated effort at political retribution, involving the forging of documents to create a fake traffic study just to snarl traffic in a Democratic area. Ezra Klein gets to the issue here: <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/01/08/chris-christies-problem-is-that-hes-really-truly-a-bully/?tid=pm_pop">http://www.washingtonpost.com/...d=pm_pop</a> >>That's not typical behavior for an adult. It's definitely not typical behavior for a national politician. But it's typical behavior for a bully. In fact, it's not even very creative bullying. Anyone who's ever been a boy in an American middle school has heard "keep walking!" What makes Christie unusual is that he's a bully with power. That can be a dangerous combination.<<
Originally Posted By ecdc I'm watching Christie's press conference. Whatever you think about him, he is an absolutely formidable politician. Democrats in love with President Hillary better get ready for a fight. #PredictingTheFuture
Originally Posted By Dabob2 One of the WashPo commentators had this: "Why Chris Christie will not be able to get away with claiming that he knew nothing about the Fort Lee Traffic-gate plot. What would be the point of many of his top aides, some who have been his pals since high school, hatching and launching Operation Political Payback, if they were not going to inform the guy they were doing it for, what was being done, so he could enjoy watching the payback spectacle?! Of course he knew what was being done right from the outset." That, of course, has yet to be proven. But it makes all kinds of sense. And I notice some of the WashPo commenters are saying things I've been thinking myself since yesterday. Note that when Christie's Deputy Chief of Staff says "Time for some traffic problems in Ft. Lee," the Christie-appointed childhood chum at the Port Authority simply says "got it." No further explanation needed. In other words - he knew exactly what she was referring to. They'd talked about this plan before. It was all set up, and all the PA needed was the go-ahead from the Governor's office to screw over Ft. Lee. So the Deputy Chief of Staff was the one in the Governor's office with the authority to give the go-ahead? Really? Also - this was certainly local news in NJ at the time it was happening. Ft. Lee was snarled for a full week, the Mayor was asking for help from the PA, the Ft. Lee police were asking how the hell this happened, etc. etc. If I, the governor, really knew nothing about this, and asked how this could happen, and was told by my (we now know complicit) staff that it was a "traffic study"... wouldn't I, as governor, ask to see that traffic study that ended up screwing over one of my towns so badly? And when no one could produce it for me, wouldn't I start digging deeper and asking some questions... you know, if I actually didn't know anything about the whole thing to begin with? And wouldn't it seem awfully suspicious that the Ft. Lee police, fire, and EMT weren't notified about something that would inevitably cause such disruption - which is ALWAYS the case with any legitimate changing of traffic patterns - wouldn't that seem to me like this "traffic study" might have been bogus? You know, if I actually didn't know anything about the whole thing to begin with? This is big trouble for Christie. At worst, of course, he could be found to have known about it (or even ordered it), in which case he's instantly toast for 2016, and maybe even won't survive his term as Governor. But even at BEST, this has taken a major amount of shine off that the national media was (inexplicably, to me) giving him, and practically guarantees that some enterprising reporters will start digging deeper not only into this, but to other rumors about Christie that so far are only rumors. The Romney team was reported to have really wanted Christie for Veep, but after vetting him, decided he had too many skeletons that could come out. After he wasn't picked, the press sort of let those lie. Will they now? What did Romney's people find out that caused them to drop Christie? There have been rumors for years about possible sweetheart deals for pals and things like that (and confirmed stories about Christie as US Attorney charging the taxpayers for stays at the Four Seasons when most US Attorneys find a Sheraton just fine)... almost certainly, now, those will get greater scrutiny. Lastly, I'll say the big question for me from yesterday (other than the classic "what did Christie know and when did he know it?") was "Why was so much redacted, and WHO redacted it?" As of last night, NO news outlet I watched knew the answer to either question. It certainly wouldn't seem that anything like national security was involved... so why was so much redacted? And who redacted it? There may be a legitimate explanation... but I'd sure like to hear it. Of course, he just fired Kelly (Dep. CofS). He had no choice. He said she lied to him. We'll see.
Originally Posted By ecdc Great post. Christie did extremely well with his prepared (but crafted to look off-the-cuff) remarks. His whole, "Hey, it's me!" persona, with the straight talkin', I'm just like you shtick. But the Q&A isn't going so well. He's still insisting it started out as a traffic study. What part of "time for some traffic problems in Ft. Lee" doesn't he understand? He said he didn't talk to his aide. Like, seriously? He just fired her? He had no questions about it? No inquiry into the details of this scheme he knew absolutely nothing about? Christie could be telling the truth. It's odd, but it's definitely possible. Where this could go really bad for him is that this has already turned into an investigation, and it's likely criminal charges will result. Upper-class people have a way of talking when they're staring at potential jail time.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>wouldn't I, as governor, ask to see that traffic study that ended up screwing over one of my towns so badly?<< This is really key to me. If it were me, I'd hasten to get the traffic study and say that, pardon our dust, but we were working hard to make your commute much more efficient and this is part of that process. This traffic study, while inconvenient and mismanaged, was valuable because it revealed _________________ . In this press conference, Christie says he wouldn't know a traffic study if he tripped over one. Okay, day to day, that's fair enough. But when this particular one has been making news for months now, it seems strange to me he wouldn't demand a copy of the study, it's findings and purpose. This was no ordinary traffic study and hasn't been for some time, so you'd sure think he'd learn about it in the 5 months since this all happened. I don't know if the press will focus on that part of the question for very long. I doubt it.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>His whole, "Hey, it's me!" persona, with the straight talkin', I'm just like you shtick.<< LOL! Exactly. But, I also think it will work. People tuned in for the apology soundbyte, and that's what will get played. But for news junkies who watched beyond that, his impatience started to seep through now and then, and the answers about not knowing what a traffic study are reminded me of the scene in "A Christmas Story" when the teacher asked who talked poor Flick into sticking his tongue to the pole. "Flick? Flick who?" as Ralphie looks around the room quizzically. Traffic study? What's traffic? What's a study?
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt Christie will never be elected POS because he is a terrible liar and today's press conference proved it. I predict that he will not recover from this.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt The plot thickens. According to Gawker, "Just after the New Jersey governor's damage-control presser, a Chris Christie classmate and Port Authority appointee who engineered a traffic jam in Ft. Lee last September pled the fifth in a state Assembly hearing." What's he hiding?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 That would be Wildstein. And in the latest development, the NJ State Assembly may be (already has been? Things move fast) charged with criminal contempt for refusing to answer anything.
