-
It's that time of year again - our ISP is asking for money. If you have some spare change, please click the Donate link... Thanks!
- About Us
- Search
- Need Help?
- Donate
- Login/Register
Latest Entries
Actions Menu
Blog Roll
- 4F Facebook Page
- Turn Up The Night with Kenny Pick
- Stephanie Miller Show
- The Tim Corrimal Show
- The Rachel Maddow Show
- Angry Americans with Paul Rieckhoff
- Thom Hartmann Program
- Turnips! Fans of Turn Up the Night Facebook Page
- Snopes.com
- Factcheck.org
- Official White House Page, if you must.
- The Brad Blog / Green News Report
- The Poorly Written Political Blog (Joe Santorsa)
A Tangled Web
Author: BobR
Date: 01/10/2014 15:17:31
Much as I'd rather not have yet another blog post about NJ Governor Chris Christie, there were too many juicy tidbits out of yesterday's marathon presser to ignore. The entire transcript is here, for your use, and I will be quoting from it throughout the blog.
The big takeaways are that Christie claims to have no previous knowledge of what happened, claims to be upset, has fired those responsible, and doesn't know who the mayor of Ft. Lee is. Let's take a look at some of these claims, as well as some of the other things he said.
First off, Christie claims:
Keep in mind this happened in early September 2013. At the time, it was claimed that this was part of a "traffic study". In the interim months, did Christie ask for details of the traffic study? Did he bring people into his office to ask what kind of traffic study requires creating massive gridlock? Did he ask for any details at all that he could forward onto the press and the citizens of his state to show that no harm was intended?
The Rachel Maddow Show noticed that his story doesn't quite add up. After claiming he had only heard about the subterfuge the day before, he said this:
Whoopsie - when you're telling the truth, you don't make mistakes like having to keep your story straight.
There's also the reason for why this was done. Christie fires his deputy chief of staff for lying about something that could sink his chances for the presidency, and he doesn't even ask her why she did it? He says he doesn't care, he's more upset that she lied? What does that say about his feelings towards the folks in Ft. Lee that he can't even care enough to provide them with an explanation?
He did put a lot of focus on the mayor of Ft. Lee, diminishing him as some inconsequential local pol, unworthy of his attention. That dismissiveness in and of itself is rather disgusting. However, once again the Rachel Maddow Show has uncovered something rather interesting regarding the timing of the closure (which occurred during the week of Sept 11). Perhaps it wasn't the mayor that the Christie administration was trying to punish:
The timing is pretty damning, and this actually makes more sense than the "Mayor lack of endorsement" explanation, which could possibly have been floated by the folks in the Christie administration as a red herring.
Right now the former NJ transit guy David Wildstein is pleading the fifth with regards to this. To me, that says he's looking for a deal to pass the buck to Christie in exchange for clemency or even immunity. This is not over, not by a long shot.
The big takeaways are that Christie claims to have no previous knowledge of what happened, claims to be upset, has fired those responsible, and doesn't know who the mayor of Ft. Lee is. Let's take a look at some of these claims, as well as some of the other things he said.
First off, Christie claims:
Well, let me tell you, everybody, I was blindsided yesterday morning. I was done with my workout yesterday morning and got a call from my communications director at about 8:50, 8:55, informing me of this story that had just broken on the Bergen Record website. That was the first time I knew about this. That was the first time I had seen any of the documents that were revealed yesterday.
Keep in mind this happened in early September 2013. At the time, it was claimed that this was part of a "traffic study". In the interim months, did Christie ask for details of the traffic study? Did he bring people into his office to ask what kind of traffic study requires creating massive gridlock? Did he ask for any details at all that he could forward onto the press and the citizens of his state to show that no harm was intended?
The Rachel Maddow Show noticed that his story doesn't quite add up. After claiming he had only heard about the subterfuge the day before, he said this:
But in a response to a question from CNN’s John King, Christie suggested that the scandal had been weighing on him much longer.
“I haven’t had a lot of sleep for the past two nights and I’ve been doing a lot of soul searching,” he said. “I’m sick over this. I have worked for the last 12 years in public life developing a reputation for honesty and directness and blunt talk, one that I think is well deserved.”
Whoopsie - when you're telling the truth, you don't make mistakes like having to keep your story straight.
There's also the reason for why this was done. Christie fires his deputy chief of staff for lying about something that could sink his chances for the presidency, and he doesn't even ask her why she did it? He says he doesn't care, he's more upset that she lied? What does that say about his feelings towards the folks in Ft. Lee that he can't even care enough to provide them with an explanation?
He did put a lot of focus on the mayor of Ft. Lee, diminishing him as some inconsequential local pol, unworthy of his attention. That dismissiveness in and of itself is rather disgusting. However, once again the Rachel Maddow Show has uncovered something rather interesting regarding the timing of the closure (which occurred during the week of Sept 11). Perhaps it wasn't the mayor that the Christie administration was trying to punish:
Senate Democrats were so mad about what Christie did to take John Harris off the Supreme Court when he was up for re-nomination that they would not let anyone through. It’s been a big political crisis in New Jersey. Senate Democrats rejected every one of those Christie nominees, one after the other.
And then when another of the justices on the Supreme Court, a Republican, came up for re-nomination just like John Harris had, and the Senate Democrats signaled that they were going to give her a whale of a time at her re-nomination hearing, Chris Christie just flipped out. He had enough. He pulled that justice off the Supreme Court rather than submit her to re-nomination before the Senate Democrats.
[...]
The governor, enraged, held a press conference to tell reporters, “I was not going to let her loose to the animals.”
The “animals,” in this case, were the Democrats in the state Senate.
Christie said that on the afternoon of Aug. 12, 2013.
On the morning of Aug. 13, 2013, Christie’s deputy chief of staff told the governor’s guy at the Port Authority, “Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee.”
The leader of the Senate Democrats at the time was a senator from … Fort Lee.
The timing is pretty damning, and this actually makes more sense than the "Mayor lack of endorsement" explanation, which could possibly have been floated by the folks in the Christie administration as a red herring.
Right now the former NJ transit guy David Wildstein is pleading the fifth with regards to this. To me, that says he's looking for a deal to pass the buck to Christie in exchange for clemency or even immunity. This is not over, not by a long shot.
